All right. We're in agreement up to this point.

Now, given that you are more acclimated to heterosexual couplings, especially since you are from a part of the world where homosexuals are not open about their preferences, is it possible (I am not asking if it is necessarily the case, only if it is possible) that you do not actually see more homosexual couplings of this nature - you just remember them more, because they are so unusual to you?

I'm not going to attempt to address everything that's come up since my last post, but I will attempt to address a few points.

First, the issue of marriage.  I will agree that currently, marriage holds religious connotations, and that some people object to gay marriage because it is seen as an affront to God.  I actually have no problem with that, I obviously value freedom, otherwise I wouldn't be worried about things such as equal rights.  But freedom of religion must also hold true to freedom FROM religion, in that I should not be held back because of other people's religious beliefs.  My boyfriend and I have been together for 4 years, and yes, someday we'd like to show our commitment to each other.  My ideal compromise for the issue of gay "marriage" in the United States would be this:  the government would no longer issue marriage licenses for any couple, heterosexual or homosexual.  Instead they would issue civil union contracts, where all citizens are given equal rights and status under the law.  Then, for those who are compelled to seek a religious blessing of their union, please feel free to go to a church of your choosing and commit yourself before God.  Because I believe in religious freedom, I would not be offended if I was denied a marriage in the eyes of the Catholic church, or whatever other church opposes homosexual unions.  I know there are churches out there who are welcoming and accepting to homosexuals, and if I felt that was important for my relationship, I could seek it out.  But to deny a group of citizens equal rights UNDER THE LAW, due to religious circumstances is unconstitutional.

Second, the question of homosexuals "flaunting" their sexuality by doing, essentially, anything in public.  First and foremost, as some others have pointed out, not all gay men are wrist-flipping, lisp-slurring queens.  In fact, the exact opposite is true, most of us look and act almost exactly like our straight brethren, something I will bring up again in a minute.  TV and film have for the most part marginalized us as the comic relief or as I see it, the "super-awesome-gay-best-friend who gives the ugly girl the makeover she needs just in time for her to win the hot boy she's been obsessed with for the whole movie and can fall in love with forever, while her super-awesome-gay-best-friend can remain on the sidelines, alone, with essentially neutered sexuality" stereotype.  Because a homosexual without sexuality is non-threatening to the general public. Yes, there are homosexuals out there who might hold hands in public, or *gasp* even kiss, but what they're doing is no different that what I see everyday between heterosexuals.  What makes it different, and thus infinitely more noticable, is that they are two men or two women.  If 5 couples were kissing on park benches, 4 straight couples and one gay couple, the vast majority of people would only notice the gay couple because it's different and not something they're used to seeing.

Third, the issue of gay people being sex-driven rather than relationship-driven.  While I will not deny that a certain population of gay men and women are promiscuous, you can not generalize an entire community based on a few people.  As someone who actually is aware of the community on a more than passing note, I can say there are a lot of gay men and women out there with long term, long-lasting relationships.  When I was in college I dated two guys, while I watched my two straight roommates hook up with a different girl every weekend.  Men and women do, what men and women do, regardless of their sexual orientation.  In the past, when being gay was considered a mental illness and gay sex was actually illegal in many states, a large portion of gay men and women did seek out sex driven relationships, in large part because they couldn't have a relationship with someone of the same sex, for fear of the safety of their job, income or health.

Finally, the issue of pride and the invisible minority.  Gays are, for the most part, an invisible minority.  Unlike my skin color or my sex, being gay is not something visible.  Most people, when they meet me, have no clue that I am gay.  If I say nothing, people will think I am a white, heterosexual male.  So, unlike blacks, or women, or fill-in-your-blank minority, there is no easy way to identify us.  This brings up the issue of pride.  It is, perhaps a misnomer to call it "Pride".  It's not like we go around saying, " Hi, I'm gay, isn't that great?"  Pride is a chance to come together and show strength in numbers, to show that we are out there and that we will not give up until we have equal rights.  To show that we are not afraid and not ashamed and that who we love is a vital part of who we are.  My boyfriend is extremely special to me, and my relationship with him has an impact on who I am as a whole.  Why should I be afraid to have a picture of us on my desk?  Why should I be afraid to hold his hand in a movie theatre?  The only logical answer is that I shouldn't be afraid.  I accept who I am, I realize what I want, and I am not afraid to fight for it.

I get what you're saying, and I think it's true. I suppose if I seen a heterosexual couple doing extreme snogging or anything in public I wouldn't make as much or anything of it.

So yea, I think you've cracked it, minorities always get extra scrutiny becuase they are more unusual and not the norm, although I still stand by my point that a higher percentage of homosexuals would do such activities, and I also still think that a higher percentage of gays aren't as interested in longer term relationships, more sex. I suppose there is reasoning to this however, usually males are more sex driven and females are more into relationships/romance, you know what I mean?

Well, as I said, my experience runs counter to that, but it doesn't matter. As long as you acknowledge that your experiences shape the way you interpret and remember situations, you're a lot better off than a lot of people.

Thank you for the conversation; I'm glad we had it.

Too lazy to read 5 pages of arguing however I have just one question.

Why the hell do you give a damn what anyone does in bed and with who? Are you there? Are you forced to watch? Do they hump your legs? Or maybe they rape you?

Please, provide me with a nice and decent answer.

Because religions say it is a no-no.

That's it. That's the only reason there is any hate against homosexuals. There is NO OTHER REASON.

I'm sure you don't meant that a 100% literally right? What about secular communities and countries, or liberal areas where even religious people aren't very religious?

I agree, a lot of anti gay hate comes from chavs/rednecks those sorts of people.

But it all comes back to religion. Honestly, I can't think of another reason for all of the bigotry.

Live Seece said, main stream society believes that homosexuality is a effiminate quality, or that sexuality is in some way related to masculinity/feminity. And because main stream society expects males to act masculine, females to act feminine, any contradiction is responded with disgust, to some varying degree.

It's just socialization, that's why even though America is mostly Christian, you have liberals and social conservatives (neo-cons), bigots and tolerant people all around the USA.