Christian couple lose their High Court battle to foster children because they are against homosexual

reply to post by The Djin


There's nothing irksome in my dialogue except for your interpretation.

And you got some nerve saying i'm an idiot, why don't you put in the time to research what some people have as myself instead of pushing it away as nonsense or, at the lowest end of the spectrum denying its existence. What are you a tool?

Originally posted by Xerxes1434
They try to push the homosexual agenda at school. There is nothing wrong the parent correcting the kid. Judge orders gay agenda and here is another Link for resources on it.

There is no "gay agenda" - no one is holding secret handshake meetings or recruitment drives, only in the paranoid fantasies of those who obsess over homosexuality from afar.

Homosexual relations are a natural part of society - there is a entire spectrum of sexuality, and stating so is not "promoting an agenda" it's simply explaining the truth. In social and sex education in schools, if nothing is mentioned at all about the broad spectrum of sexuality - you are going to end up with a lot of screwed up kids - gay kids who have no idea about what they are feeling, and straight kids who think gay people are second class citizens.

Your fears are unjustified - by explaining the truth, you are not losing anything, heterosexuality is not being stamped out, you're safe, don't worry

reply to post by texastig

Let's see, God says to not have sex outside of marriage. People are having sex outside of marriage and they get sexually transmitted diseases.

God says? Can you explain to me where you get this idea? I mean I'm aware that bronze age documents like the Bible say not to have sex before you're married but God himself, I think not. While I suppose having a total of one sexual partner in your entire life would make it hard to get an STD does that make it morally WRONG to have sex out of wedlock? I'm afraid I don't see the connection to gays or the connection to whether it is moral or not. The Bible, I'm assuming that's what you're referencing, merely says that homosexuality is an abomination, it makes ZERO mention of STDs in that regard or in regards to fornication.

The data is in that children do better with a mother and father figure.

Strange considering the fact that in most places gays aren't allowed to adopt, and in places where they are it has only been that way for a short while. So I think claiming the "data is in" is premature, especially when you've presented a total of none of it.

A homosexual professor on the east coast of America was giving his adopted kid to other men to have sex with. So you can't just say Christians are bad.

When did I ever say that Christians were bad? And when did I ever suggested that there weren't immoral gay folks. Of course there are bad people who are gay, straight, religious and non-religious. It is not being a Christian that is the problem, it is the discrimination against gays merely because they are different. What you're dealing with in your example is child sexual abuse, something that is wrong no matter who is doing it and regardless of sexual orientation of the person. Again I see NO connection from what you're saying to the point I was making.

So they are saying that you are not fit to have a child because they don't believe in Homosexuality.

So if I say that I do not believe in Homosexuality, there are going to take my kids away?

Originally posted by wpowell
I believe that going against homosexuality and homophobia are complete different things. First, I am a Christian. Second, we don't hate homosexuals, we hate the sin but not the person themselves. Another point is that the Crusades and other violent acts that the Catholic Church did were wrong and were not justified because it went against the teachings in the Bible. About to those tribes were decimated, they were decimated because they reached an apex of missing the mark intentionally and that is why they were killed. Another reason was that some tribes were possibly related to the Nephilim that are mentioned in Genesis 6. These are my thoughts, you can disagree or agree. A final point is that we are not gullible, meaning that we are not naive.

Just because homosexuality is accepted in a culture doesn't mean its right. There is a difference between relative right, absolute right, and cultural right. For example, relative right is when something like a ritual is not considered wrong even though it might be. Absolute right is right all the time even if people think it is not fair or discriminatory. Absolute right is giving clothes to the poor and food to the hungry. Finally, cultural right is having sex before marriage, for example. The reasons why we as Christians are against it, is because it is immoral, when premarital sex occurs (whether the people know it or not) is that a physical and emotional bond is formed that cannot be broken, sexual diseases like syphilis and AIDS occur which can be deadly and are not a laughing matter, as many people think it is, and finally when it has been committed the person or people involved at some point in their life will feel guilty for what they have done and that is okay. And now back to you.

I am not religious but appreciate your post and your views. These are all valid opinions IMHO, but I perceive them as health and emotional dangers, the sin aspect I do not agree with. This is the crux of the matter for me, I have no problem with someone holding these views, it would be the level of vitriol if any they used in explaining their beliefs to their children. For me, I try and educate my children on these potential dangers in my own way by outlining the consequences for them in the terms of health and emotional wellbeing through discussion not fear of punishment or eternal sin. (sorry I know the eternal sin comment is flippant)

The people in this court case have done nothing wrong except hold a view that homosexuality is immoral, how they represent their view to the child is crucial, they have done nothing yet and there is no evidence as to how they would do so and should be allowed to parent children until they do something wrong. For all we know they might be more than able to outline that it is their belief and allow the child to reach it's own conclusions.

Originally posted by VelvetSplash

Originally posted by Xerxes1434
They try to push the homosexual agenda at school. There is nothing wrong the parent correcting the kid. Judge orders gay agenda and here is another Link for resources on it.

There is no "gay agenda" - no one is holding secret handshake meetings or recruitment drives, only in the paranoid fantasies of those who obsess over homosexuality from afar.

Homosexual relations are a natural part of society - there is a entire spectrum of sexuality, and stating so is not "promoting an agenda" it's simply explaining the truth. In social and sex education in schools, if nothing is mentioned at all about the broad spectrum of sexuality - you are going to end up with a lot of screwed up kids - gay kids who have no idea about what they are feeling, and straight kids who think gay people are second class citizens.

Your fears are unjustified - by explaining the truth, you are not losing anything, heterosexuality is not being stamped out, you're safe, don't worry

You should look into "After The Ball' it's written by a homosexual that outlines their plan to inject their agenda into society, media, etc. It's hidden in plain sight!

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


The agenda that he is referring to is that of the spirit whether they are aware or not that is the question we interpret our emotions and ideas to that of our own mind always when that is not the case there is only 2 sources of information in the universe, God and Demonic spirits. The purpose is to gradually degrade and blur the lines between what is right and wrong,

And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.

Originally posted by VelvetSplash
By turning it into a thing to swept under the carpet or punished, that parent has probably already caused psychological damage to their child down the road. Children remember this kind of thing, and it shapes their entire psyche from a very young age.

This is what I fear, along with the fact that she'll continue the "anti-fag" emphasis his whole childhood, causing more damage. She wasn't such a judging person before entering that religion either.

It bother's me personally, because it's my little nephew being hurt here.

Is there any christian argument, or even acknowledgment, about trauma caused by suppressed feelings like this? I never heard any. There should be full support for the claim that everyone's better off with each of the bible's standards though.

reply to post by autowrench


I totally agree, the God of the bible is bloodthirsty and jealous. Of course the bible was written by man's hand, and it served as a warning, a uniter of people, a righteous motivator, and psychological warfare against the enemy, so it isn't surprising that it is bloodthirsty in areas.

The God I speak to is not so jealous and petty, but also does not mind the seeking of justice. Maybe my God is only a figment of my mind, we all tend to model our God after our own beliefs.......ok, maybe not all, some people follow blindly, but the leaders among us taylor our God to our beliefs, and our beliefs to some system of morality. My system of morality allows for some bloodshed, including the blood of some supernatural entity that would wish death upon me and/or my family. So, while I do worship and pray, I am not afraid to be blasphemous or fight against an unholy God, even if he proves to be real and not imaginary!

The tattoo on my back reads:

He teareth me in his wrath, who hateth me: he gnasheth upon me with his teeth; mine enemy sharpeneth his eyes upon me.

Forgot to give credit: Job 16:9 KJV, but there are other versions of course.

Some variations of that verse replace "enemy" with "God" and I am fine with either version. Sometimes God does sharpeneth his teeth upon me, but I maintain, and I struggle, and I live on. There have always been some men willing to fight against the Gods and improve the stature of mankind. I prefer to work with God's help, but I am perfectly willing to go it alone.

I forgot to finish part of my sentence. That verse in Mark 7: 14 does not mean that homosexuality is right, inside means sexual , done by using your body and the outside is everything not done using your body, that is what Jesus. Now that point about him being intimate with his disciples. Being intimate is not homosexuality, that is why we have the concept of best friends in which men can have close relationships with men and women can have close relationships with men. But that doesn't make them homosexual. Just because Jesus did not have sexual relations with women doesn't mean he was gay. In the first place, the reason why he was sent to earth was to save people's souls, to do miracles, and to die on the cross for their sins. For example, if someone hasn't had sex, they are not homosexual. They might simply not have sex because that would be against their beliefs and because they don't want to get infected with sexual diseases, which have no cure (that includes condoms, birth control pills (supposed to be used by married women not teenagers), and other contraceptive devices). If you have sex before marriage, you have to suffer the consequences for your whole life.

You can dull your conscience, but your conscience still knows what is morally or absolutely right from what is morally wrong or absolutely wrong. Finally, the reason Jesus came in the form of a man was to show who God is and also because that culture would not have listened to him if he was a woman because it was a patriarchal society and God has no gender because he is not human, he is a spirit that created the earth in a million years or a few days.

P.S. we as Christians don't pick and chose from the Bible if we did that the whole Bible would be wrong. If that were the case I would read it just like any other book. But since it is not, I read, examine, try to understand, and then apply it to my life and this world. In fact, through my pastor, Christian friends, and God's word I have conquered my addiction to pornography. Praise be to the Lord.

reply to post by LoverBoy

How about wake up. This is not B.C. YOU are discriminating. My father was a great dad and raised me very well...he is a christian. He never killed anyone.

Hey we have something in common, my dad was also a great dad who raised me well he was an atheist and didn't kill anyone either.

However that's where the similarity seems to end, because if my dad heard a voice telling him it was the lord and he should kill me, he would have seen a doctor, would yours ?

I think now days aren't more people being killed by STD's than by religious christian views?

According to the christian churches that preach in Africa contraception is against the godmans wishes and millions of "heterosexuals" are dying from stds .

So much for christian views eh?

Why not try keeping them to yourselves we may possibly see a little more love and peace on earth.

reply to post by wpowell

P.S. we as Christians don't pick and chose from the Bible if we did that the whole Bible would be wrong.

So when the bible tells you how to treat your slave you follow the instructions to the letter ?

There was a case a few years ago - - it might have been in the UK.

Where a foster baby was legally given to a gay couple for adoption. The foster parents were Christian - - and refused to give the child to the couple - - and instead filed to adopt the child themselves. Not sure if that is completely accurate - - but something like that.

So I say the High Court is absolutely correct in their decision.

Foster Parents do not get to make any decisions in regards to belief or other. They have one job to do.

reply to post by The Djin


Right because they preach a knowledge of self control. Something you apparently are lacking. Discipline which is where the word disciple comes from.

Originally posted by Wertdagf

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by minkey53

 

I didn't think there could ever be a thread where I disagreed with both sides so adamently?

Of course God tells people to kill one another. Ever hear of the crusades? Or Job? Or jihad?

More people have been killed in the name of God than all other things combined.

Now, for the answer to the real question, if "God" told me to kill someone, hell yes I'm going to kill them. I would have to be certain it was God, and I would have to agree with the order, or otherwise I just wouldn't believe it was God speaking, but if I get some supernatural order to commit murder, and I can logically justify why the murder might be important, then I am going to complete it without a doubt.

absolutly disgusting.

Ive never respected the people who moderated this site less than now.

Care to elaborate?

Was it the realization that God is angry and does command people to kill? Or was it the fact that I would be willing to follow through on an order from an almighty being, if he had proven himself to be one? Or was it the fact that I am also willing to refuse an order from an almighty being, if I disageed with the order?

So many ways to be offended by what I see as common sense, please tell me which one it was that really got to you. And after you have decided which one it was that really got to you, tell me how you reconcile your comment with the fact that you necessarily must agree with at least 2/3rds of my post?

reply to post by EnigmaticDill

And you got some nerve saying i'm an idiot, why don't you put in the time to research what some people have as myself instead of pushing it away as nonsense or, at the lowest end of the spectrum denying its existence. What are you a tool?

What exactly would you like me to research my friend ? Jesus ?

Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by wpowell

 

P.S. we as Christians don't pick and chose from the Bible if we did that the whole Bible would be wrong.

So when the bible tells you how to treat your slave you follow the instructions to the letter ?

It really amazes me that Christians - - - are so in denial that they pick and choose from the bible - - especially Leviticus.

And when ever you present Leviticus to them - - and show them - - they either avoid answering or come up with some completely ridiculous excuse.

Originally posted by EnigmaticDill
reply to post by The Djin

 

Right because they preach a knowledge of self control. Something you apparently are lacking. Discipline which is where the word disciple comes from.

What ?

reply to post by The Djin


You make the mistake to think that I have been Christian all my life. That would be a lie. I'm a Christian by faith of what I witnessed.

Thats why its called your testimony of the Living God.

We are nothing but timeless observers corrupted by sin which is what I saw, because of the perverted knowledge takin from God's physical manifestation, Fallen angels ring any bells?

Sorry but it is not as easy as you would think to put these things in words.

Originally posted by EnigmaticDill
reply to post by The Djin

 

You make the mistake to think that I have been Christian all my life. That would be a lie. I'm a Christian by faith of what I witnessed.

And I was raised Christian.

But became Atheist in my search for the truth. Because there isn't any.