GfS, I believe you are missing (dodging?) the point of my question.

Perhaps that is my fault for phrasing it in personal terms, asking how someone else's same-sex marriage can adversely affect Barbara's and my marriage.

Let me phrase it differently:   How can the same-sex marriage of any man/man or woman/woman couple affect the heterosexual marriage of any man/woman couple?

Unless, of course, they (the heterosexual couple), for whatever reason, let it bother them. And then, as I pont out above, that's their problem, no one else's.

Regarding your statement, "One thing, that I want to point out, is that your slur, about 'Would you want your daughter to marry one?', was both out of place, and non-applicable." First, it was not intended as a slur, it was quoting a frequently heard statement back in the 1960s during the Civil Rights movement. However, it did not originate in the movie "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" it was said long before that. And usually when that question was uttered, you knew you were dealing with a bigot with all flags flying.

Miscegenation (interracial marriage) was, at one time, not just disapproved of, it was illegal. The justification was that mixing of the races was "unnatural." And "against God's Law." "Which is why God put the Blacks in Africa, the Yellows in Asia, and the Whites in America!"

Fortunately, we have moved a bit closer to being civilized since then, but we still have far to go (as some wag once pointed out quite accurately, "Science has discovered the missing link between primitive apes and civilized man. It is us!")

The details about my own marriage and offspring, or lack thereof, have nothing to do with my respect for the civil rights—the human rights—of everybody. And that includes my fellow humans of whatever—

Well, GfS, I can't really think of a better way to put it than the way it is stated in the "Affirmation of Welcome" of a church about nine blocks from where I live. You will note that this is not some "off-the-wall" sect, it is a main-line church; a member of one of the major denominations. Whether one is of a religious bent or not, or even if one is antipathetic toward religion as Rig is, it still sums up a general attitude toward our fellow humans that, if followed, not necessarily as a religious conviction, but for reasons of simple humanity, would lead the way toward a far more just world. Replace the words "God" and "Christ" with the word "Life" and you will note that it works quite well:

We affirm with the apostle Paul that in Christ "there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female" (Galatians 3:28). Christ has made us one.

As a community of God striving to be inclusive and open to diversity, we, the members of Central Lutheran Church, welcome all people to join us as we struggle to better understand the mysteries of God's teaching and purposes for us. Although our world can seem to be a place of alienation and brokenness, Christ calls us to reconciliation and wholeness. We are challenged by Christ to care for, to love, to understand, and to listen to each other, regardless of our race, age, gender, marital status, physical and mental abilities, sexual/affectional orientation, national origin or economic status. We celebrate the special gifts that each has to bring!

This is also a more than adequate affirmation that the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells of the world do not speak for all Christians. But then, that's another subject. (The church cited above has performed at least six same-sex marriages that I know of—whether Washington State law recognizes them as legal or not.)

And once again I point out that scientists—independent scientists, not scientists following anybody's political agenda—have found more than just a little evidence to show that gender orientation is quite probably not a matter of choice, but a predisposition from birth. To try to claim otherwise is to attempt to stifle current research because one is afraid of the conclusions that appear to be emerging. A most unscientific attitude and a refusal to face reality. If one finds reality to be distasteful, once again, that is not reality's problem, one must learn to simply accept it and deal with it within oneself (a sound principle of counselling, I believe).

And your question regarding my son, "Any regrets, or wishes that something might have been done or handled differently, back then???" On the one hand, I wish I had never got involved with the woman in the first place. On the other, considering the fine man that is the product of this union back then, I am most glad that it did happen. And although I would have liked to have participated in his growing up, his mother (and eventually, step-father) did a more than fine job, and I doubt that I could have done any better. He, his partner, Barbara, and I have a very loving family relationship.

But this is irrelevant to the discussion.

Don Firth

P. S. Ake I am simply ignoring because he's so caught up scoring in his own points that he simple can't be bothered to try to understand what other people are saying.