- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,743
- Reaction score
- 30,011
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
And you are trying to play the same self-stroking narcissistic game I've seen heard so many other homosexuals try to run down about their "group's" contributions to history as though there was some sort of wonderful thing about the "gay culture" that made people contribute special things to the sciences and arts and business than plain ol' heterosexuals would have or could have done. Go ahead and make the case that the "gay culture" has contributed significantly to society in any way other than as individuals utterly independent of their sexual activity.... just like any other nondescript group of people that is only defined by specific sexual behavior.
I know that I cannot force myself to be attracted to just any guy. There are plenty of men who have shown interest in me in the past that I was not attracted to. And there are some who would have been good catches. Why would you assume that a person has a say in this? Even if it isn't something genetic, it still is something that is innate and/or not a conscious choice.
This is my question. Why did Mr. Loving have to be married to Mrs. Loving? If we can choose who we are attracted to, as you claim, then they should have been able to each choose someone of their own race instead. Afterall, their relative races isn't what put them in a relationship, but rather just them choosing to be in one. What was the purpose of changing the laws for their relationship, just because they couldn't choose to be with someone of their own race?