It is a representation of the people for the people by the people that I do not agree with. Seriously man, if we need to rehash the gay debate this weekend, fire away.<quoted text>Ok, but what does that have to do with their being a politician?
I do not agree with someone watching someone having sex with animals, but I do not think it will involve their political agendas.
I have shown how no matter the sexual preference, the agendas of democrats and republicans do not change. So why does it matter? Can you not answer a simple question with a answer that actually answers the question?
You seem really worried about peoples personal lives yet oddly, you do not care to see what deductions Mitt Romney has taken advantage of. One could be to a gay rights group for all you know.
Procreation factor alone is a reason why the gay choice lifestyle is not acceptable. Yes, there are traditional couples that require outside assistance, but ALL gay couples require assistance.
So what happens when there are no more surrogates and your kids world is comprised of all gay people? Your kids die off. Humanity dies off. And yes, that will probably eventually happen but at least give your kids the chance to make that determination for themselves. Again, I only speculate because I am not an anthropologist or bioengineer.
I alreay know your posture on the religious implications.