There seems to be confusion
1997

  There seems to be in the media, government and now even business a number of general misconceptions best brought forth by an editorial in the Seattle Times that need to be addressed. The misconceptions were on page B-8 Sunday Nov.24, 1996, the article was titled “A time to celebrate family, a time to widen our circles”.
  The first misconception: “is same-sex love really all that different? By reducing marriage to the sex act, we belittle all that marriage is: a commitment to life long partnership and caring.”
  Sometimes a problems has to be taken to is lowest common denominator, I will try to explain this in plain, simple, unembellished English.
  The same-sex act is most assuredly different. In a normal “sex-act” the penis of a male is inserted into the vagina of a female. A male inserting his penis into the anus of another male or for that matter a female is not a normal sex-act. A female strapping on an imitation penis and inserting it into another female vagina and or anus is also not normal. Let me further state, what two or more consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is their business.
   In most cases, over the course of time (but not always) when a penis is inserted into a vagina the result is the conception of a child. It states in the article that the author has three sons, some of you working in business, government and the media also have children so I have to assume that you are aware of this. However, if a male inserts his penis into a female anus this will not work (not possible to create child). If a male inserts his penis into another male rectum it still will not result in the formation of a child. Lastly, if a female straps on an imitation penis and insert it into another female vagina (unless the imitation penis comes pre-loaded with sperm) or rectum the formation of life is still impossible. Again what two or more consenting adults wish to do in the privacy of their own home is their business.
  Yes, marriage is a commitment to lifelong partnership and caring. It is also about kids and grandkids, about aunts, uncles and grandparents. The homosexual would not have a partner to care for were it not for male and female copulation. Immediate family is only possible in nature by a male penis being inserted into a female vagina. It does not work with humans any other way in nature.
  I have drawn the line when it comes to the idea that schools, (we are talking about a system that exhibits an impaired ability to carry out basic instruction in reading, writing and arithmetic) are going to teach my children that a man inserting his penis into a rectum is O.K. or normal. That a fist being shoved up the anus of a male or female is acceptable, or for a female to strap on a penis and play with her “girl toy” is all right.
  Let me reiterate, what two or more consenting adults with to do in their own home is their business, just do not try to shove these ideas down my or my children’s’ throats. 
   Let us move on. “Beyond the political reality of the issue, the arguments against same-sex marriage just don’t hold up. There’s no evidence that children raised by two mothers or two fathers fare any worse then those in traditional families.”
  Let us see if maybe some of you confused people can be helped to understand something that must have been missed in biology class in college, (I am going to take it for granted that most of you went on to higher education). A child can not have two mommies or two daddies! It is biologically impossible.   The child’s mother or father may be living an alternate lifestyle but a man inserting his penis into the anus of another male or female does not create a child. Nor is a woman strapping on a penis and inserting it into a female vagina and or anus capable of forming life.
   Which leads us to the problem of news, government and education based on fiction. Since a child can have neither two mothers nor two fathers said child must be living with its’ mother and her “friend” or its’ father and his “friend”. Somehow in this era of political correctness, something previously known as fact has been tossed out the window. But alas, I have come to expect no better from the “educated” crowd.
  In the next statement “as for the biblical imperative against homosexuals, those who cite it are selective readers and enforcers of the Bible unless they also confirm to Old Testament rules against certain foods clothes and cutting of hair.”
  I am going to make the assumption on the bases of the preceding paragraph that some have never read the complete Old and New Testament of the Bible. If the time was taken to read the Bible it was long ago and most seem to have forgotten what was read or it was a very superficial time of life and nothing sunk in. Yes, the Old Testament condemns homosexuality. It also condemns rape, lying, murder, theft, and adultery to mention but a few items, and gives their corresponding punishments.
  The New Testament teaches that he who is without sin can throw the first stone. The last perfect person, who could have thrown that stone, but did not, got hung from a cross. It teaches about a man named Jesus and what He stood for.
  Why is it that people like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, Daniel Webster, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr., just to name a few, could accept GOD and his book the Bible but so many of you cannot?
  The next statement, “the nations discomfort with same-sex marriage is really about fear.” I do not fear these people, I just believe their lifestyle is perverted. If others don’t have a problem with men screwing men or boys (North America Man Boy Love Association N. A. M. B. L. A.) and women trying to screw women that is fine with me, but please quit saying it is normal because it most assuredly is not.