Nope. I didn't say that at all. I said humans are extremely social, and that's why we want acceptance for who we are, whether we identify as gay or straight.

Ha, ha! We're both trying to influence. I've never denied trying to influence. I'm talking about equality under the law. Having the right to same-sex marriage, doesn't mean you must personally accept it into your life, by having one. HOwever, saying I can't have one, is affecting the way I live.

You haven't made one yet. Calling me dishonest, and leaving it at that, isn't an argument.

I'd like to debate something of substance. You want to play semantic word games. No one is buying the junk you're peddling, so why don't you get lost?

Well, the government provides marraige. It makes sense that I'd want to influence it to accept equal marriage for same-sex couples, and you would want to influence it to not accept it. Trying to have what others have is not externalizing.

Maybe you should get a dictionary, and look up the words homosexuality and pedophilia. These are not the same things. The fact that you'd suggest this proves your ignorance and homophobia. It's a standard tactic of bigots to say a group they hate are a danger to those deemed vulnerable in society. Blood Libel myth has been used for centuries to suggest that Jews are a danger to Christian children. White racists in the U.S. southern states, thought or some still think, that black men are a threat to white women.

And why isn't heterosexual marriage an attempt by straight men to get closer to children? We know of men in heterosexual marriages, molest their daughters. This is very prevelent. Surely it implies a connection between heterosexuality and pedophilia. No? Do you know, that it's relatively recent that women have been allowed to refuse sex to their husbands? In Afghanistan they won't be able to do this. A study I posted in the Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing the Myths, showed that over 40% of straight men have thought of raping a woman. For the record, I am being facetious, and don't really believe this.

Becaue they teach about heterosexuality. Go back and read what I said, unless you have a comprehension problem. I was saying let teaching occur about both. Let that teaching be accurate. People already know about these things. Gays exist, just like straight people exist.

Ahhh...so profound-or not. What lesson would you like to be taught about homosexuality? People are going to know about it, and will be asking questions.

Okay, I agree. We're getting somewhere now.

That's a nice try. But there are good reasons to oppose Heroic Stalin day. Stalin did a lot of horrible things, we as a Constitutional democracy, a free society, with a Charter of Rights, cannot celebrate or endorse.

I prefer my children slow-roasted on a spit, thank you. To talk seriously about a serious matter, that's a very ignorant piece of propaganda on your part. My choice of perversion is Men's Workout magazine. There are definitely no kiddies there. It's all MEN!

That's obviously the opposite of what I said. But, I'll allow you a bit of leeway here. Perhaps you were confused by the way I said they have homosexuality or heterosexuality as their fundamental sexuality. I wasn't saying it's all the same or should be treated the same. I just meant that homosexuality and heterosexuality are themselves fundamental to the way one expresses one's self as a sexual human being. The paraphilias may not be. If a person represses his homosexuality or heterosexuality, that person totally represses themselves as a sexual human being. Even if pedophila could be proven just as fundamental, it is still harmful, and that need to be considered. I'll concede I could have been clearer on that point.

I don't appreciate being accused of wanting to molest children. Talk about a heinous attack! Naturally, it affects my personal life, and my status in society.

It's not all about sex acts, even if that's your personal issue(I don't know for sure). We discuss sex between a man and a man. There's nothing wrong with teaching that men and men have sex. It's important to teach about things like disease, relationships, just as they do with heterosexual sex. It's no more promoting for homosexuality than it is for heterosexuality. It's about providing accurate, unbiased, education.

Canada is kind of similar. Equal marriage for same-sex couples was decided on the provincial level. Then the federal government enacted legislation, when enough provinces had passed laws(actually just complied with legislation after court rulings). But popular votes on these issues are not allowed here. I realize that balance of power, that allows for free popular votes exists in the U.S. Marriage is a social and a civil issue.