I support those who are homosexual. I too believe it is something you're born with. I am against Prop 8 (in California, U.S.) and am appalled that the courts decided to support it. *0.o Ugh. People today are so closed minded! I thought we (the U.S.) were a nation with equal rights!

Your entry reminds me of the days of segregation in the U.S. When African Americans weren't allowed to dine in the same restaurants or drink from the same water fountains as white Americans. When some white Americans thought that touching an African American would "infect" them or some similar b.s. like that. *0.o Those were ignorant times. I thought the U.S. had come a long way since then. But apparently not.

I don't think people can say it's against nature because there are even animals that are homosexual. There have been studies that show that increased stress during pregnancy result in a homosexual baby.

One thing is true:  The undisciplined life is not worth living.  Experience will teach any honest person this. Check it out if you have a doubt.

A few other things are statistical facts worth knowing for those interested in experimenting with sexual simulacra, or simulations of sexual activity which are inherently sterile (where one expresses his passion in a way that produces no offspring, producing nothing really that can't be equally, or better, gained by honest conversation.).  Homosexuality in America is finally "free," or admired, lauded.  Homosexuals earn very good money and are no longer treated so badly. 

When I was in high school, people used to beat up gays, which was horrible.  Soon after I graduated, some of my students (I used to coach cross country.) would pretend to be gay, holding hands, and pretending to kiss.  They made a big thing out of it, and I found it hard to believe.  But they said that was the new thing; it was popular to imitate gays, with the flamboyant gestures, mannerisms and clothing.  In just a few years, that was a total reversal.  Homophobia was replaced by homophilia.  Interesting, and in my view, a whole lot better on the surface, as it can never be good for one group to be beaten up because of identity with that group.  Hate crimes must end, if society is to improve.

Yet despite all this social acceptance, homosexuals are still very sad people, statistically, according to research.  They have higher incidences of mental problems, suicide, and a host of other issues, conditions related to melancholy.  That melancholy is stubborn over time, while the culture changed, and it became faux pas to say anything bad about those who choose a homosexual lifestyle. 

One of my dearest lifelong friends (since age 2 really, as our mothers were friends) is homosexual and I have learned much about the homosexual lifestyle through him.  His friends live a smiling/despairing lifestyle, and avoid exercise like the plague.  They drink a whole lot.  I enjoy being with them, and enjoyed it more when I was younger, in college, and the decade or so after college.  They were great to talk with. Straight men do not always enjoy just sitting down and chatting.  So, through my childhood friend, Davis, I made many more friends who had chosen the homosexual lifestyle.  Some are dead now, from AIDS.  But the most persistent feature, salient point, that sticks out over all these years, is the entrenched despair and sadness. 

"Natural" does not equate to "good," though I have sometimes (at least in part) wished that it did.  I have a natural love of ice cream.  And the lowfat kinds are decidedly NOT acceptable alternatives.  But, nothing is so satisfying in all of my life than to lie down at night with my five children sleeping all around me.  They toss their arms and legs over me during the night, and even rest their heads on my body at different points.  They are flesh of my flesh, blood of my blood, you know, the way Adam described Eve.  That was important to him.  I understand.  I do not believe that your love for a boyfriend can be exactly the same quality as that of your mother's love for you.  Ask her if she agrees with what I wrote.  

I do know that among young people it seems to be of critical importance to avoid making any judgments about the expression of another person's desires, even if strong statistical evidence supports that this person will more likely be miserable if he follows his desire.  Or, even if a person worships some religion which teaches that those who choose a homosexual lifestyle endanger not only their health or sanity, but their very souls ... even then, young people are inordinately concerned about conformism, not daring to strike out on their own and state an opinion that differs with the current socially accepted convention that "No one publicly states a negative opinion of the choice to follow a homosexual lifestyle." 

Shux, you could lose all your friends. So it takes "cojones," and very few American youth have the courage to do that, despite overwhelming evidence, and the "sneaky dirty secret" (the pink elephant in the living room) that very few of them would want their children to follow such a sad and sterile lifestyle as a matter of course. 

Some people have no choice but to be sterile.  They have difficulty gaining a sense of rightful existence.  There is no way that your parents could fully describe to you how difficult it was to raise you.  The only way you will ever understand this is to raise another person, with the intensity of loving attention one naturally gives to one of his own flesh and blood.  We all inherit a debt, then, to our parents for this, and we cannot pay them back.  All we can do (if we wish to enjoy a sunset without having to drink ourselves silly to feel at ease in the deepest way) is to raise a brood of our own. 

Yes, this is true for the overwhelming majority.  I like to believe it is not absolute.  But it does indeed operate as a natural law.  I like to believe that Mother Theresa (spelling?) who worked with the indigent in India, I believe, found such deep existential satisfaction, even though she did not, as far as we know, engage in coitus and multiply.  I like to believe that she gave of herself so fully that her sacrifice was equal to the quality of sacrifice your mother gave to raise you.  That is rare indeed, and as a teacher, it is not something I can strongly recommend, as most people fail to live up to such a standard, using some other means of motivation.  I would encourage my son to serve others at such an intensity if he were inherently sterile (bum sperm boy), and the same for my daughter were she a barren woman.  But I could not wish them to voluntarily position themselves at such a position in life, like a race horse in a starting gate many meters behind all the others.  It is just not something you could advocate for, or wish on, another person, to choose that consciously. 

I do the opposite. I consciously go against my nature in many ways, not just eschewing ice cream in the quantity, frequency and fatty quality I enjoy (17% minimum fat, no hydrogenated substitutes, either).   Although I am Baptist and therein free to use contraceptives, by experience I find that I enjoy eminently greater complete sexual satisfaction following the Catholic model, which views any sexual activity which is inherently sterile as being evil, so that includes all forms of contraceptives. 

But I like most of all seeing tolerance of different views.  Many people have great difficulty respecting any view which is different from the currently popular view, mentioned above, which dictates that we must agree that a choice to follow a homosexual lifestyle is healthy and good, to be commended.  I cannot commend it in the abstract, particularly when I think of all the homosexuals I have loved throughout my life.  Their eyes give away too much.  And by comparison when I think of my own satisfaction ... it would be most unfair, and deceptive, of me to keep that a secret, and pronounce otherwise. 

I would guess that your mother agrees utterly with me.  Let me know if Indian mothers hold a strongly divergent view.  Maybe the upper class women of middle age are now bored, do not work, and hold suprisingly radical views from the general tenor of Indian culture.  I really don't know. 

Perhaps the most important thing is to learn to respect and tolerate diverse expression of views that are different from your own.  If we cannot do that, then progression of society is at an end.  Tolerance of diversity is critical, and we seem to be losing that in the U.S., on this and other issues. 

My two cent's worth.  

yes i do think it's against the nature. but what you've said, i have to agree.

about gay marriage, i still have no opinion, there's both good sides and bad sides.. hmm..

i study in a girls school there's a few les in our grade, but we all get along with them.

True, it was some illiterate bitch on the Roadies auditions, wasn't it?

@niikhita - yeah... I felt like beating that b**** up! 

is it a proven fact that homosexuality is by birth?

@Padooker - I don't say homosexual lifestyle is good or bad. It's just something we need to accept - happily or grimly. And as far as that Mothers' day article is concerned - I WROTE IT - okay? I really did. And it definitely is my style. The thing is I rarely add such sentimental posts out here so that may give you the false impression that I have not written it. 

@Padooker - so, what is from birth is the tendency?  meaning to say that the person have a great tendency towards homosexuality? did i get the correct understanding?  if my understanding is correct, then homosexuality is not by birth, the tendency towards it is by birth....   (unlike gender of male/female is by birth)

@maniacsicko - Geez, you're smart. Do you wanna trade brains?  Mine's wearing out.  I forget things all the time....

But, yes, you're right, from what I understand according to continuing scientific developments.  I am going to assume that when you write "homosexuality," you mean a choice to follow, and engage in, the homosexual lifestyle.  In that case, then, yes, you are right.  Participation in a homosexual lifestyle is always a choice, and one made by people with greater and lesser degrees of the innate tendency.  My homosexual friends support this view as well, frequently pointing out to me that certain people who live a straight lifestyle are, in their words, "closet queens," even though they may be married and raising children.  Also, they acknowledge that some "gays" are better understood as "bi's" not really comfortable with giving up the freedom to engage women and raise a passel of offspring, some not really even "good gays," as they put it.  I don't engage in such judgmental parlance, just listen, and record. 

Yes, anything you do has some element of choice, much, too, to the degree that you believe that what it means to be human is that you are conscious and have free will, the ability to strike out in some self-determined direction apart from nature.  I do that everyday, when I go out for a bike ride, rather than sit home, watch some TV and eat a barrel of ice cream.  But, I have decided for my satisfaction that the undisciplined life is not worth living.  Gotta get my four oldest children to bed now.  Good luck.

They say there's also a genetic factor involved in alcoholism. Does this mean we have to accept alcoholism as natural too? I don't think so.

@ZSA_MD - Thank you so much for the lovely comment!

I'm a huge supporter of someone doing what they need to do to be happy. If being with the same sex makes you happy...hey do you!Holding back who you are and trying to be something you're not can really do damage to your mental state. I don't see what the big deal is. I can't help that I'm attracted to guys, why should I think that a homosexual can help who they're attracted to? If the tables were turned I think people would be more understanding. :)

@AasthaKathy - I don't have a problem with same-sex couples wanting to be together. However, I have one with gay marriages and the claim that they are as equally legitimate as heterosexual ones. They aren't, because same-sex couples don't have the biological potential to reproduce. If they ever wanted children, they would either have to adopt or rely on science to do the procreation for them. If they choose the latter, that would mean their children would be biologically related to only one half the couple. Do you think it's right for a child to be half conceived by someone who's not even the legal parent? That'll be like giving that child a stepparent right when he/she is born.

Another factor that concerns me is that if we were to legalize gay marriage, would that make procreation seem unimportant? One reason for marriage is to provide the necessary protection for a man and woman to conceive children and raise a family. Procreation is essential to propagate the human race and that is what marriage should primarily be geared towards. While it's true that not all married couples want to have children, the importance of children still has to be emphasized. It's just like wearing seatbeats. Some people may not want to wear them, but we still have to stress how they save lives. Procreation is the same way. I have a fear that our society may end up viewing procreation as a choice rather than a necessity if gay marriage were to be legalized. I don't want my son growing up in a society like that. I want him to know how important it is to have children, and legalized gay marriage will only put a wedge into my lessons.

Don't get me wrong. I don't believe in depriving gays of their citizenship rights, such as the right to vote. It's just their sexuality that concerns me and how it will affect our society. I'd be willing to accept civil unions or domestic partnerships for them, just not marriage.