Church: we'll make gay rights martyrs

Its already happening without gay parents, I do not even want to envision the future of our schools when these homosexuals begin raising adopted children.

Your all backing the rights of the adults, but consider the child. Obviously infant children will have no choice, but the older kids may realize how rediculous the idea is and refuse to accept them.

I do not normally support the Catholic Church, but ANY and all Christian adoption or foster organizations should follow suit.

Originally posted by DYepes
So then, it is ok for children to be taught to be gay, and seek same sex relationships, with the likeliness of being encouraged or pressed to find a good gay partner in middle school, or even younger?

One can not be taught to be gay, it is a natural occurence.

Because that is what will happen. It is already happening no doubt. I sure hope all you who support this have middle school aged children that all turn gay, so you can see the sickness it will bring to the world.

No, what will happen is everyone will devlop normally, apart from
people not seeing homosexuality as anything more than a normal
occurence in nature, and that all people are equal.

I am fine with allowing homosexuals to marry, and even teach and hold political jobs. I will be damned if we allow them to adopt children, and then they will raise gay children that will try and turn my own kids in school. Argue the issue all you want, thats what will happen.

First of all, as I said above, homosexuality is not taught, is a naturally
occuring thing.

Seconsdly, well I really am to disgusted with people like you to really
even write anymore.

DYepes, this is where I would have to rarely disagree with you. Children look to their parents for a protective force, as well as a source for learning how to survive in this world. Parents cannot teach their children to be attracted to the opposite or same sex, children do it on their own.

Think of your first crush. I can bet you that it was when you were young. Now tell me, did your parents teach to have a crush on that girl or did you yourself realize it?

Originally posted by DJMessiah
Think of your first crush. I can bet you that it was when you were young. Now tell me, did your parents teach to have a crush on that girl or did you yourself realize it?

Better yet, let's get a gay point of view. I had straight parents. They did not teach me to be gay. Then, how did I turn out to be gay if it wasn't taught to me?

BTW, I knew I was gay before I knew what gay even ment.

Some clarification on the title of the article, since I don't want it to create any confusion. It means that the "rights of gays" are going to be "martyrs," not the people who support gay rights.

Originally posted by DYepes

I do not normally support the Catholic Church, but ANY and all Christian adoption or foster organizations should follow suit.

Just as I don't believe religious organizations shouldn't be forced to betray their beliefs, I also don't believe state funding should be used to promote policies that the government has found to be illegal, or chose to discourage. if the government finds the idea of descrimination against homosexuals, or women, or whatever unappealing, and the church just don't see it that way, then the church shouldn't get any funding for programs that advance their descriminatory beliefs. if they're accepting some kind of funding for these adoption agencies, then they should give up this funding, or abide by the the conditions that the government lays out.

Originally posted by DYepes
Its already happening without gay parents...

Then how can you attribute it to gay parents?

Originally posted by dawnstar
then the church shouldn't get any funding for programs that advance their descriminatory beliefs. if they're accepting some kind of funding for these adoption agencies, then they should give up this funding, or abide by the the conditions that the government lays out.

Very well-said. If the church is operating without connection to the government, they can discriminate however they like. If they are subsidized by the government, they should follow the law.

Duh.

Can anyone answer? Is church-based adoption subsidized by the government? If so, case closed.

I tried looking but I'm the worst at Google. They do appear to be government subsidized from what I read though. At least in part.

Yea sure whatever guys. And then in 2147, when 70% of the World's population has become homosexual due to secret government immoral population control measures, everyone swears they "KNOW" that they were gay when they were young and before they knew what it was.

I dont give a damn if you marry, or whatever job you may have, but please for the love of God do not go out and try and raise children as if it were a normal fact of life, because it isnt.

It is a normal fact of life, and has been since the dawn of the species.

Probably before, as not only does homosexual behavior occur in the animal kingdom, but in many mammalian species it's becoming clear that a certain percentage of individuals will always have a preference for their own gender. (See research on gay sheep)

The fact that some among us persist in perpetuating primitive taboos in the name of ancient superstions shouldn't hold the rest of us back from facing reality.

[edit on 2/23/07 by xmotex]

This topic was discussed at some length over on UK politics when the issue first arose,

Catholic Church & Gay Adoption

One of the key points that was made on that thread was that the Catholic adoption agencies receive public money to support their activities and, as registered charities, they gain certain tax privileges as well.

You would think that a church would recognise its responsibility to act legally in the general course of events but as long as they have the front to take that money they must act within the law. What scale of arrogance does it take for a church, which one would assume would be supposed to set a good example of civil responsibility, to deliberately flout a law designed to prevent discrimination and still take public money for doing it.

If the prisons weren't so full I'd suggest that the Archbishop of Westminster should be locked up.

Good on the Catholic Church.

Im sorry, but it should be the Child rights before gay rights. I know many kids who were bullied at school for having gay family members or being gay. What will happen if they had gay parents? it will be hard on the child.

Originally posted by infinite
Good on the Catholic Church.

Im sorry, but it should be the Child rights before gay rights. I know many kids who were bullied at school for having gay family members or being gay. What will happen if they had gay parents? it will be hard on the child.

That is only because of other people. So, because a child might get bullied in school for having a father that is slightly slow, should that father not be able to adopt if he wants to? Arguing that OTHER PEOPLE'S KIDS will bully the adopted kids is not a good arguement at all. Stop your kids from being jackasses and maybe the kids of gay people won't get bullied. Just maybe?

That's it, Griff. Kids are taught that being gay is wrong by their parents. So if a child gets teased or bullied, it's the fault of the intolerant parents of the other kids.

And kids tease other kids about everything. Should we send our children to school without their glasses or braces because other kids will tease them? Should we get our children to pretend that they're rich so other little jerks won't tease them about being poor? Should the parents with smaller, nerdy or brilliant kids go to a special school so they won't get teased?

That's a lame excuse. Sorry.

Originally posted by DYepes
And then in 2147, when 70% of the World's population has become homosexual

Do you have any indication that the percentage of gay people is increasing? Or is this just a fear-based fantasy?

Alright let me pacify my views a bit, as intolerant as they may appear to be. Obviously I do not conedone these adoption rights for gays. I personally find it appalling. However, it would of course be unconstitutional to deny yall, Griff, the same rights entitled to any other citizen simply because of sexual preference. I cannot be a patriot and support such a thing.

So then, taking the diplomatic route, seeing as there are many people against this, such as myself, perhaps we could make it a requirement for the adoption agency to ask any people, whether they be anonymous or not, giving up their children to answer whether they approve their child being adopted by a homosexual couple. This would be a file that is legally binding.

This way the government is not forcing anything upon anyone, homos get their kids if they are legally authorized by the biological parent, and people are given the choice!

Why I must say, I should be a politician, because I would be introducing this as a bill, it practically satisfies everyone

VOTE for me in 2032

Originally posted by DYepes
Obviously I do not conedone these adoption rights for gays. I personally find it appalling.

As appalling as a child growing up to adulthood without having any parents? Please do explain how having two gay parents will be as bad as that.

Perhaps we could make it a requirement for the adoption agency to ask any people [...] whether they approve their child being adopted by a homosexual couple.

It's an adoption agency, not a dating agency. You can't choose who you want your baby to go to; that's left up to the state. As soon as the parent gives up their child, they lose any parental rights and responsibilities, and that includes deciding if the home their child lives in meets their standards.

This way the government is not forcing anything upon anyone

How would this not be forcing anything? It would be a law, meaning everyone would have to follow it. That in itself is force.

h**** (censored) get their kids if they are legally authorized by the biological parent, and people are given the choice!

Please refrain from using that word.

Once again, the "parent" is no longer legally a parent and they can have no form of authorization over their child's future.

Why I must say, I should be a politician

I'm guessing you would be a Conservative Republican. Am I correct?

because I would be introducing this as a bill, it practically satisfies everyone

No, only the people who are opposed to homosexuality. Would you allow the same kind of option for a parent who wants their kid to be placed in a homosexual household only?

[edit on 24-2-2007 by DJMessiah]

Oh please DJM whats with the censure, I just wanted to shorten the word, it has nothing do with disrespect. I have never met a homo who had an issue with being called a homo.

Would you allow the same kind of option for a parent who wants their kid to be placed in a homosexual household only?

Well sure, if we gonna do one we might as well do the other. There should also be a way to generate revenue in there somewhere... and that benefits the taxpayer you know.

I have no problem with homosexuals, I socialize with some, and support their right to get married. But raising CHILDREN!? Come on man. They themselves gave up that biological right when they chose their sexual preference. Now we have to bend to their will and risk the mental health of an already stressed orphan?

I mean while were at it, we should start allowing zoophiles to adopt children as well. No problems there you know, they just enjoy the company of animals is all. Animals are less discriminating than humans are right?

As far as my political affiliation, I have many conservative values, but I am a registered Green. I dont care much for political affiliation because I am not ALL THE WAY with any of them.

[edit on 2/24/2007 by DYepes]

Originally posted by DYepes
Oh please DJM whats with the censure, I just wanted to shorten the word, it has nothing do with disrespect. I have never met a homo who had an issue with being called a homo.

That word is often used as a derogatory title against others.

Well sure, if we gonna do one we might as well do the other. There should also be a way to generate revenue in there somewhere... and that benefits the taxpayer you know.

Well at least we can agree that both parties have the same equal rights

I have no problem with homosexuals [...] But raising CHILDREN!?

Why not, bro? Are you basing your judgment on any research that says a child will be harmed by living in a homosexual household?

I understand that your concern over this is whether the child "grows up" to be homosexual, but if the child were to be straight after growing in the household, would you still have the same opinion?

Come on man. They themselves gave up that biological right when they chose their sexual preference.

I would say many would disagree with you. I didn't choose my sexual preference when I became attracted to women. Being straight wasn't a choice by me, nor was it something that I was taught, it was something natural that I realized early on. I'm sure you and every other straight person can say the same thing. It's the exact same thing that happens to homosexuals. They don't choose their sexual preference, but rather it became a natural occurrence.

Now we have to bend to their will and risk the mental health of an already stressed orphan?

Homosexuals are humans too, and I will not treat them with any disrespect because they they have a different lifestyle. If any couple is found to be proper parents by the adoption agency, then why should any child be deprived of a home to live in?

I mean while were at it, we should start allowing zoophiles to adopt children as well.

Simple answer: nope. Just as we shouldn't let rapists or necrophiliac. Unlike homosexuality, those are not natural sexual preferences.

No problems there you know, they just enjoy the company of animals is all. Animals are less discriminating than humans are right?

It equates to animal abuse.

[edit on 24-2-2007 by DJMessiah]

Originally posted by DYepes
Alright let me pacify my views a bit, as intolerant as they may appear to be.

Your views don't just "appear" to be intolerant, they are the epitome of intolerance and ignorance. Sorry if that sounds rough, but you're basing your views, not on fact, but on disinformation and false assumptions.

There is no way you can soften the blow of your views or pacify anything when you make such statements as:

Originally posted by DYepes
I mean while were at it, we should start allowing zoophiles to adopt children as well.

You have just compared a gay person to someone who has sex with animals. I'm not feeling pacified, here...

When it comes right down to it, I support you to have your views, regardless how much I disagree with them. But I don't support you in keeping other people, of whom you don't approve, of being treated unequally under the law.

You don't have to have anything to do with gay people adopting. As far as we know, you aren't gay, you aren't giving a child up for adoption, you don't work in a Catholic orphanage, you aren't involved IN ANY WAY with this situation, yet you take it upon yourself to dictate how other people should be and what they should be allowed to do as regards their own personal pursuit of happiness. And you base your objections on erroneous, unfounded ideas. Nothing you have said in this regard is based on actual fact.

That's the problam I have with people who feel they have the right to tell other people how to live. Especially when it means they don't get equal treatment under the law. I have a problem with you (and people like you) actively working to keep people oppressed.

Thanks for listening.

[edit on 24-2-2007 by Benevolent Heretic]