@rat-fish Actually, it's 17+. Not 18. And it's not the principle homosexual subject matter that warranted that rating. I didn't say anyone was legally viable according to the rating system. I'm saying that the media outlets release material with this kind of subject matter regardless of ratings systems because growing cultural trends encourage them to do so. Theoretically, according to the logic of most people here, homosexuality is perfectly valid subject matter for, say, the Lego parodies.

@WCK619 Explosions and violence are easy to explain and contextualize. Both of which are frowned upon in our culture. Media however, is absolutely saturated with sexual content of both the general and esoteric varieties. It's far more likely that someone who watches American Pie will turn into a Stiffler than it is that someone who watches Silence of the Lambs will turn into a Hannibal Lecter. And no, I shouldn't have to explain issues to my kids that I don't feel they should be exposed to. I know that certain types of behavior exist and therefore I should talk about them and length and full detail to my kids? What kind of logic is that? Many media outlets overstep their boundaries in deciding for me what they should be exposed to.

@ZRavN It's a lot easier to explain away relationships with fictitious aliens that exist solely as archetypes for humans than it is to properly extrapolate a social behavior that mimics a cultural phenomenon. And not all of the detractors here are Christian by the way. Nice bit of profiling there.

@Calvin How many geneticists do you know exactly? To this day, no one has been able to identify homosexuality as an ingrained behavior. There is far more evidence that it's a socially developed behavior--and aside from the lip-service of people who just don't want to admit to disorders, you really can't say otherwise. So please spare everyone the pseudo-scientific drivel. I must reiterate to everyone who's trying to say that these developments don't affect non-homosexuals: my kids play Mass Effect, and I don't want whatever their playing to teach them something that goes against the morality I choose to raise them with. It was hard enough rationalizing the Asari and having to talk to them about lesbians simply because they're playing a video game--I SHOULD NOT have to do such a thing.

@foxrock66 "To the christians who are making christians look bad... Yup, you. Listen up." I think a couple of these "Christians" are trolls trying to assign more credibility to the homosexual camp.. So I haven't been paying much attention to them.

@Radnen "Why is there a struggle between the mainstream and homosexuality?" Faux distinction. Homosexuality sees its strongest defense in mainstream media nowadays.

@Smokescreened Make up your mind. You're the one who initially made the argument that the older practice was conducive to the most relevant cultural aspect. But now you're going on multiple wild tangents talking about murder, war, etc.. Whatever message you had has been lost in favor of more ad hominem responses. Whatever that point is or was, it hasn't successfully distinguished one act from another. @Macbeth Obviously it's a biological issue if that's all you're doing. The reason I brought up that quote from before is because I was categorizing it similarly to kissing. It serves as a complement to sex rather than an emphasis on it.

@Smokescreen How does the age of homosexual behavior somehow make it more valid? A lot of things have been around that long. That doesn't make them positive.

@Carlo I would argue that the Christian principles America was founded upon had a great deal to do with its success. Christianity is not simply a matter of faith. It's a philosophy. The more Diest Founding Fathers even acknowledged this by basically accepting the Bible's morality while ignoring its claims about God. And of course, I must point out that you're misstating the intent of the "Separation of Church and State" clause. It was put into place to clarify that religions were free from state regulations. Not that one had to maintain a distance from the other at all times. It was the interpretation of an anti-Catholic judge in the fifties that took advantage of the wording to suit his bias intent. To complement my point, I must point that every Founding Father believed in God and the overwhelming majority of them were Christian.

@TheMacbeths I actually went over this a little earlier: "If you 'd like to me to talk about sodomy though, I would point out that while homosexuals do not have exclusive rights to its behavior, they are the biggest enablers of the practice--and whatever other extraneous act that exists as a substitution for actual sexual intercourse. Using the act of kissing as a way of somehow demeaning the heterosexual relationship in relation to homosexuals is a flawed counterargument since heterosexual relationships enlist its practice strictly as a complementary sign of affection as a prelude to, or in he midst of, consummation. The developing homosexual sub-culture however, would see any sort of act that involves physical contact categorized as a form of "love-making" solely for the purpose of being comparable to heterosexual couples regardless of how it violates the very meaning of the word. This serves not only as an attack on common sense, but also on our very vernacular." I actually don't see a great deal to be wrong with oral stimulation as long as it's foreplay and not a main event. At that point, you're defeating the purpose of coupling.