All that high minded rigamarole aside, I don’t think it’s as big deal as we think and God is truly in His heaven and all will be sorted out eventually. If my neighbor chooses to marry a girl (she being a girl) it’s not going to make much difference to my marriage. But it might make the kid across the street a little confused. And it might influence his choices later, all the rhetoric about homosexuality being a matter of choice be damned.

I’m very confused about homosexuality and its origins and its destination, but I have to bring it all back to that basic belief in God, the gospel and in the atonement of Jesus Christ, who asks us to love all men.

The future of this country, society, and even Mormonism belongs to people like me–those who reject notions that women are genetically disposed to doing dishes and that the “traditional” roles lead to greater happiness in the long run.

I don’t care to missionary you, and your amazingly trite and shallow thoughts here are far from converting me, I just thought I’d point out that your ilk–just as royalty, the Nazis, and Jim Crow laws were before–will eventually be purged from society.

The Christ I know and love, as well as the scriptures I know and read, testify that your thoughts are wrong-headed. Whether you accept that fact or not is irrelevant to me. Thank you for not using the word Christ in your post; he truly has nothing to do with your post and I appreciate you not using his name in vain (or associating it with your thoughts here).

The teachings you have preached “women are better” at housekeeping, etc., are simply contrary to the teachings of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Might I remind you of a man you might have heard about–Jesus. When Mary was “learning at his feet” (which, in Hebraic traditions, means to be the student or disciple of a teacher), Martha entered the room and complained that Mary was not helping her in the kitchen where she belonged. Jesus chided Martha and reminded her that we all have our ways of serving him. Thus “roles” are *not* fixed as roles–an idea to which you so dearly seem to be clinging. Roles are a set of attitudes and traditions (as you yourself pointed out) that simple-minded folks cling to when they don’t have the imagination or strength to pursue life outside of “roles.” So, sure, for weak-minded people, roles are great. They give people something constant and predictable to cling to, and they help these people not fall into lives of complete degeneracy or nihilism. For those of us who do not need comfort and predictability, for those of us who can imagine our own lives as something greater than a set of traditions of men, a set of attitudes, etc., we can imagine serving the Savior in other and meaningful ways–ways outside of rote repetitions of the traditions of men. We can imagine ourselves in Mary’s place.

By the way, I’ll hold my sex life up to any “traditional” marriage (that’s right, I come from one of those “androgynous marriages at which you sneer). So far I’ve found few “traditionalists” who are willing to compare notes, however.

With all the subtle jabs at reasons why homosexuality is indeed ruining marriage, oh so keenly disguised by the use of the phrase “androgynous” I would have reason enough to make these points on logic. Ladies and gentlemen, I am a bisexual male, who is currently in a relationship with a female. I promise you as I would promise her. If the future saw us in guardianship of a child, there would be no difference in the amount of care between us.

I also happen to be pretty DARN good at housework.

There are periods of time I RUN my house on my own.

The whole basis of this argument is that gender roles keep society functioning cleanly and smoothly, no?

If it’s so smooth, why was this article necessary?

I feel as if I’ve sullied my own mind by reading this article, but I found solace in the comments, and I thank all below me for provocative reading.

This channel already exists… It’s called LOGOS and it’s available on DirecTV. I was looking for a show about the church and found one on LOGOS about an LDS missionary though the premise was something other than what I was hoping for. Just use your imagination and I won’t have to go into it!

Given that as the law currently stands, gays can be married, it shouldn’t be too long before we start to see some old television standbys modified to include gay couples.

“The Dating Game” and “The Newlywed Game” would probably include a certain number of gay matchups or married couples per week, as would other dating/relationship shows if they were brought back and remade.

“Wheel of Fortune” would have the occasional “gay couples” week.

Surely the demand for a cable “all gay, all the time” channel exists; imagine the “Lifetime” channel, but oriented to gays and lesbians.

The power of the “ick factor” that could be brought into play here shouldn’t be ignored. I mean, they’re certainly not implausible ideas and wouldn’t have to be done in a cartoonish, condescending way, like some other anti-whatever or whoever campaign ads I’ve heard on the radio or have seen on TV. But it could just be put out there so as to creep everyone out. I think it has the potential to put the Yes on 8 crowd over the top.

Karl Rove would probably go for it.