Presbyterian Church (USA) Amends Constitution to Allow Gay Marriage

a reply to: DeathSlayer

I had to google what the peanut butter lick trick was all about.

WOW, I must admit I am still trying to get those images out of my head including the "jerking off" dogs part. Man, I love my dog but not that way.

I'm sorry. I just wanted to put a little perspective into the "bestiality" outrage.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

The children of the homosexuals that choose to adopt or even impregnate without love, are beginning to come of age and express how they themselves feel about it. Please check out this article posted by the daughter of a gay couple.

Coming of age

a reply to: Annee

Of course, it is a completely natural birth defect.

a reply to: chadderson

One of my closest friends was raised by two mothers. He's heterosexual. He has nothing but loving things to say about his mothers, and LGBT in general. He's indistinguishable from those raised by heterosexual parents. You wouldn't know he was raised by gay parents unless it came up in conversation or you saw them for yourself. He's just as successful in life by any normal measure as the rest of us.

Of course there will be those raised by gay couples who think otherwise. Gay people are not immune to bad parenting, just as straight parents are not.

As for that link you provided. She essentially said her two moms were great parents. She was hurt by the loss and absence of her father. From that feeling she now believes gay parents deprive someone of a father and of a mother. She's upset that her parents split up essentially. That happens all the time. Her parents could have just as easily split up for other marital problems. And in fact considering the sentiment she expressed towards her father “wasn’t a great guy,” and “didn’t bother coming around anymore.” I think it's likely those problems would have arose regardless.

Either way what's that one experience against all the others?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Indeed, from the moment of conception to the birth, the baby is being nurtured and shaped. The mother's stress level dictates the development of the baby. What dictates the stress level? Knowledge. What is knowledge? Knowing one's creator. What IS knowing one's creator? It is love.

Stress CAN be combatted to zero. While the body's stress levels are low, it heals faster, responds quicker, functions better, does not contract sickness... the list goes on. Meditation is a real thing, and accomplishes real things. Cymatics is a real thing and a great way to learn (en analogy) about creation as well as ourselves.

Back to the plant analogy. It is not a poor analogy at all. A pregnant woman full of stresses (stress, which is directly related to love) is impacting her child's development adversely. A world with a clouded atmosphere, full of chaos, does not allow the sunlight to reach the plants growing on her surface.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Either way what's that one experience against all the others?

Proof. You cannot pull from people's opinions because half will say "good" and half will say "bad". This is a law of creation. So, let us look at something higher than human opinion, scientific facts.

True homosexuals do not possess the desire to have sex with the opposite sex.
True homosexuals will not reproduce because of this fact.

To have a child as a homosexual, they must force themselves to have sex with the opposite sex out of the desire to have a child, or have a test tube baby. This is NOT fair to the child. The third option is adoption, but as we see with the article i provided in my previous comment, even if half of all kids raised by gay couples thought gay couples could not properly raise children... it would not matter, it is only an opinion.

a reply to: windword

The arranged marriages you refer to are only demonized in modern culture. These marriages were done in faith. Done in faith. These folks were so committed to god, that they accepted the one chosen for them by their earthly creators. It is silly how our culture portrays it as slavery or forced marriage. Yes those comprised HALF of all arranged marraiges, but the entire concept when followed as it should be, is done in faith.

You are envisioning god as a human, who "watches". This a prime misconception and no wonder you feel "creepy". Our creator does not judge, the rules are already created for us to discover. It is the act of finding our creator and learning how to live that brings one closer to peace/joy/consistency.

Allow me to tell you why it is only fair to the child to bring them into this world under the veil of love...
From the moment of conception to the birth, the baby is being nurtured and shaped. The mother's stress level dictates the development of the baby. What dictates the stress level? Knowledge. What is knowledge? Knowing one's creator. What IS knowing one's creator? It is love.

Stress CAN be combatted to zero. While the body's stress levels are low, it heals faster, responds quicker, functions better, does not contract sickness... the list goes on. Meditation is a real thing, and accomplishes real things. Cymatics is a real thing and a great way to learn (en analogy) about creation as well as ourselves.

a reply to: chadderson

You cannot pull from people's opinions because half will say "good" and half will say "bad".

So why did you offer that one person's opinion as evidence?

This is a law of creation.

Who's law!? You have yet to reveal!

So, let us look at something higher than human opinion, scientific facts.

Yes please. Let us do so. Present scientific facts to support your argument. To support the many claims you have made.

True homosexuals do not possess the desire to have sex with the opposite sex.
True homosexuals will not reproduce because of this fact.

Again. If this is ultimately about procreation. If this is ultimately about bringing babies into this world. Then they are doing so. That's a fact.

This is NOT fair to the child.

Why??

originally posted by: chadderson
What dictates the stress level? Knowledge. What is knowledge? Knowing one's creator.

Sorry, these are religiously biased definitions of those words and are meaningless to anyone who does not share the same belief system.

Back to the plant analogy. It is not a poor analogy at all.

Yeah, it was. You said 'conceived' which, in relation to a plant, would not be its growth stage and beyond which you referenced to a child.

A pregnant woman full of stresses (stress, which is directly related to love) is impacting her child's development adversely. A world with a clouded atmosphere, full of chaos, does not allow the sunlight to reach the plants growing on her surface.

And what makes you think a pregnant homosexual women is 'clouded' and 'full of chaos' if they were to tell you they were happy and in a loving relationship?

I know religious fundamentalism does not allow much deviation from its highly dogmatic teachings so I am not expecting you to ever have any level of acceptance and understanding of people unlike yourself. I do however find it incredibly profound that some of the people who preach 'love' and 'tolerance' for others are so opposite of what they claim to embody from their savior.

a reply to: chadderson

The arranged marriages you refer to are only demonized in modern culture. These marriages were done in faith. Done in faith. These folks were so committed to god, that they accepted the one chosen for them by their earthly creators. It is silly how our culture portrays it as slavery or forced marriage. Yes those comprised HALF of all arranged marraiges, but the entire concept when followed as it should be, is done in faith.

LOL! Where do you get your statistics? Does your knowledge of the faith of 14 year old brides come from your "creator" too? What about the other 50% of marriages? What were they? Kidnapped women who were divided as booty of wars, women who were sold into slavery by their debt ridden fathers?

Yeah, it's really silly to think of arranged marriages as forced or degrading and shaming to women. Yes, modern culture demonizes it, as they should! We can see the real time effects of such "faithful cultures" on women, as it's practice is still going on in backward countries today.

Allow me to tell you why it is only fair to the child to bring them into this world under the veil of love...

You're unrealistically singling out same sex lovers and completely ignoring the rest of the less that perfect population, who are copulating outside of your "airy fairy" version of the "veil of love"! You're masking your hate and your desire to alienate and separate people you don't understand from general acceptance, calling it the "Creator's Love".

Stress CAN be combatted to zero.

LOL! You've got to be one of the creepiest posters I've come across! I imagine you protecting some ivory tower, where you've got your pregnant bride holed up, where you can have 100% control over her and her environment's "vibes".... Control her diet, who she communicates with, what music and media she's allowed to "digest", in order to

KEEP THAT STRESS LEVEL TO ZERO

Cult much Chadderson?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

How is a homosexual woman pregant? She must have had sex with someone that she was not naturally attracted to and thus made a movement out of a selfish nature, without love. What were her motives? Does she believe she 'deserves' kids?

When i speak of creator there is no "religious" ties whatsoever. You were created. Your earthly creators were created. Your earthly creators creators were created.

a reply to: windword

Arranged marriages are demonized because today's culture does not understand faith, nor their own creator.

Many copulate without love, and this is not right. Homosexuals are the target in this thread because homosexuality is the topic.

You post so many words but so few pertain to the thread. Try to stay on topic.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

You keep saying homosexuals are having kids. They are not truly homosexual if they are having kids. They would not be having sex with the opposite sex if they were homosexual. Do you understand?

Homosexuals have functional sex organs just like heterosexuals, this is known but does not refute what I am saying.

Edit: and even those homosexuals that go out of there way to reproduce WITHOUT having sex with the opposite sex, it is still not fair to the child to be conceived in test tube.

a reply to: chadderson

Arranged marriages are demonized because today's culture does not understand faith, nor their own creator.

Many copulate without love, and this is not right. Homosexuals are the target in this thread because homosexuality is the topic.

You post so many words but so few pertain to the thread. Try to stay on topic.

As long as "marriage" is bestowed by religious institutions on those that violate the moral objections given for the denial of same sex marriages, it is on topic and relevant to the thread.

Stop using hypocritical cop outs to dismiss criticism of your bigotry and your logic for defending it.

a reply to: windword

So then your argument is that not all heterosexuals should be allowed to marry because they are equally immoral as homosexuals?

You continue to call me names. Who is really being negative here? Truth is not bigotry. Hate is bigotry. Refute the truths, and stop making personal attacks, its easy.... that is if you actually have higher truths to refute me with. Otherwise it would seem the name calling is nothing more than you going off topic again.

a reply to: chadderson

You keep saying homosexuals are having kids. They are not truly homosexual if they are having kids.

What kind of pseudo science is this? The same kind that says that no "legitimate rape" will have an outcome of pregnancy?

What is your answer to lesbian women who are married to men and have children? What about "closet homosexuals" that come out to their wives AFTER they have children?

a reply to: windword

Why would a lesbian marry a man and have children? She must not be a lesbian.

The thing you said about rape. No. Poor analogy.

The closet homosexuals that come out to their wives after their children are born are showing their GUILT for conceiving a child with someone they are not naturally attracted to, and thus their mistake.

a reply to: chadderson

So then your argument is that not all heterosexuals should be allowed to marry because they are equally immoral as homosexuals?

If the proposal is that "marriage" is a sacred religious institution, and homosexual unions are abominations due to religious moral standards, then yes, no atheists, no divorcees, no adulterers or fornicators, no arranged marriages, no marriages for anything but the procreation of children by virgins should be called "marriages" either. Otherwise denial of same sex marriage is just hypocritical bigotry.

a reply to: windword

Marriage is NOT a "religious" institution. This is another misconception creating new generation of misconceptions for you.

Marriage is a ceremony to celebrate the promise between one's self and one's creator to have faith in who that creator has put before them. Having faith in your creator would mean, you trust in that partner because of your relationship with your creator. People make the mistake of thinking this is a commitment to the PERSON and not our creator.

This is the misconception of marriage.

a reply to: chadderson

Why would a lesbian marry a man and have children? She must not be a lesbian.

This (rhetorical) question is an example of your abstinence and your willful ignorance.

The closet homosexuals that come out to their wives after their children are born are showing their GUILT for conceiving a child with someone they are not naturally attracted to, and thus their mistake.

BS! My opinion of your opinion is that this is a desperate rationalization of your own personal bias and is not rooted in fact whatsoever.