The rhetoric of gays being a threat to families, etc. is too simplified and easy to interpret as right-wing paranoia. When you tell that to a gay guy... it sounds absurd. They think you mean it in the most literal sense, accusing them of planning to rape "NASCAR dads" in Wal-Mart parking lots while the family is getting out of the mini-van.<br><br>But I take the statement's meaning as "homsexuality's impact of on the balance of things". It's been my experience that most guys will do anything... they won't admit to it, but usually if they are comfortable enough (with the person, with the situation) they'll give something a try. And usually do it again. And again... <br><br>So that said... I'd say that what the religious-right means to say is that homosexuality is a threat to families because if the social taboo is lifted, a lot of guys wouldn't come back from a self-indulgent "phase". <br><br>The balance of power between sexes would shift... women would maybe get left behind... and the world would one day resemble "Lord of the Flies" meets "Peter Pan". That's what those books were about anyways... Gay society, aka a world without the stabilizing influence of women.<br><br>Further, I don't think it's coincidence that in the last 5 years we've seen a rise in anti-gay sentiment. I think that's largely due to the internet. Before the internet people were isolated in their sexuality. It wasn't so easy to read each other's thoughts, or exchange anonymous headless naked body picts. With the advent of the internet, I think a lot of guys that would never have been exposed to homosexuality have found it a lot easier to experiment or investigate it.<br><br>I'm gay and this stuff is obviously just my opinion... but I'm curious to see what others think.<br><br><br><br>--------------------<br>
My Audioblog / Podcast - "Aural Fixation"