Mary Ann - i respect your feedback, and actually can see now from your point of view about your replies being just that; not necessarily getting the last word in. I think I was wrong about that. When you are engaged in discussion, you are always articulate, responsive, and, yes, as Toni Anne says, passionate. THOSE are the kind of people I like. I didn't and don't want to seem harsh, ever, toward any other blogger. I do realize you are passionate about this subject, as am I. What a wonderful country we live in that we may have open, intelligent debate about such subjects!

I want to say that all responses on this thread have been interesting and enlightening. And, Mary Ann, if you care to respond, even if you get the last word, I won't be offended, I promise! We can indeed agree to disagree, for I have a feeling that we have much more common ground than not. I think this sentence by you sums up what we both feel the best (pardon the plagiarism; it is done with all credit given to you): I can separate the actions of a person from the person, and still love the individual.

SO... I was going to leave this alone - but I really want to add something that was bugging me...

1. The VicAd charges you MONEY to post an obit? Seriously? That is such a travesty... If I would have had to deal with much more than I did when my dad passed away - I would have cracked. I cannot believe that Advocate would try to get their share of the "death business." I would like to see a story on why money from dead people's families is needed so much. Have a bake sale... goodness.

2. Little Blue Book - you crack me up.... :)

3. I respect both Mary Ann and Sugar Magnolia. I read you both often and I wanted to say something about your comments. I didn't see "hate" in Mary Ann's comments, only her passion for what she believes in. I have an intense passion for the things I believe in as well, so I can sort of see both sides. On the other hand - I can see where someone who is gay or supports the gay lifestyle would be offended with the things that Mary Ann said. I think that the best advice was from Little Blue Book. If you see something in the headline or first few words that you don't like - click away.

You can only have a debate or argument if you continue to engage the other person. I can post all day long about how I feel about certain issues - but it only becomes an argument when someone wants to try and change my mind.

I am thankful that these forums allow people to post their opinions. Let's remember that even though we may not like what we hear, we have to allow each other the space to voice what we believe in. Again, as LBB said: we aren't going to change anyone's viewpoints by posting on a forum.

4. As for THE article: I don't know if it should have been front page and the reason I say that is that I am fairly positive that when the Advocate printed that particular article there - they knew the kind of reaction it would bring. I feel that you used the GLBT community to make a little more publicity/press for yourself.

But – that is my opinion.

5. I thought this kind of ironic and couldn’t pass up posting it – but how many of you are aware that “The Advocate” is a gay magazine?

(silent lol moment for myself…)

Lastly - God loves all of his children. ‘Nuf said.

MaryAnn, you need help!

But what you fail to realize is that your children will grow up to be more accepting of the gay lifestyle than you. You can beat it into their head all you want that its wrong, etc but the reality is that most of the younger generation is more accepting of it. Its the older people like you that are causing all the uproar.

I will LMAO if one of your kids "comes out" to you when they're older. Then I'd feel sorry for him/her because they have you as their mother.

Most people change their opinions when it hits closer to home.

SM,

I do like to reply to people who ask questions, make comments (positive or negative) using my name, or even insult me. I don't think that's always wanting to get the last word in, though I can see your point.

  I have ended quite a few discussions with reasonable people saying that we can agree to disagree.

I believe homosexuals are exceptionally loveable- and I say that sincerely. I have often asked myself (as one poster asked me) what I would do if one of my children would be homosexual. I would have unconditional love for the child, and I would always be trying to understand and help.

 That doesn't mean I condone homosexual acts. I can separate the actions of a person from the person and still love the individual.

I think our last two posts have been quite civil. I can agree to disagree civilly, AND you can have the last word! (said with a smile and meant truly)

Mary Ann, I did not come to this blog to do battle with you, either. You always seem to have to get the last word in though, even when others' comments have as much merit. Do not lecture me on what love is. I am not naive nor stupid. I don't love some of your viewpoints, but I love the fact that you as a parent are doing what you as a parent think best for your children. I believe the world would be a better place if more people took their parenting responsibilites as seriously.

Similarly, I may not love a person's actions, be they homosexual or otherwise, but that does not mean the person is not lovable or not worthy of being loved. A person's sexuality is such a small part of who they are and what they do; I look at so much more than that when I look at someone. If you cannot see beyond that, I am indeed sorry.

I am doing my best to keep this discussion civil. I believe we have both made our respective points.

SM,  I won't trade insults or personal attacks with you.

But please don't try to silence me because I make you uncomfortable. If you go for the "sex sells" headline, that's your option.

Male-on-male sex is going to be a controversial topic, especially when our government has stated: "Men who have had sex with men since 1977 have an HIV prevalence (the total number of cases of a disease that are present in a population at a specific point in time) 60 times higher than the general population, 800 times higher than first time blood donors and 8000 times higher than repeat blood donors (American Red Cross)."

These aren't my words.  Why do you want to silence a message that could help to save lives?

You mentioned "true love" ealier. SM true love isn't conveniently forgeting health information and turning a blind eye to potentially destructive behavior. That's false compassion.

Mary Ann - with all due respect, Ma'am, I must say: How embarrassing for you, making such a spectacle of yourself. True ladies know better than to stoop so low. FDA guidelines for blood donation have absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand. I defended your right to speak and your right to your viewpoints with my very first post, but my goodness, enough is enough! If you wish to expand on the FDA guidelines and preach more morality, you have your own blog space to do so, and believe it or not, I would read it, as I read most comments and posts you make.

Also, I have read and reread Scorpio's post, and cannot for the life of me see any hatred evidenced therein, even if I wanted to. The only posts filled with hate appear to be yours.

Hello Chris,

Further in the article to which you gave the link, the definition of journalism is expanded:

While it is true that the homosexuals are having a "pride" celebration, I have never seen coverage of any facts that male-on-male sex is dangerous to one's health. Perhaps I missed it. But is so harmful that government entities are in the business of making sure that no blood donated from this at-risk population gets into the blood supply. 

Do you think that this information is not odd enough or controversial enough?  It certainly would be comprehensive and proportional.  I can't revel in the fact that our passion and hit-numbers to your site seems to boost ratings at the expense of only part of the truth.

Thank you, CF!  :)

Many blessings to you and your family who understand what true love is all about.