From: ez000281@hamlet.ucdavis.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.latin-america
Subject: Re: Homophobia: US vs. CUBA
Date: 23 Jan 93 08:50:35 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, UC Davis

Greg Parkinson writes:

>There is no place in the United States where two persons
>of the same gender may legally marry.  San Francisco allows
>any two people of any gender to become "Domestic Partners"
>but this is not recognized as a marriage by state or federal
>laws, and does not qualify couples for the large number of
>economic benefits which come along with legal marriage, such
>as inheritance, social security, taxation, insurance, etc.

I never said *legally* I said *marry*, and you are wrong about the benefits 
since community property is shared property and in the event of a gay divorde, 
the property splits 50/50.  As to inheritance, we should allow for it, but 
given the fact that the MAJORITY of gays never bother with kids (Herod's 
influence perhaps?) I dobt it will affect anybody.  As far as social security, 
it very difficult to determine who will be widow, and since SS benefits widows, 
given their disadvantaged position within society, I think more study should be 
done in this regard.  As far as taxation is concerned, it only really benefits 
married coulples with children, since it is usually better to have people file
indpendent returns as long as they have no dependents, but perhaps exceptions 
should be made with gays.  Finally, insurance people feel that gays are a high 
risk category given the fact that they sometimes are involved in high risk 
activities which expose them to incurable diseases.

[...]

>Not quite.  It's on hold until the court case
>questioning its constitutionality is heard.
>It has not been forbidden or nullified in any
>way.

Well you know judges can rule permanently on anything before hearing all sides 
of a case, in the meantime, its forbidden and homosexuals can promote de 
passage which make of them an affirmative action group,  and of course, recieve 
equal protection before the law as stated in the Constitution. 

[...]

>So what's your point?  It would be equally stupid to
>say that since there have been no societies dominated
>by left-handed people that left-handedness is not
>natural.

Left handedness is not a socially acquired behaviour, nor does it (now) creat 
moral havoc in the intimate sexual relations between people.  This debate 
reminds me of this nude student who used to go to school in Berley and argued 
that he had the RIGHT to walk around nude  in class since others would be 
discriminating against him for his practicing nudity.  Aparently he forgot that 
in our society sexism has made nudity repuslsive to the gross majority of the 
population, and since it is so repulsive is should be shoved down others 
throats.  Likewise, homosexuality has been improving in terms of the TOLERANCE 
which heterosexuals now have towards homosexuals.  I am a HOMOPHOBE,  I utterly 
dislike (phobia) homosexuality (homo), yet I do not think that homosexuals 
should be deprived of any rights do to their abhorent (personal opinion) 
behaviour.  Instead, I think they should live as any citizen would, and that 
they can express their view on sexuality to anyone they wish as long as it 
doesn't infringe upon others rights.  Much progress has been achieved with 
respect to tolerance towards homosexuals.  Pretty soon (next week) they will be 
allowed to participate openly in the Armed Forces and this simply shows that we 
are world leaders regarding the tolerance of homosexuality.  In no other 
country in the world will gays and lesbians be party of the military machinery, 
and we should be proud of it.

[...]

>Amazing.  First, lots of heterosexuals have non-procreative
>sex.  Birth control, masturbation, oral sex.  People have
>been doing these things for a large number of years, yet
>the birth rate continues to soar.  

Simply because the majority of the population continues to stick a ding a ling 
in a pussy, otherwise there would be no procreation.  You see Greg, we straight 
people are responsible for 99.9% of all procreation, even though some of us 
rather practice annonism, felatio or self pleasure along the way.  But it we 
were as perverted as to devote entirely to such acts, there would be no species 
left to take over.


>It seems that some percentage of people are gay, and that
>percentage is less than the percentage who are straight.
>It seems that some percentage of people are left-handed, and
>that percentage is less than the percentage who are right-handed.
>Both states are normal and natural but exist in different
>numbers.  The difference in percentages doesn't prove anything.

There was a time when lefties were sinister (SINESTRA > izquierda), but now we 
know that it doesn't impede their performance.  We also know that homosexuality 
doesn't impede the job performance of anyone (unless the individual incurrs in 
unprotected sex).  However, if everyone were left handed, the  human species 
would continue until eternity, but if everyone were homsexual, we would become 
extinct.

[...].

>But it seems that "civilized" and therefore non-natural
>societies are the ones with all the proscriptions on
>sexual behavior.  "Primitive" societies seem to recognize
>the existance of gay people as natural and normal.

Precisely, that's why their "primitive", and we have reached the moon.

[...]

>Not all societies have incest taboos, so it can't be "natural".


Well fortunately ours does.  I don't want hemophiliacs competing with AIDS 
patients in search for "treatment".  Asf or the pedophiles and molestors:


>You expect to be taken seriously when you try to equate
>consentual adult sexual relations with by definition
>non-consentual relations between adults and children?

Why not?  "Primitive" societies frequently have pedophiles a plenty.

>That would be like me saying "Would somebody please state the
>difference between heterosexual sex and rape?"

No, it would be like you saying: could someone state the difference between 
natural homosexuality and natural pedophilia?

>Fool.

No need to insult me.  I am a sincere homophobe that tolerates homosexuals.

Edelmiro Salas