You haven't addressed them, you've just regurutated (sp) all the same things as you were saying before, without actually answering any of the questions. Such as how, where, why, evidence, etc.

A few points, liberalism does not equal the gay movement. Many gays are liberal, and liberal political climates have facillitated much of the gay movement, admittedly, but liberalism is a much broader thing, not always actually even in consideration of gay rights. Liberalism is actually a rather vague term, and not all liberals are socialists. Not all gays are liberal, left wing, or even moderate. Also, illegal immigration is off topic, and often misrepresented by the media, and you are singing to the choir, I don't agree in unlimited immigration, or benefits that go beyond that of other citizens for immigrants.

Ok, I'll word this simply for you, because it still seems to be alluding you. How does allowing gay marriage, through the courts, not forcing churches who disagree with gay marriage to participate, take away any rights in your life. How does it possibly infringe on you? I don't like catch pharses, but I feel its applicable, 'dont agree with gay marriage? Dont get one'. You still have your right to exercise your beliefs that same sex couples shouldnt get married, just like you can exercise your right to express that fornication is wrong (which I sincerely hope you believe).

I've never worked hard? Um... wrong. I've had jobs, one was an incredibly physically demanding job, 10pm-10am, 5 days a week, in a warehouse, in which many of my adult male co-workers quit early as they couldnt hack it. Whereas I, at the time, an 18 year old girl, stayed for my whole contract. I also, in my teens, was a youth worker in my church. I've worked in a cinema. I've dedicated an awful lot of time to staff work on this website, which is actually volunteer work, but it's still a demanding job. I've worked for my grades in school, and I'm set to be graduating from the 5th best uni in the UK with a decent mark if I maintain my present performance, or an amazing mark if I step it up a bit.

No, I don't pay taxes right now, I'm a student, in the UK, students don't. I did however pay taxes when I worked in the year before coming to uni. And my parents have paid taxes their entire life, and with my mom being 60, yeah, I come from a family use to paying taxes.

I've never been denied a job due to the spaces being filled by people on an affirmative action scheme, because I've never applied for a job or scholarship where such a scheme existed? That's not my fault? Though to be fair, the majority of people misunderstand how affirmative action actually works... but again, I don't understand what this has to do with anything?

I'll admit, after rereading my paragraph on the NUS LGBT Campaign, it may not have been clear what I was intending to say. What I was trying to highlight was that a large part of the movement, didnt have any focus on this. Yes, there are some gays who will want such a thing, but it's generally not a wide focus on the movement, from my experience. I also happen to know quite a lot of the youth and student movement political leaders, and as of yet, I havent meet one who particuarly desires to infiltrate the church. It was more of a challenge to go source something that implies this plan is a big scale part of any 'agenda'. More then refusing that ANY gays want this. Apologies if that wasn't clear.

Though I have noticed a lot of gays couldn't care less about the church, because yeah, a lot of them have disdain for the church, to the extent they want nothing to do with it, more commonly then they want to change it.

If its an obstacle, regardless if its true or not, but due to how people feel, then surely communication is the best way to approach the topic? Though I dont understand way the church needs to be over powered, except in terms of seperation of church and state. The church should not be making the laws of the land in a country of multiple faiths, or even just Biblically. Paul didn't go round trying to change the laws of the world, instead he focused on conversion, and taught Christian values to those within the church.

See, you know very very little about me. I suppose putting the gay issue aside, we'd both argue over religion till we are blue in the face, because you are Catholic, from what I can tell, and I'm far more leaning to Baptist. But regardless, yeah, you would know more about what the church believes over a gay rights activist who only read a few verses and talked to a self-proclaimed minister. But thats not me. I've been involved in the church since I was born effectively. I come from a religious family, my dad is a pastor, my uncle is a vicar, my mom was my Sunday teacher. I've studied my faith, its been challenged, and strengthened. I know more about my faith then many others of my age. For the record, my parents, and the churches I've been involved in are not accepting of gays. nor was I until recent years, and that change with a long process or soul searching, pray, and general complete spiritual breakdown that God had to pick me back up from.

I very much know what certain denominations are most likely to believe, against gay marriage. Including Catholism. You dont know about my religious beliefs or background.

Now, I haven't once said that the Bible does allow gay sex, I said there is academic work that suggests the conventional church translations and readings of certain verses may not actually be accurate. I've never talked to a gay minister by the way,But this is going off topic, and I'm willing to talk to you about this if you want, in another thread or PM. Though with Catholicism, these issues mean much less, as you have loads of other doctrine and rules and stuff.

Things can vary in degree and remain with the same name. For example, women were second class citizens, but didnt 'have it as badly as African Americans before the civil rights movements'. Though, before the gay civil rights movement gays did have a much worse time then in the present Western World (lots of other countries still arent even at that point, and still have death penalties, lack of police protection from physcial harm/murder, no anti-discrimination laws socially or in employment, etc)

Then even in the west, about 50 years ago (and probably continuing till more recent years), gays could be given electric shock therapy (against their will), chemical treatments, forced marriages, a range of other rather bizzaire things have been known to have been done to gays (such as in the early 1900s in Germany, some doctors would swap a gay man's testicles with that of a dead man's, without even telling the gay guy). Gays got some of the most horrific treatment in the Holocuast, and considering how few people are gay, a lot of gays were killed in concentration camps. Out homosexual American citizens are not allowed to join the army, etc.

Sure the current status of rights is not that bad, but it doesn't mean that gays are equal under the law, because they simply aren't. And if you want to make other routes to give gay's partners equal legal benefits, then please, at least encourage that. But at the present, there isn't even that in some places.

I'll admit I can sometimes overreact when I feel/percieve someone as being enthocentric, particularly about America, because it always seems to happen on the internet, so I jump to the gun a bit too fast sometimes.

And I don't feel your arguments are all that applicable universally. Different cultures have different purposes for marriage, different beliefs behind marriage, different social climates and such forth. For example, in some countries, marriage is geniunely secular. Family values can also be different, etc.