Comments on: Opposition to Hospital Visitation Rights http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/31/263 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:03:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Jason D http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/31/263/comment-page-1#comment-28558 Jason D Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:12:34 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/31/263#comment-28558 The opposition to this bill is all about maintaining negative consequences for homosexuals, and has zero to do with protecting anyone or any "tradition". The skewed logic is that homosexuality is a choice, thus if we remove negative consequences, more people will choose that option. What does it say about heterosexuality, though? That it's so boring and unfullfilling that people are just chomping at the bit for something else? But these are the same people who want us to believe that homosexuality is both considered abhorrently disgusting by most people and yet at the same time, overwhelmingly difficult to resist. The opposition to this bill is all about maintaining negative consequences for homosexuals, and has zero to do with protecting anyone or any “tradition”. The skewed logic is that homosexuality is a choice, thus if we remove negative consequences, more people will choose that option.

What does it say about heterosexuality, though? That it’s so boring and unfullfilling that people are just chomping at the bit for something else?

But these are the same people who want us to believe that homosexuality is both considered abhorrently disgusting by most people and yet at the same time, overwhelmingly difficult to resist.

]]> By: Jarrell http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/31/263/comment-page-1#comment-28552 Jarrell Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:46:08 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/03/31/263#comment-28552 This bill is an example of something so innocent and benign, yet it's opposed by a "family council" because it would be an acknowledgement that same-sex relationships exist. This proves they are unconcerned about actual family advocacy when that family doesn't fit in with their narrow view. These are real people. They live, breathe, drive to work, pay taxes, and try to have some type of home life together and not bother anyone or impose upon anyone. Yet, if one of them gets sick or gravely ill, it's not right that the other should be able to visit them in the hospital?!! Where is even the most basic of human decency in that logic? This bill is an example of something so innocent and benign, yet it’s opposed by a “family council” because it would be an acknowledgement that same-sex relationships exist. This proves they are unconcerned about actual family advocacy when that family doesn’t fit in with their narrow view. These are real people. They live, breathe, drive to work, pay taxes, and try to have some type of home life together and not bother anyone or impose upon anyone. Yet, if one of them gets sick or gravely ill, it’s not right that the other should be able to visit them in the hospital?!! Where is even the most basic of human decency in that logic?

]]>