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

Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by minkey53

 

And the purpose of quoting bible bigotry was ?

So, would you kill me if your god told you to ? Yes or no ?

God wouldn't TELL anybody to kill another human being because it's Murder, one of the definate don't do's!

Anybody knows that murder is wrong whether they are religious or not.

What planet are you on?

Your question is pointless unless you've been on the waccy baccy?

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.

Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist

 

to have children together... to bring up children knowing that a man and woman are supposed to be together not man and man....

Who says so ? An invisible misogynistic bigot that lives in the sky by any chance ?

Not that I am religious or even against homosexuality, but nature itself has kind of made it the Male + Female way of doing things. Granted, some evidence of homsexual behaviour exists in nature, but for the most part this appears to be about who is "dominant", with the "receiver" being shown who is boss by a jolly good buggering.

Well the lord "moves in mysterious ways", yes he does, indeedely doodely.
And what with him being omnipresent he must have known that this would happen when he had this day in court.

So that means the Lord must have a reason to deny these two christians an adoptive child. i think they should be investigated more, God thinks they're Dodgy.
perhaps if we set fire to them or maybe drown them for a bit they might to confess to something.
I think thats what god wants.

not condoning hatred, but since when does one's opinion trump all other requirement to take care of a child, I think it's completely irresponsible giving today's problems, and to act like the world is filled with perfect parents waiting to adopt a perfect kid, whose childhood was perfect, who can not say they would change one thing about their family if they could

....I think the world is moving to much toward the self righteous, and forgetting our own faults and given the state of the world today, I got to say, these type of rhetoric ain't moving us forward

if these people where making hatred filled signs and other such hate filled acts then I can understand, but being against homosexual's is just an opinion and quite frankly since when did having an opinion make you a bad person

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.

if you knew it was God (he was standing in front of you pointing his finger at you) and he was telling you to do it, I guess you would have to obey and all that!

So, yes, you're correct here!

Originally posted by theicc
I'm really proud of this court for standing up to the pressure of mindless "Christians" and barring them from indoctrinating an innocent life with their hate filled religion.

It's interesting to me that Christians get to pick and choose what parts of the Bible to follow - you don't see many interested in throwing their daughters to be raped by a mob, smashing babies against rocks or repenting for eating shellfish. If you do something as terrible as being born gay though, Christians will have a major problem with that. Isn't it interesting how Jesus never said anything against homosexuality? Look it up, it was all against lustfulness. Homophobic, insecure "Christians" distort the message though and believe the one out of the old testament.

You don't get to pick and choose, it's all or nothing. Throw your daughters out to be raped and hate homosexuals or don't do either.

I guess we can tell the Queen, head of about 100 countries in the World, that she is SACKED / FIRED!

Why?

Well she is the head of the Church, the Church of England. You know, the people who follow the Bible!

If the Bible isn't relevant anymore, according to some people, then the Queen is a waste of tax payers money.

Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist

 

to have children together... to bring up children knowing that a man and woman are supposed to be together not man and man....

Who says so ? An invisible misogynistic bigot that lives in the sky by any chance ?

Nature tells us thats who.

Men and women have sex to produce children, to be parents to that child.

You can't say that about two gay men can you.


Its ridiculous, it's politcal correctness gone mad.
I am against the idea of Gay being natural, because it isnt. Does that make me a horrible person for having a beleif?

Originally posted by theicc
I'm really proud of this court for standing up to the pressure of mindless "Christians" and barring them from indoctrinating an innocent life with their hate filled religion.

It's interesting to me that Christians get to pick and choose what parts of the Bible to follow - you don't see many interested in throwing their daughters to be raped by a mob, smashing babies against rocks or repenting for eating shellfish. If you do something as terrible as being born gay though, Christians will have a major problem with that. Isn't it interesting how Jesus never said anything against homosexuality? Look it up, it was all against lustfulness. Homophobic, insecure "Christians" distort the message though and believe the one out of the old testament.

You don't get to pick and choose, it's all or nothing. Throw your daughters out to be raped and hate homosexuals or don't do either.

Thats one of the most vile posts ever.

Christianity? Hate filled?

Have you ever read the 10 commandments? If not go away and read them. Love thy neighbour? Yep pretty hate filled that is.

Im not Christian, and i oppose Gay people. Bring it on lefties.

Killing another human in defense is not murder!

Killing someone for being homosexual is...

There is a fine line...

What if one of the foster kids turned gay, and something happened to him
because the foster parents forbid that...
That would be the states fault....

reply to post by Haydn_17

I am against the idea of Gay being natural, because it isnt

There are plenty of incidents of homosexuality in the natural world, are you saying nature isn't natural ?

reply to post by minkey53

God wouldn't TELL anybody to kill another human being because it's Murder,

You've obviously never read a bible then.

Sadly, I think that the English government is sliding into the PC toilet.

No longer car we appreciate the differences in people that makes a country unique.

Now, Christians are bad. So much for tolerance. I think that it's a sad day for England.

reply to post by Haydn_17

Men and women have sex to produce children,

The majority of consenting sex is for pleasure this is why contraception was invented :p

You can't say that about two gay men can you

We are evolving species anything is possible

reply to post by minkey53

If the Bible isn't relevant anymore, according to some people, then the Queen is a waste of tax payers money.

And there are millions of brits that would agree, not least in Scotland and Wales

reply to post by The Djin


Ohh again!

The animal argument.

Animals also have sex with other species of animals.

Does that make beastiality natural?

Sorry to ruin your Gay utopia but a mans Penis was built by nature to enter a womens vagina and ejaculate sperm cells.

Sperm cells have no use in another mans arse.

Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by minkey53

 

If the Bible isn't relevant anymore, according to some people, then the Queen is a waste of tax payers money.

And there are millions of brits that would agree, not least in Scotland and Wales

And there are millions who wouldn't agree.

Originally posted by minkey53
The couple concerned are Christians.

All they are doing is following what is written in the Bible, the Word of God, the boss, quoting the rules so to speak.

It clearly says on lots of occasions that being Gay is wrong and definately not a good thing etc.

As they are Christian, they will follow what is said in the Bible, the heart of Christianity across the World.

So if following the Bible is wrong, our World is a very screwed up place and God will deal with it as he sees fit.

Remember the Flood anyone?

Yes, we all remember the Flood. I know what it says in the Bible about a man laying with a man, but it says other things too, things that make me think something is going on here.

Jesus was very comfortable sharing intimate love with members of his own sex. Two men were especially close. John, "the disciple Jesus loved," would lay his head on Jesus' chest at that final dinner and, alone of all the apostles, stand by him during his crucifixion. Lazarus was referred to by Jesus' friends, when speaking to Jesus, simply as "the man you love," He was so dear that Jesus would weep openly at his tomb and perform, for him, his most astounding miracle, raising him from the dead in the very shadow of Jerusalem and provoking the fatal wrath of the religious authorities.

Mark 7:14-16 shows that Jesus approves of homosexual acts. The critical phrase reads: "There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him..."

Matthew 8:5-13: and Luke 7:2: "One day a Roman Centurion asked him to heal his dying servant. Scholars of both Scripture and Ancient History tell us that Roman Centurions, who were not permitted to marry while in service, regularly chose a favorite male slave to be their personal assistant and sexual servant. Such liaisons were common in the Greco-Roman world and it was not unusual for them to deepen into loving partnerships....Jesus offered to go to the servant, but the centurion asked him simply to speak a word of healing, since he was not worthy to welcome this itinerant Jewish teacher under his roof. Jesus responded by healing the servant and proclaiming that even in Israel he had never found faith like this! So, in the one Gospel story where Jesus encountered people sharing what we would call a 'gay relationship,' we see him simply concerned about -- and deeply moved by -- their faith and love." It is implied that Jesus' sensitivity towards the gay couple might have arisen from his own bisexual or homosexual orientation.

The truth is that we simply don't know whether Jesus was straight, gay, bisexual or celibate. There is certainly no evidence for the Church's unspoken presumption that he was either heterosexual or devoid of carnal desires. Since nothing in the Bible points to Christ having erotic feelings for women, or relationships with the female sex, the possibility of him being gay cannot be discounted.

This couple wasn't turned down because of their religion. It doesn't matter what religion they are. It's their beliefs that are getting in the way. If they were members of Westboro Baptist Church, they would be found unfit to foster, too, and for the same reason. If they thought girls were worthless and boys were valuable, they would also be turned down.

The child has to be considered. What if the kid they foster turns out to be gay?

reply to post by autowrench


I am going to save that post.

I am not a fan of homosexuality, but I also do not see the point in demonizing it. I am sure your post will be highly controversial though, and so I am going to save it and pull it out at the most opportune times!