It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'Gayby boom': Children of gay couples speak out

page: 14
22
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Totakeke
 


Again, strictly your opinion. Funny, now you only speak for 'true' Christians! Glad I don't live in a world of absolutes! The world is such a small place to a closed mind. No room for growth. This is exactly why I don't subscribe to any organized religion.

"Organized religion is for the weak minded." Former Governor Jesse Ventura, (I) Minn.




posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I can't speak for those people. The Bible does preach love, but it also preaches not to engage in sinful behavior.

[edit on 1-7-2009 by Totakeke]



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Regardless, being gay doesn't cause you to be any less of a parent, yes biologically, gay people can't have their own children, together, however...aren't we over crowded anyways?

In my state, Gays can't even adopt, the fact that some people believe children can rot in the city system, because 'God knows thats better than living with Gay parents' is ridiculous, and embarrassing.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Totakeke
 


I find it a bit arrogant that people who lived 3000 years ago are able to dicate what is a 'sin' and what isn't in today's climate. It's a bit draconian if you ask me.

That's just my opinion however and I completely respect your views on the matter, I simply wished that Christians looked at the bible a little more objectively.

~Keeper



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 




Well, NatureBoy, I also do not care for gay men who act more like a woman than women do, and I am gay! It makes life tougher for the rest of us when some go out of their way to reenforce the 'stereotype', when a majority of gay men do not fit said stereotype. When I see such flambouyant displays, I find myself muttering 'Why don't you act like you actually have a pair!' under my breath. Expressing such an opinion does not make on a homophobe, and the post by open_eyeballs that you had such a problem with was not hateful in the slightest, but your response(s) certainly have been.


Just because you are gay and still don't like flamboyant displays even that doesn't give you the right to tell other people how to live their life any more than a catholic has the right to tell a protestant how to act.

I'm not gay nor am i flamboyant by nature, in fact i'm a working man who fills pretty much all the traditional male stereotypes and i like flamboyant people as they add a bit of color and variety into life. I'm not a big fan of testosterone fueled idiots with a point to prove however but meh as long as they aren't in my face i don't really have a problem with them, they just take everything a little too serious for me - I try to concentrate on finding myown foothold in life and adapting it to suit the changing world while enjoying as many beautiful and exciting things as possible along the way.

A good friend of mine had disabled parents, his father was in a wheel chair and his mother housebound - His childhood was tough to say the least, he missed out on so much that 'normal' parents could give their children but yet he has managed to grow up to be a fine individual who is both respectful and outgoing in his manor, educated and informed in his wit and confident of his purpose. It is very possible however that his tough childhood could have led him down a bad path, he could have ended up well on the wrong side of the tracks. No one would suggest that disabled people can't have children or should someone be struck down with a debilitating illness (as his mother was when he was about 6) that their children should be taken away would they? (ok, maybe adolf hitler would but no rational people, right?)

What's the difference? Lots of people don't like gay people, some gay people don't like flamboyant people so all of a sudden its different and everyone yells 'think of the children' - just because you don't like something doesn't mean you should oppose it.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by NatureBoy
 


No one was telling someone how to live their lives. Expressing an opinion that you dislike a certain behavior is not 'telling someone how to live their life', it is merely expressing an opinion, and does not justify the nasty response(s) that you gave. The point is that it would be greatly appreciated if all could keep their responses civil. Attack the post, not the poster. All anyone is asking for is a little decorum. You are entitled to your opinion, just as open_eyeballs and I are. It can be expressed without getting nasty. That's all I'm saying.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   
This whole argument isn't going to matter much anymore. The encroachment of the Muslim world into other countries including the U.S. is going to seriously crimp the gay lifestyle, not to mention the Christian lifestyle. You choose your battles. Gays might well win the right to equal treatment in this country with the current population, but that will be short lived as long as people keep making the statement "what's wrong with electing a Muslim into office?"

Think about it.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by Totakeke
 


I find it a bit arrogant that people who lived 3000 years ago are able to dicate what is a 'sin' and what isn't in today's climate. It's a bit draconian if you ask me.

That's just my opinion however and I completely respect your views on the matter, I simply wished that Christians looked at the bible a little more objectively.

~Keeper


People who lived 3,000 years didn't dictate anything. The Christian Bible might have been written by men, but every book was influenced by God himself. The commandments aren't human commandments, for example, they are God's commandments. There's a huge difference. But then you have to believe in God to put any stock in them.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


Yeah, and that's why Jesus himself contradicted it at almost every chance he got! It is quite clear how Jesus felt about the Torah (Old Testament in Christian circles).



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Jesus didn't contradict the Old Testament.

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." Matthew 5:17 KJV

[edit on 2-7-2009 by Totakeke]



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Totakeke
 


By what he taught. But enough of derailing this thread, which has absolutely nothing to do with religion of any type. Want to discuss that subject, i.e. biblical references to homosexuality, then start a thread. I will be happy to debate the subject there, but not here. It's rude to the OP.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


I'm not trying to derail the thread, I was trying to make a point (one that I tried to make a few pages back), and that is that it's impossible to have a gay, Christian church. A church can call itself Christian, but it isn't if it teaches that homosexuality isn't a sin.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Totakeke
 


OK, one last post on the subject (serously, start a thread if you truly feel that strongly about it).

The following Christian denominations accept homosexuals as members:

Angelican
Canadian and American Reformed Churches
Christian Reformed
Church of the Nazarene
Eastern Orthodox
Episcopal
Lutheran
Methodist
Metropolitan Community Church
Moravian Church
New Apostolic
Presbyterian
United Reformed Church
Quakers
Roman Catholic Church
Old Catholic
Reformed Catholic Church
Swedenborgian
Unification Church
Unitarian Universalist
United Church of Canada
United Church of Christ
Uniting Church in Australia
Unity School of Christianity
Waldensian

The following Christian denominations ordain homosexuals to minister in their churches:

Episcopal
Metropolitan Community Church
Old Catholic
Reformed Catholic Church
Unitarian Universalist
United Church of Canada
Uniting Church in Australia
Unity School of Christianity
Waldensian

The following Christian denominations either bless unions and/or marries homosexuals:

Episcopal
Metropolitan Community Church
Old Catholic
Reformed Catholic Church
Unitarian Universalist
United Church of Canada
Unity School of Christianity

Source.

So I guess that none of these people are Christians???

Again, please start a new thead if you really want to debate this subject. Enough time has been wasted on this thread (I say wasted because it is derailing the thread).

[edit on 2-7-2009 by JaxonRoberts]



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Then those churches aren't Christian. (I'm not talking about accepting homosexuals as members; even a true Christian church can accept homosexuals as members). Sure, they call themselves Christian, but they aren't. People do the same thing. Some people call themselves Christians but they really aren't.

Any church that teaches that homosexuality isn't a sin isn't Christian. Would a church still be Christian if it taught that murder wasn't a sin? Or thievery? Or witchcraft? No. Homosexuality is no different. The Bible is very clear with homosexuality, and any church that teaches otherwise is just being fooled.

There's nothing to debate. The Bible's position is that homosexuality is a sin. Any church that teaches differently isn't Christian.

[edit on 2-7-2009 by Totakeke]



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


actually the debate in question is 'should gay people be able to adopt / have children' and open-eyes suggested that flamboyant homosexuals shouldn't be able to because it is some how wrong to be genetic born male and act in a stereotyped feminine way - Further he didn't want people to act like this because he might have to explain their behavior to his child.

I suggested that it wasn't our place to get involved just because of our taste in people, i juxtaposed the idea of banning gays from having kids with the idea of banning republicans, christians, etc from having kids to highlight how offensive the idea of banning someone you don't like from having kids really is.

I wasn't calling the op a republican, a christian or throwing any other form of insult at him - i am mealy debating the points, as is done in a debate, however i see you don't want to do this and prefer to attack me personally. Please understand i;m an easy going kinda guy i couldn't care less if you like fem men, guns or jesus but if you're going to start telling other people how to live their life and what they can and can't do them i'm going to get involved in the debate.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by NatureBoy
 


Sometimes it's how you say it, not what you say. We have to strive to disagree without being disagreeable, if you get what I mean. You can disagree with an opinion without using a sledgehammer to do it. You will find that you just might get someone to see your point if you do this, while if you use a strong armed approach, it just makes people close their minds and then the flurry of Ad Hominem attacks start, which accomplishes nothing.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by NatureBoy
 


Sometimes it's how you say it, not what you say. We have to strive to disagree without being disagreeable, if you get what I mean. You can disagree with an opinion without using a sledgehammer to do it. You will find that you just might get someone to see your point if you do this, while if you use a strong armed approach, it just makes people close their minds and then the flurry of Ad Hominem attacks start, which accomplishes nothing.


This can be said for both the Christian and homosexual community. I think we saw examples of some of the NASTIEST, most brutal behavior coming from gay rights supporters during the whole Carrie Prejean incident. These were people who preached that they wanted equality for all and screamed that everyone's opinion must be respected - except when Prejean made her opinion publicly known many of the gay rights community contradicted themselves with a sledgehammer. They exposed their true beliefs as "anyone that doesn't agree with our beliefs is wrong and we won't accept you if you think otherwise". Isn't that what they accuse Christians of teaching? Pretty damn hypocrytical.



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 05:13 AM
link   
the christian church should be a sin - restricting - controlling - time changing - idol worshipping - money grabbing - i love how you christians go about preaching at random people judging their beliefs - judge and you will be judged and quoting from even newer bibles that have added homosexual references to it - and i love how you still quote from the old covenant. the whole bible is about one thing - all things were done for one purpose and thats love. im gay and i love yeshua - nothing wrong with bringing up children in a gay environment



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 05:45 AM
link   
reply to post by neilparnham
 


Preaching at people? How many Christian pride parades have you heard of? How many Christian Pride Months are there?

[edit on 3-7-2009 by Totakeke]



posted on Jul, 3 2009 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Is this supposed to be need to know information? Seems like a distraction to promote Homosexuality, so even less peope will reproduce, and promote base sexuality.



new topics




 
22
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join