1. I did research "BrotherBob" and find his site genuine. Why do some people have to label people who are committed to their beliefs as crazy? "BrotherBob" will not be swayed by nasty comments. So why make yourself look bad by saying mean things about someone who is consistent and genuine in his belief? I admire BrotherBob's knowledge and recall of scripture. I just may prefer to state my beliefs in terms of my own words. That is individual preference. One way is not better than the other.

2. There are children of homosexuals. But the children are usually adjusting to separation and divorce of biological parents [or they are adopted]. They certainly did not occur as the children of two same-sex individuals! ALL children of divorce have social adjustments to make. Some parents believe since they do all the right things and are "civil" for the sake of their children....that their children do not suffer. ALL children of separation and divorce suffer. The ones with "civil" parents adjust easier to the existing pain. Throw into the equation, the addition of a non-traditional relationship, and there is a compounding of the pain of adjustment. I wish you would take my word on this. I am not going to bore you with statistics and research although I can do so.

Put the children first is all that I am suggesting.

And I repeat that the founding fathers did not create the "separation of church and state". The founding fathers of our country were committed to religion. They merely did not wish to repeat history by having our government designate an OFFICIAL church. And by the way....Catholics are Christian.

Taking your points in reverse order, I have never said that Catholics were NOT Christian. For that matter, Unitarians, Quakers and many other non-"mainline" faiths are also Christian. However, these faiths don't have the objections to gay marriage that other faiths do.

And while our founding fathers may have felt that religion was important, they were very strong about keeping religion out of government policy and keeping it a matter of conscience for the believer. As Thomas Jefferson said:

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781-82

Finally, while there is some trauma from divorce or separation for children, such trauma can be helped by a secure relationship after divorce. While the relationship with same-sex parents are non-traditional, the relationship is no more harmful than that of opposite-sex parents. This has been shown in many studies by the APA, AMA and other medical authorities. However, denying children the legitimacy of married parents CAN be damaging. Single parents tend to be far more damaging to the children than the stability of a couple parenting. (That is not to say that single parents cannot do a good job, but that two parents, working together in raising children, tend to do better statistically.) In the same way, parents who have the legitmacy of marriage also get some financial benefits in marriage and it can't be argued that some monetary help is a bad thing for parents.

So, as you said, think of the children.

some people can't understand the difference in bullying and fighting back because they themselves are bullies.

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the word, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth." - Thomas Jefferson, In Religion
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

Mostly, Jefferson was against the Calvinistic approach to Christianity. It should be noted that he appreciated Christ's teaching but did not accept the miraculous aspects of Christ's acts. This is the basis of his Syllabus of an Estimate of the Merit of the Doctrines of Jesus (commonly known as the "Jefferson Bible").

My aim in that was, to justify the character of Jesus against the fictions of his pseudo-followers, which have exposed him to the inference of being an impostor. For if we could believe that he really countenanced the follies, the falsehoods and the charlatanisms which his biographers father on him, and admit the misconstructions, interpolations and theorizations of the fathers of the early, and fanatics of the latter ages, the conclusion would be irresistible by every sound mind, that he was an impostor. I give no credit to their falsifications of his actions and doctrines, and to rescue his character, the postulate in my letter asked only what is granted in reading every other historian.... That Jesus did not mean to impose himself on mankind as the son of God, physically speaking, I have been convinced by the writings of men more learned than myself in that lore.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Short, August 4, 1820, explaining his reason for compiling the Syllabus of an Estimate of the Merit of the Doctrines of Jesus and referring to Jesus's biographers, the Gospel writers.

We must reduce our volume to the simple evangelists, select even from the very words of Jesus, paring off the amphiboligisms into which they have been led by forgetting often or not understanding what had fallen from him, by giving their own misconceptions as his dicta, and expressing unintelligibly for others what they had not understood themselves. There will be found remaining the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man. I have performed this operation for my own use, by cutting verse by verse out of the printed book, and arranging the matter which is evidently his, and which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, October 13, 1813, clarifying his desire to strip away the myth introduced by the Gospel writers, as his motivation for constructing his Syllabus of an Estimate of the Merit of the Doctrines of Jesus