Dear Is Mise,

I am in a stable heterosexual marriage. I cannot see how allowing same sex marriage changes that in any way.

It very much affects others if they can enjoy the benefits and stability of marriage. My status and feelings will be unchanged. The status of my marriage will not be lowered in any way. Same sex marriage does not discriminate against me. I lose nothing by it.

Some people will be unhappy if same sex marriage is legal. Some people probably were unhappy when Aboriginal people became full citizens. Probably any social change will make some people unhappy. I am unhappy with the overuse of the words, fantastic and awesome, for approval of a trivial matter. Gradations of approval are lost, but I'll have to live with it. I also wish rock music will disappear, but I'll have to live with that, too.

I did not enter into marriage with the wish of denying that state to others who were at that time denied it.

The meaning of words changes whether we want them to or not. The word, gay, has changed in meaning. The meaning of the word, girl, has also changed. At one time the word, girl, meant a child of either sex.

Well said David F.

I have always wondered whether people with opinions like Is Mise are actually telling the full truth about why they feel threatened by allowing homosexual people to legally marry.

Maybe in this rapidly changing world, with religious followers rapidly declining in many churches, some people like Is Mise still clutch to the old prejudices that they believed from old fiction books like the Bible? Such as homosexuality being an 'abomination'.

Other people may feel threatened by people who are different from themselves, such as the colour of their skin, their race, their culture, their religion, or....their sexuality.
People who do feel this way must be unhappy in their own lives, that they feel the need to put others down in order to feel better about themselves.....

Gays will never get their way because marriage is only the first step. Being accepted to be in an equal relationship to a heterosexual couple will never happen so they might as well just give up because their argument is more about equality than marriage.

My marriage is real and produced children, and now grand children. So if gays do get their way, which they will in time I for one will never see their relationship as equal to mine, as will many others so go ahead and knock yourself out but don't think getting the right to be married will be the end of the fight, because this is one fight they can't win.

Dear rehctub,

Prejudices do not exist in a vacuum but are propped up
by fearful mythology. The precise mythology that says
love and parenting can exist only within certain kinds
of families and these families can only be created via
a specific type of marriage only.

A narrative has been set in stone for some people.
A young person may be unsure and can experiment but
eventually they are supposed to choose sides - as though
sexual preference determines everything else.

A culture of homophobia cannot be legislated against.

Homosexuality is still punishable by death in seven countries.

I really couldn't care less about homosexuals, they can do whatever they like but I entered into marriage within a certain definition of that state and it is discriminatory to alter that definition to pander to the wishes of a not normal sub group in society.

I have posted before of my experience with homosexual soldiers (and others who would take an 'each way bet') and all of them were good soldiers and the only problem was allocating sleeping places and who shared which fox-hole.
Picquet duty was also a problem as those on that duty needed to keep their minds on the job in hand rather than stray into dalliance in quiet moments.

Of course 'marriage' is only one more step on their perceived equality road, marriage in church will be the next step and then marriage within particular denominations.

One wonders what the followers of Muhammad will then do.

Suse'

"Is Mise, homosexual relationships ARE 'normal', as I am convinced they are born gay, and thus what they do is 'normal' for them. It is just different to what heterosexuals do, but is no less normal...."

Normal means what is common to the majority in society.
If the majority of couples in a society were homosexual then homosexuality would be normal and heterosexuality would not be normal.

"....It is also a well known that some heterosexuals indulge in anal sex, especially in some very religious families where contraception is not allowed and they don't want too many children!"

BS, if they were religious then they would not engage in sodomy and if it is well known then please give a reference.
See;http://www.sexedlibrary.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Feature.showFeature&featureid=1036&pageid=682&parentid=478
which gives no religious viewpoint but would seem to indicate that sodomy was not resorted to for contraception as condoms were available.

Certainly sodomy was practiced as a means of birth control in ages past but there were other methods of birth control and a ball of cow/pigs fat was effective if messy and probably a bit smelly.