Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
Idiot Logic

If Gays Get Married, Straight Black Men Will Run From Their Families!


Haven’t heard enough reasons why legalizing same-sex marriage will ruin society? Well, here’s a new argument against repealing it: It would hurt the black family unit!

“One overpowering cause of black social failure is the breakdown of marriage in the black community. Nationally, the black illegitimacy rate is 71%; in some inner city areas, it is closer to 90%,” writes Heather Mac Donald, a former lawyer and Manhattan Institute fellow who says she believes gay marriage is inevitable. “When boys grow up without any expectation that they will have to marry the mother of their children, they fail to learn the most basic lesson of personal responsibility. A community without the marriage norm is teetering on the edge of civilizational collapse, if it has not already fallen into the abyss. Fatherless black boys, who themselves experience no pressure to become marriageable mates as they grow up, end up joining gangs, dropping out of school, and embracing a “street” lifestyle in the absence of any male authority in the home.”

Right, okay, but what does that have to do with gays getting married? (Emphasis ours):

If the black illegitimacy rate were not nearly three times the rate of whites’, I would have few qualms about gay marriage. Or if someone can guarantee that widespread gay marriage would not further erode the expectation among blacks that marriage is the proper context for raising children, I would also not worry. But no one can make that guarantee.

Why might it further depress the black marriage rate? There is a logical reason and a visceral reason. First, it sends the signal that marriage is simply about numbers: it is an institution that binds two (for the moment) people who are in love. It erases completely the significance that marriage is THE context in which the children of biological parents should be raised. And there are undoubtedly many other subtle meanings and effects of gay marriage that we cannot even imagine at the moment—which institutional shift is something that conservatives should be most attuned to.

As for the visceral reason: It is no secret that resistance to homosexuality is highest among the black population (though probably other ethnic minorities are close contenders). I fear that it will be harder than usual to persuade black men of the obligation to marry the mother of their children if the inevitable media saturation coverage associates marriage with homosexuals. Is the availability of homosexual marriage a valid reason to shun the institution? No, but that doesn’t make the reaction any less likely.

What are the chances that gay marriage would further doom marriage among blacks? I don’t know. Again, if someone can persuade me that the chances are zero, then I would be much more sanguine. But anything more than zero, I am reluctant to risk.

Is it fair to those gays who want to marry that their desires should be thwarted for the sake of black boys? Maybe not. And as has been pointed out many times before, it is exclusively heterosexuals who have eroded the institution of marriage through easy divorce, increasing rates of single-parenting, “blended” families, and co-habitation. But just because marriage is already in bad shape, for reasons wholly unrelated to gay marriage, doesn’t mean that gay marriage won’t weaken it further.

If only Ms. Mac Donald could remember a time when whites thought allowing interracial marriage would somehow destroy their unions — and not only how the moral logic didn’t hold up, but neither did the theory.

On:           May 7, 2009
Tagged: , ,
    • DM73

      What you talking about Willis?

      May 7, 2009 at 10:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • kademonster

      there are no words. i’m too busy laughing.

      May 7, 2009 at 10:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev

      LOL. Ooooooooooooooooooh-WEE!

      May 7, 2009 at 10:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Roy Pyatt

      Wow this woman is a poster child for pre-employment drug screening ’cause she must be high!

      May 7, 2009 at 10:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brad

      @DM73 Wow, thanks for saying something racially insensitive.

      May 7, 2009 at 10:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sam

      Dude, getting married is SO GAY.

      May 7, 2009 at 10:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Anthony in Nashville

      Some people expend so much energy trying to co-sign some bullshit.

      People claiming to speak for “the children” or “the community” need to stop fronting and admit it’s about their desire to control other folks’ lives.

      May 7, 2009 at 10:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • blake

      “If only Ms. Mac Donald could remember a time when whites thought allowing interracial marriage would somehow destroy their unions — and not only how the moral logic didn’t hold up, but neither did the theory.”

      –Why do people constantly use interracial marriage as a way of dealing with homophobia amongst minorities? This strategy is inherently bigoted because it assumes that non-whites are the singular beneficiaries of interracial marriage. As statistics show, the whites Americans as a group have a larger percentage of out marriage than, for instance, African-Americans.

      The largest number of interracial marriages in the United States occur between Whites and Latinos or Whites and Asians, not African-Americans and others.

      Moreover, by focusing on interracial marriage, there is the tacit thought that African-Americans should be grateful for the privilege of marrying non-blacks (especially marrying whites). That becomes insulting.

      The interracial marriage argument is a failure. A better argument would revolve around the fact that marriage for non-whites was outlawed. During the age of slavery, African-American slaves could not legally marry. Their marriages were dissolved by their slave masters.

      Similarly, the United States deliberately prevented Asian female immigrants from coming to the United States as a result of the Yellow Peril laws. The goals was to prevent the growth, in particular, of Chinese populations.

      May 7, 2009 at 10:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Aaron Akins

      Oh wow. Oh wow. I…

      The complete and utter lack of anything resembling critical thinking in that article is just stunning. I’m still reeling from the sheer idiocy.

      May 7, 2009 at 10:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tarcash

      OK, so if a community that doesn’t want gays to marry has a higher rate of illegitimacy, but another community that is more accepting has a lower rate of illegitimacy….


      May 7, 2009 at 10:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dawgson

      How does that make any sense? It’s the weirdest spin on “Think of the children!” I’ve seen yet.

      May 7, 2009 at 10:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev

      @Anthony in Nashville:

      I’m glad you dove into to this POS writing, Anthony Or whatever the hell it is.

      Gay marriage is a threat to “the black community”? Who the fuck does she think there is.

      Hell, more folks in “the black community” would get married if there were gay marriage. In terms of percentages, black gay couples are more likely to have children than couples of other ethnicities. If anything, it might strengthen “the black community” a bit.

      May 7, 2009 at 10:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev

      @Chitown Kev:


      I’m glad you dove into to this POS writing, Anthony. Or whatever the hell it is.

      Gay marriage is a threat to “the black community”? Who the fuck does she think there is.

      Hell, more folks in “the black community” would get married if there were gay marriage. In terms of percentages, black gay couples are more likely to have children than couples of other ethnicities. If anything, it might strengthen “the black community” a bit.

      Forgot the period in the sentence.

      May 7, 2009 at 10:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tropos

      She is trying so desperately hard not to come off across as a bigot, while propounding pathetic reasons for being anti-gay marriage, that it is almost laughable.
      Blame the gays for the collapse of civilization!

      May 7, 2009 at 10:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • HayYall

      So the major thing holding baby daddies back from being loyal fathers and husbands is the faggots. Riiiight.

      May 7, 2009 at 11:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec

      @Chitown Kev:

      Hell, more folks in “the black community” would get married if there were gay marriage. In terms of percentages, black gay couples are more likely to have children than couples of other ethnicities.

      This really is a point that should be hammered home. The (male) couples with the most dire need for marriage rights aren’t the couples most people assume will be rushing out to get married. I was actually a bit surprised by the study that was released in 2005 showing that to be the case, but I guess it shouldn’t have surprised me then.

      May 7, 2009 at 11:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Landon Bryce

      The most fascinating thing to me in the article as excerpted here is that Macdonald is so shamelessly selfish in her reasoning: forget about gay people, same sex marriage might be bad for straight black women, so it should not be considered. Regardless of the stupidity of her reasoning, her basic contention is that the happiness of people like her matters to the point that the happiness of people unlike her is of no interest. What a horrible, horrible person she has revealed herself to be.

      May 7, 2009 at 11:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev

      @Landon Bryce:


      May 7, 2009 at 11:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426

      @blake: Good point, Blake, I never really thought of it that way.

      May 7, 2009 at 11:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DM73

      Umm…racially insensitive how? Can you see me?

      May 7, 2009 at 12:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • timncguy

      Ms MacDonald needs to wake up and get the black community to work on the attitudes of its black males about marriage, family and responsibility without expecting gays to shoulder that responsibility for them.

      While she is at giving the young black males an attitude adjustment, maybe she could take some time to work on the black females as well and give them some information on birth control so that they wouldn’t get pregnant by men who have no desire to be a part of their lives.

      May 7, 2009 at 12:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • LOL

      But if black men are already resisting marriage at such high rates, doesn’t that mean by her logic that they see the “gay lifestyle” as too attractive? Does this make as much sense as what she said?

      May 7, 2009 at 1:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec

      @LOL: One would think. The carefree “gay lifestyle” is simply too irresistable. Banning gay marriage leads to more men taking up the “gay lifestyle,” just as allowing it leads to more men sodomizing each other. They’re doomed!

      It must take an awful lot of work to maintain one’s sanity as a social conservative.

      May 7, 2009 at 1:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bubba

      Machiavellian conservatives have been pitting blacks against gay as if civil rights are a zero-sum game. Manipulating people over civil rights is evil. And as a black gay man, this manipulation takes the cake. Stop the madness conservatives!

      May 7, 2009 at 1:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • naprem

      From the headline, I thought that her argument was going to be that if gays are allowed to get married, all the down-low guys wouldn’t bother sticking with their women but would be more comfortable openly going with a guy instead, which would lead to them leaving the families they created under false pretenses in the first place. And I thought that would be a fairly silly argument.

      But then I discovered that her actual argument was even sillier than I thought.

      May 7, 2009 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec

      @naprem: Didn’t think it was possible, huh?

      May 7, 2009 at 1:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev


      I swear.

      May 7, 2009 at 2:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • GranDiva


      That fucking “blacks should fit the white heterosexist norm” philosphy chaps my ass to no end, even without the gay angle attached. My cousin Phyllis, when not spouting off in support of Clarence Thomas’s Supreme Court confirmation, used to spew that shit every time they’d let her on BET to be the voice of the conservative black shitheel. Everyone is supposed to fit the illusion of the middle-class ideal that positively no one has fit into since Leave it to Beaver (why, by the way, you conservative shithells, was television FICTION).

      Of course, bourgeois affectation on that level is bound to be anti-gay, and it’s just moments of discussion before the conservative blacks start speaking to their bourgeois aspirations just like wingnut white people, to the detriment of gays everywhere. Hate it.

      May 7, 2009 at 2:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal

      Another race baiting article Queerty? Anyone notice how there is a high percentage of articles on this site intended to make black people look stupid? They daily target the President and any article that has reference to blacks (Giselle photo shoot). I have enjoyed this site immensely but the constant slant of anti-black content has made it almost impossible to continue reading. What’s the matter David did a black guy beat you up in high school? Time to get over it and be a journalist not a muckraker.

      May 7, 2009 at 3:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec

      @getreal: This is race baiting?

      There are a fair number of articles (say, on NY and DC, for example) that balance it out. I don’t think the Obama animus (and there is that, without question) has much to do with his race.

      But c’mon, this is an insane argument, virtually indistinguishable from Maggie Gallagher’s “ideal of marriage” argument. It is an argument that is usually directed at black audiences, btw, in one form or another, to legitimize homophobia. It’s ugly and it should be confronted.

      May 7, 2009 at 3:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev


      I don’t look or feel stupid at all, getreal. And this argument has defintely come my way.

      And even you must admit, the argument of this bigoted woman is ludicrous.

      May 7, 2009 at 3:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlwaysGay

      @blake: Actually heterosexual whites are the least likely to marry outside of their race.

      Whether gay people like it or not McDonald wrote what many heterosexuals think about gay couples marrying. In their view heterosexuals come first. You hear this same type of language on any other gay issue, that gay people have to wait because there bigger/ heterosexual-caused problems to take care of.

      May 7, 2009 at 3:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK

      This is so sleepy. Since when has the focus of state marriage in the u.s. ever been primarily about the children? Never…as it’s basically been about two couples who marry because of love, not to simply…discharge kids like. Hence the reason why infertile couples or couples with no intention of having kids get married… Most religious marriages emphasize the bond of “love” as the primary reason to engage in marriage, too, with kids as a secondary occurrence…which is why infertile roman catholics and episcopalians (catholic lights) and baptists and evangelicals can get married in a religious ceremony…

      And second, she think it’s important to validate the bigotry of, say, the black community…by denying gay people marriage…now that’s condescending…for if it were true that black men refused to marry because it got all gay…well, that’s not saying much for the intelligence of black men…so it’s racist, too.

      May 7, 2009 at 3:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK

      Or, for that matter, it’s primarily about two couples who want to get married for ANY REASON.

      May 7, 2009 at 3:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sparkle obama


      it’s hard to talk about this.
      i think we are going to have to just ride it out.

      May 7, 2009 at 3:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev


      it’s not the first time that gay men generally and black gay men specifically have been scapegoated by people that presume to speak for “the black community.” Whatever that is.

      The best known politician in Washington D.C. put this shit out there this go around. And…I don’t know, I’m gay, I’m African American, and arguments like this and a lot of the other stuff that I hear is plain stupid. African American gay couples with children have the most to benefit from marriage equality.

      Truth be told, this is the the largely white Christian right wing churches that are feeding black churches this homobigotry; I believe they are subsidizing these churches to some extent too. The same type of churches that enslaved them…

      May 7, 2009 at 3:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)

      sad,why are the minorities being pitted against each other?sad…unity my people

      May 7, 2009 at 4:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev

      @sal(the original):

      and the racist homobigots are oh so happy to see it…

      May 7, 2009 at 4:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue

      “Truth be told, this is the the largely white Christian right wing churches that are feeding black churches this homobigotry; I believe they are subsidizing these churches to some extent too. The same type of churches that enslaved them…”

      Or as Desmond Tutu said, in a slightly different context <blockquote< “When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said “Let us pray.” We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land.”

      I’m sure that some Euroamerican cult groups are whole hearted supporters of homophobic AA cults but everything I’ve seen points the finger at Rove and Dubois as the main culprits both while managing their bosses respective campaigns and using ‘faith based’ federal bribes to solicit and get homophobic support particularly on the question of same sex marriage.

      Here are a couple of sources;



      May 7, 2009 at 4:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev

      Am I correct in that this is a right wing Christian scapegoating gays and African Americans? Google the image and see what you find.

      May 7, 2009 at 5:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • some girl

      I’m trying to figure out why marriage is THE

      May 7, 2009 at 5:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • some girl

      Crap sorry, accidentally hit the enter key and it sent my message before I was finished. Trying again…

      I am trying to figure out why she thinks marriage is THE institution bla bla bla for raising kids. That’s massively discriminatory to straight single parents as well. I guess my best friend growing up was just screwed because his mother died in a car wreck when he was young, and his dad raised him alone? I mean, I guess a single dad (or mom of course) is almost as “evil” as being a gay parent to this idiot…

      May 7, 2009 at 6:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal

      The black community has a host of problems we need to address as a people. It is inconceivable to me how furthering the cause of bigotry and the 2nd class citizenship of lgbt people could possible address any of those problems. As a black person my people’s history of legalized discrimination in this country make not just support of equality for lgbt people but activism on this issue a no brainer. This is going to no doubt get some hate posts but as a black person I feel a responsibility to further the cause of equality in this country.

      May 7, 2009 at 7:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev


      No hate posts from me getreal (in fact I’d like to correspond with you away from queerty).

      May 7, 2009 at 8:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal

      @Chitown Kev: Ditto. Let’s figure out how.

      May 8, 2009 at 5:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jjm16


      race-baiting??? There’s no baiting involved, when you call individuals out on things-key word being individuals. Black people should be held accountable for their disproportionately expressed homophobic sentiments, even if such happens to the peril of some potentially enlightened image.

      I can see what you imply about Obama articles, but that fact that he is black shouldn’t even be taken into account when he’s, um, the freakin’ President.

      As a black gay atheist(haha), I think taking people to town on homophobia is necessary to point out those few “progressive” blacks-and how ridiculously rare blacks who make a point to be other than embarrassing in this regard are in this country.

      I do think we should question why black (moralist) christianity and (misogynist) masculinity have taken on such hateful character over time, and today against gays… since blacks were forced to happily convert to christianity (via slaveowners and imperial governments) and, later, when literally excluded from mainstream society for centuries.

      questioning individuals can be accompanied with observations of their complexity.

      May 8, 2009 at 11:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)

      @Bill Perdue:

      Wow, thank you for that Desmond Tutu quote.

      So true..

      May 8, 2009 at 11:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock

      Except when you call white homophobes on their views we don’t talk about them being fucked up because of their race, and we don’t consider yelling racist names at them.

      From what I see (and I have no experience of it outside this site) blacks do seem to be singled out for special treatment.

      May 8, 2009 at 11:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev


      You do see it, although it has more to do with “class” than “race”. I see “redneck” and “cracker” used quite a bit, actually.

      May 8, 2009 at 11:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock

      @Chitown Kev:
      Exactly, and there’s a difference.
      When a white guy gets put down the worst assumption is that it is cultural – something he has learned.

      When it’s a black guy there’s an assumption that is genetic – something that he IS.

      May 8, 2009 at 11:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev


      well, that’s why I wish phrase like “the black community” would stop being used. It implies some sort of POV that all people of a certain race shares.

      I mean, at least say “ghetto black folks” or something like that (and I have actually used that, though not at queerty). Don’t get me wrong, it’s still “offensive” but at least something like that makes a necessary distinction. Or say “black communities” then specify the particular “black community” you are talking about.

      May 8, 2009 at 11:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock

      @Chitown Kev:
      Just read a post on another thread about someone considering cancelling their subscription. I may be moving on myself pretty soon. It’s not just the editorial change, but the incredible intolerance here as well.
      It’s very disappointing, because there is a lot of potential, but unfortunately the attitudes of division and non-compromise seem to be the loudest …no way to win a revolution, IMO.

      May 8, 2009 at 11:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev


      yeah, and in the mean time the right wing bigots to gays and blacks both are patting themselves on the back for a job well done.

      Ignorant homophobic blacks and ignorant racist gays…what can you do.

      And I’m on the verge of checking out of queerty myself.

      May 8, 2009 at 12:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec

      @jjm16: I was responding to getreal’s suggestion that it was race baiting. I don’t think it is.

      May 8, 2009 at 12:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev


      Well, its race AND gay baiting.

      May 8, 2009 at 12:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec

      @Chitown Kev: You think the article itself is? The post here, I mean, not the absurd argument advanced by the author.

      May 8, 2009 at 12:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev

      The article itself is race and gay baiting, yes. The post here, no it’s not, the article is in the public eye.

      the editors on this article actually did a good job of not commenting on the article itself and simply presented the content. I think the author is a white woman and a right winger, which is significant as to the motive for writing it.

      May 8, 2009 at 12:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec

      @Chitown Kev: We agree. I think JJM16 had the impression I thought the Queerty post itself was race baiting.

      And yes, she is: http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/mac_donald.htm

      She has a long history of this, too. See, for example, her article on how boycotting the Boy Scouts will hurt minority children, with this telling (anti-gay) closing line:

      Defunding the Scouts would be a tragic loss for innercity youth and for the country. Gay pride that comes at the expense of poor children is bought at too high a price. If gay activists are so convinced that boys need gay role models, they can start alternative organizations with just that goal. But they should leave the Scouts alone.


      The scare tactics couldn’t be more obvious.

      May 8, 2009 at 12:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lex

      Since when did only black people become homophobic?

      Either a lot of people are asleep or really stupid.

      The vast majority of people in this country are white. Focus on changing their minds and the votes will be swayed. You could have every black person in the country vote the way you wanted and nothing would change.

      Of course then people would have to make comments like “Ignorant whites.” and since the majority of the “gay community” are white that won’t happen.

      Let the anti-black comments fly.

      May 8, 2009 at 12:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev


      Exactly, and…dumb gay folks and dumb black folks fall for this shit.

      May 8, 2009 at 12:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeremie

      Has anybody else noticed this sideway pointe?

      “… it is an institution that binds two (for the moment) people who are in love …”

      May 8, 2009 at 9:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK


      There you go again. Chant it, jeremie…”POLYGAMY IS A GAY RIGHT!” No, it’s not…it’s something that can be debated separately, though.

      May 8, 2009 at 9:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • BRIAN


      May 28, 2009 at 5:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Corvin

      Poor Lex you need to read something about Violent crime & who commits it in the US. Per capita who lives off the Government.. translation..the tax payers. 75-89% of all children born to black females do NOT have a present father. on & on & on.. 89% of all blacks polled after voting on Prop 8 voted for it.. Sad but Minorities are the FIRST to hate.. Hate themselves & one another.. esp. due to Race.. Tell the truth & shame the Devil.. You know its ture.

      May 29, 2009 at 12:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Evan

      This is a real concern. If poor black boys, who grow up without a father in the home, are given the option to “experiment” with other black boys (and we all know how well endowed they are, and how sexually excitable they tend to be) then it is highly unlikely that they will ever sleep with another black woman again. Once he feels another man’s lips — you know — down there, I would be afraid that there may be no turning back. After all, black men already grab their own crotches in public, what’s to keep them from grabbing the crotch of another man?

      Keep marriage, safe, legal and heterosexual.

      Dec 6, 2009 at 1:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • James

      i do hope that these law makers.will put their thinking caps on .in a few decade the school system will be coming up short in enrollment for young kids. to each 1000 same sex marriage in five to ten years, that 2000 guys will not be Fathering any children. because there will be no ladies getting pregnant by that 2000 men, those same sex marriage that represents two schools that will not be there for kids and at the same time two schools will have be closed. just think you guys how many teachers are needed for a school with a 1000 little kids, I am aware that this same sex thing is up to induvidual choice ,needs and feeling. there will be a 1000. families that will not be buying diapers, children wears.stroller.baby car seat. even milk at the corner store for babies.. people please dont try to eat me raw. these are the facts,you know i remember when i walked my three kids to school in the mornings.. and pick them up before leaving for work at 4.pp daily that was fun for me people i will not change my life style i am a man and thats why i choose a wife to have children with, god bless my three children but to each person you have your live to live bye you all have a nice day

      Jul 24, 2011 at 10:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sluggo2007

      @BRIAN: If you’re not gay, why are you posting on this blog?

      May 15, 2016 at 10:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.