[Cerek]

Originally posted by Melchior: I don't understand your problem. I didn't devalidate unhappiness. I pointed out that we are in control of our reactions to what happen to us. It's incorrect to say to someone "you make me so mad". No-one makes you mad, you chose to be angry with a person, just as you can chose to calm down and let it go. Of course circumstances make that choice difficult, just as time passing make the choice easier. If you deny this very basic concept you can live a powerless life, unable to control your emotions, be committed in relationships, create emotional art etc etc. Actors choose to emote for a living. That's why they fall in love with their leading partner all the time. This is quite a common knowledge idea. Many have espoused it before me. I really don't understand your sarcastic attitude.

My attitude is not sarcastic, I was asking a question. However, as you correctly pointed out, I cannot control how you choose to interpret and react to my comments - only you can.

You are correct that we each control how we react to situations and circumstances, but to blithely state (or imply) that victims of severe emotional and/or physical abuse are simply choosing to look at the glass as "half empty" is naive' to the extreme.

Originally posted by Melchior: If you think a piece of paper makes you happy you've misunderstood marriage. A homosexual is not discriminated against here. Homosexual relationships are, given the current aims of U.S. society. (Actually the way things stand now, homosexuals aren't being defined by their sexual preference at all.)

Homosexuals aren't seeking a piece of paper to complete their happiness, they are seeking to have the same legal benefits granted to their relationship that heterosexual couples receive. Your comment IS applicable to that group of gay/lesbian activists that INSIST their union be labeled a "marriage" instead of a "civil union". The label shouldn't matter, so long as the rights received under both terms are equal. You are also right that - in this particular instance - it is the homosexual relationship that is being discriminated against. But you are wrong to say that homosexuals themselves are not discriminated against. Even if you choose to ignore the obvious prejudice some people feel towards them, you have admitted that homosexuals must currently make a choice regarding their relationships. They can be with a person they love, but they won't receive the same legal rights and benefits granted to heterosexual couples (in most states). OR they can choose to marry someone they don't love, but receive the legal rights and benefits simply because that person is the opposite sex. And to imply the second choice is actually an acceptable option is to truly misunderstand marriage.

Originally posted by Melchior: Look, if you want to change society by all means do so. Please don't try and take some sort of moral highground in the process though, because both camps are doing exactly the same thing. What changes is the picture people want to see their society become.

To be perfectly honost, Melchior, you're the only one I've seen taking a supposed "higher ground" (whether morally, intellectually or both) so far. Well, with the exception of Azred - but then he shamelessly admits he has an elitist attitude. Maybe I am wrong to interpret your comments that way, but that is certainly how they sound when I read them. And I feel safe in saying I'm not the only one who has made this possible misinterpretation.

Originally posted by Cerek: And finally, if you believe that homosexuality is a conscious choice, then (theoretically) you should be able change your current sexual preference (if you really wanted to). Can any heterosexual male here honostly say they could "decide" to start being attracted to other men? Points to ponder. quote: Originally posted by Melchior: You bet. They often do. Again I present my aquaintance:

[/QUOTE]I'm not asking about acuaintances - I'm asking this question directly to you and to every other member here. Could any member here (males especially) honostly say they think they could become "attracted" to another guy and desire a loving, sexual relationship with them?

Because of my religious beliefs, I have always been firmly in the "choice" camp myself. I agree with Morgeraut that the "choice" may not even be a conscious one, but that it could have been affected by environment and social situations without the person even being aware of it. The examples shamrock gave help support this theory. However, when a gay member here asked point blank if I could ever "choose" to fall in love with a man, I had to admit that I could not.

I had a lifelong friend admit to me that he was gay. He also said he had always wanted to "date" me. When I told him that wasn't my lifestyle choice, he echoed the same sentiments expressed by Illumina's friend..."Why would he CHOOSE to live a life that was ostracised by society?" He did not WANT to be gay, but he could not help feeling attracted to men instead of women. He was also a strong Christian and the conflict with his beliefs caused him deep emotional turmoil. That is another example of how the "half full attitude" falls terribly short of truly understanding the full depth and seriousness of emotional pain.