Gays can change ways
Published: Monday, February 4, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Updated: Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Re. Melissa Charlton's letter, “Open our minds to gays” (Jan. 13.), which was critical of my letter, “Gay marriage (Jan. 5): I don't know why anyone would choose to be gay, a pedophile, a druggie or a prostitute. But if they were all born that way, the chance for change would be slim to none. But we do know that some people are able to change their lifestyle, homosexuals included. I have personal knowledge of two who did.
Ms. Charlton says she's a libertarian, but my guess is she's a liberal. While gay people do adopt children, I question if that environment is best to raise a child.
She correctly states there were homosexuals when the Bible was written — Sodom and Gomorrah offer proof of that. Jesus didn't abolish the Old Testament and replace it with the New Testament.
Ms. Charlton completely missed my point that gay marriage could lead to people wanting to marry animals. My point was marriage is more than just love. There are physical differences that must be addressed in order to consummate a marriage and this difference makes marriage impossible for same-sex couples.
Prior to President Clinton's “Don't ask, don't tell” policy, the military discharged homosexuals as soon as they were discovered. This was done to reduce the threat of venereal disease and had nothing to do with one's ability to do his job.
Homosexuals used to live their lives and keep to themselves. They didn't demand others accept their lifestyle as normal. That changed when public schools started teaching homosexuality as an alternate lifestyle and encouraged some students to experiment with it.
- Oppose Common Core
- Blame districts, state
- Connellsville’s finances
- Close corporate loopholes
- Go to the Heritage
- Leechburg to Heritage: Bad move
- Multiple Bibles: It’s OK
- Local zoning essential
- Fox sarcasm
- Free speech
- Guns a public health issue
You must be signed in to add comments
To comment, click the Sign in or sign up at the very top of this page.
You know, it’s really weird, as a gay man, to be categorized as one in the same with someone who has sex with animals or wants to marry their pet. While I don’t think Mr. Gagliardi means to be an intentionally malicious person, it really does affect the way people think about homosexuals when you categorize them that way or compare them with people participating in bestiality. Whether it’s for the sake of an argument or not, I wish that more people, including Mr. Gagliardi, would think twice about what intention there is behind using gays as the example of nearly every social debate nowadays. There is no point in that type of argument. Why don’t we argue divorce? I am in love with my boyfriend. Our love for each other is not circumstantial. Conversations like this cheapen how I feel as a citizen that pays my taxes, devotes myself to nonprofit work and volunteer opportunities, pays my bills on time, and has no criminal record. Being thought of as one in the same with someone who has sex with animals is unacceptable in any light. You are correct in your statement, however, that marriage is more than just love. I agree; marriage is a legally binding contract that entitles me the rights to property, social security benefits, pension programs, insurance policies, and tax breaks- just to name a few. We could all argue the bible all day long, however, when it comes down to it, house pets won’t have a say in legalizing marriage with their owners until they start paying taxes. I pay my taxes- that earns me to the same rights and civic responsibilities, as well as access to the same social programs as the next person.