Often it is the kids who figure out who is different before the adults do. Whether they care one way or another might depend on how they are raised.

Instead of what do I tell my children it should be what will my children tell me LOL?

And John, you are SO right! I’ve been the beneficiary of some of that ridiculous propaganda. I won’t even get into the gay side of the propaganda, as I’m sure you’ve all heard it many times.

On the anti-gay marriage side one thing that drives me nuts is when people make a big effin’ deal about, “how will I explain this to my kids? I don’t want to have this conversation yet!”

I have four kids. One is gay (and I’m pretty positive she was genetically predisposed and we’ve known since she was about 5 she was going to lean that way) – she is 16. I also have a 10 year old, an 8 year old, and a 5 year old. My cousin is a lesbian in a committed relationship for many years. They are both called auntie by my kids.

And never have my kids even NOTICED that the aunties are “different.” Because the funny thing about kids is that they pretty much view anything as normal unless the people around them are making a huge deal about it.

So here’s the deal – I think that people who get all hysterical about “explaining” things are just looking for a reason to be hysterical. But I also think the book “Heather Has Two Mommies” is silly, because that just gives kids they idea they should be thinking it is weird and then should be learning to not think it is weird.

If that makes sense.

People don’t give kids enough credit.

You had said before that the decision made by the Supreme Court was a case of judicial activism; I both agree and disagree. The people don’t always vote in ways that agree with the laws of the land, in which case the judges have to step in and interpret the law as it is written. I’m not sure that I believe they overstepped their boundaries in declaring the ban on gay marriage illegal, then again I’ve not read their opinions on the matter.

Few judges are able to get away with acting outside their capacity to merely interpret the laws that exist, though. Both sides complain of judicial activism and I’m not sure I believe any of them. It’s an issue I want to read more about. I think I just found the subject for my thesis…

UGH!

We have in this country public school classrooms that are boys only or girls only. It is not widespread, but they exist. The parents of these kids voluntarily put their children in these classrooms.

They are separate and equal. The kids don’t get shortchanged. The law does not allow this.

The problem with Brown vs. Board of Education was in the past children at segregated black schools were getting short changed big time on many different levels. Separate was not equal in that case.

To say separate but equal can never ever be is wrong. It can be and it is.

I agree. It will not happen any day soon. But it should. We are at war in CA over this issue. It’s ugly. Both sides are not playing fair and spreading lie after lie.

I can see gay Roman Catholics getting upset over your plan becuase they can never have legal marriage in the Catholic church. But they would want legal marriage. So the options are marry in a gay friendly church or demand the government offer marriage.

This is the crux of the issue in CA. There are civil unions in CA that offer the same protection as legal marriage. But that isn’t good enough for the gay community in CA. But, it should be. Take the bus or walk; as long as you get where you need to be is all that matters.

I know two same sex couples who opted for the civil union when that was the only choice. They are not going to get married because they already are married in the eyes of the state.

I get what you’re saying about two consenting adults. And on so many levels I hear you/understand where you are coming from.

And on so many other level s I hear where other people are coming from on calling marriage between a man and a man or vice versa, the same thing. God didn’t make Adam and Adam, God made Adam and Eve, hence Mel’s point about marriage being sanctioned by the church.

I guess my thing is- if we didnt’ have income taxes in the first place, it wouldn’t matter who your spouse was, to begin with, say if we had a national sales tax. Furthermore, your benefits at work should extend to anyone that you choose to let them extend to- so long as they’re human. If you’re gay, then they go to your partner. If you’re married they go to your spouse. I don’t understand why it isn’t that way.

But then there are no benefits in ranching, save for not having an office everyday, so I’m sure I may not completely understand the benefits issue.