Backers of anti–gay marriage amendment tout flawed poll

Another day, another poll.

Let’s talk about what we have in common. Citizenship and equal rights under the constitutions of state and nation.

What does this mean to you as a citizen?

Do you see the other 308 million of us as your legal equal or not?

Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN

Jeff,

The argument is flawed. Equality doesn’t require homosexual unions to be recognized as marriage any more that it requires a caucasion have the right to be called an African-American and afforded that benefits of affirmative action.

I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I also believe marriage is between two men or between two women. They don’t ask should gay marriage be banned, or especially should it be banned in the constitution. So of course the poll is flawed.

HG,

Actually withholding marriage from same sex couples is a form of affirmative action for heterosexuals, granting rights to heterosexual couples while denying them to heterosexual couples, much the same way affirmative actions grants rights to African Americans while denying them to Caucasians.

Joe,

I’m not arguing the merits of affirmative action. It does however provide a useful analogy.

HG makes one of the strangest analogies I’ve ever read. If current marriage restrictions are analogous to affirmative action for heterosexual couples then what historical injustice do they redress? That is some convoluted religio-double speak. Expect more from him and the church.

Praise Jebus, God hates the US Constitution, Amen.

Carl,

Analogies are not equals and they can be taken too far.

This article reveals how people who think they worship God Who IS the Truth will claim and cling to dubious research to perpetuate a belief structure. A strategy that casts doubt on the legitimacy of their means and virtue of their ends.

Praise Jebus, God hates fact based public policy, Amen.

This poll may or may not accurately reflect the views of 62% of Americans, but the votes of the majority of Americans surely do. So far, everywhere it’s been voted on, marriage has prevailed. Minnesota is next. Vote for the marriage ammendment.

I detect a whiff of Thomas Sewell … whose research is tainted by his libertarian politics.

So people that believe the creation myth and Noah’s Ark fable will cherry pick questionable research to support their own religious bias.

Praise Jebus, God hates facts, Amen.

No. Every last one of those polls claiming that people want “homosexual marriage” are (((((FAKE)))). How do I know? Because 31 states have banned “homosexual marriage” by writing the definition of marriage into their state constitution, with more states about to do the same. That wouldn’t happen unless a MAJORITY of Americans opposed “homosexual marriage”. Even the states where it is legal had it FORCED on them. Look, only 38 states are required to write an amendment to the US Constitution. It’s time to stop fiddling with these corrupt liberal democrat activist judges and corrupt liberal democrat politicians and put this thing to rest. The required number of states are clearly there.

Alright Mary, let’s do it.

True “HG” however, let’s compare those margins NOW as opposed to earlier election turn-outs/results. You’ll find a very curious turning of events when it comes to the gap narrowing! Oh, rest assured Mr. “HG” hetero bigot, you’ll have your majority hetero electoral victory next year, however, don’t expect it to last long. When Flop H8 makes it to the supreme court you’ll more than likely see it bounced on over into the bottomless trash heap of human bigotry and then guess what? EQUAL MARRIAGE RIGHTS IN ALL 50 STATES!! YEEEEEEHAAAAAW!!!

So, evolution, your’re counting on legislating gay marriage from the bench? It won’t work. But if it makes you happy to imagine such a scenario, then by all means, knock yourself out.

HG since you have all the answers I suggest you jump on in with Bachmann and Pawlenty. Its a wide open field and you’re gonna’ fit right in.

What do you say, I’ll send you $25 to put my money where my mouth is. Of course you’d have to reveal your real name, which I know you never want to discuss.

I am curious, how do you feel about Bradlee Dean, do you see him as heroic?

Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN

Mary:

The “majority” rarely ever knows what is best. The majority is usually uneducated, under informed and highly susceptible to influence. The majority rarely cares enough about a topic to give an informed opinion unless it directly affects them.

All you have to do is look to our own countries history to see this. You should thank the people who “forced” women suffrage in our face otherwise you’d have none of the rights you enjoy today.

It’s a matter of time before same sex marriage is universally accepted. This is not an opinion, this is a fact. Public opinion is changing, most young adults accept it and the older folk will eventually die off.

Don’t worry though, people like you will find another minority to hate and this process can start all over again. We never learn.

Any time the general population is asked to vote on the rights of a minority, our constitution is jeopardized. The purpose of the constitution is to provide and protect equal rights to all citizens. It’s amazing that this is even an issue and that anyone supporting this amendment is able to convince themselves that they aren’t actively supporting discrimination. What happened to the separation of church and state? This shouldn’t be up to the majority to decide because the majority is too short-sided and blinded by their fear of homosexuality to vote intelligently. Gay or straight, love is love and our government should not be involved in decided whose love is legitimate.

Jeff,

I don’t know Bradley Dean. What little I’ve heard of him I don’t care for. I don’t see him a heroic, no.

Check him out HG, he is definitely your cup of tea, and it is Bradlee. You find lots of reinforcing of your world view in Mr. Dean. It’ll give you a stronger yet foundation for your beliefs.

He may want a check to support his cause(s).

Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN

I will proudly cast a “NO” vote on this bigoted and exclusionary amendment.

HG,

The entire purpose of the courts is to ensure rights are enforced. Not a single state legalized interracial marriage by legislative action, and certainly not by a vote of the people, by your definition in every single case “legislating from the bench.” Left to a vote of the people, interracial couples would have had to wait until the year 2000 to marry in all 50 states when Alabama removed the ban from their constitution by popular vote. Even then, 41% voted to keep the ban in place.

HG misses the point. The fundamental principle of the Constitution is that a citizen is presumed free to exercise a right. The bar for the state to say “no” is very high, as it should be. Congress has no authority to ban something simply because they don’t like it, or that a majority of citizens don’t like it; protecting minority rights has been important since our founding. Yes, we’ve not always been good at it, but that’s what history is for.

So, what critical motive does the government have to say no?

Jeff, no thanks.

“Given that the political debate surrounding same-sex marriage pertains to legislation rather than the contents of the dictionary”

Ummmmmmm…what question will Minnesotans be answering at the polls in 2012? Yup, that’s right, a question nearly identical to the question th ADF survey asked. So your “given” is not a given, Faith and Public Life folks. Not only that, Minnesotans will not be involved in “legislation.” They will be amending the stat constitution. That’s two strikes against you.

“nonpartisan opinion research”

Steeeeeeee-rike three.

CNN and the Washington Post and Gallup are non-partisan? Yeah, right. Only because they yield the results you like. Their questions are far from objective.

The ADF poll question wasn’t biased. It is the same question people in 31 states have already answered in the affirmative. Minnesota will be 32nd and it won’t be close.

I still don’t see any legitimate constitutional argument against this. What harm is caused? States (and entire countries) who have allowed this haven’t suffered any ill effects. What are we afraid of?

@Vincent Pinson,

And upon what basis will Minnesotans make this putative decision?

Praise Jebus, God hates the First Amendment, Amen.

HG, I guess I can see why you’re not interested in Bradlee. You do know it all afterall on the subject at hand.

Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN

Well Jeff, enough to know your side is wrong.

HG wrote, “Well Jeff, enough to know your side is wrong.”

Carl thought, “And yet not enough to explain why.”

Praise Jebus, God hates people that question tradition, Amen.

HG, your argument seems to be, in short, “We can’t do it because we’ve never done it.” Fortunately, that’s not how America works. We’ve done many things that were thought of as impossible at the time, that’s part of what makes us such an exceptional people. Democracy, the federal system, women’s equality, an integrated military, and that tiny thing about landing on the moon. Many of the “norms” we’re used to today, including marriage, have looked very different at other times. History does not hold still, especially for Americans.

Well HG, enough to know your side is wrong.

HG, the president is going to a gay fundraiser tonight, he appears to be mixing with the homosexuals. What if the president comes out and says he likes them and thinks their rights have been abused.

Do you think that is wrong of the president HG?

Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN

No Jeff,

Just because I see homosexuality for what it is, doesn’ t mean homosexuals should be disliked. Two of my immediate relatives are gay. My best friends brother, and my childhood best friend as well. All but the latter are fully aware of my opinions. The latter, Mark, committed suicide after college. I want everyone to wake up to the reality of homosexuality, especially the risks to the homosexual’s physical and mental health. I’m tired of people pretending and imagining homosexuality isn’t an unnatural, abnormal, health risk.

@HG,

Oh! Wrong lesson learned HG.

Praise Jebus, God hates the whole cause and effect thing, Amen.

HG, it sincerely saddens me to hear about Mark. I’ll assume you were there for him in the depression leading up to his choice. It would have gotten better. That’s what love can do for people, help them through things.

I am puzzled by your final remark using terms like unnatural and abnormal. Where would I look up what is unnatural and abnormal? As the old joke goes normal is just a setting on a washing machine. As to unnatural how could that be if for all of mankind’s presence on earth it has all forms of sexuality have occurred then by definition isn’t the opposite, it is natural?

Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN

Charles,

No, that’s not it. My arguement is more along the lines of what I’ve actually been saying. That homosexuality is unnatural, abnormal, and a health risk. As such, it is behavior incompatible with our biology. Therefore, it is a lie against nature and subsequently immoral.
Marriage is what it is, a religious and civil union between a man and a woman. Marriage has never been about whoever anyone wants. Changing marriage to accommodate homosexuality is ill-advised given the characteristics of homosexuality noted above as well as the history, tradition, and religion marriage boasts.

Well now HG, you say marriage has never been about whoever anyone wants. If I’m not mistaken kings of old pretty much did just that, and conquering armies often took to the marriage bed the women of subjugation.

Can you clarify your point with more exact examples?

Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN

HG, I’m also sorry to hear what your brother suffered. But it doesn’t change reality. Words like “unnatural, immoral” and even “health risk” have been used to prohibit all sorts of things in the past, and objective science don’t bear it out. Women can vote, own property. Blacks and whites can marry.

Keeping gays from marrying won’t make anybody less gay, any more than permitting it will make anybody more gay. Perhaps a few will be more honest about themselves, but that’s generally healthier anyway.

The most important argument, however, is this: There is zero evidence that allowing gays to marry has any negative health or social consequences. There are large populations with real experience on this, and the facts just don’t bear out that prediction. There is anecdotal evidence, still being peer reviewed, that gay suicides even decline in such jurisdictions.

Jeff,

Exceptions do not a rule make.

HG, oh but the kings did rule.

Charles,

Not my brother, childhood friend. As for the studies on jurisdictions friendly to gay marriage, studies have shown the mental health issues continue. The often cited NEMSIS study shows this to be the case. The CDC notes that MSM are 44 times more likely than heterosexuals to contract AIDs. Similary disproportionate infection rates exist for most STD’s. Anal cancer, osteoperosis, and other disease seems to follow homosexuality. Depression, dementia, and suicide also follow homosexuality. These are documented facts people want to ignore.

Surely you know the difference, Jeff.

HG, do you remember the knights of old. Do you recall they all had pages, young lads that would help them with their armor, their steeds, their weapons and all that. Have you ever wondered about what went on at night, in the tents, when there was no TV, when the minstrels sang and the wine was drunk?

And HG, what do you know about Afghanistan? Do you know that they keep boys for pleasure in the police stations there? Its a custom there. Been going on for years, probably centuries. My own son found it strange while he served and lived there.

It’s a big world HG. There are well over six billion of us walking around with many languages, customs and norms. I hope your not being too philistine (narrow) in your view of the world by making sweeping statements about things that in some parts of the world would be considered as you would call it normal.

I wish you peace HG. Let go, you won’t fall, you will feel your mind soar.

I’m glad we had this exchange HG. I’ve truly come to see you in a more defined way.

May the road rise to meet you HG.

Jeff Wilfahrt, Rosemount, MN

Jeff,

I am familiar with the history of indescretions and pedophilia you mentioned.

Thanks for the kind wishes.

All the best to you and yours.

The fact is that there is no evidence that legalizing MSM harms anybody. None, nothing. Gay men and lesbians face challenges, absolutely. Foolish laws and discriminatory attitudes are high on the list.

I’m sorry HG that you are so burdened with other peoples private lives. Perhaps you’d find peace if you just let us be.

Speaking of mental health and abnormality; HG, you need some help, your are one messed up dude.

Charles,

MSM is legal. I don’t object to what people do, I do object to ignorance of homsexuality. I do object to the gay agenda which seeks to noramlize homsexuality by forcing it on society through legislation, education, and changes to marriage. If you or anyone else is homosexual that is your business, but don’t think I’m going to stand idly by while activists seek to teach my children homosexuality is normal at schools, change marriage to allow same-sex unions, and seek to pass legislation forcing society to accept homosexuality.

HG,

It really is those like yourself who should let society be. You all came after marriage. You all have sought to enter our school’s curriculum. You are trying to allow gay marriage through legislation.

You want to be left alone? Back off.

That las comment should have been address to Charles.

HG:

Let’s ignore that the world health organization and psychiatric community the world over agree that homosexuality is a normal and positive variation of human sexuality.

How can you use the bible to defend your case? A book that has been translated and retranslated and misinterpreted for years.

Interpretations of your bible have been used to defend the owning of slaves, the subjugation of women, and the mistreatment of Jewish people and you want to tell me that God believes marriage is only between a man and a woman?

Peter, I’m not interested in using the bible to make my case.

HG, What then are you basing arguments on? Not science! Not reason! Experience?

No you just mention it in a previous post but we’ll ignore that. Instead we’ll focus on traditions of marriage you speak of. Like how most traditional marriages were held in a town square to show the father passing ownership of his daughter over to the husband.

Or how traditionally women had very little say or rights when it came to marriage.

Or perhaps how marriage was more of a financial arrangement and very few couples were actually in love.

Let’s instead use skewed statistics to defend our claim.

40% of AIDs related death were black and of all the people living with HIV in the US today half are black. Maybe we should take away their right to marry.

Actually the demographic that comprises the smallest percentage of HIV cases are lesbian women. So maybe we should just take away men’s right to marry?

Peter,

Where did I mention it in a previous post?

Comment posted June 23, 2011 @ 3:50 pm

> Marriage is what it is, a religious and civil union between a man and a woman. Marriage has never been about whoever anyone wants. Changing marriage to accommodate homosexuality is ill-advised given the characteristics of homosexuality noted above as well as the history, tradition, and religion marriage boasts.

Lane, that is a definition, not an agurment.

Gosh you folks are goofy.

Marriage – The social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.
-The legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of two people to live as a married couple, including the accompanying social festivities

-The act of uniting a man and woman for life; wedlock; the legal union of a man and woman for life. Marriage is a contract both civil and religious, by which the parties engage to live together in mutual affection and fidelity, till death shall separate them.

HG, Again, On what are you basing arguments? Not science! Not reason! Experience?

So what exactly is your argument?

Is it psychological? Because like I said homosexuality is universally accepted by most psychiatrists as a perfectly normal lifestyle?

Is it the health concern because their are plenty of other minorities with questionably high STD infection statistics.

Is it the old argument that families require 1 husband, and 1 wife to raise a kid?

The procreation argument?

What is it?

Homosexuality is unnatural, abnormal, and a health risk. As such, it is behavior incompatible with our biology. Therefore, it is a lie against nature and subsequently immoral.
Marriage is what it is, a religious and civil union between a man and a woman. Marriage has never been about whoever anyone wants. Changing marriage to accommodate homosexuality is ill-advised given the characteristics of homosexuality noted above as well as the history, tradition, and religion marriage boasts.

——————————————————————————–

HG you seriously misunderstand the reasons for the high suicides and mental health problems in the Gay community. They are their because of people like you who claim Gay people are abnormal, unnatural etc. i wonder what your mental health would be like if your entire life you had society telling you that you were abnormal, unnatural etc. You are blaming Gay people for the suffering inflicted on them by people like you. The tolerance show in some societies towards Gay people is relatively recent spanning a couple of decades at best and even there is more tolerance than acceptance. When Gay people gain the acceptance of society (probably not until long after people like you who say they will not allow their children to be taught to accept Gay people are dead) then their mental health issues will be resolved. If you are so concerned with high levels of STD’s in the Gay population then you should be fighting for equal marriage rights for Gay people so that they will channel their sexual acts into a monogamous relationship. Otherwise you are just using that as a stick to beat Gay people with.
Marriage is and always has been a civil function. The early Christian church did not even preform marriages. Catholic marriage celebrated in a Catholic church before a priest and two witnesses was not enforced until the Council of Trent 1563 CE. People do not need to marry in a church nor do churches grant marriage licenses the state does. Are Atheists any less married because they married with a Justice-of-the-Peace or in city hall, rather than in a church?

Enough verbal bantering with you!! Time for Mr/Mrs “HG” to come out of the closet! I hereby wave my magic wand and dispel the lying, mean spirited and hypocritical oaf known as “HG”!! Begone…begone…..BEEEEEEEGONE!!

Yes thank you for restating the claim you made before. I was expecting some factual evidence to back it up.

HG, suicides and mental health problems for gay people are correlated with the way gay people are treated, not for the fact that they are gay. It’s backed up by the APA that higher levels of discrimination are a strong correlation with higher levels of mental health problems for gay people.

And HG, as I have mentioned before, 100% of all abortions are committed by heterosexuals. Does that mean we should start banning heterosexuals from marrying to, as their unions cause abortions?

Feeling the LOVE yet, eh, HG? Meh.

I’ve already cited the NEMSIS study which discounts the claim the the mental illness among homosexuals is the fault of an unaccepting society. It’s just not the case. I’m not saying that society’s attitude toward homosexuals does not contribute at all but that the large portion of the blame for mental illness lies with homosexuality and the NEMSIS study proves just that.

* It is claimed, that the high rates of mental illness among homosexuals are the result of ‘homophobia’. However, even in the Netherlands, which has been far more tolerant to same-sex relationships and which has recently legalised same-sex marriages, high levels of psychiatric illness, including major depression, bipolar disorder (‘manic depression’), agoraphobiaAgoraphobia, obsessive compulsive disorder, Obsessive compulsive disorder, and drug addiction are found. (Sandfort TG, et al. Same-sex sexual behavior and psychiatric disorders: findings from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS). Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001; 58:85-91.)

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Doctors+speak+out%3a+%27gay+marriage%27+and+homosexuality%3a+brief+sent+to+…-a0133249485

Robert,

I’ve never claimed gay people are unnatural or abnormal, but that homosexuality is. Homosexuals are every bit as human and as natural a human being as anyone. I even dislike calling them homosexuals. They’re people who are living with an abnormal sexual orientation, but they are every bit a person as you or I.

Marriage in a church isn’t necessary to be a marriage. But marriage in a church is just as much a marriage as one in city hall.

By the way. I came across this article. Thought some might find it interesting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/magazine/my-ex-gay-friend.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&pagewanted=all

After reading all of this and listening to all the statistics and “facts” that HG is quoting, it makes me very sad. Everyday we have to see the “hetero agenda” thrown into our faces from commercials, to TV shows, to advertising, to people holding hands and kissing in public, but somehow gays have the agenda? Really? The bottom line is that gays have been around for thousands of years, they aren’t going anywhere, and by not recognizing them as equal in our society, we are only causing further damage and heartache for millions of gays and their families. Our gay youth are killing themselves because of people like you, HG. They don’t have hope and they don’t have self worth because the message they constantly are given is that they are flawed, sinful, and an abomination. Many have been disowned by their families which further strengthens their view that they are worthless. They are taunted every day of their lives because of the bigotry they experience. If you were to live like this and to not have hope, you’d be depressed and suicidal, too. Homosexuality isn’t causing the mental illness issues that you talk about, the way our society views homosexuality is what causes it. You have blood on your hands and you don’t even know it, HG. You protect yourself by claiming right away that “you have friends who are gay”…….doesn’t matter. It is still bigotry and knowing a queer person personally doesn’t diminish that. You talk about it being an abomination, blah blah, yet do you have personal experience of what it is like to really know a gay family on a day to day basis? Come live in my house for a week or two. We really are normal. In a gay household—and yes, one with children—-we still hold down jobs, take care of our elderly parents, pay our taxes (even though we don’t have over 1,000 rights that straight couples have) do homework with our kids after supper, attend the parent teacher conferences, play with our children, drive them to soccer practice and music lessons, ry to teach them right from wrong, guide them spiritually, laugh, cry, fight, and love our kids into adulthood. Our kids (who also have a father as well as 2 moms) have always preferred to live at our house—even tho Dad is rich and tries to buy them off all the time! They have seen their grandparents disown and disinherit their mother. They have seen the garage spray painted with vulgar slurs directed at their moms. They are both of age now and when home from college, they stay with us because they know they can be themselves and not have to listen to the comments on their father’s side. They bring their friends and girlfriends over to our house to hang out, play cards, croquet, go biking, whatever. They could be totally unsupervised at their dad’s—for a young male with a girlfriend? Sounds pretty good. But they don’t. They come to us and they talk and confide in us. Why? Because we are good parents and they know that we support them and love them. They have learned what forgiveness is, what compassion truly means, and they have seen their moms stumble, get back up, and continue on with grace and dignity. So, HG, you can go blue in the face trying to convince us that gay is an abomination and how your side will “WIN” next year—and you’re probably right—–but it still doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do. Our history of slavery and treatment of women should prove that quite clearly, but sadly, it doesn’t seem to matter to you people. All you are thinking about is winning, and you aren’t aware of — nor care—-how many families, people, and children will be really hurt by it. You have no idea what it is like to have others view your life as a vote and who’s gonna win. If that isn’t dehumanizing, I don’t know what is.

HG, the Netherlands is definitely not free of homophobia nor the effects of it. You sadly confuse legal tolerance with social acceptance. They are not the same thing. You have not discounted anything but your own intelligence to claim otherwise.

By the way, I came across this discussion thread. Thought HG and others might find it interesting.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/06/homoquotable-michael-glatze.html

HG, anyone can claim to be “ex-gay”. Most everyone who claims to be “ex-gay” is still gay, i.e. homosexually attracted, just not currently having sex with persons of the same sex. It’s like claiming to be “ex-heterosexual” if your spouse divorces you and you sit crying in a corner. It’s a word game played in religious circles.

HG provided the link to a report “Doctors speak out: …”

Seeing that this report was published in the “Catholic Insight” along with NARTH mentioned for further reading, I knew right away that the report would be essentially worthless despite its litany of facts and statistics (some of which are questionable, taken out of context, dated or irrelevant) laid out to cast homosexuality in the worst possible pathological light.

HG mentioned NEMESIS several times. I refer the reader to these links:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2040376/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16670235

“CONCLUSIONS: We found that sexual orientation was associated with mental as well as physical health. The causal processes responsible for these differences by sexual orientation need further exploration.”

HG,

I see you are still here spouting your lies and hatred. The basic American principle is, no matter how many people are for it, you can not impune upon the civil liberties of any race, person, creed, religion, or sexual identity. You have nothing but hatred and dishonesty. You are nothing more than a snake that would destroy America and all it was built upon.

These polls mean NOTHING!!!! WE, AS AMERICANS, CAN NOT DENY CIVIL LIBERTIES AND RIGHTS TO ANYONE NO MATTER WHAT A MAJORITY WANTS. If you find yourself among those that do wish to deny rights to a segment of our community then you are in no way an American.

HG,

Yes, I read the same article. The guy in the article didn’t become ex-gay, he ran away from it to the most remote, sparsely populated place he could find where he wouldn’t run into any gay people… Wyoming. If every gay person were to do the same, the population would quintuple overnight.

So I am curious, what do you propose gay people do?

HG, in specific regard to NEMESIS and the Netherlands study you cited, the author of the study expressly disclaims what you’ve claimed. In regard to your claim about Netherlands society allegedly being more tolerant and what significance, if any, one might make of it, even if it were true, the study author said, “It is unclear to what extent findings from this Dutch study can be generalized to other cultures or nations”, because the differences between cultures and nations are incalculable. You also tried to claim that homosexuality and not the social stigma imposed by society is the culprit, but again, the author expressly disclaimed your conclusion: “Because of the study’s cross-sectional design, it is not possible to adequately address the question of the causes of the observed differences.” And, “The effects of social factors on the mental health status of homosexual men and women have been well documented in studies, which found a relationship between experiences of stigma, prejudice, and discrimination and mental health states… The outcomes [of this study] are in line with findings from earlier studies”. And, “Furthermore, controlling for psychological predictors of present distress seems to eliminate differences in mental health status between heterosexual and homosexual adolescents.” Again, even if Netherlands society were more tolerant in some ways in recent years than in earlier years, the author specifically points out that negative effects of the earlier years are lasting: “Differences observed in the preceding year might be a consequence of earlier differences, since ever having had a specific disorder might predispose people to subsequent disorders.” It’s also worth pointing out that same-sex marriage was not legal in the Netherlands until April 2001, which is AFTER the study you cited was published! And it wasn’t legalized by popular vote either. In no way does the study you cited measure the effects (pro or con) of society legalizing same-sex marriage. We’ve also had same-sex civil unions in Vermont and California since 2000, and who believes that means gay people in Vermont and California are free of social stigma, prejudice and discrimination? Social stigma, prejudice and discrimination cross borders. Even if a person were free in the Netherlands of stigma, it would be like living in a gilded cage, and that has negative effects as well. Absolutely nowhere does his study “prove” or even claim that “the large portion of the blame for mental illness lies with homosexuality”. That’s your folly, not his study.

The NEMESIS study shows exactly what I quoted. High levels of mental illness among homosexuals in a country where homosexuality is broadly accepted and gay marriage is legal. That’s the facts. So, to argue that the mental health issues are the result of society’s attitude toward homosexuals alone is proven false.

It should raise a red flag with many of you that the credibly documented and broadly accepted disease and mental illness directly linked to sexual orientation and sexual behavior goes ignored, denied, or is explained away by the homosexual community and its proponents.

Joe, gay people should face the facts not hide from them or explain them away. Stop assuming that the disease and mental illness is wholly the fault of society. Look at what is known and deal with reality.

Leave marriage alone. Leave our children’s education alone. Drop the phony equality nonsense and live your life. Stop forcing homosexuality on society in your quest for acceptance.

@Brenda
Very well said. I have not lived it but everything you said makes sense on a deep level.

Brenda,

Of course I disagree. Strangely though, many on this site continue to misquote me ascribe to me ideas or thoughts I’ve never expressed. Brenda, I never refered to homosexual youth as an abomination. Hell I never even used the word abomination.
I don’t deny the attitude much of society has toward homosexuals. It can be very cruel. Even in hollywood homosexuality is little more than a punch line. People just don’t take it seriously. However, the way to go about changing that is not an ‘in your face’ attitude that demands acceptance, raunchy gay pride parades, and calling everyone homophobes and bigots. Like it or not, this is the face of the homosexual community the public perceives. If you want others to treat you normal, act normal. Normal people don’t run around wearing their sexuality on their sleeve daring society to offend them. They don’t celebrate their sexuality in parades complete with nudity, lewd behavior, and an ‘in your face’ theme. They don’t demand respect through disrespectful behavior and name calling. Only homosexuals can change society’s perception of homosexuals. There’s a right way and a wrong way to go about this. For the most part, you’re going about it the wrong way.

Tovin,

You make a point. Problem is its unknown. The facts are that the report found disease and mental illness directly linked to sexual orientation, that homosexuality is broadly accepted and gay marriage is legal in the Netherlands. What is unknown is the extent to which social stigmas remain and attitudes persist and what role they play in the findings. So if we stick to what is known and deal with that, we avoid the risks assuming the unknown presents.

Yeah why on earth would a group that has been treated unfairly for centuries want to celebrate finally being able to be open about who they are? HG, people have been making the same complaint you just made about the gay community for decades yet we have made huge amounts of progress in achieving legal equality and societal acceptance. Luckily, we don’t have to depend on gaining support from the likes of you, nor do we even try. Younger generations have little problems accepting us for who we are without us having to change our tactics as not to offend your sensibilities. Believe it or not, most people now days accept the fact that not everyone acts or lives their life just like they do, but that they still deserve to be treated with the same respect. Unfortunately for you, societal attitudes are shifting, and we’re going to gain the legal rights you feel we don’t deserve.

HG,

You’re still vastly overgenerallizing, blaming all of these things on just the fact that people are gay rather than looking at the root cause. Yes, gay people still have higher incidence of mental health issues. But those incidence are lower in places with greater acceptance. This is a fact. But even in Netherlands, gay people still face stigma and isolation. As long as people like you exist that will always be true.

I’m exhibit A. I’m gay. I really have no problems in life that straight people don’t have. I have a committed relationship, we’re very happy, and I’m completely disease free and there’s absolutely no reason I won’t stay that way and life a very long, happy, disease free life together. That’s except one problem: I constantly have to spend hours each week trying to explain to other people who somehow think they know me better than me. It’s a relatively futile exercise, because obviously they rarely if ever change, and they continue to spout inaccuracies and misinformation about my life. They are not true. You see HG, no ones going around telling YOU you are sick and diseased when you are not. But for me, they are. YOU are. You don’t have this problem. I do. Therefore I am treated differently by society and you are not, and I have this incredibly frustrating problem in my life that can severely impact in my mental health and you do not. You are your own self-fulfilling prophecy.

You would not stand idly by while people assassinated your character on a daily basis. Neither do I.

Th simple fact is we all deserve equal treatment under the law. It’s our birthright as American citizens, and I will stand up and demand just as you have.

Joe,

I never said all homosexuals are diseased, much less that you are. Talk about rididulous. You go ahead and blame me and those like me for your problems. See where that gets you. Or, face the facts and deal with reality. Your call.

Black people have equal rights under the law. Are we likewise to assume black people never face any stigma in society as well? That the are never prejudged for the color of their skin? That never denied a job that they should have received? That they never face any problems white people don’t face simply because of the color of their skin? Did the civil rights act just magically make all the bigots go away?

Then why do you blame me for the actions of others? Are we not to be treated individually, judged by our own actions and not the actions of others? I am a good citizen, I have my own company, I pay my taxes, create jobs, I have a stable household, I do everything right. And yet you judge me based in the actions of others, restrict my rights based on what others do.

HG, tell me, what is it that I personally have done to be denied equal treatment under the law?

Exactly, HG. You made a generalization about all gay people, not directed at me but all gay people. And by my membership in that group you made me guilty of other people’s actions and not my own. That’s prejudice.

Joe,

I’m getting tired of repeating myself in answering your questions.

You’re not denied equal treatment. Marriage has never been about whoever anyone wants to marry. You and I both are free to marry a member of the opposite sex of our own choosing.

HG if I want to “face the facts” I’ll consult all of the major medical associations in the US that say homosexuality is fine. The only people who think otherwise are people like you who take data from other people’s studies and make conclusions that the study authors would strongly disagree with. Did you miss this part?

“Furthermore, controlling for psychological predictors of present distress seems to eliminate differences in mental health status between heterosexual and homosexual adolescents.”

Joe,

You’ve got problems. There i said it. Anyone reading your nonsense can see it. For crying out loud, Joe. I made no generalization about all gays. I spoke of the disease and mental disorder that follows homosexuality, not all homosexuals in general. Your inability to comprehend that distinction means your problem is in reading comprehension. A little education will fix it.

HG,

From Merriam Webster: Homosexuality – the quality or state of being homosexual.

The two are intrinsically linked. If it follows homosexuality, by definition it follows homosexuals.

HG, the NEMESIS study does not “prove” what you claim. Your claiming that it does does not make it so. Do you understand what “prove” means? The very study you cited itself says it does not prove what you claim and that it is not even possible for the study to prove what you claim. The study says: “Because of the study’s cross-sectional design, it is not possible to adequately address the question of the causes of the observed differences.” In order for the study to prove what you claim, it would have to disprove, for example, that social stigma, prejudice and discrimination negatively affect mental health. But the study does not disprove it. Instead, the study says that “The outcomes [of this study] are in line with findings from earlier studies” “which found a relationship between experiences of stigma, prejudice, and discrimination and mental health states.” Therefore the study does not prove what you claim. You say “gay marriage is legal” in the Netherlands, and yes, same-sex marriage is legal as of April 2001, but it wasn’t legal at the time of the study. It didn’t become legal until afterwards, and it didn’t become legal by popular vote. You allege that “homosexuality is broadly accepted” in the Netherlands, but “broadly accepted” is a vague term and has no scientific standard. For example, in the U.S., homosexuality is legal in all 50 states, and polls report that a majority of people in the U.S. support same-sex marriage. If that means that homosexuality is “broadly accepted” in the U.S., that doesn’t mean that many gay people do not suffer and continue to suffer from stigma, prejudice and discrimination. It is the same in the Netherlands. Again, even if society today were to totally and universally embrace homosexuality 100%, the study you cited shows that it does not erase the effects of the past that continue to affect people today. The study you cited says so: “Differences observed in the preceding year might be a consequence of earlier differences, since ever having had a specific disorder might predispose people to subsequent disorders.” How people were treated in years past continues to affect people today. And if I might remind you, “broadly” does not mean “universally”. Even in the Netherlands, it varies significantly from family to family, city to city. Even in Amsterdam, many gay people are afraid to hold hands in public. Contempt, even violence, toward gay people remains a problem even in Amsterdam. It exists in families, schools, everywhere. A survey in recent years reported that 40% of the Dutch people themselves did not believe that the Netherlands is gay-friendly. Another survey reported that 30% of the population remained homophobic. Indeed, it is quite possible that “broadly accepted” really means “broadly sensitized” to the point that what might be considered a minor offense elsewhere becomes viewed as a major offense, like the story of the princess and the pea. She couldn’t even sleep at night because she was so sensitive. And as I pointed out to you before, it also crosses borders. As an example, your posts can negatively affect people around the world, making you, what some would call, a spreader of disease.

Joe,

Well then take it up with the CDC and NEMESIS. They are the ones who linked the disease and mental health issues with homosexuality.

Of course your definition does not mean that I made a generalization about all gays and your persistence on this point demonstrates the lengths you will go to in order to blame your problems on others.

Tevin,

Believe whatever you wish.

HG,

As I’ve stated before, marriage is about marrying the person you love. Historically marriage has been restricted on what government says you should marry, restricted by religion, race, ethnicity, and now on gender.

Mildred Loving, a black woman who went all the way to the Supreme Court to legally marry the white man she loved, put it perfectly: “Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the ‘wrong kind of person’ for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.”

To you, like it was to Mildred, my partner is the “wrong kind of person” for me to marry simply because of his gender. Marrying has always been about forming a family with someone you love.

Yes, I could marry someone of the opposite sex. But this is 100% impractical. I’m gay. I’m not even attracted to women. It’s preposterous. What woman in the world would marry a gay guy? The 50% divorce rate already high enough. The world doesn’t need more loveless marriages.

We all deserve the same rights to pursue our own happiness in ways that are appropriate to us and no one else.

Wrong, Joe.

Best of luck to you.

HG,

I don’t blame others on my problems unless they are to blame. And you are attempting to dictate to me, even using the State Constitution in order to do so, how I am to live my life. If you tell me how to live my life and it causes problems, you own the problem. Otherwise get out of the way, treat me equally under the law, and mind your own business!

If the definition of marriage is sacred and shouldn’t be changed, which one of these definitions is the right one?

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/54935/original.jpg

HG,

You still have yet to explain to me one thing: Why do you care? You spend hours and hours, more time even than I do, on this subject, trying to tell other people how they are to live their lives? What harm is to you personally? What do you find so threatening that would consume such an enormous part of your life?

HG,

“Wrong.”

Oh I get it. You have a particular worldview, and any fact that does not meet with that worldview is simply “wrong’.

Please do us all a favor. Let it go. Go on, live your own life, let people live theirs. Go hug your wife or husband or kids, go play with them in the park, plan a trip, get out and enjoy the weekend, and concentrate on your own problems for once. It’s painfully clear to everyone you’ve been spending way too much time on other people’s.

HG, “if we stick to what is known and deal with that”, we DO NOT “avoid the risks”. And to “assume the unknown presents” is nothing more than choosing to remain mostly ignorant. Your posts exemplify that approach. You use phrases like “directly linked” but there is no proof that the link is “direct” rather than indirect by way of your approach of ignorance. For example, “if we stick with what is known”, we know, according to the World Health Organization, that “Gender is a critical determinant of mental health and mental illness” and that “These disorders, in which women predominate,… constitute a serious public health problem.” To use your language, there is a “direct link” between being female and a serious public health problem. Do we “deal with that” and “avoid the risks” by remaining in ignorance? No. The World Health Organization points out, “Gender specific risk factors for common mental disorders that disproportionately affect women include gender based violence, socioeconomic disadvantage, low income and income inequality, low or subordinate social status and rank and unremitting responsibility for the care of others.” Sound familiar? There’s a “direct link” between how society treats people and their mental health, whether you choose to ignore it or not.

HG, “Believe whatever you wish” is clearly your approach.

Tovind,

By HG’s logic, we should ban women from marrying and only let men marry.

Funny. This “flawed” poll you speak of reflects, almost exactly, the percentage of voters at the ballots who vote “yes” to pass marriage amendments (63% of voters). 31 of the 31 states, given the opportunity, passed marriage amendments, preventing same-sex marriage. This poll clearly uses the same language that the marriage amendments use, defining marriage as the union between one man and one woman. Only a third of respondents strongly disagreed with that statement, to the chagrin of liberals everywhere. We don’t need a poll to tell us that if voters in 31 states passed marriage amendments, that obviously does NOT equate to “majority support for legal recognition of same-sex marriage.” What nonsense. People will believe anything these days.

I suppose the people that believe the Jonah and the Whale story will believe anything, as long as it has the religious seal of approval.

Praise Jebus, God hates reality, Amen.

Dan,

I recommend you do nothing then, wait until election day and see if your prediction holds true then.

My life is 1000% better since I stopped reading anything posted by HG. He’s a boring old troll. We all have better things to do than to read his trash.

Only one place we’ll EVER receive our civil rights from is from the SAME place which racial minorities and women EVER received theirs from: THE COURTS!! Don’t spend ONE dime on these referendum campaigns!! NOT ONE F*CKING DIME to make HRC or NOM anymore richer than they already are!! Save your pennies for the court battles that will grant us our civil rights and freedoms NOT FROM ACTIVIST JUDGES but from the US CONSTITUTION which SAYS WE HAVE THOSE RIGHTS!! End of conversation!! Let the dumbf*ck hetero bigots like “HG” et al, p*ss out there hard earned $$$ on issues that will ultimately be decided in courts of law!! These Marriage Equality wedge issues serve ONE purpose and ONE purpose only: getting the republipuke sheep out to the polls! PERIOD!!

Dan, all of the polls showing majority support are from THIS YEAR. That’s what everyone is failing to understand, polls from even last year show significantly less support. Same-sex marriage didn’t have majority support in 2004, 2008, or even 2010. The claim is that it has majority support in 2011, as showed by several different polls from major national polling organizations. Public opinion on this issue is shifting rapidly, as can be seen if you look at the polling history from any organization that has been polling on the issue for a while.

The “everyone is free to marry a member of the opposite sex” argument reminds me of something Henry Ford once said:
“Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black.”

Both arguments are inane.

This wording of this poll that actually legitimate since that wording is similar to the way marriage amendments are usually worded on ballots.

>This wording of this poll is actually legitimate since that wording is similar to the way marriage amendments are usually worded on ballots.

Is the other polls that are worded oddly.

>It is the other polls that are worded oddly.

@Phil,

Easy for you to say.

Praise Jebus, God hates literacy, Amen.