Same-Sex Couples Could Create Children

All the nuclear family talk is nice, except for the fact that these days most kids are growing up in single parent households anyway.

Besides, the "nuclear family" is not in fact, a traditional arrangement, extended families living under the same roof were far more common until the last 100 years or so.

IMHO it's more important that kids grow up in a family where they are loved than who actually makes up the family.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

 

Yeah, one was an absentee father

Hah!

Touche.

that one fatefull holy night, Jesus's 1st dad, impregnates the virgin and then get's the hell out of dodge I guess the standards for good ol' healthy family dynamics has been around for a while!

I'm more concerned that the product of these experimental births would be in some way deficient. I'd hate to see a flood of mentally retarded children or children with physical deformities

Yeah I will be concerned as well when this takes off. Hopefully the mice and computer simulations will be enough to iron out the kinks Well those children are also in luck. As rare as it is, there are couples that will love and care for children despite those medical conditions!

children of strait couples are accidents (and with many families that are anti-abortion, they're seen as an unavoidable burden). And, because they're accidents and burdens, they're treated as such, with less love and care.

That's a very interesting observation! It's logically sound that much more planning is typically done by gay parents, as they have to go through external means. And yeah, the 'accidental' aspect most certainely doesn't help increase the likelihood of the children being loved!

In effect, they are more of an example of a stable nuclear family than many heterosexual families are.

I have been in the foster system my whole life. I wasn't a foster kid myself. But I helped care for close to 20 children and teens. By that I mean my family and I had a residential care-home. Believe me, straight 1 man 1 women families is absolutely no guarantee of success. I'd much rather have a child in the arms of gay partners that would love and care for him/her then that abused child going back to their straight, meth-addicted parents. *I am not at all suggesting something negative on hetero parents in general*. But it's absurd that some seem to make the assertion that the children turn out perfectly fine so long as they have hetero parents.

[edit on 013030p://16u38 by Lucid Lunacy]

I think children can grow up perfectly happy and.....normal, well kinda normal. Anyway I've heard of lesbians that will use one partners egg and the other partners brother or something for sperm and gays that do the same except with a sister or cousin for the egg. As weird as that sounds to me, it's perfectly acceptable and I'm willing to bet a gay couple will raise a more well rounded civilized person than most. But to bore a child with no female or male dna is crossing the line.

I'm no religious person, but if that happened I would take that as a sign of the end. It's just sick and disturbing and really is like child abuse. But judging from some of the elitests in here that hold such a higher plane of existence other wise known as politically correct sheep maybe we really are too stupid for are own good.

It's naturally INHERIT in children to KNOW they have a father and mother and INHERIT in them that they're male and female.

Here's the problem, children will start being confused and emotionally breakdown when they get around other children that have a male father and female mother...their minds can't comprehend the struggle inside themselves when in their hearts (mind, will and emotions) want to call their parents mom and dad. Because Mom=female and Dad=male.

Even now, children that are raised without a father, whether or not, it's the fathers fault or not, somewhere deep inside...............

CHILDREN want to know they're Moms & Dads(male/female).... that's why we see so many people searching for them years later..

"Originally posted by forestlady

Jack Chick, it is exactly your kind of self-righteous, patronizing attitudes that made me leave the Church. Do you even understand what Jesus's message was? Christianity is not something one should hide under in order to justify one's agenda of hatred, discrimination, and being judgmental about others. "

"Very wise and exactly correct a very old soul you have forest lady =) "

Now MODS, the person who started this thread started with hate speech right off the bat and this is what stoked the fire IMHO. - shift

Not so humble an opinion when you can assert such drastic sentiment is held by Jack Chick. Hate is a strong word and I would suggest you, forestlady, marg and anyone else calling someone who doesn't share your ambiguously nebulous lines of demarcation between that which is right and just, to that which we are just to ambivalent about taking a stand then having your mind read being told you are filled with Hatred and Bigotry.

That when the Jesus of the Bible speaks of such things being wrong and foretells the consequences of our moral acceptance to these behaviors.

When those consequences rear their ugly heads, those same people blame God saying he doesn't love us or he must not really care. I then see them talk about the love of Jesus message when in fact their are many messages where that love must be expressed in the form of rebuke.

A parent can chasten his child, judging the childs actions while showing dis-approval and the parent still loves the child. The love Jesus spoke of, has NOTHING to do with obscure, unique, "special" ineterest groups obsession with encroaching on society in a campaign to get synthetic public approval for their brand of sexual or personal indulgences.

The more off to the left we go, the more extreme to the left we get, the more extreme the method of satisfying that indulgence becomes and then we wonder why we see kids on utube exchanging fecal matter in a french kissing contest who are perfectly recognised by their parents when they get the news of it via a spiteful former friend.

Honor thy mother and father is from the Bible and that just isn't allowed in public schools anymore. So we have kids going to school to stab a student, or kill 30 or more then themselves.

Loving your neighbor as yourself, does NOT mean approving of his abberant sexual deviance. What is so ironic about Forestlady's post, is that she represents a convoluted theme for dealing with Christians I see all over this forum. Not only will Most Christians disagree with ideas like the OP brings to our attention, but you should EXPECT them to.

While people like Forestlady and many others using "Bigotry" the new word for those who disagree with us, they also express so much understanding and support for such ideas behind the guise of whats is good for the children.

It is many times these same people who have no compassion or concern for babies murdered in the womb of their mother, trading innocent life for a more independant lifestyle.

Sex is so out of control, is it any wonder why we hear woman finding out for the tenth time when Maury Povich says "John, you are NOT the father".

It is all of us then who end up having to pay for this mothers moral mistakes. It is getting to be too much to bear and I will not let anyone forget the spread of aids, the 1 in 4 females in public schools having STD's. Enough is Enough.

All acts of perversion whether we have a perversion of Science or sex, seem to have huge consequences and this new idea for same sex couples creating children may or may not, it remains to be seen. In most cases however, this kind of liberal modernism and materialism adds a burden on society as easy divorces create and gay marriages will prove once again, that any society that endorse let alone encourages such bad ideas, bring to fruition those exact consequences we see Jesus warn about.

He doesn't even dignify the acts of this kind of personal affront in the presence of his divine nature, but condemns it with rebuke calling this type of immoral negligence, an "Abomination ".

Question: What does "abomination" mean?

Answer: There are five different words translated abomination in the Bible. The predominant meaning is, "to stink, to be loathsome, uncleanness" (Old Testament Word Studies by Wilson, pg. 3). The original words are expressive of the greatest disdain on the part of God. Let us see what is an abomination to God.

Witchcraft, adultery, and homosexuality.
Divination, enchanter, or a witch, etc. are expressly called abomination (Deut. 18: 9 ff). Many of the practices of some of the Eastern Religions and of New Agers come under these headings. "Abominations" is applied to adultery in Leviticus 18: 17-27. Homosexuality is also included in the list, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is abomination" (vs. 22).

Prayer of disobedient, dishonesty, and justifying the wicked and condemning the just

Proverbs 28: 9 states, "He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination." The Book of Wisdom enunciates another general truth, "A false balance is abomination to the Lord…" (Prov. 11: 1). Those who justify the wicked and condemn the just, "…they both are abomination to the Lord" (Prov. 17: 15).

All sin is bad (I Jn. 3: 4, Isa. 59: 1, 2). Some sin, however, is suggestive of a greater degree of depravity and rebellion. We must remember God does not always see things as man does (Lk. 16: 14, 15).

The foregoing references are often not appreciated today - "You are judgmental and too intolerant," we hear. However, God's word remains true, whether we like it or not! Man may laugh at the above, but such is a repulsive odor in the nostrils of God. More and more today, the "respectable clergy" is found justifying matters such as homosexuality and dishonesty.

How sad and contrary to God's pronouncements
www.biblequestions.org...

In closing, I would like to say, that making allegations about so called hate speech, may succeed in getting those you accuse a reprisal from a Mod, but you still look like a little tattle tale who would have us slide down a slippery slope, relinquishing free speech for the protection of a censorship bordering on thought crimes.

Life isn't fair, and those who like to make disparaging remarks about a God who doesn't care, will always appear as if they have such an intimate knowledge of a God, they have little faith in or, none at all. Many deny his existence while critisizing the way he operates as if they know just how a God should act.

People have a RIGHT to say stupid things, they have a right to judge people and we should temper our justice with mercy. Whether I agree with this or that, the pursuit of happiness is not always right, not always in harmony with others and sometimes gets in the way of others right to same. It isn't nor should it ever be a Government entitlement. We should NOT expect it therefore not complain about bigotry so much so often that the word loses its meaning and calling someone on it is no differen't than having a pepsi.

Life was given to you for free,

Therefore,, it doesn't

owe you a dime

- Con












[edit on 16-4-2008 by Conspiriology]

When I read the Article I see nothing about Male and Female parents, what I see is a way for people who love one another, and can't have kids, to have a kid that will not be like them.

For example, you have a disease that gives you poor circulation of blood in your legs, and it is genetic so you pass it down from generation to generation. You don't want your offspring to have it, so you have one altered.

Now for some of you it looks like you are going against "Gods" will or "Natures" will, which ever you believe, but the simple fact is that you can have a child that will not suffer from your genetic disease. Of course their may be side effects, and whatnot, but we will never know unless we try. Its like cars, new cars are being designed all the time to be more safer and fuel efficient, why can't we do it to ourselves?

We may even learn more about ourselves and the universe by "playing god".

For the people who say we should not, give me one reason why we shouldn't, don't go saying its against the Bible, or against "Nature" you don't know. So lets just try and see where we end up.

Originally posted by Conspiriology

That when the Jesus of the Bible speaks of such things being wrong and foretells the consequences of our moral acceptance to these behaviors.

He doesn't even dignify the acts of this kind of personal affront in the presence of his divine nature, but condemns it with rebuke calling this type of immoral negligence, an "Abomination ".

The pronoun 'he' which you use in the paragraph above must be assumed to be a modifier of the word Jesus as that is who you have been referring to in your writing. However, in the large outside source quote that you used immediatly following this statement NOT A SINGLE source was the words or instructions of Jesus. So many of you want to have it both ways. Either Jesus IS the New Covenant or he isn't. The beliefs that you expouse are relying on the Old Covenant. Believing in Jesus while keeping the old covenant is the realm of Messianic Jews.

You dont get to have it both ways.

I am completely ashamed to see all this hatred and judgment being tossed around in this thread. Why do people feel the need to push their idea's and way of life on others? Why is it so hard for people to accept others who might have a different lifestyle? As long as someone isn't committing a criminal act or harming themselves or another they should be allowed to do what they choose.

How does hatred and judgment of others help the world? Your life is not going to cease to exist or be destroyed because someone lives their life differently from yours. And if you really think your way is the only way and the correct way then you put way too much stock in your opinion. Nobody has given you the power to be judge and jury over your fellow human beings.

Originally posted by pavlovsdog


The pronoun 'he' which you use in the paragraph above must be assumed to be a modifier of the word Jesus as that is who you have been referring to in your writing. However, in the large outside source quote that you used immediatly following this statement NOT A SINGLE source was the words or instructions of Jesus. So many of you want to have it both ways. Either Jesus IS the New Covenant or he isn't. The beliefs that you expouse are relying on the Old Covenant. Believing in Jesus while keeping the old covenant is the realm of Messianic Jews.

You dont get to have it both ways.

That isn't what I am saying at all and having it both ways is not the same as having your cake and eating it too

I didn't say I espouse anything furthermore the referance IS quoted

Read my post or get your eyes checked

- Con

reply to post by 1Angrylightbulb


Sometimes it has to do with unfulfilled lives of many self proclaim righteous and bible thumpers, specially the extremist type that had made their life purpose to make others as miserable as them.

Enjoyment of life, nature and love for other human beings is a sin and unspeakable, they twist he bible teachings to make sense of their pitiful existence.

How do you fight such negativity? with hope, love and only good intentions for others.

Even these people needs love as long as they don’t pay back with insults.

Originally posted by the titor experience

Originally posted by jedimiller
Most guys think it's sexy when two females get together. I dislike it, it makes me puke. how is it ok for two woman to get together? it's not. Same way it's not acceptable for two men to get together. the point? have you seen those lesbian woman that get married? They look like beat up men coming out of a strip bar at 4 am. these woman don't deserve any respect or children. they should be send to a mental hospital and given medications. Yeah, I believe that doctors, psychologists can help gay people.

Funny that - i know a number of lesbian women who have many men (unaware that they are gay) lining up to ask them out.

Ahhhh generalisations.......do not paint people with the same brush my friend.

You reek of homophobia. But i have to admit, it is hilarious to know people with your views still exist. You are the human version of a BETA tape cassette.

What's your point? He reeks of homophobia, so you're implicating that God reeks of homophobia? Homosexuality is a sin, and a ticket straight to hell, doesn't matter what a good person you are or not..

reply to post by Astyanax


Dude I ain't a militant Christian (agnostic I guess)by any means but I have friends in a church run orphanage and its pretty cool there. They let us hang out and no one I ever met was abused. Dude they used to make little kids work in factories back in the day. It had nothing to do with religion it was society. So get off your high horse. Are one of those militant atheists or something? You are just pointing out the bad without giving credit for the good. If the churches didn't do it NOBODY would be doing it. Especially in Africa and all. Whether the religion is true or not has noting to do with the fact they take care of people in need. I am glad for it.

And cloning humans is a bad idea period.

Originally posted by Yosimitie Sam
You are just pointing out the bad without giving credit for the good. If the churches didn't do it NOBODY would be doing it.

When determining the overall value of something you have to weigh the pros versus the cons. In this case, many of us feel, myself included!, that the good things the Churches do, is far outweighed by the abuse and ignorance it breeds.

BTW what good thing are you speaking of that the Church does that NOBODY else is doing? I am curious.

[edit on 033030p://16u46 by Lucid Lunacy]

Originally posted by Armin
Homosexuality is a sin, and a ticket straight to hell, doesn't matter what a good person you are or not..

So is hatred and judgement.

[edit on 4/16/2008 by Griff]

Originally posted by Armin
What's your point? He reeks of homophobia, so you're implicating that God reeks of homophobia? Homosexuality is a sin, and a ticket straight to hell, doesn't matter what a good person you are or not..

That's basically their stance yes. Welcome to the "Radical Evangelical Agenda"

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

that one fatefull holy night, Jesus's 1st dad, impregnates the virgin and then get's the hell out of dodge I guess the standards for good ol' healthy family dynamics has been around for a while!

What an ignorant thing to say.

Jesus was near God his ENTIRE life until the crucification.

He was even able to TEACH the priests of the Temple at Jerusalem at 12 years old;


Luk 2:39 ¶ And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth.

Luk 2:40 And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.

Luk 2:41 ¶ Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.

Luk 2:42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast.

Luk 2:43 And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not [of it].

Luk 2:44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among [their] kinsfolk and acquaintance.

Luk 2:45 And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him.

Luk 2:46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.

Luk 2:47 And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers.

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

Luk 2:49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?



[edit on 16-4-2008 by Clearskies]

Originally posted by Conspiriology

Originally posted by pavlovsdog


The pronoun 'he' which you use in the paragraph above must be assumed to be a modifier of the word Jesus as that is who you have been referring to in your writing. However, in the large outside source quote that you used immediatly following this statement NOT A SINGLE source was the words or instructions of Jesus. So many of you want to have it both ways. Either Jesus IS the New Covenant or he isn't. The beliefs that you expouse are relying on the Old Covenant. Believing in Jesus while keeping the old covenant is the realm of Messianic Jews.

You dont get to have it both ways.

That isn't what I am saying at all and having it both ways is not the same as having your cake and eating it too

I didn't say I espouse anything furthermore the referance IS quoted

Read my post or get your eyes checked

- Con

I'm not sure what your response means. I pointed out that the quote you inserted to support your assertation regarding Jesus's teaching regarding homosexuality, did not support your argument because nothing in that quote was directly attributed to Jesus. Most of it was Old Testament quotes. However, my assertations regarding the old and new covenant and Messaniac Jews still stands.

This thread is prime example why ATS's slogan is:

DENY IGNORANCE I have never seen so many ignorant statements made on one thread. Well, maybe I have.

I dont care about gays having kids. I support that because there is NO evidence that it produces screwed up kids more so then hetro couples.

Im more concerned about the science experiments taking place on human beings.

[edit on 16-4-2008 by greeneyedleo]

reply to post by Clearskies


Ahhhhhhhhhh

I have been smoted!

Oh it burns!

God's vengefull wrath is upon me!

Please stop spamming this thread with scripture. Or, at the very least, include your personal thoughts and feelings after each passage...

[edit on 033030p://16u54 by Lucid Lunacy]

reply to post by xmotex


Interesting that you bring that, when I was a teacher we could not use the term nuclear family as the main way to describe family groups, modern times brings a big set of rules to describe the family unit.