GUEST COLUMN: America must change its views on homosexuality

Wednesday, February 18, 2009 | 10:00 a.m. CST; updated 11:13 a.m. CDT, Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Editor's note: The author, Andy, is a 14-year-old junior high student in Columbia. He was encouraged to submit this essay to the Missourian by one of his teachers. His last name is withheld by request.

I’m 14 years old, and yes, I am gay. I know it's not a walk in the park for any teen to grow up and “change.” I would say my life is a normal one. However, I fear that one day I will be in my boyfriend's arms and he’ll ask me to marry him. There lies the fear that I’ll have to give up being myself. I have been through talks about phases. I believe strongly this is no phase. I’m writing this article so that maybe one person will read this, and try to help my cause.

It is within everyone that you have to be a better person, live for a better cause, and provide for the better life. It's my story, or rather struggle, that I hope you’ll see why America needs its views changed on homosexuality.

I have As in every class, I like baseball and football, and I also write. If you looked at me you’d have no idea I’m gay. If you got to know me and studied me, you’d see. I may be 14 and may not know that the world isn’t bad, but I see America degrading its people, and everything Americans do against gay people is against even our founding fathers’ words. Below I’m going to describe the U.S. Constitution.

The preamble states “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.” Right there America came together to end the hate, the killings and even the churches overpowering people's lives. That’s all I need. Earlier in the start of our country, even the British knew that Separation of Church and State was needed. Today this rule still is active. However, we deny this rule and use it to stop America from being ruined.

I know religion has played a big part in the government's mind over allowing homosexuals to marry. But realize every time you say no, more gays come on board the fight for rights. Every time you say no, you’ll be ruining a couple's life by not giving the “partner” rights to the deceased’s belongings, which means even kids you love will have to go live with grandparents, sisters or family members.

Every time you say no, you also avoid the best way to handle the problem.

If gay marriage were allowed in America, under the Separation of Church and State, each church then would have the right to practice it. They then wouldn’t have to fight; then homosexual men and women would be able to share a bond, to give rights to their spouse, and wouldn’t have to give up their home state to be married.

Same-sex marriage is legal in one state — Massachusetts. Eight states ban same-sex marriage, and the constitution bans same-sex marriage. America has the principal that being different is OK. However, the American youth have been brought up to think this is bad, being homosexual is bad. I know that every time I hear “that’s gay” to describe something it hurts. You may think it is no big deal. Well every day countless students in America will say "that’s gay."

Out of those students, some will go on and bash gay people in public areas. The rest will teach their kids being a homosexual is wrong. I will not, nor can I change your view. But if being gay is so “bad,” then don’t be gay! If you ruin a person's life over them being gay you're going against their “freedom to be heard.” And I understand that everyone lives, grows and dies. But Americans, wake up, smell the roses and live your own life!

I’ll end my story by saying Harvey Milk died in the name of a perfect union. Bill Clinton was smart and gave homosexuals the right to defend our country. And you have the power to make up your own mind, whether you're for or against it. Homosexual marriage is going to work. Now or later. No one has the right to hide. Stop making them!


Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Kevin Gamble February 18, 2009 | 1:04 p.m.

Andy, thank you for this excellent and brave piece. You're completely right, and you demonstrate wisdom that most people in this country simply don't have, and they fill that gap with fear and hatred.

This may be the last 'acceptable' prejudice/apartheid in this country, and as you say, it will be defeated at some point. But in the meantime, it's incredibly sad to see the millions of seemingly good-intentioned people who so casually deprive their fellow citizens of basic freedoms, when those citizens are doing harm to none, because of what they've been taught to believe. Because they believe some dusty old book tells them it's the right thing to do.

In time, the current majority of bigots will be recognized as primitive, like those who think non-whites are an inferior species and those who thought the sun revolved around the earth. But in the meantime, millions of people here and now are suffering for their quiet hatred.

(Report Comment)
Charles Ludeke February 18, 2009 | 2:35 p.m.

Great column, Andy. It's wonderful to see someone so confident in himself. Stay strong. Stay positive. Work toward change; to make things better.

Next time you hear people using the phrase, "That's gay," you could always try educating them as to why it shouldn't be used. That it is effectively perpetuating subconscious hate against the LGBT community.

Either that, or even changing the notion of how "That's gay!" is used. Instead of it being a negative, convince more people to use it positively.

For instance, when you see something you like, say "That's gay!" Mean it to be something good. Something great. Something awesome, that everyone should enjoy.

Take back the phrase. Make it your own.

Good luck, Andy. You have my support.

(Report Comment)
Ricky O'Bannon February 18, 2009 | 2:39 p.m.

Andy, great piece. I enjoyed reading it and sympathize with the struggle and issues about which you write. The use of the term "gay" as a pejorative has become widespread and I would agree that it is tossed around with little or no thought about what it actually means.

My main question for anyone to respond to is about the hot topic of gay marriage. I have recently wondered if perhaps this has become a red herring that has taken focus away from where it may be better placed. Social justice is often a series of small, progressive steps toward an ultimate goal rather than broad, radical leaps. So I ask, is the more humble goal of establishing civil unions (or possibly another term) with the same legal and government recognition as a marriage a more attainable and worthwhile goal in the short term? Or would that be viewed as just another unacceptable case of "separate but equal?"

Marriage is for the most part can't be divorced (pardon my pun) from its religious connection, and whether we like it or not asking a significant portion of our population to ignore that "dusty old book" as Kevin mentioned is nearly impossible just as I would be recalcitrant to someone else imposing their spiritual beliefs on me. I wonder if asking for marriage is asking for acceptance from a section of the populous who is unfortunately set in their ways and may never accept homosexuality in general, but other than the significance and symbolism, should it be the legal rights connected to marriage that should be fought for first? I wonder if this objective was lost in the debate that enveloped and polarized this country a few years ago when the "m-word" was put on the table. Should we refocus efforts or are we on the right course? What do you think?

(Report Comment)
Danielle Koonce February 18, 2009 | 3:21 p.m.

Great to see this!!

I'm more on the side of allowing civil unions that provide a bond for couples legally and discontinuing "marriage" under the law as it is based in religion. That's mainly for the separation of church and state though. I still think that same sex couples should be allowed to "marry" if they are religious.

But anyhow, you're very awesome for submitting this. And I think there are a lot of other people that no one would notice were gay at first glance because of the stereotypes they hold of gay individuals.

(Report Comment)
Drew D February 18, 2009 | 4:07 p.m.

I love to see, that I'm not alone. I wrote this to set-up a base for the furture articles I'm starting to write.

The fight now is a split. The marriage idea and gay adoption.

Harvey Milk made an office in government. So either we need that hero or I'll become as much of one we need. Every comment, view, and approval is one way we are getting heard. So everyone, gay or straight, to show this important don't stop here. Lets ALL voice our Oppinions!

(Report Comment)
Lane Wilson February 18, 2009 | 7:28 p.m.

Great column! Sad, though, that we have to be having this conversation in the 21st century.

(Report Comment)
Drew D February 19, 2009 | 8:48 a.m.

Who here would protest?

Go to Washington?

Who wants to join the Rights Fight?

And should I do another article, would you like to it?

(Report Comment)
Danielle Koonce February 19, 2009 | 9:59 a.m.

I'm all for taking visible action through protesting and so forth. People need to remember how much they can change things!

(Report Comment)
Drew D February 19, 2009 | 12:22 p.m.

Danielle thanks for taking so much for interst. I would like to know what role you play in this Fight. Sorry for being rude, but its cool to see someone, like me fight so hard without throwing a punch.

Please everyone tell me what role you play in this fight. Be yourself and Fight for you. It ends up being the same.


(Report Comment)
Danielle Koonce February 20, 2009 | 11:16 a.m.

I'm not sure if I exactly understand what you mean by "what role", but I'll try and answer.

This fight is important to me because I am bisexual, and there is a personal impact. I also have many friends in the queer community who are hurt that they cannot marry the person that they love. When I attended MU I worked at the LGBT Resource Center for a while which had such a positive influence on my life.

I'm a self proclaimed feminist, which I believe encompasses the rights not only of women, but of all oppressed people.

(Report Comment)
Drew D February 20, 2009 | 3:55 p.m.

Thats what I meant. And Thank you for sharing. Its going to help, all of us will. So please don't stop, share who you are, and Lets fight to win, together.

(Report Comment)
Drew D February 25, 2009 | 8:40 a.m.

Hey everyone. I wanted to tell you in March I will be "coming out". Well I'll spread my name, and view even more. But I want to know if you have any topic you'd like me to address?

If so no matter what I will!

Andrew, Andy, Drew.

(Report Comment)
David McInnis March 2, 2009 | 11:13 p.m.

I applaud you, Andy/Drew for your courage to acknowledge and to be who you are. And for speaking out for equality.

I don't condone sex for anyone, straight or gay, at 14 years old, though. You didn't say you did, but I'm just stating a position.

Anyway, I, personally, am an athiest. Couldn't tell by looking at me. It's not going to accidentally rub off on people near me. Believe me, if you haven't heard it yet, you will: gayness might be contagious. Stay back from the gay man, kids! Kinda like leprosy. Atheism, not so much. You do realize I'm being facetious.

But amazingly enough, without the 'divine inspiration' from some book, I still have compassion for my fellow human being. I still believe we are born to be who we are despite the early indoctrination or later attempts at 'retraining' us to follow the accepted norm.

Many like you that come to the realization that they are gay try to fight the notion because they are taught that it's an abomination. So they are in turmoil because their feelings are seen as a sin against God (I capitalized it for the sake of the rest of you). Unfortunately, many attempt suicide; more unfortunately, some succeed.

For the religious, God created all of us. And if God is infallible, and God created homosexuals and heterosexuals, then both are His children. By saying that homosexuality is wrong, aren't you saying God made a mistake? Try THAT one on for size you intolerant Republicans! LOL

For the non-religious, we are born who we are, and hopefully, despite all the crap that's dumped into our heads, we will still be who we were meant to be and not fight against ourselves.

As far as gay marriage, I believe that it should be fully legal. My ex-wife (yes, my ex--we lasted 3 years) has a friend who has been with his boyfriend for over 20 years! Do I think all gay marriages would last that long? No. Just as our heterosexual marriage didn't. But I feel you should have the same opportunity to succeed or fail.

And the arguments against gay marriage are weak!! The biggest one: Marriage should be for propagation of the species. Well, then shouldn't we ban women past child-bearing age from getting married? Or senior citizens in general? Or guys that have had vasectomies? The powers that be didn't even ask (yes, I'm fixed) before I got remarried.

I'm sorry, I tend to rant. And I don't always choose my words wisely. I hope there's nothing above that offends or seems less than well-thought out. I know I used a few pronouns like 'you (plural)' and 'they' but I don't mean to alienate. We're all in this life together, friend.

The best advice I can give, and if I'm repeating myself so be it, is be yourself. And you already seem to have a strong sense of who you are.

Again, I applaud you.
And again, no sex at 14, dude!! (but if you do, be safe)

Take care, and best wishes,


(Report Comment)
Meg Mitchell March 3, 2009 | 2:18 a.m.

@Ricky, if marriage was about religion, why all the legal benefits? Why do atheists, agnostics, et al get married? The truth is, there are two kinds of marriage: legal and religious. It's a shame so many people confuse the two. Anyway, most queers I know don't much care for the approval of bigots. We just want the legal rights we're due. When interracial marriage was being debated, many strongly opposed it on religious grounds, using the same arguments that are being used against same-sex marriage today. Do you think it would have been fair and just if interracial couples were allowed to have a "civil union" but not a "marriage"? Of course not! One person's right to religious freedom ends when it begins to violate another's human rights.

Thank you for having the courage to write and publish this, Andy. It was a very brave thing to do, and probably not easy in today's political climate.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 3, 2009 | 4:07 a.m.

Although I see this young man's views I do not feel any traditionally raised citizen should be forced by law nor by public opinion to change their view points on the issue of homosexuality or the behaviors that go along with it.

Alot of citizens are raised in the traditional style of home by long standing traditional parents with traditional values who were raised by their traditional parents who were raised by their parents in kind.

Why should these people be forced to change their sense of moral values after they have been raised in this traditional Christian manner that has held their family values in check these long many years.

You are practically asking these same people to abandon their family core,their family make up,their family heritage and more.

Is that right of any citizen to ask of another citizen?

To myself also being raised in a traditional family it wreaks of coercion to be told "You Must Change Your Sense of Values" and to that request or demand or whatever they call it or present it as I say "Oh Hell No!"

My suggestion is that the homosexual community learn to adapt to every citizen around them and not visa versa because that is what "America is founded upon is adaptability".

All are created equal this is true but your rights cease in the venue of being out in public when your behaviors offend me as a citizen just as my rights end out in public if my behaviors offend you.

It goes both ways.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 3, 2009 | 7:33 a.m.

Here is my take on this whole issue. I don't really care what your sexual orientation is, but I don't want it "thrust in my face" every time I read the Newspaper.

To me (and probably most people), a person's sexuality is supposed to be personal and private. I don't want to hear about your sexuality whether you are gay or straight. I have nothing against a person that is gay, but it occurs to me that I see more gay people putting their sexuality out here for the world to see more than anyone else; in hopes that everyone will accept it I guess? I don't want to hear about your preferences towards someone of the same sex anymore than I want to hear about the preferences of someone towards the opposite sex.

So, you are gay? No big deal. Just be who you are, but for God's sake you don't have to make it a mission to force us all to hear about it. Just be who you are, and stop trying to get everyone to accept you; because no matter what you are that simply is not going to happen.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 3, 2009 | 8:33 a.m.

Amen Rick!!

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 3, 2009 | 8:36 a.m.

Its only about equal rights. I'm not going anyone so please voice your opinion. But I have to say its not your place to Tell me to keep it to myself.. Its about ensuring my safety and my rights, those the constitution has given me. Those most americans keep locked up, hidden, and dose not let my look at them one.


Thats my view.

(Report Comment)
Steven Welliver March 3, 2009 | 8:37 a.m.

Charles, your ignorance offends me, so I suppose you should stay out of the public. Nobody has asked you personally to give up anything, and if your "family core" is shaken by the fact that the family two other people have formed is legally recognized then I'd say yours was pretty unstable to begin with.

Andy, great column. You're a brave, intelligent guy. Keep up the good work.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 3, 2009 | 10:02 a.m.

Drew D. Says: "But I have to say its not your place to Tell me to keep it to myself.. Its about ensuring my safety and my rights, those the constitution has given me. Those most americans keep locked up, hidden, and dose not let my look at them one."

Excuse me Drew, but if you are not going to keep what is supposed to be private and personal to yourself, then it IS my place to tell you to keep it to yourself. And anyone else that might not want to hear about it or see it. It's not that I care if you are gay or not; because I don't. I couldn't care less to be hones with you. But, I don't want to hear about your sexual orientation, or why it should be acceptable for you to be openly gay, anymore than I want to witness a man and a woman having sex on the streets of Columbia,

I just don't care either way, BUT I do care about what YOU are trying to expose ME to! You probably would not be too fond of me going out to where you live, and taking a crap in front of your house, would you? Okay then, don't expose to me to something that I think is just a personal and private, please?


(Report Comment)
Brandon Schatsiek March 3, 2009 | 10:12 a.m.

Great article Andy.

I am personally not gay but have friends that are and I live and fight vicariously through them. I am a very religious person as well but do feel that God loves everyone no matter their race, sex, religion, sexual preference, etc. Not that that should even matter to those that don't believe in God but just they way I see things. I hope that you use your talents to push forward in gaining recognition by the US government. Everyone deserves to be with the person they love. Just remember not too long ago it was seen as an abomination to marry someone that was of a different race. This is now seen all over the place including with our president. I wish you luck in all of your future endeavors. ALWAYS fight for what you believe in.

God Bless...

Brandon Schatsiek

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking March 3, 2009 | 10:30 a.m.

A comment for Andy:

You seem very bright and committed to your beliefs, and that is good. I do not mean to criticize homosexuality or gay marriage - I support gay marriage and rights.

You're only 14. I imagine you haven't been interested in sexuality for more than a year or two, am I right? It is hard to know, at your age, really who you are. I knew classmates who experimented with homosexuality when they were your age, and none of them went on to actually have any sort of lasting same-sex relationship. Others, who dated conventionally for a few years, went on to be some of the earliest of the "Gay and Prouds" in the 70's.

Give it time. Date those people that interest you, and keep an open mind. There's no one that says you have to be straight or gay but yourself and your feelings. But give your feelings some time to mellow and mature.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 3, 2009 | 10:55 a.m.

Steven Welliver thank you for coming out of the closet for us all here.

My beliefs and values are my own and as Rick said when you push yours into my face that is where I will draw the line in the sand so to speak.

Deal with it.

(Report Comment)
John Schultz March 3, 2009 | 11:12 a.m.

Chuck, people have a right to express themselves in public. If you or someone else does not like it, and they are not breaking the law, then you are free to walk away.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 3, 2009 | 11:29 a.m.

John Schultz Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Boone County if you or anyone is exposing me or anybody I am with to behaviors that are offensive to me or my friends with me I have the right to say "No that is no acceptable" because it is offensive in nature to my beliefs and values.

I like the way Rick said it. Would you like me or anybody to come take a huge dump in your front yard right in front of you,your wife or your kids? I doubt it and the same goes for you exposing me or my friends to homosexual behaviors we might find offensive too.

Your rights end when you subject me or my friends to any and all offensive behaviors that are against our values and or morals.

Please keep your behaviors to yourself and I will keep mine to myself in public as I always do. If you offend me in public you dam right I am going to say something guaranteed.

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking March 3, 2009 | 11:43 a.m.

Chuck, last I heard we still have something called "Freedom of Speech". This means if someone wants to talk about their homosexuality, they can, just like someone might want to talk about their heterosexuality (within generally accepted limits of graphic or obscene descriptions). People also have the right to publically advocate white supremacy or Holocaust denial. That does not mean anyone has to listen to it.


(Report Comment)
John Schultz March 3, 2009 | 12:37 p.m.

Chuck, if you come and "take a dump" on my front lawn, prepare to be arrested for trespassing or worse. It is not at all the same as someone expressing "homosexual behaviors" in a public place. If someone did that in front of you, you have the right to tell them what you think, but not to make them stop. If they are breaking the law, then you can call the police. Otherwise, man up and deal with it. You do not have a right to not be offended by someone's beliefs or actions.

(Report Comment)
Greg Wasserman March 3, 2009 | 1:22 p.m.

Did someone really just compare homosexuality to defecating on someone's lawn?

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 3, 2009 | 1:23 p.m.

John Schultz Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Boone County so you are saying if a homosexual couple came to the edge of your property and had sexual relations on that spot you would allow that behavior or you would call the police or would you stand and watch telling them that was not appropriate?

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking March 3, 2009 | 1:27 p.m.

Public sexual relations are considered indecent exposure, and illegal. Gay marriage or gay rights have nothing to do with that, Chuck. You're really reaching with that one.


(Report Comment)
Matt Y March 3, 2009 | 1:43 p.m.

That's almost as good as Chuck opposing marijuana legalization because parents might buy their kids too many snack foods.

More and more, I just have this feeling that he's an elaborate joke.

(Report Comment)
John Schultz March 3, 2009 | 2:04 p.m.

Matt Y, sadly I am fairly sure Chuck is real and means every word he says, no matter the counter-arguments that are raised.

(Report Comment)
Ayn Rand March 3, 2009 | 2:13 p.m.

Yes, he's a real human being:

(Report Comment)
John Schuppan March 3, 2009 | 2:35 p.m.

Maybe if the city didn't cut Paquin's bus budget, he [Dudley] wouldn't have time to ruin the nice article Andy wrote.

Andy, for those of us who quietly join you in the fight for equality – thanks. For those who feel this is thrust in their face & worry about “them gays” ruining every thread of the wholesome blanket America warms itself with – I suggest reading another article.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 3, 2009 | 3:15 p.m.

John Schuppan obviously you do not understand the basics of debate on this site and how we as citizens are entitled to our opinions.

Nobody says you have to read them and I welcome you to just scroll on by mine whenever you see my posts.

(Report Comment)
Porsha Williams March 3, 2009 | 3:35 p.m.

I'm thinking that this Paquin place must be the last denizen of uncivilized society, and I would like to mention that I am so very glad I have no links to the rampant "open mouth insert foot" disease that is assaulting the town and its citizens. That being said, I'm shocked, appalled, and demoralized at the fact that society continues to hold on to these last few bits of lint and cobwebs that are our blatantly discriminating past. We've seen change in a way that we once could never dream at the beginning of this year, yet we still have to have *someone* to be our personal punching bag, even if their lifestyle and choices do not concern or affect us. Though our country is built on freedom of speech, I'll continue to hope and pray that those without a shred of knowledge on what they are speaking about refrain in the future from subjecting the rest of us to their rants and ravings. Take a pill, Chuck - a shave might help as well. Your favourite, Porsha "Try Me" Williams. =)

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 3, 2009 | 3:54 p.m.

Sex, really?

Ok. I'm 14. Sex is nothing. I'm not saying let gay actions take over. No I will stand. I will fight. Its not about shoving it in your face. Its about living your live. So take it and deal with it your own way.

I have thought of myself. I knew last year. It took a few years but I know. So what, how will me having really affect anyone? This is about life. And IF I am kept from saving a child from no home where is that justice?
If my dying Boyfriend wishes to give it all to me, I won't get it.

You, if you truely don't care, why aren't you leaving this only, why aren't you allowing gays to live?

Fight me! Oppose me! And I will bring 110% to this. I'm not asking America to throw away family Value, or to have people bring homosexuality to a person taking dump on a yard.

I'm only asking for you to look at me, to my life, and to thoses who are the same. Gay, Straight, Bisexual, and transgendered. It dose not matter. We are flesh & blood. So yeah this is something that needs to be in papers, on tv, and in your mind.

I will not stand for injustice!


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 3, 2009 | 4:14 p.m.

Porsha Williams Nobody says you have to read them and I welcome you to just scroll on by mine whenever you see my posts.

>>> Drew D If my dying Boyfriend wishes to give it all to me, I won't get it.<<<

I call bullox due to any attorney can set up a living will of trust that allows anybody to leave their possessions to anybody they choose to. Anybody can write up their own will as well and have to notarized by a Notary Public. All of the forms are online and for free.

>>>Drew D I will not stand for injustice! <<<

Wow 14 years old and how much injustice have you seen at 14? Wait until you get over 40 and then you might be able to say this type of statement to it's fullest.

I do aplaud you for your tenacity but Drew you have alot of hard years ahead of you that you do not really even know which road you will choose yet.

That is up to you alone. You can make it hard or you can make it easy but either or it is your choice alone. Choose wisely young man for once you begin that journey often times it is not so easy to switch roads or to find your way back to that fork in the road you passed up knowingly.

(Report Comment)
John Schultz March 3, 2009 | 4:37 p.m.

Chuck, marriage isn't just about being able to pass possessions to the person of your choice. Hospital visits is one big area that I have heard of gay people not being allowed to see a partner, even when they are terminal. How does a contract solve that problem?

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 3, 2009 | 5:05 p.m.

Life its a hard thing. There isn't any easy way out!

What happens if within the first few months of a relationship my "partner" dies. Its not about wills.

You'd be surprise. I see racism, I see people mistreating women, and world problems. So yeah America is an example for people. Its not fair, and stop yourself from saying lifes not fair. All I have done here is got people thinking, nothing else, meaning I don't care what you do, because One person grows to two, to three, and so fourth. So I'm 14. It dose not mean I am not wise in my actions, and what happens in the world I live in.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 3, 2009 | 5:29 p.m.


I am certainly not asking you to stand for injustice, apparently you do not know much about me or what I do...

If your argument is about equality, being oppressed, being discriminated against, or anything of this nature, then your argument has very little to do with being gay. Being gay may be the reason some people choose to oppress you, disrespect you, discriminate against you, or whatever, but those people can all be lopped into the same category as people that act the same way towards blacks, or Jews. They are just shallow minded people. You are not going to change everyone's mind. Some people CHOOSE to be shallow minded. In essence your argument would be about how shallow minded people choose to disrespect or discriminate against you because of your personal preferences.

But this is not my point, as I said many times here, I don't think I could care any less that you are gay. But, I don't want to have to be reminded of it constantly. Perhaps some of the attention that is drawn to you, is drawn by you? Have you ever thought about that? It's not ALWAYS a good thing when "the squeaky wheel gets the grease"...

Perhaps instead of making sure that everyone knows that you are gay, if you were just yourself, kept your private and personal preferences to yourself, life might seem a bit less "discriminatory"... I am not saying don't be proud of who you are, but you don't have to wear your personal and private preferences like some brand new baseball hat that you just bought at Yankee Stadium.

Being gay deserves no more attention than being straight. I am not sure that either deserves much attention from anyone.

I often thing that it is not as much about people discriminating or disrespecting, as it may be about people being disrespected. Now for example, if you want to make out with another guy, go ahead! But, have some respect and keep it private, perhaps the whole world does not want to see it? To be honest, "heavy displays of affection" in public, are considered distasteful by most people whether it is by a gay couple or a straight couple.

Being flesh and blood does not mean that you have carte blanch to expose me to your beliefs. Charles Manson is flesh and blood, so should we all have to be exposed to his madness? Now, I am not trying to make a comparison here, what I AM saying is that "the old we are all flesh and blood excuse" really does not hold water with me.

Some things are just better kept private.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 3, 2009 | 6:26 p.m.

>>> Ricky Gurley Being gay deserves no more attention than being straight. I am not sure that either deserves much attention from anyone. <<<

Well stated.

>>> Drew What happens if within the first few months of a relationship my "partner" dies. Its not about wills. <<<

Young man a few months does not a true relationship make by far. That is just the start of a friendship IMHO.

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 3, 2009 | 7:14 p.m.

I never said I want more attention. I would not be here if I had the right in the first place. As soon as I'm "equal" in governments eyes then gladly I'll shut up. But I'm using the freedom of Press. So get everyone to listen, fix, and solve the problem.

If redefining marriage needs to be brought up I'll say that America allows black and whites to marry because they took it opon themselfs to change. So theres nothing wrong with gays saying we should not do the same.

Everyone will watch and once we win, maybe in 20, you'll see far more like a gay president. It dosen't matter how you attack this is the civil fight faced at the beginning of the second thousand set of year after the birth of our "lord". So begin to watch america adapt "straight" america adapt to us rather then us getting screwed out being told deal with it!

(Report Comment)
Porsha Williams March 3, 2009 | 7:35 p.m.

That was weak, Chuck. WEAK, just like I knew it would be. To Drew and all the others on the fence of equality vs. masked prejudice, keep on keepin on. I'm not going to waste my breath or blow a gasket on people who will never get the drift. I actually have a job to do, so I can pay taxes and take care of my family, and contribute to the betterment of SOCIETY vs. up taking up space and polluting the air with a bunch of okie-doke. Live and Let Live!!

(Report Comment)
Lucy K March 3, 2009 | 8:53 p.m.

When 'traditional values' people express concerns about gay people being too out and proud, exhibiting offensive behaviour, or making private things public, what are you talking about exactly?

Because straight sexuality is out and obvious all over our culture; in advertising, you see straight couples everywhere, in TV shows & movies, people express hetero desire all the time, on the streets, no-one complains if you hold hands or even kiss, and people discuss hetero relationships in papers and on TV. Should all these things be kept 'private' too? No-one should express feelings for another person in public at all?

If it's ok for straight people to be obviously in couples in public, why is it not ok for gay people? I'm not talking about sex on the streets or other illegal activity, just normal behaviour which happens to be with a person of the same sex.

Imagine for a moment that it is heterosexuality that's stigmatised. You're a man with a girlfriend you adore, but you can't get married because you're (ssh!) straight, and straight people aren't allowed to have legal partnerships. You go to work and you know that if you mention your female partner, people will stare and you'll lose friends; you might even get fired if you're unlucky. So you pretend you spent your weekend with a boyfriend, and you police yourself every moment in case you slipped up and used the wrong pronoun or said something that doesn't fit your story. Or you just try not to say anything, avoid the questions, hide your entire personal life, because if you tell the truth someone will express disgust and disapproval. It might be your manager. But keep your mouth shut like that and everyone you work with will think you're weird and unfriendly. You can't win.

I haven't the heart to ask you to imagine coming home to find your girlfriend's been taken to hospital, seriously ill, and you can't arrange to see her; or going out for the evening, avoiding holding hands on the street, and going to one of the two bars which are friendly to straight people like you (and they get windows broken sometimes); walking down the street or opening a magazine and seeing ads everywhere with smiling women holding hands or men embracing, advertising chocolates and deodorant and movies and Kraft dinners and making it clear that you're a freak, you're not normal, or there'd be people like you visible somewhere.

When you ask gay people to keep it to themselves, you're asking them to spend their whole lives acting something they're not, or worrying constantly about what they say and do, when the consequences range from dirty looks through verbal abuse to physical violence. Can you imagine what that's like? Pretending, all the time, being on edge every single day? It's just not ok to tell anyone they should hide like that, or to make people live in a world which tells them loudly at every turn that they are wrong, unacceptable and lewd simply for existing.

(Report Comment)
Lucy K March 3, 2009 | 8:53 p.m.

And to conclude, because my comment got too long:

You are welcome to think what you like in the privacy of your own head, but when you deprive other people of rights you have because of something they didn't choose, that's wrong. When you tell someone they can't do something you can, because you're straight and they're gay, that's wrong. You don't have to change your values - no-one can make you - but your *behaviour* must respect other people's rights and values, too.

(Report Comment)
Deleted Account March 3, 2009 | 10:38 p.m.

Come on America! Things will NOT come automatically! Fight for the power! Demand the change!

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 3, 2009 | 11:37 p.m.

I never thought this. I'm amazed. And yet I can't believe the way the comments have been like lately. Keep it up. Lets debate.

Come on someone, lets fight verbally because thats going to fix the problems. If you have a problem address it please and then let me and my follow comment-ers, answer our beliefs. No I'm not going to change your view but it about getting you to think if its really wrong. So I'm going to get married somehow. Lets truelly speak of the pros & cons. Please enlighten me!


(Report Comment)
Ricki Fudge March 4, 2009 | 7:50 a.m.

>>> Ricky Gurley Being gay deserves no more attention than being straight. I am not sure that either deserves much attention from anyone. <<<
>>>Chuck - Well Stated.<<<<

Stop and think about what this says. You go on about being gay not deserving more attention than being straight, yet our government gives it more attention by stating that gay marriage is illegal. No one in the gay community that I know is looking for attention, we just want the same rights as any other American. We want to be able to marry the person we love, and have all the goodies that goes along with that.

As Americans we should see how we are discriminating our own people and make the change to better ourselves.

Andy, I think that as a 14 year old you have shown great courage to voice your opinions and beliefs. One day it will make a difference.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 4, 2009 | 8:39 a.m.

I have a few questions here, and I am just curious.

Why is marriage so important to the gay community?

Why not just have a "life partner" and not worry about the marriage?

What is it about that piece of paper that comes from being married that makes this such a hot topic?


(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking March 4, 2009 | 8:46 a.m.

This has really nothing to do with gay rights, as I've had my say about that, and Drew, I hope you will be able to marry whoever you want.

Is it just me, or do other people detect a significant difference in the style and grammar of Drew's essay, and his later posts? If I were his teacher, I'd wonder about how much help he had in coming up with the finished product.


(Report Comment)
John Schultz March 4, 2009 | 9:46 a.m.

Rick, part of it I think is the spousal rights that government has conferred on married partners. Some of that can be resolved via contracts and other lawyer work, but some cannot (Social Security benefits, hospital visitation, etc.). In my ideal world, people would not have to rely on a piece of paper from the government for these activities.

(Report Comment)
Deleted Account March 4, 2009 | 6:48 p.m.

People stop picking on the kid! He is 14 not 20s or 30s or 40s or whatever you are. He's not an adult and I'm positive he doesn't like it when you people compare being homosexual to "taking a dump in someone's front yard". Please just use your sense and help don't hurt.

Fight for [the] power! Demand the change!

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 4, 2009 | 6:50 p.m.

The first thing that caught my eye about this article was in the title the word "Must".

Now as human nature is when you tell anybody they "must" do something their first reaction is to tell you to jump off a high cliff. That word just does not right with anybody and never will.

Nobody is going to listen to you Drew and especially being you are only 14 when you use the word "must" in any frame or sense of the word.

Think about it and how it relates to what you wish others would do and how you wish they would feel in this issue.

(Report Comment)
Deleted Account March 4, 2009 | 7:00 p.m.

Charles: Like I said earlier, stop picking on him. He is fourteen! Just because he "doesn't have good writing skills" doesn't mean he didn't make a point worth talking about and more importantly acting about! The country needs change!

Fight for [the] power! Demand the change!

(Report Comment)
Katie Walley March 4, 2009 | 7:14 p.m.

I would like to point out that the title or Web headline of this guest column is created by a copy editor, not the author. The roles of a copy editor that most people know about are editing for style, grammar and clarity. However, most people don't know that copy editors are the ones writing the headlines. This is not always the case, but for the Missourian, it is a part of our copy editing duties.

Katie Walley
Assistant news editor

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 4, 2009 | 8:45 p.m.

I have two voices. One of that I use to show my view as such in the article, and The normal one here.

Partner! I hate that word, that gives more attention to gays too. Its a difference, so "Life Partner" dose not cut it. Marriage isn't really about the benefits, yes they give us more to do incase of death or taxes, but Marriage is to combined under god. You may believe in him or not, but if god so forgives sins, this is just anthor sin to forgive, no worse than drinking.

I'm thanking everyone, the LGBT members, and those who have questioned this.

We are looking to drop the differences, so yes give the marriage and lets have kids, that could be given homes and saved from broken homes, Equal! Thats what we are all in need of.

Drew D.

Pick on me, I'll take it, and I'll stand in DC crying "Harm me" because if this is so hard to grasp then everyone hasn't purpose.

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 5, 2009 | 7:43 a.m.


Here’s a little food for thought on the issue being “thrust” into your face:

If calling myself gay means saying what I do in bed, then mentioning heterosexual marriage means saying what heterosexuals do in bed. The same goes for when heterosexuals announce their marriages and anniversaries in the newspaper; when they ask about or talk about girlfriends and boyfriends while at school; when they refer to their spouses or other romantic interests while at work; when they put each other’s pictures on office desks; when they hold hands in public; when they bring their significant others to job-related parties; when they try to set up one of their coworkers on a blind, heterosexual date; and when they assume they can always visit relatives as a couple. After all, those actions or references point to one’s sexual orientation.
Unsatisfied with all that flaunting of heterosexuality, they even wear engagement rings or wedding rings to signify their heterosexual status, and they love for people to compliment those rings. Coworkers and family members will often ask personal questions regarding one’s marital status, dating preferences, etc., but then say “You should keep that to yourself” if a gay person answers those questions truthfully.
Reality includes diversity, like it or not. Even if I decided to abstain for the rest of my life, that wouldn’t change who I am or who I love. Whatever the case, heterosexuals in general aren’t any more or less discrete about their sexual activity than gays in general.

Furthermore, we have seen how well keeping our mouths shut has worked in the past. I’m sure that if people that were affected in regard to segregation, racism, women’s rights would have kept their mouths shut, we would not be the nation we are today.

Here’s a beautiful thing that was initiated by our Founding Fathers:
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution--
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

That means YOU don’t get to tell me what I get to say. Unfortunately, the same is true for you, but that doesn’t negate your obvious ignorance.

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 5, 2009 | 7:43 a.m.

“Why is marriage so important to the gay community?”

I don’t know -- Why is marriage so important to the heterosexual community? Why can’t people from “Focus on the Family” focus on their own family and leave mine alone instead of trying to intrude on my relationship and tell me how I can label it and what rights I’m “allowed” to have. I’m not asking anybody to relinquish the rights they’re afforded in their marriage, but I want all 1,049 federal rights, benefits and privileges that are routinely given to married couples and I don’t want to have to label it differently because you’re uncomfortable with calling it “marriage.” Give me that and get your nose out of my personal life.

“Why not just have a "life partner" and not worry about the marriage?

Exactly who do you think you are to tell people what to call their relationship. If it’s going to be a “life partner,” that term should be used for EVERYBODY not just homosexuals. No more wife or husband, you’re “partners.”

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 5, 2009 | 8:39 a.m.

Go Kaleb.

I agree 100%.

Still its not about the differences. In fact the difference are only making the "Fight" bigger. SO I have a Questtion on "Why, as in whay do you care, can gay people be pushed around and kept from there god given, founding fathers, rights?

Drew or Andy.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 5, 2009 | 9:56 a.m.

Kadie Elmore omg now I am picking on him? I presented something of a factual nature as I see it and others might too who do not agree with his view points he is presenting and that is picking on him?

Give it a break.

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 5, 2009 | 3:54 p.m.

Kadie is just looking out. So people please answer my question.

(Report Comment)
Deleted Account March 5, 2009 | 8:26 p.m.

Thanks drew. I agree with kaleb 100% as well

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 6, 2009 | 4:56 a.m.

Drew D it is quite ironic you mention in the post above about a "God given right" but if you will kindly go read your Bible young man it clearly states "that a man and a woman will leave their mother and father and then become as one flesh".

Nowhere in the Bible have I ever read that a man and a man or a woman and a woman or even human and a beast shall leave their respective mothers and fathers to become as one flesh.

If you go read your Bible young man you will see in fact that any and all homosexual behaviors resulted in civilizations being wiped off the face of the earth(the flood of Noah) and entire cities being wiped off the face of the earth(Sodom and Gomorrah)(also from which the word sodomy is derived because that was their many sexual practice at that time) and even more.

Before you begin spewing about "God given rights" young man please be sure you actually go read what your Bible teaches instead of what man teaches today.

God did not create Adam and Steve but he did create Adam and Eve.

You will go alot farther I assure you with out bringing God into your little advocacy campaign. Go read in the Book of Revelation how God is going to deal with all forms of iniquity in the Last Days.

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking March 6, 2009 | 6:23 a.m.

Chuck said:

"If you go read your Bible young man you will see in fact that any and all homosexual behaviors resulted in civilizations being wiped off the face of the earth(the flood of Noah) and entire cities being wiped off the face of the earth(Sodom and Gomorrah)(also from which the word sodomy is derived because that was their many sexual practice at that time) and even more."

That's controversial, Chuck. Some interpret the sins of Sodom as lack of charity toward others, also. This article lays out a lot of thoughts on this:


(Report Comment)
Porsha Williams March 6, 2009 | 9:53 a.m.

Oh Dudley. I KNOW you didn't go there. I didn't even need my overly expensive college education to rationalize the fact that the bible is FREE, and you are utterly wrong in your quoting on Noah and Sodom and Gomorrah, which were not destroyed based on acts of homosexuality. Read between the lines of history. You can come to your own conclusion, that is your right, but you are sadly mistaken if that's what you believe. Regardless, why are you so concerned about someone else's sex life, sexual choices, or the sexual acts they choose to perform. Where, when, and WHAT does it really have to do with you? Regardless of what you decide to continue 'spouting' from the bible, remember a few standard philosophical truths..."Those in glass houses...He who throws the first stone...?" Your judgement day theory applies to you as well. Judge your own actions, and your own life, and leave others' out of it. If you want to hate one something, because that IS what you're doing, HATE on your own shortcomings and misgivings. Don't subject the rest of us to your inner insecurities and battles.

(Report Comment)
Chris Gibson March 6, 2009 | 9:54 a.m.

Let me start off by saying Andy - what you have done here is brilliant. I only wish that I would have had your kind of courage at your age. Despite what anyone says - keep doing what you're doing. People like you will change this world for the better.

As for you, Charles - I won't bother pointing out the many inconsistencies and flaws in your logic. I won’t point out the many cases of your bigoted nature, nor that fact that as someone who preaches about the Bible, you should practicing compassion and acceptance - not intolerance. What will I point out, might you ask? That your home - Paquin Towers, has likely been fumigated one too many times and has caused you to be even more deranged than you were before ( ). Stop trying to make people miserable and worry about the fact that you've got bed bugs.

Peace out.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 6, 2009 | 10:57 a.m.

Kaleb; I would not EVER want o impede your right to free speech. If you knew anything about me, you'd know that.

However, when we post, and when we take what might be considered by others as an unpopular stance, we should well expect that the majority may have something contrary to say to us.

Now, if you want to be open about being gay, I have no problem with that.But, as I said before, it is just a sexual preference, in my opinion it deserves no more attention than being heterosexual. And you seem to want to give it FAR more attention.

On that voicing your approval for it openly; how's that working out for ya?

Actually Sodom and Gomorrah can be interpreted several ways, however there is a very KEY piece of information that can be found in the Tanach version, please allow me to show you:

In the Tanach version, Genesis19:4-5, the final episode in the story of Sodom is described as the angels visit Lot to warn him to flee:

When they had not yet retired, and the people of the city, the people of Sodom, surrounded the house, both young and old, the entire populace from every end [of the city]. And they called to Lot and said to him, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, and let us know them."

Lot refused to give the visiting angels to the inhabitants of Sodom. He offered them his two daughters instead, but the people refused. The men were struck with blindness, allowing Lot and his family, who were then instructed to leave the city, to escape. As they made their escape the angels commanded that Lot and his family not look back under any circumstance. However as Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed with fire and brimstone by God, Lot's wife looked back longingly at the city, and she was instantly transformed into a pillar of salt.

In this interpretation, the MEN asked for the MEN (the angels) that Lot had in his house to come outside so they could "know them". In a strictly textual manner, this implies that the MEN wanted to have homosexual relations with the MEN (the angels) that they asked to come out of the house.

So, in this version, the bible does imply that God does not approve of homosexuality.

But, I am not one to preach the bible. And I have never said that I had anything against anyone that is gay. I have friends that are gay, and they are very fine and decent people, but their sexual preferences do not dominate the conversations I have with them.

As far as being ignorant about this topic, I probably am. This is why I am asking questions, putting my views out, and reading responses. I should remind you, the word "ignorant" is not a bad word. It just means that I may not have enough relevant information to make an informed decision on this issue. But, I am getting there.


(Report Comment)
Sarah Evans March 6, 2009 | 11:19 a.m.

I have been watching several friends of mine comment about this issue and have been proud to see there are several others in support of Andy.

I decided to refrain from comment, until I saw Rick's last post. (No Charles, I won't scroll past them)

All I have to say about the Bible/Religion aspect of this argument is this...GOD created all of us...which means he created people that like those of the same sex. Get over it Rick and Charles, no one is threatening your way of life and no one is thrusting it in your faces anymore than heterosexuality is thrust in EVERYONES faces.

As for Rick's latest comment "On that voicing your approval for it openly; how's that working out for ya?"....

How low. Rick, how is voicing your opinion on here going for you? You speak of majority but if you take the comments on this article as can see that the majority is in support of Andy. Rightfully so.

I have never been able to understand why there is hatred and misunderstanding towards a group of people that really, truly, are no different than the ones doing the hating.

Its can that be bad? How can loving someone and caring for them be bad? Or so separate from heterosexuality?

Get a clue, its not different. Learn to accept others and their lifestyles and it will get EVERYONE a lot farther.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 6, 2009 | 11:53 a.m.

Look Sarah, I am sorry if you think it is the right thing to do to "coddle" a person under the age of 18 by treating them with "kids gloves" in your response to them on here. But, I'll not apologize for "keeping it real" on here. The fat is you are doing Andy a greater disservice by treating him like some "special needs child" on here, than you would be if you ask the serious questions, and out forth the REAL views, concerns, and issues that people have on this topic. Andy stands to gain more from intelligent and honest debate here than he does from "coddling". Now, the Missourian gave Andy a WONDERFUL opportunity here. They gave him an opportunity to interact with the public, and to author an article here to gain that interaction. Try not to detract from his opportunity to learn by "coddling" him.

Now, since you seem to have a problem reading, as I have repeated this several times (this time let me put it in caps just for you) I NEVER STATED THAT I DISAPPROVED OF A PERSON'S SEXUAL PREFERENCE EITHER WAY. There, that better? The fact is that I don't care either way. I don't determine who I will befriend based on their sexuality.

But, I do want to give Andy something to consider. Something to think about. Something to research. Another angle to consider. AND, if he does openly, objectively and honestly pursue views other than his, he may find that he becomes a little more "well rounded" on this issue.

Voicing my opinion here is going just fine for me. Because I understand the concepts behind voicing my opinion. I don't ask you to agree, I don't even ask you to read my opinion. This is simply a "sounding board" for me. I don't get offended over opposing views. You are entitled to your views as I am mine. I have no expectations, that is why it works fine for me. Keep it real, Sarah..

You seem to have some expectation. What? We are all just going to jump on the gay rights bandwagon because you posted that it is the right thing to do? Shall we all organize a march on Jeff City for you too? No, post your opinion, use your free speech, but don't expect or get offended if someone disagrees with you.

So,have a sip of herbal tea, take a deep breath, relax, and try to understand that my posts might not be as "anti-gay" as you seem to perceive them...


(Report Comment)
Christopher Foote March 6, 2009 | 12:11 p.m.

Equality is a rather simple concept.
If one feels the need to invoke magical beings to argue against equality, perhaps they should re-evaluate their argument.
One is free to believe whatever they like, however a marriage license granted by the state conveys certain legal rights. One's "faith", which by definition is a belief without evidence, should not preclude others from enjoying the same legal rights.

Dial the clock back 50 years and here is your justification for racial purity laws banning marriage between two people with different levels of melanin in their skin: "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."

This is exactly the same logic invoked by Chuck, Ray and others.

(Report Comment)
Sarah Evans March 6, 2009 | 12:50 p.m.


I have no problem reading, thank you for your concern though. I must be confused because as you say you don't care about someones sexual prefrence, most of your comments (aside from the 'i couldn't care' flat statements)seem to contridict that. Just keepin it real lol.

You might have a problem reading as well, or reading comprehension. I don't expect anyone to jump on any "band wagon" or form marches. I simply would like to see so many people stop fighting it. I'm not asking you to embrace it, but as it has nothing to do with you..why not stop fighting?

I'm sure you will comment with some witty remark about our rights and liberty to fight against a cause. No need to insult me further, I understand and agree with that concept...believe it or not.

As for keeping it real for Andy, I'm sure that he is fully aware of the For and Against view points of Gay Rights. As for him being "well rounded"...Are you saying that he should learn from the negative comments on here and let that affect his life style? Um, I think not lol.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 6, 2009 | 1:51 p.m.

Sarah says: "Are you saying that he should learn from the negative comments on here and let that affect his life style? Um, I think not lol."

YES, I am saying that! I learn from "ignorant" people and people that make negative comments about various topics everyday.

Don't think you can learn from a "dumb person"? You CERTAINLY CAN learn what NOT to do from a "dumb person". Learning is an opportunity, if you don't know how to fully take advantage of a learning opportunity, that is fine. But you are ignorant to believe that you can't learn something from ignorant people...


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 6, 2009 | 3:54 p.m.

Drew is the one that said "God given right" not I.

Show me in the Bible the exact text,chapter and verses where God gives the right and in fact blesses those of homosexual behaviors,tendancies and or actions.

The truth is that it is not there,never was there,nor has been there from the beginning.

So if it is not there then how can it be a "God given right"?

I do not know what version of the Bible you read but I have never seen nor referenced and "God given right" to be a homosexual nor condone it either. Yes we are commanded to love others as ourselves but that does not condone in any manner of the text homosexuality.

We are commanded to love the person and hate the sin which is all and good but nowhere does it say anywhere in the Bible that we are to condone homosexual behavior as acceptable.

I have friends who are homosexual too and always have and they know my personal stance on the issue and they respect that stance even though they know I do not respect their stance. Yes they have more acceptance that I do but they do not condemn me for my stout belief even after I made my beliefs known to them in very precise words explaining myself to them.

Me thinks alot of you protesteth far too much due to it might just call your own beliefs into question.

Aint that a shame.

(Report Comment)
Matt Y March 6, 2009 | 3:58 p.m.

The condemnation of homosexuality was so important to Jesus of Nazareth, that he chose to never say a word about it.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 6, 2009 | 5:18 p.m.

Show us all Matt Y where it says God condones this behavior.

In fact nowhere does it say as such in the Bible so it cannot, nor ever has been a "God given right" as Drew and others here present. The exact opposite is the case in this issue.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 6, 2009 | 7:09 p.m.

Biblical Reference:

Jesus followed and lived by Moses Law:
“For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” (John 5:46-47.)

Moses Law Says:
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.... Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you (Leviticus 18:22,24). If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them (Leviticus 20:13). There shall be no ritual harlot of the daughters of Israel, or a perverted one of the sons of Israel. You shall not bring the wages of a harlot or the price of a dog to the house of the LORD your God for any vowed offering, for both of these are an abomination to the LORD your God (Deuteronomy 23:17,18). The word dog here is a synonym for a homosexual.

It's all pretty debatable, but for each argument that indicates that there is no condemnation for homosexuality by Jesus in the bible, there is an argument of the opposite persuasion.


(Report Comment)
Drew D March 6, 2009 | 11:24 p.m.

Who said your god, is mine?

Think that one over.


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 6, 2009 | 11:52 p.m.

Who said I am referring to MY God? Notice the top line that reads: "Biblical Reference"?

Think that one over...


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 6, 2009 | 11:55 p.m.

If God is a personal concept, then there are a million Gods....

Think that one over too, while you are at it Drew....

I am a poet...


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 7, 2009 | 12:31 a.m.

Drew, you are 14 years old. There is much that will change in your life. Hopefully, this debate will be a learning experience for you. Hopefully it will give you a wide variety of opinions to consider and learn from.

One of the things that you will learn is that the older you get the less you will know. It's a kind of paradox; you will find as time goes by that there is much more to learn that what you see now.

They say that a human being's psychology changes every ten years. Right now, I am sure that in your mind you believe that you are right in your beliefs and that your sense of morality can not be swayed. But this is not so. And you wouldn't believe your God if your God appeared and told you that right now. But that is okay. It is just one of those things that has to come to pass.

I don't have a problem with whatever you choose to prefer; your personal preferences are yours to make. You are certainly at an age where you should be experimenting, and finding out what is right for you. What is going on in your mind right now is nothing unusual or unnatural for any teenager. And I am not talking down to you, even though right now your believe I am.

What you will find one day is that you are attempting to match your intellect and experience with people that are 3 and 4 times your age. Contrary to what you believe, I applaud you for that. But therein lies the rub. I don't expect that you will ultimately find that you were right about much here, in the distant future when you look back on this. But what I do hope for you is only two things. One; that while you may not be right about this debate, it will have at least challenged you into an excellent learning experience to broaden your horizons. And two; that IF you later look back and find that you were wrong about any of this, that you will not feel any shame about it, but instead know that you are a better man for putting your views out there, and learning from what others had to say in response to them.

There will be ignorant people on both sides of this debate, and cruel people on both sides of this debate. And I hope that you will take advantage of the opportunity to learn how to deal with these people too. Some people seem to believe that you can't learn from these people, but you can. You can learn how to deal with them, how to identify them and stay away from them, and you can learn to not make the mistakes that they make. And in doing so, you will enrich your life.

Whatever choice you make in life, I hope you make it the same way you are trying to make it here, by openly discussing how you feel, and considering the feedback you get from others in that discussion.

Take care of yourself.


(Report Comment)
John Doe March 7, 2009 | 12:43 a.m.

Rick, you are a fricking idiot.

I'll agree with your stance on homosexuality right after I go buy myself a couple of Hebrew slaves, cuz God is cool with that too.

You either believe the Bible in its entirety, or EVERYTHING written in it comes into question. Personally, I know it's a bunch of crap.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 7, 2009 | 12:48 a.m.

John Doe (Imagine That) says: "You either believe the Bible in its entirety, or EVERYTHING written in it comes into question. Personally, I know it's a bunch of crap."

REALLY? Just how did you come by THAT knowledge? Ohhh tell us, "Enlightened One"? Please? We want to be "enlightened" too... LOL.


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 7, 2009 | 12:51 a.m.

John Doe (Imagine That) says: "I'll agree with your stance on homosexuality right after I go buy myself a couple of Hebrew slaves, cuz God is cool with that too."

A couple of tutors might be a better investment, and God might be much cooler with that too....


(Report Comment)
John Doe March 7, 2009 | 12:58 a.m.

So how do you pick and choose content, eh Rick? Please tell me. I'd love to know how you elect to disregard parts of the Bible and not others.

(Exodus 21:20-21 NAB) When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 7, 2009 | 1:11 a.m.

John Doe (Imagine That) says: "So how do you pick and choose content, eh Rick? Please tell me. I'd love to know how you elect to disregard parts of the Bible and not others."

I don't you "DIPSTICK"! Read my post, it was a Biblical Reference. It was simply a response to the assertion that Jesus does not mention homosexuality, so he must not condemn it.

Which means, when put into proper context, it might not be my personal belief, but it is a biblical reference that refutes the notion that Jesus does not condemn homosexuality. Since the discussion encompassed biblical references

And you did not read the top part of my post which states "Biblical Reference" (that was the first two words of my post), so you must have missed the fact that I did not endorse this belief anywhere in my post. And furthermore, I also stated that it is all "highly debatable". And you missed all of this, hence me calling you a "DIPSTICK"! AND, suggesting that you need some tutors, more specifically Reading Tutors....


(Report Comment)
John Doe March 7, 2009 | 1:29 a.m.

OK, fair enough.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 7, 2009 | 3:36 a.m.

>>> Drew D March 6, 2009 | 11:24 p.m.
Who said your god, is mine? Think that one over. <<<

Drew is your God the same God who created the heavens and the earth in 6 days and rested on the seventh from all of his labor?

Is your God the same as the God who created woman out of the rib of a man?

Is your God the same one who parted the Red Sea?

Is your God the same God of Abraham,Issac,Jacob,Elijah and the twelve disciples of Jesus?

Is you God the same one who sent the Word,His only begotten Son to walk amongst us in the flesh of a man so that same God could redeem us unto Himself because the blood of animals was just a foretelling of the death of Christ Jesus once and for us all?

Drew is that same God you follow or do you follow another?

If your God is the same as all I have mentioned above then please show me in the same Bible you read whether it be the KJV,NIV,NIT or any other where it says God condones homosexual behaviors.

So drew who is your God please tell us all here as we all want to know.

Like Rick I am not talking down to you but I am talking at you as you present yourself wanting to be treated and talked to here.

Rick referenced the text and the content correctly in his presentation. Great job Rick and thanks for that presentation.

(Report Comment)
Bob Mitchell March 7, 2009 | 6:09 a.m.

All I have to say is it's a pitiful, dirty, lowdown shame that a 14 year can set up and talk about being gay, when in fact he probably doesn't even realize that his mind is being forced to believe and to except this belief.
Columbia has become and has always been an community of gays, and when you start letting other people force their crap on you and you don't Know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, for who HE really is, then you'll except anything.
In addition to Rick's statement on Jesus not mentioning or condoning homosexuality, and it might not be mentioned in scripture, well for all you educated folks and to this young gay fellow that believe God made him like this, read these scriptures PLEASE, and then I'm through, cause I am a married man, to A PURE GOD-MADE WOMAN, and we have 4 wonderful grown children, 3 girls - 1 boy. I dare for ANY of you to blashpheme MY LORD & SAVIOR, although God said this day would come, which means, it want be very long before God is coming back to take us Christians out of this sinful world, and then you sinners - gay people, shacker upper's, etc, can stay the way you are, and in reality, your final destination for eternity will be HELL. That's not my answer, but the WORD of GOD. You can be saved, BUT, once you get saved, YOU CHANGE the way your life is in sin, and God makes you a NEW person. So that means Homosexuals can be delivered from that sin-lifestyle, BUT it takes God to deliver. Just like a WHORE or a PROSTITUTE that lives that life, she too can be changed, once they except JESUS CHRIST as LORD and SAVIOR.
But with all these preachers and homosexual bishops - pastors, etc. that we have now in America, I can understand why so many of you don't want to be saved. You don't know the truth. But if you read your bible, and stop trying to divide it to your standards, but just accept God's word, you can be saved, and changed.

(Report Comment)
Bob Mitchell March 7, 2009 | 6:12 a.m.

Part 2 of my comment - with Scripture information:

Now, read these scriptures IF YOU DARE, and see what God says through HIS writer, Apostle Paul, in the word.
Romans Ch. 1:21-32vss KJV.
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

Additional Scriptures on this subject:
Homosexual {Sodomite} {Sodomy}

Sodomite: A person guilty of unnatural sexual relations, as between the same sex, or with beasts, Dt. 23:17. The Hebrew word - qadesh means a male devote to licentious idolatry, practicing prostitution with the same sex. This is what the word dog in Dt. 23:18 refers to.

Sodomites: 1 Ki. 14:24; 15:12; 22:46; 2 Ki. 23:7
See Sodomite and Sodomy:

Unnatural sexual relationship with the same sex or with beasts.
Israel went into sodomy; Dt. 32:32; Isa.3:9
Forbidden by God;
God's curse upon; Gen. 19

"For more information. feel free to contact me at:

I will be more than happy to provide you with more scripture & references, as well as definitions.

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 7, 2009 | 7:50 a.m.

Bob, don't bring your religion against this.

I'm gay, I'm sure. A 9.5/10. Thats sure!

My god, is Gods. I'm a person who, if did really believed was real, I'd follow the Romans, having multiple gods.

So please beside religion, which isn't a fight (due to seperation of church and state), what do you have?

Fact: there are gay couples willing to house children and love them keep them from a broken home.

Fact: Gay couples are likey to divorce just the same as that straight couples.

So what you have against it?

Drew D.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 7, 2009 | 7:51 a.m.

Compliments go out to John Doe!

I wish that everyone could be like John Doe. Our argument got a little "heated", and we expressed ourselves in what I'd call "a natural expression of frustration", but we both maintained a pretty "thick skin", and eventually we came to an agreement of sorts. No harm was done to either of us, and I think we just expressed ourselves as we naturally would and got some issues off of our chests. Probably cleared a few things up too, as to how we feel about certain things.

John Doe, thank you for being "thick skinned" and handling our brief little encounter like two mature adults that can get into a "heated exchange", but also at the same time act like a mature adult should when someone says something we don't like.

It was refreshing to see someone handle an exchange like ours with some reason and intelligence. I hope that we do come to know one another one day; as you are the type of person I like to call friend.

Take care.


(Report Comment)
Tim Dance March 7, 2009 | 8:40 a.m.

God approves of slavery:

Leviticus 25:44-46 that God told them: "As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: You may buy your male and female slaves from the nations that are round about you ... You may bequeath them to your sons after you, to inherit as a possession forever."

Exodus 21:20: "When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, he shall not be punished: for the slave is his money."

So those of you take the Bible literally must approve of slavery and therefore racist. Can't pick and choose what the Lord says to you. Most Christians that I respect are Red Letter Christian and don't focus on the Old Testament. Only racist and hate-filled Bible belter like to follow scripture given to ancient nomadic Hebrews when it suits them

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 7, 2009 | 9:41 a.m.

>>> Drew D March 7, 2009 | 7:50 a.m.
Bob, don't bring your religion against this. <<<

You young man brought it up as your "God given right" in one of your posts above. So now you tell somebody else not to bring religion into this thread?

Too late Drew you opened the door and left it all out there on the table for all to debate and comment on or towards.

>>> Tim Dance Most Christians that I respect are Red Letter Christian and don't focus on the Old Testament. <<<

These types you mention here are commonly called "Sunday Christians" due to they go out and look all pompous and of piety on Sunday then the rest of the week go back to their old behaviors alot or most of the time only to repeat the cycle every Sunday.

The problem is you cannot have the New Testament with out the Old Testament because the Old Testament was the listing of events that were to come up to the New Testament but those Old Testament teachings,laws and ordinances are to remind us all of where we have been and where we are going too.

God says in his word "I do not change I am the same today,yesterday and forever more" so if God does not change that means people change or will try to change God to their own views. Thus you will see my Bob Mitchell's presentation above of God allowing them to have a "probate mind" and giving them over to their own lusts.

Bob Mitchell is totally correct in his entire presentation he made.

Drew if you are going to debate this issue and especially how religion ties in,I would strongly suggest you know what you are talking about when it comes to religious beliefs and the "traditional moral values" concerning the family structure before you step out too far.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 7, 2009 | 10:57 a.m.

I hate to say it, but Chuck is right on some of what he says here. And it should be a very valuable lesson for Drew. Drew, you did open this door, so to speak. You did in fact write that this was your "God given right"; and by doing so you injected religion into this debate. And there are many different views and opinions on that topic. Arguments over Religion and Politics are never winnable.

I am not going to "preach" to anyone here, because God knows I hate it when someone preaches to me! I have quoted parts of the Bible, but that is not necessarily my personal belief. The Bible has been translated many times, some of the words used in Biblical times have different meaning now, and we know that there are "lost books" to the Bible. So, who is to say what is accurate and what is not in the Bible? I suppose all we can do here is match each other scripture for scripture to prove our point, but that is really no good; as it all still boils down to our own personal opinions.

Ultimately, we all have to let our own conscious be our guide. The best that we can hope for is to have the strength to follow that guide.


(Report Comment)
Drew D March 7, 2009 | 12:32 p.m.

Your "God" gives you rights. Sicence is all powerful. Now really kill the religion, give me real reason.

2% of child rapers are gay!
98% straight!
What do you have?


(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 7, 2009 | 12:50 p.m.

I am not generally a person to argue the Bible when it comes to government issues, so this will be my first and last posting regarding the bible itself.

I’ll preface it with this:

Let me remind everyone that “separation of church and state” is a political and legal doctrine that government and religious institutions are to be kept separate and independent from each other. As far as I’m concerned, marriages should be performed by churches, while civil unions should be issued by the government. In other words, if my church wants to perform a marriage ceremony for two men or two women, so be it...If your church isn’t into that, no hurt feelings. When somebody applies for the government to recognize their relationship as a union, whether it be two people of the same sex or two people of opposite sex, there should be a collective term for everyone.

The Declaration of Independence says it best:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 7, 2009 | 12:50 p.m.

The Bible:

* DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21
If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately.
If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
* MARK 10:1-12
Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced.
The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman's period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.
* MARK 12:18-27
If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
* DEUTERONOMY 25:11-12
If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy's genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.

The list goes on:

Polygamy is acceptable, as is a king's having many concubines. (Solomon, the wisest king of all, had 1,000 concubines.) Slavery and sex with slaves, marriage of girls aged 11-13, and treatment of women as property are all accepted practices in the Scriptures. On the other hand, there are strict prohibitions against interracial marriage, birth control, discussing or even naming a sexual organ, and seeing one's parents nude.

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 7, 2009 | 12:51 p.m.

Leviticus is a holiness code written 3,000 years ago. It includes prohibitions against round haircuts, tattoos, working on the Sabbath, wearing garments of mixed fabrics, eating pork or shellfish, getting your fortune told, and even playing with the skin of a pig. (There goes football!)

The Greatest Commandment:

One of the Pharisees tested Jesus with a question, "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" (Matthew 22:36 NIV). Jesus replied, " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments" (Matthew 22:37-40 NIV).

Ask yourself: Are you following the Bible word for word? If not, then you have no basis to condemn my life.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 7, 2009 | 1:49 p.m.

>>>Kaleb “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” <<<

You forgot to mention that in that time those people were stout Christians who believed in the Word and followed the Word not the words of men.

Mathew Chpt 5 Verses 17 20:

>>> Jesus' Attitude toward the Law
17 ¶ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Lk. 16.17
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.<<<

Notice in Verse 18 how it is phrased.

He was speaking of The Law handed down to Moses which in turn was given to the people and later opened up to all of the people who choose to take God into their hearts. That is where The Law of God is truly written not in sticks,stones or in the buildings built by the hands of men.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 7, 2009 | 1:49 p.m.

Actually Kaleb, there are limits.....

You quote the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

It's not quite that simple.....

The pursuit of happiness does not mean that you get "carte blanch" to pursue whatever makes you happy. Does speeding in excess of 90 MPH make you happy? It does some people. Does yelling "FIRE" in a crowded movie theater make you happy? It does some people. Does smoking in a restaurant while having a meal make you happy? It does some people.

The point here is that you can pursue your happiness all of the way up to the point to where you start to impede on my right to be "happy" too. If I were you I would not use that phrase from the Declaration of Independence unless I fully understood what it means. I have a feeling that our forefathers never meant to apply the phrase that you are using to gay marriages. AGAIN; I don't care what a person's sexual preferences are. But, don't you drag government or religion into it, because you are only "muddying the waters"; as our government and everyone's own personal religious concepts already has. My point in quoting scripture and such is to show how complex we all make this issue.

Also, understand that the Declaration of Independence does imply that there is a God, in which it refers to as our "Creator". Almost everything that our government does is based on the acknowledgment of a "God", even in the courtroom we swear on the Bible, for the most part. Our currency is printed with the term "In God We Trust" on it. I think it is fair to say that "God" was dragged into this debate long before Drew stated this was his "God given right". This all makes this discussion very complex. Perhaps the answer to what is right and wrong on this issue can be found in each person's own personal belief?

My point here is pretty simple, I don't care if you are gay or "straight". Be decent about it. Keep your private life private. Wanna make a change? Pay a Lobbyist. Write your Senator. Write your Congressman. Write your Representative. Peacefully protest in a civil and decent manner. I don't care what he Bible says about it! I don't care what the government says about it! And I'll imagine most people don't; in our more "enlightened society". I just don't care much about seeing this being paraded around in the media like the people that are "coming out" deserve some special attention, because they don't. They are just people, like everyone else. I am sorry that the law does not agree with them, yet. But, they have an obligation to society to follow the law, just like we all do. It is all really just that simple...


(Report Comment)
Drew D March 7, 2009 | 5:13 p.m.

How dose my getting married impeed on your happiness?


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 7, 2009 | 7:00 p.m.

It doesn't. But there are more people's happiness to consider than mine.....


(Report Comment)
Dan Angell March 7, 2009 | 9:17 p.m.

Kevin, that's incorrect. The last acceptable prejudice in this country is against overweight people. If someone insults a gay person for their sexual preference, that is seldom tolerated. But nobody says a word when a fat person is discriminated against.

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 7, 2009 | 9:40 p.m.

Ok, avoid my question!

Besides Religion what dose the opposers have?

Oh and if My being gay affect people, simple, Look Away!


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 7, 2009 | 10:25 p.m.

We should not have to look away in public if you are doing something indecent... You should be decent enough to not do something that we'd want to look away from in public!

Besides Drew, it occurs to me that you first obstacle to overcome in your pursuit to get married is age, not preferences. You are not even legally old enough to be married...


(Report Comment)
Deleted Account March 7, 2009 | 10:27 p.m.

don't bring up the whole fat thing. I'm not exactly skinny. I'm 12 and 135lbs. I get offended easily.

Fight for [the] power! Demand the change!

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 7, 2009 | 11:19 p.m.

I'm not fight for me, Rick! I'm fighting for The Gay World, so to speak, and the future that may not be able to speak up.

I have some real questions;

Whats a relationship?
(A bond in which to people are together, can be or invole sexual activites.)
Whats marriage?
(An offical bond under god, and/or the government, provides tax breaks and benefits.)

I would kiss in public, straight people do. I'm not going to fall to the floor and have sex in the mall!


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 8, 2009 | 12:00 a.m.

Perhaps your cause should be you, for right now.....?

You probably have enough pressures and stress just being a high school student right now, without having to take on the the world on issues such as this?

I know, it is about YOU, right?

Well, not yet. At least not until you are old enough to marry, anyway...

Enjoy being a high school student. I'll imagine that you will have plenty of time to pick your causes and fight for them later on...


(Report Comment)
Drew D March 8, 2009 | 10:18 a.m.

This is my Life! Rick I'm living High School stress free. To mach I'm in many honors classes.

So look to sky. Do you see grey or white clouds? The sun?

Well whatever you see, I see as well.

At the start it was about me. In seventh grade the project I did as for me to over come my bitter peers.

Now its about the friends I have. Its about the lifes I see ruinned. And I look to Prop 8, ashamed. And then back to Missouri. I wonder, "Why do we have a ban on gay marriage?" the idoit who made us, America, stand as an anti-gay country. Thats what happened. And attack me more then once.

America land of the bans and home of the Unequal.


My hell for you have yet to be awaken.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 8, 2009 | 12:05 p.m.

Drew I would be watching how you portray yourself on line or in your community by your new and upcoming radical commentary such as the last comment in your last post.

>>> My hell for you have yet to be awaken. <<<

You will not win any hearts and minds by becoming a radical wing nut gay militant activist I guarantee you.

In fact it will not help you one bit nor further your over all cause for anybody.

You might believe it will do more good in that fashion but that is the number one thing that will get you shut down and shouted down where ever you go in life trying to advocate your message.

You know Drew once you reach legal age you can always move out of the country if you like due to nobody is stopping you and nobody has stopped others in the past either.

This country was founded on "traditional family values" and as such it will always be beholding as a whole to those "traditional family values" whether you and other gays like that or not. It is just the way it is young man.

Those who value their "traditional family values" are just like and alot of the times the same ones who also proclaim "when you pry my cold dead fingers from my guns".

If you honestly think your radical militant gay stance is going to move those types in any way shape or form you really need a serious reality check that is a fact.

This goes back to the title of this story where the word "Must" is used.

Well to that word "must" telling me and others of like mind that we "must change" you can take that word and you know exactly what you and others can do with it don't you.

I am positive I am not the only one reading this nor in America who feels the same.

I do not care what you do behind the closed doors of your house nor is it my business but when out in public your rights end when what you do offends me or my friends with me or others whom might be highly offended due to "traditional family values" they believe in.

That is our right to peace,happiness and the pursuit of liberty.

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 8, 2009 | 1:21 p.m.

I did not pick the title!

And...NO! I will not be forced out of my country. My life, my value is what it is. You my friend cannot take away the words, the past, but can prove to the world your better.

I am not ruinning families. I trying to create families. And if your going to stand and be so bias. Then you can gun me down. I'm not letting America fall in to a trap.

Equal, the only principal that gas yet to be proven. I'll die before I get married. And I don't care. Because very comment made, is another time you think. I said I wasn't going to change your mind, I need one person and I got that.


My comment meant That my life will mean something.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 8, 2009 | 1:27 p.m.

All life means something...


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 8, 2009 | 1:35 p.m.

Nobody is trying to run you out of the country young man nor wants to. It is a phrase commonly used for those who do not like how America is run. Get used to it.

I am no better than the next person at any time but I do value my "traditional values" and will stand by them as I will stand by those with the same "traditional values".

Also how can two homosexuals truly create a "traditional family"?

Two men cannot have a baby together as neither can get pregnant.

Two women can have a baby if one or the other gets pregnant.

Both groups can adopt if they choose too this is true.

Now if you are planning a "traditional family" then you need to be committed to a woman and visa versa in the sense of a "traditional family" and all that it represents with all of it's "traditional values" too.

You can create a "unconventional family" this is true but what kind of life are your children to be expected to lead in society?

There is more to this Drew than just you and your personal feelings in all of this. There is an entire world around you that "you must" think about too.

It does not matter if you wrote the title or not the fact here is that it is there and represents somebody's opinion.

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 8, 2009 | 2:13 p.m.

1. Gays cannot adopt, only four states allow.

2. Your stupid. Families are families. My kids are just and will be just as great as yours.

Straight or Gay, realize no matter how corny it sounds, the goal is to love, and marriage and kids are to be included.


(Report Comment)
Matt Y March 8, 2009 | 2:55 p.m.

Chuck, there is not and never has been a "traditional family" unit. One mother, one father, 2 children and a dog is nothing but a myth. Ozzie and Harriet is not a realistic view of what family is.

Marriage, as you well know, used to be arranged and focused on building strong family alliances - protecting land and wealth. It was never about love or religion. The norm was to keep lovers aside from one's spouse. Even now, we live in a society where 50% of marriages fail. Our families are marked by divorces, single mothers, step and half-siblings, affairs, grandma and grandpa in the attic, and so on. How's that for a tradition?

The fact is, Chuck, there is no "right" or "traditional" family, no matter how much you want it to be true. Even if there was, we possess no monopoly on dictating how others are to form their own families. To fight so vehemently to keep two consenting people from finding happiness together when they harm no one is reprehensible.

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 8, 2009 | 3:02 p.m.

Here’s a simple idea:

If you don’t believe in same sex marriage, then don’t marry somebody of the same sex. What we have is people sticking their nose in something that does not affect them, and then complaining about it being “flaunted” when homosexuals push back.

Exactly what is your explanation for the millions and millions of people around the world that are living homosexual lives that have no interest in the opposite sex? Are they all faking just to piss off Jesus?

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 8, 2009 | 3:02 p.m.

Charles (old man):

“If you honestly think your radical militant stance is going to move those types in any way shape or form you really need a serious reality check that is a fact.”

Heed your own advice, old man.

You are absolutely hilarious. Your skewed view on life must make daily living difficult. Let me guess that your view on “traditional family values” include a divorce rate of greater than 50%? Or maybe Britney Spears’ 55 hour just-for-fun marriage is a better example? How about the child molester Catholic Priests? Those are excellent examples of “traditional family values.” Maybe all of those single parents out there are your idea of “traditional family values.” I bet if we make divorce illegal, then we won’t have any more broken families and life will be that much better. Ohhhhh wait, the people that made gay marriage illegal in California by voting on Proposition 8 want to take away gay marriages that already exist...Effectively forcing a divorce between two happily married people. Maybe those are your “traditional family values.”

I cannot take the term “family values” seriously when it calls for families to reject their own children, often driving them to homelessness or suicide. I cannot take it seriously when it causes gay people to hate themselves. I cannot take it seriously when it causes parents to put children into programs that confuse and hurt them, leaving them with the feeling that they must pretend to be someone else in order for their mother and father to accept them. i cannot take it seriously when it amounts to nothing but hate-promoting legalism. To me, family values means valuing one’s family, not telling them, “Be heterosexual, or be disowned.” When a value system drives someone’s children to isolation, abandonment, depression, and suicide, it obviously needs repair.

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 8, 2009 | 3:03 p.m.

Many of our forefathers were Deists!

“Lighthouses are more useful than churches.” -Benjamin Franklin
“This world be the best of all possible worlds if there were no religion in it!” -John Adams
“Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man.” -Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson even wrote his own Bible!

Remember that we do not live in a theocracy and your religious beliefs are not the only ones in America.

“All life means something…”

That’s very Zen of you, Rick. How many bugs have smashed against your windshield when you go out for a drive?

“The pursuit of happiness does not mean that you get "carte blanch" to pursue whatever makes you happy.”

The things you mention in the above posts (the speeding and smoking and all that). Those pose risks to the health and safety of the public. Being gay isn’t going to cause an asthma attack nor will it cause you to spin out of control and hit another vehicle at 90 MPH. Using such extreme examples does not help your defense. And another thing: Don’t tell me not to drag government or religion into this; it was brought into the conversation long before I posted about it. Besides, you don’t get to tell me what to do (See Amendment #1 of the US Constitution).

If you don’t care much for seeing it paraded around the media, write the media companies. The media is owned by private companies and they choose what is worthy of broadcast. I know that if a company does something that I’m against, I take my business away from them...Perhaps you should do the same.

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 8, 2009 | 3:03 p.m.

“your rights end when what you do offends me or my friends with me or others whom might be highly offended due to ‘traditional family values’ they believe in.”

If that’s the case, perhaps you should not offend my values by talking. Everything you’ve said so far has offended me and my friends. Since you’re into telling other when their rights end, I recommend that you take your own advice.

You can also move out of the country if you don’t like the way things are going. As for me, I’m not going anywhere and I will continue to fight for civil rights.

Here’s the deal:

If people continue to stick their nose in my private relationship and try to tell me that I cannot have a marriage that’s legally recognized between two consenting adults. I don’t want you to be in my private life any more than you want to be there. I will continue to walk hand in hand with my boyfriend when we go out; I’m not going to hide that I’m in a relationship any more than heterosexuals hide their relationships. If that’s “flaunting,” then so be it. Deal with it and get over it.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 8, 2009 | 3:04 p.m.

>>> Matt Y The fact is, Chuck, there is no "right" or "traditional" family, no matter how much you want it to be true. <<<

If this is not true then explain to all of us all of those "Traditional Wedding Announcements" in alot of those newspapers nation wide every week.

Also explain to all of us here how there are millions of "traditional families" still happily married around the entire world if you claim there never has been a "right" or a "traditional" sense of the word.

Come now do explain it to everybody here.

(Report Comment)
Tim Dance March 8, 2009 | 3:05 p.m.

The Libertarians are silent on this issue. You would think they would try to differentiate themselves from Republicans on this issue. But as I suspected, libertarians are just republicans who want to smoke pot. Try to focus on the upper part of that Nolan chart for once Libertarians

(Report Comment)
Matt Y March 8, 2009 | 3:18 p.m.

Yes, there are a lot of wedding announcements Chuck. That's exactly my point. 50% of those will disintegrate officially, with who-knows-how-many engaging in extramarital affairs and other unique situations which don't fit within your idealistic paradigm.

And if you're looking for evidence for your traditional family unit, then I certainly don't suggest looking abroad. I have a close friend whose parents in India are still attempting to get him to come back to marry the girl that they have chosen for him. In many enlightened parts of Europe, they have granted homosexuals the right to marry with no ill-effects on society. In fact, I would argue that the family unit in Scandinavia (one of the 'englightened' areas I spoke of) is stronger than that of the United States.

I understand your hesitance to look at things realistically...But to argue that that view of things is the norm? That's not realistic at all. Perhaps you've spent too many lonely nights at the top of Paquin tower, because your head is firmly in the clouds on this issue.

(Report Comment)
Drew D March 8, 2009 | 3:46 p.m.

Chuck, why are you forcing me, and other gays, out of marriage?

Is it the sex? You find it gross? I find yours gross.

So really what is it?


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 8, 2009 | 4:10 p.m.

>> Matt Y because your head is firmly in the clouds on this issue. <<<

Wrong again my feet are firmly planted in this issue on the side of maintaining the "traditional family values" that were instilled into me by a loving grandmother and grandfather and by alot of "traditional families" I grew up around too.

You can protest it all you like which is your right but as I and somebody else here stated your rights end when they become or are offensive to my "traditional moral values" that I try to live by and will continue to live by.

Drew nobody is trying to force you out of anything so stop playing the victim complex at the age of 14. It does not jive young man.

You really should take Rick's advise.

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 8, 2009 | 4:38 p.m.


Yes, because your advice and Rick's is the end all and be all of great advice. Now your ridiculous comments are just wasting my name. And since "your rights end when what you do offends me or my friends with me or others whom might be highly offended," you should quit offending me and learn to zip it and quit wasting your time. You're not going to change my stance on gay marriage and I'm not going to change yours...If there is no resolution, then things will continue as they have been.

(Report Comment)
John Schultz March 8, 2009 | 5:11 p.m.

Tim Dance, Libertarians have been vocal on gay marriage, and I have spoken a few times on this thread up above. Do you think your "libertarians are just republicans who want to smoke pot" comment deserves further comment from Libertarians?

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 8, 2009 | 5:45 p.m.

Kaleb I've said it many times on many different local forums and blogs if ya do not like my views then just scroll on by.

I promise you I will not know the difference nor care either way.

(Report Comment)
Kaleb March 8, 2009 | 6:06 p.m.


So you want me to "scroll on by" when you do/say something offensive in a public forum, but you're not willing to look the other way if I opt to hold hands with my partner and embrace him?

How surprisingly bigoted.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 8, 2009 | 6:26 p.m.

Kaleb you will never change me out of my "traditional family and moral values" and I am not trying to change anybody elses as you present here.

I will though stand by my "traditional family and moral values" just like those who will not let their guns out of their hands until you pry their cold dead fingers from around them.

The same is with me and the "traditional family and moral values" I hold as honorable above what society is teaching others these days.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 8, 2009 | 9:03 p.m.


“All life means something…”

"That’s very Zen of you, Rick. How many bugs have smashed against your windshield when you go out for a drive?"

Well let's get complex here; since you seem to like to be complex.

Did my windshield hit the bug, or did the bug hit my windshield?

If that bug traveled in an exact path that landed him on my windshield at a high rate of speed, then it would seem that this was that bug's destiny. And so all would be right in the universe....

Perhaps that bug's life did mean something, and he had fulfilled his purpose, thus it was time for him to "move on"?

Think about those things, Kaleb.....

With all things we must be reasonable, Kaleb. That includes what makes us happy. We must also follow the law, or suffer the consequences for not doing so.

I should remind you that when we declared our independence, it was not from each other, it was from what we believed to be an oppressive government. So, if your problem is with the government, then govern yourself accordingly and pursue the remedies available to you to make the changes that you so desire. Again, write your senator, congressman, representative, whatever.. This is how you complain to the government, all you are doing here is putting your complaints to the population, of which a good deal of the population does not care, and a smaller percentage does not even want to hear it.

Kaleb, I don't care if you and Andrew are gay. Couldn't care less. But, if the law advocates you can't marry someone of the same sex, then you can't marry someone of the same sex. If you want to change the law, then follow the procedure for trying to get it done. I doubt this debate is going to change the law, though.... As a matter of fact, you have probably solidified as many people's positions against gay marriages here as you have for gay marriages....


(Report Comment)
Drew D March 8, 2009 | 10:11 p.m.

Rick, its not to change the law today, its to get out the message


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 8, 2009 | 10:12 p.m.

I think your message has been out for quite a while already, Drew......


(Report Comment)
Drew D March 9, 2009 | 6:52 a.m.

It drew you in, something brought you to here. Therefore we have ebabled you to go and argure with whats right. You had to think. You did. But still nothing to stop the fight. You most likely never will. So the world will watch, some will pray not, America's in for the change thats needed rather then the change wanted.


(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 9, 2009 | 8:05 a.m.

No, I did not have to think... I have had this discussion before, my responses here were pretty much "canned responses". I don't feel any different now than I did before this debate. This debate did not do as much for me as you might think....


(Report Comment)
Drew D March 9, 2009 | 4:17 p.m.


I'd stop now Rick, your impeeding on my happiness.

Chuck my family is One Mom, One Day, A girl, a little Boy. Oh don't forget my dog. So sure we fight, and have no religion, yet at the end of everyday we sleep knowing tomorrow is a day to prove ourselfs strong. My point is you look at the same sky, the same streets, and the same failing stock market. Yet one, tiny, difference sets us apart. And you refuse to let love and Happiness enter my different "World". If that truely is the Value you wish to set, I'm sorry you feel as if I'm infected, wrong.

I'm not done nor will I ever be. Plan to see me run for office, see me make an army, and see you value truely change to accept all for the person they are.

~Andrew D.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 9, 2009 | 4:37 p.m.

Drew: "I'd stop now Rick, your impeeding on my happiness."

Really? Well if that is all it takes, I am SAFE and LEGAL!


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr March 9, 2009 | 4:42 p.m.

This isn't even a debate/discussion any more it is more like taking the kids to the Saturday Matinee.

>>> Ricky Gurley March 8, 2009 | 10:12 p.m.
I think your message has been out for quite a while already, Drew.<<<

Yes Rick for how many years has this been going on?

I lost count now and there is still about the same numbers and maybe more against than there is for.

What does that tell you Drew.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley March 9, 2009 | 6:04 p.m.

I have to agree with you here, Chuck.

I think as adults it is probably time to "let he kid have the last word"....


(Report Comment)
Drew D March 9, 2009 | 7:50 p.m.

Then this is the end of My article! Everyone Recap, know where you stand. See the pain you have left. Army, don't ask, don't tell. But America Our generation is far from any old persective. So I will not hang my head because Chuck and Rick are done, I will look up, write more, film movies, and I will live for my rights, for my better purpose.

My name Is Drew, and I will return as the same man. If you let this die your tell me, I, have made no point. I bow and say farewell.

This is all I asked for...

(Report Comment)
Robert Stinnett April 4, 2009 | 8:39 p.m.


What a great article. Don't let these bigots and haters tell you what you want is not achievable. These are the same people who in the 1950s would have been aiming the hose at people of color. You Andy are the future -- and don't you dare let ANYONE (especially these people) tell you that you don't matter.

Great things are happening, and we need people like you to lead us into the future.


(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 4, 2009 | 9:11 p.m.

I highly resent you calling the posters above bigots and haters. After reading their posts, I see nothing but good intentions towards this 14 year old.
It is also unfair to assume that they would be the ones aiming hoses at colored people in the 50's. Some of us older white folk actually marched for Negro Civil Rights in the early 60's.
While we chose to march with our black brothers and sisters back then, we reserve the right to abstain from marching with the LGBTQ community. We have our reasons. These reasons may not be rooted in bigotry or hate as you imply.

(Report Comment)
Tracy Greever-Rice April 9, 2009 | 8:24 a.m.

I think it's really great and pretty darned amusing that the arguments of folks aged 12 and 14 are so much smarter, more articulate and better reasoned, than of their adversaries and critics, clearly decades older.

Here's the good news, homophobia is becoming less and less acceptable and tolerated. The market has pretty much driven homophobic and anti-gay images, products, materials out of the popular culture. A daily circulation, publicly-funded newspaper can print Andrew's op-ed and only fear retribution from a handful of right-wing nut, chron-a-bloggers. Millions and millions of Americans live in states and communities and are members of mainstream religious organizations that are unequivocal in their acceptance and support of their children, parents, and siblings who are gay.

So, huzzahs to Andy for exhibiting courage, bravery, and most importantly, thoughtfulness.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 9, 2009 | 1:50 p.m.

Tracy Greever-Rice:
I agree. The hormones of a teenager rules.
You go girl!
On a more serious note:
("I don't think there is an issue that is a tougher issue for people to stand up against in American culture today than this one, both from the standpoint of the mainstream media and the popular culture condemning you for your - they can use all sorts of words to describe you - intolerant, bigot, homophobe, hater. The other side takes it personally. And so it makes it very difficult for folks to stand up and argue public policy when the other side views it as a personal, direct assault on them. So it's very, very hard for me to be optimistic when we have a battle of ideas and one side is universally hammered for being intolerant bigots and the other side is enlightened and tolerant - which I think is false, but it is the pervasive attitude.

We know that the American public doesn't approve of same-sex marriage, but they are uncomfortable about it because, again, the public perception is if you feel that way, you're a bigot or a hater. And if the culture continues to send that message, if our educational system sends that message, which it does, you know, eventually the culture will change and people's opinions will change.

The push back is what most people know: that mothers and fathers bring something unique. I mean, I have six children. I know that two mothers would not be able to give to my children what a mother and a father can give to my children. For instance, my daughter's relationship with men is, in many respects, formed by her relationship with me. There are volumes of evidence showing that if little girls don't have a father, it impacts their ability as adults to bond with men in healthy relationships.

What do we know, really, about children raised by same-sex couples? We're into, in many respects, an unknown territory. There is already a difficult environment for children in America today, at least from the traditional Judeo-Christian perspective. So I think this is a fight worth fighting, even if it's not a popular fight.")

(Report Comment)
Eric Cox April 10, 2009 | 7:31 a.m.

Good article Drew I agree with most of what you say with the exception of "right to be heard" there is no such thing, "right to be heard" implies that other people have to listen to what you have to say, they do not. You have a "right to free speech" if other people pay attention that is up to them.

Religion always muddies the waters in these situations, it should not have any bearing on this issue, gay marriage to me comes down to equal protection under the law. Why should the government be allowed to define your relationship based on the sex of the parties involved, it should not be the governments position to enforce morality.

(Report Comment)
Dee Worley April 10, 2009 | 8:29 a.m.

I for one, will never change my views on homosexuality. No matter how many essays you write, no matter how many times it is shoved in my face on television, or given a positive slant in the news. Right is right, wrong is wrong and sin is sin, whether you agree with it or not. Some things are absolute, perhaps not popular, but true.

As a Christian, I believe in being kind to you, although I personally am disgusted by your choice of sexual affiliation. I don't think I should mistreat you, but instead should pray for you, and ask God to change your heart, and open your eyes to the truth. I am not a hater, contrary to popular belief. I am sad for you.

As a parent I would be concerned about a teacher who would encourage your behavior at your young age by applauding your subject matter and arranging for this essay to be published. You are a minor, and I believe should be protected.

You said "It is within everyone that you have to be a better person, live for a better cause, and provide for the better life." I don't disagree with that, and pray that you do have a better life than the path you are currently headed down.

May God have mercy on us all!

(Report Comment)
Eric Cox April 10, 2009 | 4:47 p.m.

1) It's a free country not everyone is a Christian and should not be subject to morality laws, but should be afforded equal protection under the law if the government is going to recognize my marriage to my wife and extend to me benefits of marriage (taxes, property rights etc.) then they should extend those same rights to homosexual couples otherwise it's not equal.

2) Why do people claim to be Christian then stand in judgment of people, "I will pray for you" that's a thinly veiled way to say I'm better than you. People like you are why I don't go to church. Everyday I am confronted by people who are "Christian" yet I almost never see anyone doing good works, although there are always plenty of "Christians" ready to point out the perceived sin of others. I used to say I was a Christian but not anymore, I believe in Jesus but I have no desire to be associated with modern Christians.

"I'd be a Christian if I ever met one."--Ghandi

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 11, 2009 | 12:48 a.m.

A Secular Case Against Gay Marriage
The biggest danger homosexual civil marriage presents is the enshrining into law the notion that sexual love, regardless of its fecundity, is the sole criterion for marriage. If the state must recognize a marriage of two men simply because they love one another, upon what basis cant it deny marital recognition to a group of two men and three women, for example, or a sterile brother and sister who claim to love each other? Homosexual activists protest that they only want all couples treated equally. But why is sexual love between two people more worthy of state sanction that love between three, or five? When the purpose of marriage is procreation, the answer is obvious. If sexual love becomes the primary purpose, the restriction of marriage to couples loses its logical basis, leading to marital chaos.

(Report Comment)
sam wardell April 23, 2009 | 3:08 p.m.

What I never understood about the religious arguments against the allowing of homosexual marriage is why God Almighty would focus on such technocratic an issue as the gender of the participants. Surely a God whose son placed Love as the central commandment would look to the feelings of the couple rather than their chromosomes.

And if anyone should think that the love expressed between two men or two women is somehow lesser in the eyes of God I would refer them to the verses of one of history's great sodomites: W H Auden, who wrote of his lover's death:

"He was my North, my South, my East and West,
My working week and my Sunday rest,
My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
I thought that love would last for ever: I was wrong.

The stars are not wanted now: put out every one;
Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
Pour away the ocean and sweep up the wood.
For nothing now can ever come to any good."

For a government to legislate against love is wrong. For a Christian to encourage them to do so is hypocrisy.

Drew - you write with great honesty. I hope you keep doing so.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 23, 2009 | 3:58 p.m.

("For a government to legislate against love is wrong. For a Christian to encourage them to do so is hypocrisy.")
I smell horse manure. The government is not in the "love" business and IMHO, should not be in the "Marriage" business. "Love" is the furthest thing from a poitician or attorney's legislative duties and/or functions.
I see no "Christian" or person wlth Judo-Christian-Muslim, beliefs in America, encouraging hate laws or active persecution against homosexual citizens. If you think this to be the case, it has more to do about you, then our government or contemporary Christians. When Jesus said, Love thy neighbor as you love yourself, he wasn't talking sexually or about the administrative governmnental handling of marriage betwen husband and wife aka man and woman. Want some happiness, get the government out of the marriage business.
Know thy enemy.

(Report Comment)
Christopher Foote April 23, 2009 | 5:30 p.m.

Mr. Shapiro and Mr. Dudley,
Will you all be attending the upcoming protest next month?( It would appear that the protesters share the same views as both of you with respect to homosexuality and gay marriage. They also reference the same source, the Bible, in justifying their views.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 23, 2009 | 6:48 p.m.

Thanks for mentioning the fanatical/radical group which plans on visiting our fair city.
("Columbia has caught the attention of Westboro Baptist Church, an organization known for picketing the funerals of gay people and members of the military with signs claiming that soldiers and gay people burn in hell because God hates homosexuality and America.")
While I can't speak for Mr. Dudley, as you chose to pair us up, I don't "belong" to that Church, or any other "Church" for that matter. I also don't believe that all soldiers and gay people burn in hell because God hates homosexuality and America. In what way do you believe that they share MY view on homosexuality and gay marriage?
I have no specific plan to witness their "protest" of our city's decision to pass a partner registry, either.
Will you be attending?

(Report Comment)
sam wardell April 23, 2009 | 8:18 p.m.

Mr Sapiro, Marriage is a legally recognised estate which afford significant benefits and security to people. To allow heterosexual marriages these benefits and not homosexual couples is discriminatory. Further to that it singles out homosexual couples and so creates a cultural and social distinction, especially in a society like America where Family values are placed on a pedestal. It is not nearnly as bad as segrigation but it is similiar in that it involves legally enforcing an us/them division in society. I would be perfectly happy for government to get out of the marriage game all together, but legislation that favours one group over another is de facto discrimination.

As for what Jesus meant by love that is very much an open issue, the interpretation of agape as a universal love as opposed to eros is early church, not apostolic and certainly not biblical. In any event the distinction between agape and eros is a blurred one, interestingly CS Lewis (who described himself as a reformed atheist) held that agape could not be meaningfully understood without an understanding of eros (it is no coincidence that in English and most Romance languages one word is used to cover both).

Your point about establishing a precedent whereby three people or incestuous couples could get married is well taken. However somewhere between 4 and 10% of the population is homosexual, that means the numbers being discriminated against are very significant. The number of trios or siblings, one imagines, are significantly smaller. Having said that I have no problem with polygomy being recognised as long as it is loving and consential.

My guess is that demographics are against you anyhow, the younger generation cares significantly less about homosexuality, it is probably only a matter of time before there is no distinction in law.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 23, 2009 | 9:16 p.m.

Until the language was challenged by gay activists, it has been administered as an understanding that the word marriage is defined as the legal, governmental, acknowledgment between a man and a woman. Marriage, therefore applies to the legal union betwewen a man and a woman. Discrimination is not an issue. It is an accusation.
Also, regardless of how marriage is administered or destroyed by attorneys, the laws of nature will remain the same.
Finally, the indoctrination of college students and young people by the secular progressives does not guarantee anything. Many of these youngsters inherently know their gay friends are behaving in a non-traditional manner. Something that is very appealing to the hormonally new. Eventually, they too will view that the government should have no part in gay coupling.
(As of today, I will not even use your term of "gay marriage" or "same-sex marriage." The word marriage deserves better. I will start using the term gay- coupling. Thanks for helping me realize I was aiding and abetting.)

(Report Comment)
Drew D April 24, 2009 | 4:01 p.m.

This is yet. I watch this world "accept" me. I don't believe in a bible. I don't believe I should sin when I sexual feeling. The mind cannot be changed in your sexuallity. As for changing your mind on Same-sex marriage, you are single voice, a person, and your mind is your own. I will not let my mind be killed by the voice of a bible. Its a book, its pages, its words. And I can't say I'm trusting some people who claim to have written what "God" said.

God has his view. I will always have mine. You believe what you want. I wont be bullied by a bible hugger.

To those who are reglious that don't have a problem with any of this, I believe you know a thing or two.

I'll be damed if this dies. To see America stop racism is not possible. To see Gay hate die will be never. But we brace. So if I go to hell, I'm glad I was able to be happy and live, and I'm glad To have been with a guy. Love is an addiction, its a posion, its my drug, and if he gives me it, I have a chance to be happy, and you look me in the eye, tell me I'm Wrong!, and I'll smile but walk away.

Drew. Andy. A voice.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 24, 2009 | 7:52 p.m.

Drew D the only problem I have with any of your above statement is that it comes across to me as the most selfish of any I have ever read on this controversial issue.

It only says me me me me and nothing but me.

It says nothing about anybody else around you,in any kind of contact with you,anybody in the future who might have contact with you and even those who might only have contact through you on a blog or a forum you post on or even those who might here of this issue and only have indiscriminate contact.

It says nothing about how it all relates to community beliefs,national beliefs but it does show the absolute facts that you obviously only care about yourself and to hell with anybody else ever. You are going to do what you are going to do no matter what the risks,hardships or mental trauma you might cause on others around you.

The attitude I get coming off of your post is no better than a self centered drug addict looking for their fix and they will do whatever they must to get that fix and to hell with society itself. The only difference is your fix is a gay relationship at all costs.

Prove me wrong.

Sorry kid that old donkey does not fly in my book and that poor old dog sure does not hunt anymore either.

There is an entire world around you that has to deal with your decisions you make in seeking that gay relationship you want whether you realize that now in your younger years or not.

You can get upset by my post if you like. I in fact expect you to but realize how your decisions are actually effecting an entire world around you before you go charging off for your quest for glory and fame.

Peace out.

(Report Comment)
Drew D April 24, 2009 | 8:27 p.m.

C. Jr. Welcome back.

Today was strong, and my messageis in context of I the mind. Not All Me, but you have a right to post on here, yet you come back in the end. Leave it to people who have an arguement.

The point is that we here are one nation, its time to lose our differences. Your still taking from people, you got to realize you deny people benfits & rights. Your taking from people, I believe to you thats a sin.

I'm not back to take on fools. I'm here to come up with a way to better the world. Make a move. Checkmate.

(Report Comment)
John Schultz April 24, 2009 | 8:42 p.m.

Chuck, Drew getting married to whom he wishes should be all about him him him and not us us us. Government and society should not have a say in his relationship, assuming the two are of legal age for "regular" marriage in Missouri. Otherwise, shall we demand the government also approve the marriage of each straight couple? When my wife and I married, I did not care how society saw it, nor how some unknown guys on the Internet or general folks in Columbia would be impacted by it.

How can his feelings for another man possibly impact you in a significant and quantifiable way? That seems to be the real issue here.

(Report Comment)
Drew D April 25, 2009 | 1:56 a.m.

By the way Ray! Same-Sex Marriage. The facts are laws are rewritten. The fact is American youth is changing, bisexual is a fad. So you don't get what American Nature is, because tradition and right don't go hand in hand. My tradition is to do right for every American! Black, White, Mexican, European, and Asian or Gay, Straight, Bisexual, Transgendered, and Cross Desser. Because thats right. Not enforcing a book of old, laws or god, you can't be an idoit. You get the unfair. But the unfair isn't marriage. Its that we stare at fools who aren't even smart enough to realize I'm a person with rights, including those that come by marriage. I'll take fries with that too, while your on your feet in amazement!

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 25, 2009 | 2:13 a.m.

Thanks for clearing things up and putting this issue into the context it deserves. You are a true American!

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 25, 2009 | 4:50 a.m.

Drew D until your views stop coming across as those of other militant gays my points still stand.

If you want to move the mountain or Mohamed first you need to learn just how to do it in context and not by force.

No the next move is yours and not mine as we can sit here and parlay all day long. The next move is yours because it is up to you to learn just how to get people to move and not the people's obligations to move for you.

Your move young man. You are far from any form of a check or even a checkmate move but in fact you are just moving people into more of the defensive stature by your militant views so they can actually and continually defend their views no matter how you come across.

Your next move and following moves will always proclaim any future moves you even intend to make.

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking April 25, 2009 | 5:22 a.m.

"Bisexual is a fad"

Hmm. I thought being gay (or going both ways) was not a choice?

Drew, I really do hope you can marry whoever you want, but please try to proof your posts a little better. The last one was just short of incoherent. You don't advance your cause by posting things like that.


(Report Comment)
Drew D April 25, 2009 | 7:28 a.m.

I understand after writing that last night that I really didn't explain.

Half the people I know engage in same-sex relationships, and thats not why I know them, Its because they're in a different generation. This is kind of Old World vs New World. And to be honest people are starting to lose faith in religion.

I do believe there is some power that created this perfect planet. I'm not going to raise a child to believe in some "followers." Rights aren't in religion.

So in return Chuck and DK (clearing up) these teenagers going through phases where they think they like the same-sex, well then there mind also knows how it feels. The vote on gay marriage won't happen. The Supreme Court will end up with the decision, or the president will veto it and it will go to the house for its second vote. My voice will still cry, over DC, over the East Coast, and Over America, because it is about me, and the 15-20% of homosexuals in the US. Thats life, too take crap from people, we did, now its being shoved back.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 25, 2009 | 3:42 p.m.

I found this great opinion composed by another blogger. I think his take on homosexual behavior is dead on...

("For both for and against homoexuality this is a good topic to read. You see after long hard hours of thinking I have realized what homosexuality really is nothing to be discriminated against.
A homosexual is like any other person with a mental disorder. For example someone with bipolar disorder, dyspareunia or gender identity disorder.
You see 100,000 years ago there were no homosexuals. People mated according to their gender instinct. Just like animals do today. You won't find your female cat rubbing up against your neigbours female cat will you? This happened because something in the brain triggerd off the male human when he sees a female human, and so he makes an attempt to mate with her as he has become aroused.

But somewhere along the line in those 100,000 years to now something in the brain evolved in a negative form so that when some sexes of the human species see another of the same sex they become aroused. This is known as a disorder in the brain, as the brain is not working in accord to it's original function, because when these two of the same sex attempt to mate they would be unable to produce an offspring thus there species would die out.
So there you have it homosexuality is like another brain disorder, and funding should be put into research towards developing proper treatment for this disorder.
--So maybe Freud and other psychiatrists were right about same-sex sexual activity being a fetish, or brain abnormality and many just caved in to what the patient wanted to be told. (You're not sick.) I guess, denial is the best cure for those afflicted with brain disorders. Brain disorders, after all, are a part of nature, just like homosexuals.

(Report Comment)
Matt Y April 25, 2009 | 4:05 p.m.

I think I'll just leave this here.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 25, 2009 | 4:21 p.m.

Those animals must really "love" each other.

(Report Comment)
Matt Y April 25, 2009 | 5:04 p.m.

Not really a valid question, since you can't rightly prove animals can "love" at all. What I did do, however, was completely invalidate the point you and that idiot 'blogger' tried to make.

"You see 100,000 years ago there were no homosexuals" is a patently false statement, since there were homosexuals at that time, and have continued be homosexuals since. Its likely that homosexuality has existed as long as sexual reproduction has existed.

I know you'll never change your mind, but don't try to blow smoke up our asses.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 25, 2009 | 5:31 p.m.

The animal kingdom, which we are part of, probably connects the sex and pleasure dynamic over the "love" connection. Man and Woman can reproduce. Man and Man & Woman and Woman are probably just hornier than heterosexuals. (Or just plain sex haters of the oppostite sex.) Hence, hedonism rules!
(I just made that up. How's that for smoke?)

Yea, that blogger was stretching it more than I ever would, however there are gay activists who stretch the value of their homosexual exploits as well. Many are just trying to validate their sexual appetite and behavior.

(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 25, 2009 | 5:55 p.m.

Well if we call it a Mental Illness and put it into that context then I can look at this picture more but this also would mean that some of these people might not be legally accountable for their own actions which totally raises an entire other issue now.

Mental Illness carries alot of weight in some circles but there is still the non tolerances of the behaviors in public that go along as well.

The new question is are these behaviors if affiliated with a Mental Illness going to be publicly acceptable we must all ask ourselves?

As it stands now alot of Mental Illness behaviors are not acceptable by all in our society.

You cannot have your cake or your buddy's cake and eat it to unless you are willing to answer for the consequences over time.

Your move.

(Report Comment)
Drew D April 25, 2009 | 9:05 p.m.

You dare to call us ill?
You call the only people with no problem being thereselves ill?

Your really crazy! Stop the childish name calling, go to the barber to get your hair cut, drive far away if you must. But here our voice! Freedom was and is the right of sane difference. My move is yet to be wasted Chuck, you have really played anything challenging.


(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking April 26, 2009 | 2:29 a.m.

Come on, Chuck. Drew isn't mentally ill. He's just different. Accept that he is different and move on.

Do you really think you'll change the way he is by calling him mentally ill? Then why did you even bring it up?

Take the advice of many who have offered it. Find a hobby that doesn't involve arguing with people online.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 26, 2009 | 4:59 a.m.

Both of you above missed the context of ray's post comment about the Mental Illness issue in this.

Both of you wasted your moves and have shown your real intentions and leanings towards the more militant side of this issue.

Failure on the part of both of you above to actually look at this issue farther outside of the box just shows that both of you really do not want to honestly debate ALL of the issue only one tiny portion.

Drew I hate to burst your tiny bubble you live in but the absolute facts and truths are that everybody carries some form of a illness and if we want to be technical about it everybody carries at least one form of an underlying Mental Illness to some degree of level.

Although it may not be evident to all but their very close friends that is a fact young man. Go research it yourself. Open your eyes and look around you for a change.

There is no such thing about any class,group,race,social status or anything else in our society that does not have some level of a Mental Illness issue to deal with. To say as such you are denying humanity in it's proper context we live in today.

Your move.

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking April 26, 2009 | 5:35 a.m.

"Mental illness" is becoming an overused, overdiagnosed label for anyone who is "different". Classifying everyone as mentally ill means professionals can make that much more money treating everyone.

Homosexuality was dropped from the DSM-IV many years ago. It is no longer considered a mental illness, nor an illness of any sort. The fact that it bothers you personally, Chuck, doesn't make it an illness.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 26, 2009 | 9:42 a.m.

Mark Foecking for all of the high paid and high class book education you have you once again fail to look at the much broader picture as this relates itself to not only human society but to as it relates to nature itself.

Let me ask some very pointed questions at this point:

Could we as a society evolved to where we are today if all people from the very very beginning of time with Chromagnum Man if the species were all or even partially/borderline/closet or back then it was living in caves gay?

Could we as a society as a whole been able to populate this world we live on if every body practiced the gay life style?

Where in fact would those who are gay be today if not for their Heterosexual parents who conceived them in the natural order of things to begin with?

Let me ask you a more pointed question here: Do you see two male dogs screwing each other on the streets or anywhere in society at all? Do you see two female dogs doing like wise anywhere?

I for one have never seen such an atrocity in my entire life time and I hope I never do so what does that make dogs that much more in tune than we so called smarter humans are with nature itself?

One might think so as at least the dogs know not to lay with their own kind even as nature itself teaches all of us.

Yes there are rare exceptions to the rule of thumb but they are not the status quo by far nor ever will be.

Truly there must be some genetic defect that causes people to turn gay or to be born gay but it is a genetic defect of some nature or all of nature would be be gay and the Heterosexual populous would be the minority.

You can try to explain away anything Mark but the reality is until the common base element is actually found nobody will ever truly understand the reasons or the why but my beliefs are alot of it is Mentally related and the other part is genetically related.

In reality the label of Mental Illness is not over used but the facts are people are afraid of the reality of the label in how it pertains to themselves.

Your move.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley April 26, 2009 | 1:01 p.m.

Chuck does make some good points, Mark. As much as I hate to be the one to post it.

I await your response, I feel like it should be quite educational and enlightening.

Take care, Mark.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 26, 2009 | 2:06 p.m.

Rick I look to see a more Grass Roots point of view than some over educated,book learned,over age college kid type of response on this issue.

Far too many times here all you see is the above types of postings and it really does not do squat for those looking at any issue from the Grass Roots point of view. Anybody can go read and plagiarize of out of a book or online.

If people wanted a highly educational over your head type of commentary they could go to the dam library and bang their heads until they either pass out or bleed all over the floor.

I for one skip over all commentary if posters cannot break it down into it's base mechanics.

(Report Comment)
Ricky Gurley April 26, 2009 | 4:21 p.m.

I wouldn't go putting Mark down, Chuck. As I said, I think you have some good points. But the gist of my reply was to illicit a response from Mark, who ALWAYS has some good points. I am quite looking forward to a response from Mark because it seems that I ALWAYS learn something from Mark's posts. He is a very brilliant and highly intelligent man.

So don't get too "cocky", just because someone posted that you have some good points, because that is highly unusual in regards to your posts, Chuck. LOL.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 26, 2009 | 4:29 p.m.

Ricky Gurley not getting cocky by far so we need not go there. was stating an obvious and honest point of view.

Often times people will not read responses if they contain too much of the book learned sides of things and not true and actual Grass Roots idealism.

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking April 29, 2009 | 6:43 a.m.

Thanks for the comp's, Rick - I shall try - sometimes I don't think I'm doing anyone any good by arguing with Chuck.

Chuck: "Hair ring" is a condition caused by young bulls mounting other bulls. If untreated it can lead to loss of, um, the bull's "manhood".

I've seen male dogs trying to mount other male dogs, haven't you? Or male dogs trying to mount their owner's leg? It doesn't mean they're homosexual, only that they need sexual release. One can argue that if every dog mounted their owner's leg, that there wouldn't be any more puppies, but that is obviously untrue. There's always enough seed to go around, even if a lot of it gets wasted.

A lot of prisoners that have homosexual relations in prison likely would not if they had access to women. It doesn't mean they're homosexual, just that their needs aren't being taken care of by themselves.

A lot of people find they're attracted to a member of the same sex after they've had children. This passes any "gay genes" on. Same with cultures that deny homosexuality - any gay genes get passed on even though they're not allowed to be acted upon. That's how you could see "gay genes" passed on. Other people are bisexual.

This is much more about your (Chuck's) gut reaction to homosexual behavior and much less about your concern for society. It doesn't bother me, and I don't pay a lot of attention to it. It's none of my business, and the only reason I pay attention to gayness is when someone who it doesn't affect, tries to make it their business.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 29, 2009 | 7:57 a.m.

>>> This is much more about your (Chuck's) gut reaction to homosexual behavior and much less about your concern for society. It doesn't bother me, and I don't pay a lot of attention to it. It's none of my business, and the only reason I pay attention to gayness is when someone who it doesn't affect, tries to make it their business. <<<

Wrong Mark you make almost everything I post your target or you would not post at all in response to my comments.

It is about society as a whole and it is about how this society is going as a whole in the direction I feel will lead to problems and also could lead to much worse issues for all.

Nothing you or any other person has been presented has factually prove that wrong. Nature itself teaches us as well as shows us differently by design.

You can be in denial all you want that is your choice but it is not mine nor will be.

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking April 29, 2009 | 5:02 p.m.

Chuck wrote:

"It is about society as a whole and it is about how this society is going as a whole in the direction I feel will lead to problems and also could lead to much worse issues for all."

I still don't know what you are talking about. What societal problems? How does it affect you if Bill and Bob across town get married, or even shack up?

Other than having to explain to your child why so-and-so has two mommies, I can't imagine how homosexuality affects anyone. It doesn't affect me at all. No man has asked me to marry him, or even asked me out (in many years, and I simply declined with no hard feelings). What's the problem, Chuck?

What specific problems is homosexual behavior, or gay marriage, causing? Don't just say "societal breakdown". Specifics! Because I don't see them.


(Report Comment)
Charles Dudley Jr April 29, 2009 | 7:25 p.m.

Mark Foecking if you do not get it with all of your higher education and book learning at your disposal then you never will.

No matter how simplistic it would be broken down for you which it has been all too many times on this site through the numerous amounts of comments.

The same thing has been broken down by countless articles you can even research yourself via the internet and at the public libraries across this entire nation.

(Report Comment)
John Schultz April 29, 2009 | 8:20 p.m.

Mark, about the most convincing argument I have seen from Chuck, and Ray to a lesser degree, is that some gays in the past have "shoved" their lifestyle in their faces. Maybe someone should give them a ride to the Mid-MO Pridefest next month?

(Report Comment)
sam wardell April 30, 2009 | 5:56 p.m.

'Homosexuality' as an identity is a recent phenomena, really the first guy to promote it was a brilliant philosopher by the name of Foucault.

However Homosexual activity is as old as history itself. In the Babylonian story Gilgamesh, the oldest epic poem we have (pre-dating the oldest of the old testament – in fact the story of Noah is a retelling of the Gilgamesh tale of Upnapishtim), the main character's true love is another man, in the text the love is clearly erotic. In ancient Greece sodomy of young boys was the social norm. The thinker Plato (who, ironically, had more impact on early Christian Theological development than any other non-Judeo/Christian thinker) in the Symposium even claimed that the erotic love between a man and boy was the highest of all loves.

Freud did indeed identify Homosexuality as a neurosis (he did not use the pop-psychology phrase 'mental illness'), however very few modern Freudians defend that view and argue that it was a cultural judgement of the time. As a side note 'mental illness' should be used with more rigour than some people posting have been, it should not be synonymous with statistical minority, otherwise a liking for lemonade over coke could be classified as 'illness'(and who knows there may be a genetic component to that!)

We should be careful of language. If you identify homosexuality as an 'illness' that has far more connotation than 'statistical minority'. Before homosexual identity became established the word used was 'sodomy'. Obviously this referred to the act itself. The creation of an identity by virtue of the act of sodomy is a huge step. Similarly the argument for homosexual marriage requires a change in the definition of 'marriage'. I understand why Christians may be upset at seeing 'their word' being changes to include those they believe live in sin. However marriage already covers drunk unifications in casinos, and in the past Christians allowed children as young as 8 to get married, and there is some evidence (see the writings of St Irenaeus) to suggest that Gnostic Christians allowed marriages of more than one partner. The words are always changing, to try and rope off a particular cultural definition is folly. Moreover when this roping off translates to tangible benefits (as legally defined marriage does) then to rope something off is (apologies Ray Shapiro) discriminatory.


ps Drew, one thing you seem to have trouble accepting is that people still disagree with you. I am afraid that's the way of things. As the old saying goes: 'never argue with a fool, at best you'll have beaten a fool'.

(Report Comment)
Michael Schrantz April 30, 2009 | 6:23 p.m.

That was one of the best comments I've read on a Missourian story in a while. Thanks Sam.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro April 30, 2009 | 9:14 p.m.

That was one of the gayest comments I've read on a Missourian story in a while.
Thanks Sam.

(Report Comment)
Jane Doe April 30, 2009 | 11:22 p.m.

Andy, please stop attempting to make your point this way. Have somebody proofread your comments, you're only hurting your cause with your hard-to-follow posts.

You're too young to understand how to reign this passion into a useful force.

(Report Comment)
Drew D May 1, 2009 | 7:59 a.m.

I'm not to young. I have the exact same understand of that person you consider yourself. Being nice wasn't working, plan b has to come into effect to make it know I'm not giving up.

I can't let anymore suffer. Anyone get hurt over people. Its not in my blood. No matter how young or old, I will be fighting this!

(Report Comment)
sam wardell May 1, 2009 | 8:49 a.m.

Drew, I am not sure there is such a thing as 'too' young. But you are young, and with that comes an admirable sense of self worth and confidence.

However the young often have less time for subtlety. Standing up for what you believe in is a noble thing to do, it is the mark of a good person. Be warned though, there is a fine line between that and demagogic allegiance to a point of view at the exclusion of all others; that is the mark of a fanatic.

Discrimination against homosexuals is the last 'acceptable' form of discrimination, and that is something to strive against. But don't paint all those who disagree with you as bad or even wrong. I am in favour of legally recognised gay marriage. But there are some good arguments to the contrary, as the belligerent Ray Shapiro suggested above, perhaps the state should get out of the marriage game all together and leave it to the individual consciences of churches. Perhaps, as in the UK, gay marriage could be called civil unions and still carry all the same legal rights without impinging upon the term 'marriage'.

Most people are kind and loving, they need to be brought to see homosexuality poses no threat, and that cannot be done by shouting from the rooftops. This is a debate that can be won, but it needs to be sober and measured. Dr King once spoke of the knock at midnight; you need people to open up, not forcibly enter. If this issue is not handled well it could put gay rights back by many years.


(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro May 1, 2009 | 11:23 a.m.

Your message to Drew contains some good sound advice, filled with wisdom.
However, "belligerent" Ray Shapiro?
Of course you know, this means war!

(Report Comment)
sam wardell May 1, 2009 | 11:34 a.m.

Yeah ... sorry about that. Anyway 'belligerence' is just another way of saying you stand up for your convictions, and I can't fault a guy for that.

(Report Comment)
Ray Shapiro May 2, 2009 | 3:32 p.m.

No sweat.

(Report Comment)
Matthew D. June 20, 2009 | 12:12 a.m.

now you people have another gay fourteen year old to argue with about your opinions an beliefs.(:

(Report Comment)
Drew D June 24, 2009 | 7:55 p.m.

Matthew, lets re-open this Article. It is june afterall. People Iowa instated Marriage in April, want to chase me there! You want me To be chase to a state? Well watch out, USA Today will soon have my next article!

(Report Comment)
Drew D August 29, 2009 | 8:48 p.m.

I would like everyones permission to release on last article, under my disclosed name, without anyone knowing who I am, I want to show everyone something bigger than the crap in this article page, it gets bigger, and I have to write and release it some home. I want to do it here, but I need everyone to say YES, to get Jake to notice and let me.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.