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

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by Kailassa
I can't say that about any heterosexual people I know either.

I have three children, yet I have never once had sex in order to produce a child.

Of course people often have sex simply for pleasure etc. etc.

However, we have a sexual drive in the first place primarily to encourage sexual relations with adult human beings of the opposite gender (not with little kids, sheep, trees, or the same gender).

You sir, are an idiot if you think all of those are equally comparable. Yes, humans are born to be able to mate with the opposite sex in order to procreate. However, you cannot compare homosexuality to pedophilia, (plant?)philia, and bestiality, since in all those cases, the other party CANNOT consent. With homosexuality, it is two consenting adults. Is that too difficult to comprehend?

reply to post by SevenBeans


So i guess gay people choose to be gay, right? To put them in the same group as child molesters is just wrong!

reply to post by Jay-morris


I'm not really arguing pro-christian as much as I am "pro-let's be rational and treat everyone as individual humans rather than pigeon-holing them into one collective set of actions".

Immediately in this thread people were referring to the couple as hate-filled, bigoted, hardcore & extreme.
There's absolutely no factual basis for these judgments. For all we know they could already have an adult gay child whom they love very much, but because of the trials and bigotry their child has faced they wouldn't want to encourage another child to take such a challenging road.
We just don't know their full rational from such a brief article.
Simply because a person won't teach a child that homosexuality is a good thing doesn't warrant these labels. It's slanderous, small-minded and irrational to jump to conclusions in this way.

If the tale was reversed, and a gay couple was rejected because they wouldn't teach the child that religion is a good thing, and folks were jumping to "God-hating" conclusions you would say the exact same thing I am saying.

As for the Bible thumpin' you were doing...If I understand it correctly, isn't the generally accepted idea the Christ came and somehow wrapped up the "old laws", replacing them with all the New Testament awesomeness that required much less lashing and chopping and stoning? I am pretty sure your quotes all came from the Old Testament, so maybe to a believer those examples are out of context, belonging to an ancient law applied to an ancient people?

Good Call by the Court... Children need a good , safe, clean, loving home.. NOT one ran by narrowminded primitives (being polite) who force their misguided hateful views upon everyone around them...

Originally posted by Varemia
Gay is natural because it happens. If it is possible at all, then it is natural.

Oh brother... nuclear power plants are natural (because they happen). Eating poop is natural (because it's possible). Hopping on one foot for your whole life is natural etc. etc. etc.

See how silly using the term that way is?

Originally posted by Jay-morris
reply to post by MaryStillToe

 

Plenty of woman enjoy anal sex. Also, what makes you think that all gay people have anal sex?

I never said it was biologically safe for women to engage in that type of behavior either. They are also prone to getting feces in their bloodstream and getting horribly sick and hemorrhoids. If you look at biology you easily see that this type of behavior was never part of God's creation but is the result of corrupt minds.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by MaryStillToe

 

Ah, so that's why people engage in bondage, foot worship, and any of the other multitudes of sexual gratifications? That's why people desire threesomes (which REQUIRE a degree of homosexuality) and all sorts of different things. That's why men have a prostate that can be stimulated during intercourse to make the event more pleasurable? I know a lot of straight couples who engage in back-end play, so don't act like homosexuals are alone. Plus, women can be homosexual too.

I never said female homsexuality was any better. It's all perverse and serves little purpose. It's the result of corrupt and evil minds manifesting itself in the flesh. If God wanted men or women to engage in back-end play, don't you think he would have given them some of the same safety features as women?

Let's stop pretending homosexuality is natural, it's not. I have never met a homosexual person that did not experience some type of emotional trauma as children or young adults in their surrounding environment. If there are any children born homosexual than it's no different than being possessed or mentally ill. Normal children raised in healthy homes don't have sexual desires until exposed to things of a sexual nature.

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by Varemia
Gay is natural because it happens. If it is possible at all, then it is natural.

Oh brother... nuclear power plants are natural (because they happen). Eating poop is natural (because it's possible). Hopping on one foot for your whole life is natural etc. etc. etc.

See how silly using the term that way is?

edit on 28-2-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)

What an awesome quote-mine. Did you really ignore everything else that I said? I wish their were words for how much I despise you right now, for your illogical hate-mongering.

reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist


And what if the child turns out to be gay?

You don't forsee that harm can be caused by that impression of gays upon them? Knowing some of my gay friends, I'd say that the parents attitude against homosexuallity is usually their greatest stress and a very painful one.

reply to post by MaryStillToe


Excuse me?

If God was involved and cared about what the hell we did, he would have never given us the programming to be gay.

But that doesn't occur to you, does it?

Go take your half brained ill conceived religious arguments else where.

reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist


Wow.!!! What a sick Society.

The way i see it the true reason is because based on the article :

The couple are not homophobic, according to the Christian Legal Centre, which has taken up their case. But they are against sex before marriage and do not recognise civil partnerships between gay couples as marriage.

And what is the view of the couple about homosexuality?

'We do not believe that this is so. We are prepared to love and accept any child. All we were not willing to do was to tell a small child that the practice of homosexuality was a good thing.

And what the Judges and the Equality and Human Rights Commission said:

'The judges have suggested that our views might harm children.

'We have been told by the Equality and Human Rights Commission that our moral views may "infect" a child

So, just because they do not willing to say to the child, that the practice of homosexuality is a good thing, they might "infect" the child??

The real tragedy at this case is the child.

Peace

reply to post by MaryStillToe


In that case, by your logic we should ban the use of all contraceptives, since sex serves no purpose aside from creating children. You should ONLY have sex if you are trying to make a baby, and you should ONLY love someone to marry them if you want to make children with them. I mean, sex is so pointless we should all be celibate unless we're making babies for the sake of repopulating our desolate planet. Wait... my sarcasm hurts.

Homosexuals sexually abuse children more than heterosexuals do here is some reports on it:

Although homosexuals account for less than two percent of the population. they constitute about a third of child molesters.6 (6. K. Freund and R.I. Watson, "The Proportions of Heterosexual and Homosexual Pedophiles Among Sex Offenders Against Children: An Exploratory Study," Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy 18 (Spring 1992): 3443, cited in "The Problem of Pedophilia," op. cit. Also, K. Freund and R.I. Watson, "Pedophilia and Heterosexuality vs. Homosexuality," Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy 10 (Fall 1984): 197, cited in NARTH Fact Sheet. ) Further, as noted by the Encino, Calif.-based National Association for research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), "since homosexual pedophiles victimize far more children than do heterosexual pedophiles, it is estimated that approximately 80 percent or pedophile victims are boys who have been molested by adultmales.7 (7. Thomas Schmidt, Straight and Narrow? Compassion and Clarity in the Homosexuality Debate (Downers Grove, IU.: Intervarsity Press), p. 114, cited in "The Problem of Pedophilia, op. cit., p. 2. )

New evidence poses problems for those who think homosexuals should be allowed to serve as foster-parents. 35% of foster-parents who sexually abused their foster-children in the last three years engaged in homosexuality.

From 2003 through 2005, a third of foster-parent molestations of foster-children were homosexual. That’s the official tally from two states — Illinois and Minnesota — that permit homosexual foster-parents. For the approximately 30,000 children/year in foster-care at some point in the two states:

—12 foster mothers sexually abused their charges: 9 (75%) assaulted foster-daughters, 3 (25%) raped foster-sons.

—28 foster-fathers sexually abused their charges: 23 (82%) assaulted foster-daughters, 5 (18%) raped foster-sons.

Link

It's a shame the courts are such anti-Christianity that they are blind to the truth. Now those poor kids will probably end up in a abusive homosexual couples home. They would be far better off being raised by Christians who can teach them morals and values.

reply to post by Xerxes1434


There will be abusive and disgusting people in any studied group of people. The singling out of homosexuals is a dirty move. You say "John's 10 million friends kick cats a couple more times a year than Mary's, therefor John's 10 million friends should be banned from having cats."

reply to post by minkey53


Please quote me chapter and verse in the Bible where the son portion of your triune, but single god, Jesus, said anything about homosexuality. I'm not interested in what Paul said, since Paul never even knew Jesus, but what Jesus himself said. Take your time.

reply to post by MaryStillToe

Let's stop pretending homosexuality is natural, it's not. I have never met a homosexual person that did not experience some type of emotional trauma as children or young adults in their surrounding environment. If there are any children born homosexual than it's no different than being possessed or mentally ill. Normal children raised in healthy homes don't have sexual desires until exposed to things of a sexual nature.

What a complete load of rubbish! My brother and sister are gay, and we all had a great upbringing, so what you said is pure nonsense. The only time they had emotional trauma is when they came out and recieved abuse from some friends. I can't believe how ignorant your post is!

Picking and choosing which aprt of the bible to follow is symptomatic of comfortable christians. At least teh moslem fanatics say they follow teh whole koran lock stock & barrel......doesn't make them any better....jsut moer consistant.

anyone else remember this from a few years ago??

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.

posted by McFox

www.snopes.com...

Originally posted by Varemia
You sir, are an idiot if you think all of those are equally comparable. Yes, humans are born to be able to mate with the opposite sex in order to procreate. However, you cannot compare homosexuality to pedophilia, (plant?)philia, and bestiality, since in all those cases, the other party CANNOT consent. With homosexuality, it is two consenting adults. Is that too difficult to comprehend?

Sorry but the consent issue has nothing to do with my point, I'm talking about attraction itself (not sexual acts).

The reason we have a sex drive to start with is primarily to encourage sexual relations with adult human beings of the opposite gender (not to encourage sexual relations with little kids, sheep, or the same gender).

A sex drive that doesn't encourage sexual relations with adult human beings of the opposite gender is like an appetite that doesn't encourage the consumption of grains/fruits/meats etc. etc. but things like tar or glass.

reply to post by Xerxes1434


So gay people molest children now. Straight people abuse children too. Theay are not gay or straight, they are Peodafile's!

But Lord Justice Munby and Mr Justice Beatson ruled that laws protecting people from discrimination because of their sexual orientation 'should take precedence' over the right not to be discriminated against on religious grounds.

Amen to that!

This couple may be the nicest people in the Universe but what happens if they are the caregiver for a Gay child?

Sorry no, leave your Bible out it.

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by Varemia
You sir, are an idiot if you think all of those are equally comparable. Yes, humans are born to be able to mate with the opposite sex in order to procreate. However, you cannot compare homosexuality to pedophilia, (plant?)philia, and bestiality, since in all those cases, the other party CANNOT consent. With homosexuality, it is two consenting adults. Is that too difficult to comprehend?

Sorry but the consent issue has nothing to do with my point, I'm talking about attraction itself (not sexual acts).

The reason we have a sex drive to start with is primarily to encourage sexual relations with adult human beings of the opposite gender (not to encourage sexual relations with little kids, sheep, or the same gender).

A sex drive that doesn't encourage sexual relations with adult human beings of the opposite gender is like an appetite that doesn't encourage the consumption of grains/fruits/meats etc. etc. but things like tar or glass.

So, are you saying that gay couples do not love eachother?