Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » LOTD

LOTD

Filed at 4:12 am under by dcobranchi

Just because I thought y’all could use a bit of sheer insanity to go along with your morning coffee:

Stop gay marriage to uphold identity

What does it mean to be homosexual?

There are very few perfect males and females. We were created with DNA that determines our sexual orientation. Culture, religion and environment also play big roles.

We are created on a line: one extreme is the macho, the other the overly compassionate. The expanded middle is the “normal,” who have an almost equal portion of male and female traits.

Machos are aggressive, hard-driving, self-centered with rigid beliefs and tunnel vision. The opposite are those who have a laid-back tendency, want to nurture everyone who is hurting or despondent, with tendencies to love, accept and embrace every new idea that comes along.

At this point, there is nothing wrong with the picture. It becomes distorted when couples lose their identity by not celebrating their position on the line. They drop off when they need someone else to affirm their masculinity or femininity.

Psychology lost its scientific credibility by claiming a proposed DNA structure to affirm homosexuality. That has not been scientifically proven.

Vermont has legalized gay marriages through its legislature rather than judicial process, which will be exploited throughout the states. Gays do not want tolerance of civil union but will only settle for marriage, and President Obama has promised to appeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

If we want to uphold the right to true femininity or masculinity, then the time to stop gay marriages is now before the train gains any more speed.

Ray Miller
Fayetteville

13 Responses to “LOTD”


Comment by
Nance Confer
May 16th, 2009
at 2:09 pm

WTF???

Nance


Comment by
Doc
May 16th, 2009
at 4:49 pm

I’d like to punch that guy in the face.


Comment by
Nance Confer
May 16th, 2009
at 5:33 pm

How very unfeminine of you, Doc. 🙂

Not saying it’s not a good idea. . .

Nance


Comment by
Mary
May 16th, 2009
at 5:59 pm

Seems to me Mr. Miller knows a whole lot about being gay….


Comment by
Lisa G.
May 16th, 2009
at 7:47 pm

This would be funny except for the fact that this kind of gender essentialism is EVERYWHERE.


Comment by
Nance Confer
May 16th, 2009
at 8:56 pm

Oh, this talk has a label?

Nance


Comment by
JJ Ross
May 16th, 2009
at 9:47 pm

Well, not EVERYWHERE . . .

. . .apparently there is this thing called a Kinsey Scale of Sexuality that Dr. Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues created in the 1930’s and 40’s. It ranked people on a scale from 0 to 6, 0 being entirely hetero and 6 being oh-so-homo, and in their studies, most people were somewhere in between.


Comment by
JJ Ross
May 16th, 2009
at 9:48 pm

Not that I am arguing against Lisa G., with whom I “essentially” am the same! 😉


Comment by
JJ Ross
May 16th, 2009
at 9:57 pm

Ack, sorry — that is indeed a good how-we-screw-up-thought link but not the one I meant for THIS thread, which should be this instead.


Comment by
Lisa G.
May 17th, 2009
at 8:26 am

@ Nance – Yup. I recommend this book: tinyur...pjmcrv
I would take a few things in it with a grain of salt, but by and far, it’s good.

@ JJ – The Kinsey scale measures sexual preferences something entirely different from one’s gender identity. No one’s entirely sure how a person’s gender identity, sexual orientation, and physical sex all interact.


Comment by
JJ Ross
May 17th, 2009
at 11:19 am

Point taken. Different yet mysteriously connected?


Comment by
Lisa G.
May 17th, 2009
at 12:07 pm

And furthermore! (heh)

Physical sex can be broken down into a few categories like chromosomal sex, which primary sex organs are present and to what degree, and which primary sex organs one’s brain is “wired” to.

@ JJ – Maybe connected, but then again maybe not as much as society conflates them.


Comment by
JJ Ross
May 19th, 2009
at 11:56 am

And does this fit in there somewhere? 😉

Salute when you call my son a cross-dresser at school!