This will be shot down by the supreme court so very quickly. It seems like the Tea-party types, for all there appeals to freedom, don't undertand civil rights at all. They extend to everyone. You can't ban someone from a public establishment because they have red hair, or they are short, or they like classical music. This is just flame bait to stir up the Indiana hicks and score points with the Evangelicals. 

A. Correct, are there males and females in those species? If not the term homo (same) sexual doesn't apply as the species isn't sexed.

B. Some yes and there is also the possibility that said behaviour has nothing to do with sexual pleasure and is more about dominance.  Not saying this is always the case.

I have to say, I am a supporter of gay rights but I think the argument of whether or not homosexuality occurs in nature is irrelevant. I don't even buy into the idea that people are born with a "gay" gene. That seems like an oversimplification of human sexuality. I really don't see why it should matter. If two straight men decide they want to get married, that is their choice. As long as both parties are consenting adults, the argument of whether people are born that way or whether it is a choice shouldn't even matter.

Hopefully that is the case.

So now people can do anything based on their interpretation of their religion. Great.

How is discriminating against gay people even going to work? If 2 men walk in and are dressed in a flamboyant manner do I then have cause to discriminate against them based on my religious beliefs? What if they are not gay and just have an eccentric fashion sense?

Also, doesn't this law open the door to the Muslim "no go" zones that conservatives were so worried about?

I would agree IF that business didn't take ANY help from the government or state, didn't rent on public ground and basically lived in its own state :).

I'm not talking about a gay gene. I cannot confirm that. I am stating that the being gay is displayed by a lot of other species around us. Its already proven. We make it look like we as higher animals having homosexuals are making a sinful decision and religion is not really a proper way to explain the world around us on a scientific level. My point is...could a Christian condemn their dog for being a homosexual any more than a man? Marriage is a societal structure created by humans. I mean, any two people should be able to marry like you said. I agree, they should have the rights guaranteed to us.

It wouldn't if people didn't use it as a crutch "they can't help it they were born that way" or "they don't have a choice"  I personlally don't give a rats ass if someone is gay or not, that is their life and their choice(?) We get so focused on our differences that we fail to see what we have in common sometimes.  I guess I feel like focusing on differnces tears people apart more often than it brings them together.  Focusing on what we have in common more often binds us than it doesn't. Hell focusing on what we have in commmon (video games in this instance) is what has brought nearly all of us together to this site.

lol dumb