30 Days Forums

Planet Green (ended 2008)

"Same Sex Parenting" episode

Do you think gay people should legally adopt raise children?

  • Avatar of coutterhill

    coutterhill

    [21]Jul 4, 2008
    • member since: 09/10/06
    • level: 14
    • rank: Autobot
    • posts: 59

    Why does everyone not like Kati for standing up for what she believes in? The gays in the episode had their point of view and Kati had hers. Why is that a problem? I don't like how everyone is standing up for the gays when it is wrong, in my opinion. You don't have to accept that opinion or even like it. But why should Kati bend to opinions of the gays? 30 days is to see the other side of the issue, Kati saw the other side and still stuck to her beliefs. Too many people give up their beliefs and morality just because someone else says it's wrong. It's not like she was actively stopping legislature or anything. I didn't like how the family started gaining up on her and yelling at her. I do think that Kati should have had more back up to her arguments, because when she cried all the time it made her look weak.

    This is America, people are allowed to express our opinions even if the liberals don't like it!

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Steve-Ooooo

    Steve-Ooooo

    [22]Jul 5, 2008
    • member since: 08/01/05
    • level: 12
    • rank: Evil Bert
    • posts: 72
    yroston wrote:

    Based on the bible or the koran (Christian, Jewish and Muslim beliefs) homosexuality is punishable by death

    You are a moron, the only place that homosexuality is forbidden in the bible is in a section that also calls for the stoneing of people who work on Sundays, the stoneing of disrespecfull children, and calls for the slaugter of men with long hair. You self-richeous, pompus, moron. If your entire beleaf is based on a book that you clain is the word of god then why do you not follow it entierly?

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of JustineCrdbl

    JustineCrdbl

    [23]Jul 5, 2008
    • member since: 07/06/08
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 3
    yroston wrote:

    I'm sorry to those of you who hated the eppisode. I however really liked it because I obviously agreed with Katies view. I understand that this whole entire argument is based on religion. If you exclude religion then obviously gay and lesbian couples should be able to marry and raise children. However, considering that most of the nation or for that matter most of the world is religious it chages the whole picture. Based on the bible or the koran (Christian, Jewish and Muslim beliefs) homosexuality is punishable by death, and is something that should never be done!! In that sense, it is the same as shooting someone or stealing something. (a lot of you will argue on this analogy) However as a western society we see terrorists as immoral and anamalistic people (rightly so), however in their eyes, they believe that they are doing the correct thing. They justify their actions. The same could be said about the gays and lesbians, they believe that they are doing something that is correct, but in my opinion and all those who are religious it is a grave sin. I must say however that this has nothing to do with gays or lesbians raising children, rather it has more to do with them getting married in the first place. I also agree with katie about actually liking the person as a person. I can like a gay person for being a great person, I however disagree with his/her beliefs and actions.

    So I was extremely happy to see that there are still people that stick to beliefs and religion, and understand that America is becoming too lax in its beliefs which leads to gays and lesbians and from there to polygamy and G-d only knows what else.

    For those of you who are going to argue and say that I am old fasion and too firm, you must understand that YES morality comes from religion. I am a good person because I follow my beliefs and they were made in order to make good people from its followers.

    Obviously You've been living in a dream world, alone and by your own set of make-believe rules. We, who live in the REAL WORLD...on the other hand, know differently. Let us remember this is NOT any other nation, this IS the USA. Where we have a Constitution and a Bill Of Rights, by which we live our lives and form our laws. One law/right we have here is to FREELY practice our personal religion without Governmental interference...either impinging OUR right to practice our religion or of our Religion infringing on the rights of OTHERS to practice their own...OR to NOT practice at all.

    Here in the USA we DO NOT form our laws around ANY ONE SET of religious views.

    The most recent episode, "Same Sex Parenting" took an ultra-conservative Mormon from Utah and placed her in the home of a gay male couple raising four boys on a Michigan farm. The idea was to hopefully open her mind and see that her strict religious views may be ok for her and her family, but impinged on the rights of this family.
    Unfortunately it backfired miserably!

    Kati, the mom from Utah, actually left after her 30 day trial, more cemented in her views that gays/lesbians should not adopt/foster or raise children. Not because "they're bad people" but because it flew in the face of her personal religious views. She just couldn't get it idea through her thick skull that her religious views were perfectly fine for her and her family, but might be actually impinging on the rights of others. She couldn't wrap her warped mind around the concept of "Separation of Church and State" in anyway, shape or form. She actually argued that her religious views were how everyone should live. She attempted to say that allowing gay/lesbian couples to adopt/foster and raise children actually somehow impinged on HER religious right to live in her family in the manner she chose.
    AS IF!

    I'm sorry, but how does allowing gay/lesbian couples to adopt/foster and raise children impinge on her right to practice her religious views in any way? Does it FORCE her to leave her husband and hook-up with another woman? Does it FORCE her husband to leave her for another man? Does it FORCE her to raise her children differently than she does now?

    NO!

    And this is the whole point that was NEVER mentioned to her, or if it was, it was not aired.

    But this is the point with which I have issues.
    From the editing, it seemed that anytime anyone came close to discussing this issue with her, she actually would stomp away and go cry in her room. As if she was being asked to leave her religion and take up a new one. NO not at all!


    I still believe we, as individuals, all have the right to practice whatever religion we choose as long as it doesn't hurt anyone or anyone's ability to practice theirs without infringement. This Kati-chic absolutely couldn't see this at all. She really insisted that her religious views were the ONLY views that our Government should follow and that the Government should force those views down the throats of every citizen.

    I just don't get these types of people. James Dobson to this Kati-chic. Where do they get off telling ANYONE else how to live, who to love and what family group in which to live?

    Edited on 07/05/2008 11:13am
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of JustineCrdbl

    JustineCrdbl

    [24]Jul 5, 2008
    • member since: 07/06/08
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 3
    coutterhill wrote:

    This is America, people are allowed to express our opinions even if the liberals don't like it!

    Ironic that you say this since I see Right-wingnuts like you doing all the whining.

    Look, the woman was weak. Weak, mousy, pathetically brainwashed and unable to see anyone else's point of view. How sad and shallow her life must really be. How sheltered her childeren will be. Reality doesn't always work they way you want. There are changes, challenges and differences in everyday life. Deal with it. But if you for ONE SECOND think I'll sit quietly by as your moronic way of life infringes on the rights of ANYONE else to live their life with all its changes, challenges and difference...you better think again buck-o.
    I fought for your right to disagree with me...GLADLY, and I'd do it again, but I will not be idle when you think for one moment that YOUR way is the "right" or "only" way.
    Nope, sorry...not gonna happen.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of JustineCrdbl

    JustineCrdbl

    [25]Jul 5, 2008
    • member since: 07/06/08
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 3

    Draleex wrote:
    Thank you finally someone who isnt completely ridiculous. I'm glad I saw someone stand by their beliefs. Im tired of everyone accepting gay people like theyre not doing anything wrong. Even if I wasnt a christian and basing all of this off of religion i still wouldnt support gay people. Since no one seems to care about the bible anymore ill give a few reasons why its wrong without using the bible. First of all its completely disgusting, second of all gay people cant have babies which hurts the population, third of all its compeltely against what a man should be, and last of all strait people are the majority and most of us say no gays so there you go no gays.

    First: It's ONLY disgusting to YOU if you're not gay Duh. Obviously you don't posess the knowledge of the concept of Empathy. How sad really.

    Second: Gays and Lesbians are NOT Sterile! Trust me, I know...I dare you to tell my son that because his mother is gay that it's impossible that he exists! I DARE YOU! Gays and Lesbians are physiologically idenical to straight males and females. We all have the same reproductive organs and they work just fine. The world population has NOT been seeing any set backs. We number over 7 BILLION and growing every SECOND! Or are you trying to argue that people who CHOOSE not to reproduce or who are physically unable be denied basic Civil Rights? If so, does that include Straight people or the elderly who either do not or cannot reproduce?

    Third: Right-handed people are the majority, but that doesn't mean being left-handed should be made illegal or that southpaws be denied basic CIVIL rights. That's just a moronic argument with no basis in reality.

    Just because being gay is "against" what YOU feel You as a man should be doesn't mean your shoe fits ALL men. Just because you might wear one size shoe does that mean all shoes should be sold ONLY in that size? NO, that would be stupid....as stupid as your argument.

    Edited on 07/05/2008 11:29am
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of yroston

    yroston

    [26]Jul 7, 2008
    • member since: 09/05/04
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 11

    To Jmallen99:

    To tell you the truth, I dont really have so much against a gay couple adopting children, unless obviously it has a negative effect on the kids. As you see in the episode morgan meets with this woman who says that her life was hurt by the fact that she grey up with a gay father!! I also found it interesting that this gay couple on the show happened to have adopted FOUR boys and not a single girl?!?! Are there no girls up for adoption?? I know that as a person who grew up in a family with both males and females the female siblings have something to offer that the males do not and vice versa. I believe that this is harming America. It says on the American Dollar "In G-d we trust", if we are all here to escape religious persicution why would such a statement be writting on every one of our bills?? And I believe that America is what it is today specifically because of that belief.

    I'm actually Jewish, not Christian so I believe in the old testimant alone. It says over there in Leviticus Chapter 20 Verse 13: "And a man who lies with a male as one would with a woman both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon themselves." Now I dont believe that we should go around killing anybody G-d Forbid. But I do believe that it is a great sin. I have friends that are gay and I think that they are amazing people, I just believe that they are doing the wrong thing. So as long as they keep it to themselves I wont say anything about it. However, when it becomes a national issue I believe that this country is starting to loose its moral ground.

    Please understand me correctly, I dont hate or condemn anyone (excluding those who murder other people) especially not gays or lesbians. However that doesnt mean that I should allow them to marry or adopt essentially my kids. I understand that there is a huge problem with the adoption or lack thereof in this country and I agree that this is an extremely big dilemma. And if I were to know for certain that such an adoption would not adversly effect the children in anyway then I would be pro such an adoption. But for starters, If I consider such a partnership a sin then such a couple raising adopted kids would teach them that it is not so. Or even more they would try and convince them that they should play around with their sexuality which would beget more gays and lesbians until we have a country of male and female partners selling sperm and impregnating themselves...... Just the thouhgt of such a situation is uterly disgusting.

    I agree with your point about the votes, which is what makes this whole situation sad. Everyone sees that this great country of moral standings is going down the drain and no one is doing anything about it.

    As to your second comment: I agree to the irony which is exactly my point. There will always be two sides to the story. I just hope that the correct one remains. As you can see I still have the same beliefs as my anscestors and theirs all the way backto moses.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of yroston

    yroston

    [27]Jul 7, 2008
    • member since: 09/05/04
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 11

    Dear LostNaivite,

    First of all, I believe that the sin is specifically against being gay and not lesbian, as the bible says "And a man who lies with a male as one would with a woman". And I believe that you are a great moral human being who makes this world a better place. However when it comes to marriage there is a problem. You see, marriage was instated by the bible (I'm not positive about this point, but my argument stands) and it says that marriage is between a man and a woman (actually according to the bible it may be more than one woman, but lets leave that aside). That is the sanctity of marriage. So my question to you would be simple, in the previous episode of 30 days (the one with the hunter and animal rights activist) there was a question asked by one of the activists "If your dog or I (who you dont know at all) were in a life threatining situation and you were only able to save one which would you save" and the hunter obviously said "I would save you - you are a human" and the woman was shocked. As was I at the woman!! She would rather save a DOG than a human!! What has this world come too?? So now to my point... If she wanted to marry her dog bec she loved him so much would you allow her to do so??? And if you answer yes, then please tell me what marriage is if not love??? In reality Marriage is a HOLY union between a male and a female. NOT between two men or two woman, nor between two men and a woman or a man/woman with anything other then another human of the opposite sex!! When you wish to marry someone of the other sex you are degrading the term marriage, and you are lowering the moral state of this whole world. On the otherhand I still believe you to be a good person and I wish you all of the luck in the world. Just please dont start removing holy and moral symbals that have been around for a lot longer than any of us.

    All the best.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of yroston

    yroston

    [28]Jul 7, 2008
    • member since: 09/05/04
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 11

    Dear steve-ooooo,

    I am actually jewish not a moron:-) So I dont belive in most of what you have written and am therefore not a hipocrite. However you missunderstood me. I have not called for the death of anyone nor have I called for that. I was merely showing the gravity of the situation. It is something that should be taken into EXTEREME consideration.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of yroston

    yroston

    [29]Jul 7, 2008
    • member since: 09/05/04
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 11

    Dear JustineCrdbl,

    You bring up some very good and valid points. Some of which I have just answered in the previous posts. Whats actually interesting is that all major religions agree about this point of homosexuality, so even if you dont believe in anything there must be something to this, as religious were created thousands of years ago and have remained and are still blosoming today, especially in the USA. For which I am obviously very greatful. I am not an activist and have never told anyone not to do something that he was doing as long as it didnt hurt anyone else. Please read my past posts about gay vs lesbiansm and why I am against adoption etc.

    The government is not interfering here but rather the gays and lesbians are interfereing into laws, conditions, and facts that have stabalized America since its inception. America was working perfectly for the past centuries what changed now? Time didnt make it right to kill or to steal how come time made it right to be gay

    I still believe in the "in G-d we trust" written on our currency and I hope that G-ds morals - especially those recognized by ALL major religions are at least something that we could hold onto.

    I aplaud your wish for freedom, but even freedom needs boundries. Look at nations without any government in control - you see what happens to nations without laws and morals. As an American I want freedom as much as you, I just dont want it to come at the price of morality. And once again let me point out that anyones being gay by themselves with a gay partner who agrees is fine with me. That would be an issue between themselves and G-d. However marriage and adoption are things that effect this entire country.

    Happy belated independence day.

    Thank you for listening to my opinion.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of marvelfan89

    marvelfan89

    [30]Jul 7, 2008
    • member since: 06/15/05
    • level: 39
    • rank: Fonzerelli
    • posts: 2,677

    yroston wrote:

    To tell you the truth, I dont really have so much against a gay couple adopting children, unless obviously it has a negative effect on the kids. As you see in the episode morgan meets with this woman who says that her life was hurt by the fact that she grey up with a gay father!! I also found it interesting that this gay couple on the show happened to have adopted FOUR boys and not a single girl?!?! Are there no girls up for adoption?? I know that as a person who grew up in a family with both males and females the female siblings have something to offer that the males do not and vice versa. I believe that this is harming America. It says on the American Dollar "In G-d we trust", if we are all here to escape religious persicution why would such a statement be writting on every one of our bills?? And I believe that America is what it is today specifically because of that belief.

    So far there is no indication that it has negative effect s on kids. The girl who cried about her father's gay life seemed out of touch out reality. I mean fine she had a hard time with it but really if it bothered her that much why didn't she leave? Or live with her mom? As far as the gay Dads, I don't find it interesting that they would want boys. Boys need their fathers when they grow up. I mean we've seen hundreds of straight deadbeat dads in this world that really have done more harm than good than any gay parent would so that examinations seems a mute point. So there is no harm to American coming from the gay community. As far as the dollar bill and God we trust well that doesn't mean anything as well since people have a different definition of who God is, some people don't even believe in God.

    yroston wrote:

    I'm actually Jewish, not Christian so I believe in the old testimant alone. It says over there in Leviticus Chapter 20 Verse 13: "And a man who lies with a male as one would with a woman both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon themselves." Now I dont believe that we should go around killing anybody G-d Forbid. But I do believe that it is a great sin. I have friends that are gay and I think that they are amazing people, I just believe that they are doing the wrong thing. So as long as they keep it to themselves I wont say anything about it. However, when it becomes a national issue I believe that this country is starting to loose its moral ground.

    It also says that we as Christians should love our God first, and foremost love our neighbor as we love our self gay or straight), the Book of Leviticus is rather old and I don't know of too many Christians that would follow such an archaic and rather discriminating line that calls for the killing of homosexuals. Look at (Matthew 22:37-40)

    "Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

    So with that said being gay isn't a sin and gays aren't doing anything wrong. The country losing its moral ground? I don't know if you kept up with the news lately but the country lost its moral ground many years with its countless useless wars (Vietnam, now the Iraqi War), its constant discrimination against religions and races -Muslims, and other Middle Eastern people are seen as terrorists, and of course most recently with the last episodes this country's rather unhealthy obsession with guns. With all that saying this country is losing moral ground is a bit of a joke. This isn't even talking about the hypocrisy among Catholic Church and Christianity over centuries: Turning a blind eye to slavery, discriminating against women as priests, persecuted the Methodists,Pharisees rejecting Christ and then the Apostles rejecting Gentiles.

    yroston wrote:

    Please understand me correctly, I dont hate or condemn anyone (excluding those who murder other people) especially not gays or lesbians. However that doesnt mean that I should allow them to marry or adopt essentially my kids. I understand that there is a huge problem with the adoption or lack thereof in this country and I agree that this is an extremely big dilemma. And if I were to know for certain that such an adoption would not adversly effect the children in anyway then I would be pro such an adoption. But for starters, If I consider such a partnership a sin then such a couple raising adopted kids would teach them that it is not so. Or even more they would try and convince them that they should play around with their sexuality which would beget more gays and lesbians until we have a country of male and female partners selling sperm and impregnating themselves...... Just the thouhgt of such a situation is uterly disgusting.

    So you are ok with murders being committed but not gays getting married or adopting something seems a bit loose with that statement. There is no evidence that supports that the adopting of children by gay parents have a bad effect so any sort of argument against such things is weak. You might consider it a sin but many people don't. The Bible doesn't, legislation allowing the adoption of kids by gay parents certainly doesn't see it as a sin. If it really that bad, such an episode as this would have never taken place. The only disgusting then to consider is whether you want a country full of discrinimating Americans who continue to discriminate someone because of their race, sex, or life****or you want a country that can finally shed its bad image and adopt gays as equals (which they are since in God's we are all God's children). God knows we have plenty of straight deadbeat dads and straight dsyfunctional families to begin so once again assuming that gay parents are bad just because their gay is rather the most discriminating ever, it be like discriminating somebody because of their race (which coincedentally on the subject of moral ground) American has been well known for.

    Edited on 07/07/2008 7:55pm
    Edited 3 total times.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of yroston

    yroston

    [31]Jul 9, 2008
    • member since: 09/05/04
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 11

    Dear marvelfan89,

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    So far there is no indication that it has negative effect s on kids. The girl who cried about her father's gay life seemed out of touch out reality. I mean fine she had a hard time with it but really if it bothered her that much why didn't she leave? Or live with her mom? As far as the gay Dads, I don't find it interesting that they would want boys. Boys need their fathers when they grow up. I mean we've seen hundreds of straight deadbeat dads in this world that really have done more harm than good than any gay parent would so that examinations seems a mute point. So there is no harm to American coming from the gay community. As far as the dollar bill and God we trust well that doesn't mean anything as well since people have a different definition of who God is, some people don't even believe in God.

    You dont know whether or not it has a negative effect on kids. Both me and you are taking examples from this show and maybe a few cases that we have heard, here or there. I would be interested to find out if there was a national study done on the subject and what the results have been. It's not always easy to leave your fathers home. How can you say that she shouldve just left, unfortunately there are many abusive cases in the US where the people being abused have a hard time leaving. I'm sure that she most probably tried to leave but was unable too do so. Now excuse me for saying this but your above comment is the most ignorant one that I have heard; "I don't find it interesting that they would want boys. Boys need their fathers when they grow up." Are you telling me that they dont need moms? Or sisters? Which was my point excatly!! Being a guy I can tell you personally that my life is much more enhanced since I have grown up not only with a mom and a dad but with sisters and brothers as well. I know that my friends who have sisters in their families have something in their personality that the ones without, dont, and thats with a mom around. Although I have no sceintific evidence I can assure you that someone who grows up without ANY females in their life is definitely missing something in their personality. Bringing up the point that there are worse people in the world that are getting away with abuse doesnt prove anything at all. It's like saying - If you steal instead of commit murder, you are a good person -?!?!? If we agree that gay adoption is wrong and deadbeat dads are wrong but the gays are a better bad then the deadbeat dads...???? As for the "In G-d we trust" on the bills, that was something that was part of the foundation of the United States of America. The amazing part about it is that it didnt make a difference which G-d you believed in (Which is what America is about). It is just about believeing in morals from a higher power.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    It also says that we as Christians should love our God first, and foremost love our neighbor as we love our self gay or straight), the Book of Leviticus is rather old and I don't know of too many Christians that would follow such an archaic and rather discriminating line that calls for the killing of homosexuals. Look at (Matthew 22:37-40)

    "Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

    Loving thy neighbor as thyself has nothing to do with loving gays. It means that you should treat everyone with respect and dignity. I respect a gay person as a person. But if my neighbor steals, I will tell him that it is wrong and that it should not be done. The same applies here. As you said, first you should love G-d, and then thy neighbor. G-d is correct - your neighbor not neccessarily so. As Ihave mentioned earlier, I am actually Jewish and therefore believe in the Old Testiment alone. According to our beliefs it is extremely rare for someone to actually have been killed on account of such a sin. However the point that it is brought down in such harsh terms, shows you the severity of the sin. We believe that everyone is given challenges that they are meant to, and able to overcome, and for some people being gay is that challenge, that could, and is meant to be overcome.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    So with that said being gay isn't a sin and gays aren't doing anything wrong. The country losing its moral ground? I don't know if you kept up with the news lately but the country lost its moral ground many years with its countless useless wars (Vietnam, now the Iraqi War), its constant discrimination against religions and races -Muslims, and other Middle Eastern people are seen as terrorists, and of course most recently with the last episodes this country's rather unhealthy obsession with guns. With all that saying this country is losing moral ground is a bit of a joke. This isn't even talking about the hypocrisy among Catholic Church and Christianity over centuries: Turning a blind eye to slavery, discriminating against women as priests, persecuted the Methodists,Pharisees rejecting Christ and then the Apostles rejecting Gentiles.

    Why brings wars into this disscussion. As long as wars are fought by soldiers against soldiers it is not immoral. Once you bring civilians into the attacks it becomes immoral. About the discrimination, America is one of the most indiscriminate nations in the world. Although it may not be perfect, or rather is far from being there much should be said about where it is actually holding. Muslims, Jews, Blacks, Mexicans and many others live in this country freely. About the muslims being considered terrorists - If I were (G-d Forbid) to tell you that I was going to kill you, but all that you knew about me was that I was Jewish, would you not be afraid of all jews. Especially if there were many of us, as a group of Jews threatinging you and your family. Such is the problems with the muslims - there are many muslims threatining to anihilate both Jews and Americans, should I not be worried?!?! Dont get me wrong, I have muslim friends as well as friends that are arab. But as a whole I feel threatened around most of them. I believe that America feels much the same. Last, as you mentioned about the episode of the guns - we see from that episode that guns can be used for both good and evil. And whichever opinion you side with, you must agree that it really is the person who shoots the gun and not the gun itself that is bad. Even though I agree that guns give bad people an easier way to do bad things. I cant reply to you about all of the christian hypocrasies, but just the one that you mentioned about "discriminating against women as priests" once again leads to the same argument. Woman have many jobs in this world, being a priest is not one of them. Why argue? Thats the fact that has been passed down.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    So you are ok with murders being committed but not gays getting married or adopting something seems a bit loose with that statement. There is no evidence that supports that the adopting of children by gay parents have a bad effect so any sort of argument against such things is weak. You might consider it a sin but many people don't. The Bible doesn't, legislation allowing the adoption of kids by gay parents certainly doesn't see it as a sin. If it really that bad, such an episode as this would have never taken place. The only disgusting then to consider is whether you want a country full of discrinimating Americans who continue to discriminate someone because of their race, sex, or life****or you want a country that can finally shed its bad image and adopt gays as equals (which they are since in God's we are all God's children). God knows we have plenty of straight deadbeat dads and straight dsyfunctional families to begin so once again assuming that gay parents are bad just because their gay is rather the most discriminating ever, it be like discriminating somebody because of their race (which coincedentally on the subject of moral ground) American has been well known for.

    You seem to have understood me wrong. What I said was just the opposite. The only people I condemn is murderers. I do NOT condemn gays and lesbians. But that does not argue with the fact that I believe that what they are doing is (immoral) or wrong (if you like that term better). I'm sorry that you think that America has a bad image. I've lived around the world and the image that I have seen from there is a very positive one. As for discrimination - you need boundries. My boundry in this situation would be marriage. If you feel that you are gay and want to be gay - be my guest. But to ruin the sanctity of marriage is where you cross that line.

    If you have watched the latest episode of 30 days (Indian Reserve) you may recall a line from Morgan "Why cant we move forward in this world and still have the heritage and values as before?". This episode shows you how important values are. And being a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim you should retain these values. If you are none of the above then you may do with yourself by yourself whatever you like (conforming to the law). But dont bring that into the public. Dont try to change marriage or adoption. DONT try and change facts.

    Without morals coming from a higher power, people can change morals themselves until the morals become immoral. As you see is happening.

    Just because we are G-d's children, doesnt mean that we are behaving properly. That is what we must strive to do ourselves.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of marvelfan89

    marvelfan89

    [32]Jul 10, 2008
    • member since: 06/15/05
    • level: 39
    • rank: Fonzerelli
    • posts: 2,677
    yroston wrote:

    You dont know whether or not it has a negative effect on kids. Both me and you are taking examples from this show and maybe a few cases that we have heard, here or there. I would be interested to find out if there was a national study done on the subject and what the results have been. It's not always easy to leave your fathers home. How can you say that she shouldve just left, unfortunately there are many abusive cases in the US where the people being abused have a hard time leaving. I'm sure that she most probably tried to leave but was unable too do so. Now excuse me for saying this but your above comment is the most ignorant one that I have heard; "I don't find it interesting that they would want boys. Boys need their fathers when they grow up." Are you telling me that they dont need moms? Or sisters? Which was my point excatly!! Being a guy I can tell you personally that my life is much more enhanced since I have grown up not only with a mom and a dad but with sisters and brothers as well. I know that my friends who have sisters in their families have something in their personality that the ones without, dont, and thats with a mom around. Although I have no sceintific evidence I can assure you that someone who grows up without ANY females in their life is definitely missing something in their personality. Bringing up the point that there are worse people in the world that are getting away with abuse doesnt prove anything at all. It's like saying - If you steal instead of commit murder, you are a good person -?!?!? If we agree that gay adoption is wrong and deadbeat dads are wrong but the gays are a better bad then the deadbeat dads...???? As for the "In G-d we trust" on the bills, that was something that was part of the foundation of the United States of America. The amazing part about it is that it didnt make a difference which G-d you believed in (Which is what America is about). It is just about believeing in morals from a higher power.

    Actually so far we know it doesn't have a negative effect. Clearly though we could pick over a hundred or so heterosexual cases where having heterosexual parents doesn't guarantee a happy home so this idea that having same sex parents would have negative effects just seems like paranoid at the moment without any concrete proof. A national study I can tell you would probably be in the favor of gays. The girl with the gay father wasn't abused or anything like that. Cleary she had an issue like Kati with the whole gay thing and couldn't accept it. Well if you are comparing ignorant things then your previous comment about why it's interesting that the Dad only chose boys is rather ignorant. Were you implying there was something more to it other than two dads wanting sons? There is nothing ignorant about what I said, if you find what I said ignorant you clearly are the ignorant. I grew up without a Dad and there are many things that a son needs that a mom just can't deliver. Of course a son needs a mother but needs a father even more. Again going to your previous comment so what if they chose boys? It's not relevant. Maybe that's all they could get. Being a guy I can tell you that having a Dad and Mom didn't enhance anything for me since it ended up in divorce, and like many straight kids I could pull hundreds of similar cases again your point is rather weak. Also you wouldn't need scientific evidence to counter this notion that someone needs a female in their life? Maybe they require a soul mate if they are straight but if they are a gay man would they? Probably not, Same thing goes for a lesbian, I don't think men would be at the top of their list of what they need in life. Actually saying they are worse people who commit abuse and you being fixated on this gay adoption thing says multitudes about you doesn't it. Really if it comes to a kid being without any parents or his life or a kid being raised by The only chance for a real family with two dads or two moms would you take it? If you say no you clearly don't have kids well being at heart. Yes "In God We Trust" seems to be something irrelevant giving the state of this world with corruption. You keep on talking about morals but God himself would discriminate against gays because in the eyes of God we are his children.

    yroston wrote:
    Loving thy neighbor as thyself has nothing to do with loving gays. It means that you should treat everyone with respect and Actually so far we know it doesn't have a negative effect.

    Actually it does, Loving they neighbor has everything to do with gays, you just said yourself you treat "everyone with respect" that includes gays.

    yroston wrote:

    I respect a gay person as a person. But if my neighbor steals, I will tell him that it is wrong and that it should not be done. The same applies here. As you said, first you should love G-d, and then thy neighbor. G-d is correct - your neighbor not neccessarily so. As Ihave mentioned earlier, I am actually Jewish and therefore believe in the Old Testiment alone. According to our beliefs it is extremely rare for someone to actually have been killed on account of such a sin. However the point that it is brought down in such harsh terms, shows you the severity of the sin. We believe that everyone is given challenges that they are meant to, and able to overcome, and for some people being gay is that challenge, that could, and is meant to be overcome.

    You can believe in whatever scripture you can believe, bottom line gays are God's children any sort of discrimination or abuse/hate would go against what God wants since gays are God's children. If you respect gays as you say do then are in full support of same sex parenting. You can't say one thing and do another especially if that what is your beliefs tell you to do.

    yroston wrote:

    Why brings wars into this disscussion. As long as wars are fought by soldiers against soldiers it is not immoral. Once you bring civilians into the attacks it becomes immoral. About the discrimination, America is one of the most indiscriminate nations in the world. Although it may not be perfect, or rather is far from being there much should be said about where it is actually holding. Muslims, Jews, Blacks, Mexicans and many others live in this country freely. About the muslims being considered terrorists - If I were (G-d Forbid) to tell you that I was going to kill you, but all that you knew about me was that I was Jewish, would you not be afraid of all jews. Especially if there were many of us, as a group of Jews threatinging you and your family. Such is the problems with the muslims - there are many muslims threatining to anihilate both Jews and Americans, should I not be worried?!?! Dont get me wrong, I have muslim friends as well as friends that are arab. But as a whole I feel threatened around most of them. I believe that America feels much the same. Last, as you mentioned about the episode of the guns - we see from that episode that guns can be used for both good and evil. And whichever opinion you side with, you must agree that it really is the person who shoots the gun and not the gun itself that is bad. Even though I agree that guns give bad people an easier way to do bad things. I cant reply to you about all of the christian hypocrasies, but just the one that you mentioned about "discriminating against women as priests" once again leads to the same argument. Woman have many jobs in this world, being a priest is not one of them. Why argue? Thats the fact that has been passed down.

    Bringing war into discussion is a very relevant point. Let me clarify a few other things that are immoral in war. War is immoral if innocent people die yes of course but war is also immoral when people engage in war for ulterior motives for other reasons other than to help that country or people in it. It doesn't matter if it's solider against soldier doing It for the wrong reasons is immoral. You are wrong again, America is the most "indiscriminate nations in the world" are you kidding me? I've never heard such ignorant things. You mean the same America that allowed slavery for hundreds of years. The same America that even after the black slave was "freed" still underwent decades of abuse, lynching, rape, murder at the hands of this country? The same America that's immediate knee jerk reaction to any attack is to blame another foreign country yet incident like the Oklahoma City Bombing are key evidence of an attack done by an America. Which brings us back to the topic of gays and many years of hate crimes against gays just for being gay

    ================================================================If I were (G-d Forbid) to tell you that I was going to kill you, but all that you knew about me was that I was Jewish, would you not be afraid of all jews

    Why would I be you are just one person, clearly demented and insane but not indicative of the rest of your culture.

    =========================================================================

    .. Especially if there were many of us, as a group of Jews threatinging you and your family. Such is the problems with the muslims - there are many muslims threatining to anihilate both Jews and Americans, should I not be worried?!?!

    Yet there are many Muslims and other groups that have lived in America freely as you put it and in other countries that wouldn't dare want to commit any violence against Americans and Jews. If your fear is based on paranoia that's one thing but if you are really intelligent you know that just because someone does something harmful from one group isn't concrete proof of how the whole culture acts. Did every white person in the country attack the black man when the Ku Klux Klan started? No.

    I don't feel threatened by Muslims so please stop trying to say what America believes in because what America believes in the moment is not what I believe in. Right now it believes in waging a war for clear economical interest which if you've done any sort of homework on US History know that Is very much part of our culture.

    =============================================================================

    And whichever opinion you side with, you must agree that it really is the person who shoots the gun and not the gun itself that is bad. Even though I agree that guns give bad people an easier way to do bad things. I cant reply to you about all of the christian hypocrasies, but just the one that you mentioned about "discriminating against women as priests" once again leads to the same argument. Woman have many jobs in this world, being a priest is not one of them. Why argue? Thats the fact that has been passed down.

    Because if women are equal as men as we say they are (even though they didn't actually get the right to vote until the 19th amendment then clearly why should anyone let alone a religion (which you don't want to comment on its many hypocrisies) be against a woman being a priest? Especially given how the reputation of a priest has falling down considerably since all these cases of child molestation. Women have many jobs? Like cleaning in the kitchen? Once again you can be ignorant and say one thing and do another or your so called beliefs apply to everybody. Just like the gay issue, you can't you respect gays or women and then say crap like "well women have other jobs so what's the big deal if they can't be priests". Again the fact that's being passed down is a long history of discrimination and you just pointed out that with the "women have other jobs" comment.

    yroston wrote:

    You seem to have understood me wrong. What I said was just the opposite. The only people I condemn is murderers. I do NOT condemn gays and lesbians. But that does not argue with the fact that I believe that what they are doing is (immoral) or wrong (if you like that term better). I'm sorry that you think that America has a bad image. I've lived around the world and the image that I have seen from there is a very positive one. As for discrimination - you need boundries. My boundry in this situation would be marriage. If you feel that you are gay and want to be gay - be my guest. But to ruin the sanctity of marriage is where you cross that line.

    If you have watched the latest episode of 30 days (Indian Reserve) you may recall a line from Morgan "Why cant we move forward in this world and still have the heritage and values as before?". This episode shows you how important values are. And being a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim you should retain these values. If you are none of the above then you may do with yourself by yourself whatever you like (conforming to the law). But dont bring that into the public. Dont try to change marriage or adoption. DONT try and change facts.

    Without morals coming from a higher power, people can change morals themselves until the morals become immoral. As you see is happening.

    Just because we are G-d's children, doesnt mean that we are behaving properly. That is what we must strive to do ourselves.

    If you say that you what they are doing is immoral or wrong you are condemning them. Dude you can't have it both ways. You either respect or you don't. I'am not sorry that America has a bad image so why should you be? Clearly that's America's doing. I've been around the world too and talked to many people and it's not really just my opinion that America has a bad image. Heck turn on the news and you'll hear especially around these political times how America must improve it's image and diplomacy against other countries. If America had a "good image" such talk wouldn't even be discussed. The sanctity of marriage is once again something that like American "good" image can be seen a joke. I know what you are saying is of the pure belief, the sanctity clearly is changing and it's not just an agreement or relationship between a man or woman. I'am not gay I'am 100% heterosexual. Clearly as well some states are changing their laws and allowing marriage to be defined in a much different fashion from what the old days defined it as. That is America right there being able to change with the times and not discriminate against somebody because of what they believe to morally wrong.

    I did watch the last episode and clearly what Morgan was trying to say (and he in fact did say it) is that America has lost a lot, He also clearly felt guilty for what this country to the Native Americans . The values this country have therefore have significantly gone down, that's been one of the main themes of the shows if you've been watching from "The MinuteMan" episode to the episode about "minimum wage laws" and of course the episodes about Same Sex parenting. I think you misunderstand what he is saying.

    The "facts" so far say that several countries and states are allowing same sex parenting and marriage. The facts so far proved that this has have little negative effect as far as our morals go. Thus what we have left is opinion, if you disapprove or approve of the changes then that's clearly up to you. All these talk of a higher power well rather is ridiculous because the higher power sees everyone as God's children. If Jesus loves everybody, do you think he would discriminate against gays like some mortals on this earth especially when it's their time to go to heaven? Probably not.

    Yes just because we are God's children doesn't mean we are behaving properly and clearly discrimination is a sign that certain children of God are behaving improperly.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of windseeker15

    windseeker15

    [33]Jul 12, 2008
    • member since: 01/08/06
    • level: 9
    • rank: Door Number 2
    • posts: 1,122

    yroston wrote:
    As for the "In G-d we trust" on the bills, that was something that was part of the foundation of the United States of America. The amazing part about it is that it didnt make a difference which G-d you believed in (Which is what America is about). It is just about believeing in morals from a higher power.

    "In god we trust" was only put on American currency in the 1950's during the Cold War, simply as contrast propaganda against "the godless Soviets."

    The original motto of the founding fathers was "E pluribus unum" (Out of Many, One).
    And I feel I should point out quite a few of those founding fathers weren't Chrisitan, namely (but not limited to) Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin (they were Deists).
    Thomas Jefferson established the separation of church and state. There are no references to god in the Constitution, nor is there a reference to the Christian god in the Declaration of independence (which refer's to "Nature's God").

    Edited on 07/12/2008 12:01pm
    Edited 3 total times.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of yroston

    yroston

    [34]Jul 13, 2008
    • member since: 09/05/04
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 11

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    Actually so far we know it doesn't have a negative effect. Clearly though we could pick over a hundred or so heterosexual cases where having heterosexual parents doesn't guarantee a happy home so this idea that having same sex parents would have negative effects just seems like paranoid at the moment without any concrete proof. A national study I can tell you would probably be in the favor of gays. The girl with the gay father wasn't abused or anything like that. Clearly she had an issue like Kati with the whole gay thing and couldn't accept it. Well if you are comparing ignorant things then your previous comment about why it's interesting that the Dad only chose boys is rather ignorant. Were you implying there was something more to it other than two dads wanting sons? There is nothing ignorant about what I said, if you find what I said ignorant you clearly are the ignorant. I grew up without a Dad and there are many things that a son needs that a mom just can't deliver. Of course a son needs a mother but needs a father even more. Again going to your previous comment so what if they chose boys? It's not relevant. Maybe that's all they could get.

    I'm not sure whether or not you have realized this yet but the majority of American homes are heterosexual. No wonder you can find hundreds of cases. Tell me, for every gay couple that you know how many hetero couples do you know? Considering that you yourself are not gay the result would be at a ratio of about 200:1 if not higher. The"fact" that so far you know that it does not have a negative effectdoes not come from enough cases to classify it. So unless you work in this area please don't tell me that you know. I am not under the illusion that I know. The gays are the same humans as the heterosexuals and therefore there are the same problems with "partnership" that you have with a regular couple. The question is what are the consequences of their gay behaviour to the kids?

    What if an adopted kid has the same problem as this girl did? They can be stuck in the exact same situation. And once again you don't know the nature of this woman's situation so please stop putting words and theories into her mouth!!

    One, Two maybe three boys are regular. Considering the average American home consists of one boy and one girl. Sometimes a third child. 4 Children is ABOVE the average amount of kids in a family here in the states. With the statistics above average I would find it much more likely for at LEAST one girl to make it into the mix. Especially considering the fact that a girl brings something different to a family. It would make the family a HEALTHIER family ANY way you look at it. It's funny how you are degrading girls already, and then argue about the priesthood later. They are JUST AS NEEDED as the guys in a family!!

    Oh, and according to science, the mother is needed MORE than the dad!! Here is just one link from a simple google search. Obviously it is debatable.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    Being a guy I can tell you that having a Dad and Mom didn't enhance anything for me since it ended up in divorce, and like many straight kids I could pull hundreds of similar cases again your point is rather weak. Also you wouldn't need scientific evidence to counter this notion that someone needs a female in their life? Maybe they require a soul mate if they are straight but if they are a gay man would they? Probably not, Same thing goes for a lesbian, I don't think men would be at the top of their list of what they need in life. Actually saying they are worse people who commit abuse and you being fixated on this gay adoption thing says multitudes about you doesn't it. Really if it comes to a kid being without any parents or his life or a kid being raised by The only chance for a real family with two dads or two moms would you take it? If you say no you clearly don't have kids well being at heart. Yes "In God We Trust" seems to be something irrelevant giving the state of this world with corruption. You keep on talking about morals but God himself would discriminate against gays because in the eyes of God we are his children.

    Did you have any sisters? Were you close with your mom? Did she love you and care for you in a different way after the divorce? Obviously there are exceptions to the rule. Granted there are way too many divorces today. That is another problem in this free society. Nowadays in America its almost accepted to commit Adultery?!?!? Should we allow that as well? They do it out of free will? Maybe we should allow Polygamy as well? You are correct, the person that is gay does not need the female as the lesbian does not necessarily need the male (which is really not true as you usually see that they have close friends from the opposite sex), But THEIR kids NEED both!! ANY straight kid NEEDS BOTH. Thanks for helping prove my point!!

    Your next point is as I mentioned before. If it was found beneficial for the kids to be brought up in a gay home then maybe, but that would only be O.K. if the situation did not cause sexual confusion by the kids (which I doubt that you can prove now). If they could be brought up with the same values and morals as a moral and valued American. If it didn't cause them to question their sexuality etc. I obviously have the kids wellbeing at heart but that includes their spiritual wellbeing as it does their physical. If one is great without the other than they are in a bad situation wherever they are placed.

    Is a murderer G-d child as well? The answer is yes!! HOWEVER he is NOT being a good child. G-d will love him as a person but hate his actions. I believe the EXACT same is true with a gay person. And NO I am NOT putting a murderer on the same level as a gay person but you see from the severity of the punishment in G-ds eyes how bad it is.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    Actually it does, Loving they neighbor has everything to do with gays, you just said yourself you treat "everyone with respect" that includes gays.


    I definitely treat gays with respect. But that does NOT mean that I don't disagree with their actions!! As I mentioned just before, I believe that G-d is the same way.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    You can believe in whatever scripture you can believe, bottom line gays are God's children any sort of discrimination or abuse/hate would go against what God wants since gays are God's children. If you respect gays as you say do then are in full support of same sex parenting. You can't say one thing and do another especially if that what is your beliefs tell you to do.

    According to your theory everyone in the world is a good person because they are all G-ds children!! I believe that G-d loves them all, but HATES their actions (depending on what they do, obviously). What your saying would in your theory apply to polygamists, Child abusers, pedophiles, murderers and anyone else who commits any sin. Are you going to tell me that they are NOT G-d's children?

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    Bringing war into discussion is a very relevant point. Let me clarify a few other things that are immoral in war. War is immoral if innocent people die yes of course but war is also immoral when people engage in war for ulterior motives for other reasons other than to help that country or people in it. It doesn't matter if it's solider against soldier doing It for the wrong reasons is immoral. You are wrong again, America is the most "indiscriminate nations in the world" are you kidding me? I've never heard such ignorant things. You mean the same America that allowed slavery for hundreds of years. The same America that even after the black slave was "freed" still underwent decades of abuse, lynching, rape, murder at the hands of this country? The same America that's immediate knee jerk reaction to any attack is to blame another foreign country yet incident like the Oklahoma City Bombing are key evidence of an attack done by an America. Which brings us back to the topic of gays and many years of hate crimes against gays just for being ga.

    How do you know that this war is not to help you??? Have you seen all of the intelligence that the President has seen? Please don't tell me yes!! You only see half of the puzzle, don't try and guess the other half when you don't even have the pieces!! War used to be waged to conquer land, and that was a very positive motive that people believed in. When you become president you can tell me that it is/was immoral. (Let's not get into this argument here and now).

    I'm sorry but slavery was accepted around the world for thousands of years. It has nothing to do with just America. And yes, I agree that it took Americans a long time to accept the fact that black people were no longer slaves and that they are just as good as the next person, but that was the direct result of slavery. By the way, the Americans never enslaved their own people. (Not that it justifies anything) but the fact is that the slaves and slave trade was brought in from Africa, Asia and Europe. I have a much bigger problem with the black market sex slave industry which still exists today. Mainly in Russiaand Europe but has definitely spread to the states as well. I think that we need to abolish that immediately.

    The oklahoma city bombing came not long after the attempt to bring down the world trade center in 1993. No wonder they hypothasized that it came from the muslims; after all they WERE behind the first and second attempt on the world trade center. Thats not even mentioning the many other attacks that have been perpetrated by the muslims on America and the Americans.

    Like I mentioned, the punishment in the bible for gay intercourse is death, hence the hate crimes. I do not promote any hate at all, but at least then people recognized the bible and G-d. Now it's as if he has ceased to exist (G-d Forbid). I dont believe that any extremes are correct. But that includes the extreme of letting gay people marry and adopt children.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    .. Especially if there were many of us, as a group of Jews threatinging you and your family. Such is the problems with the muslims - there are many muslims threatining to anihilate both Jews and Americans, should I not be worried?!?!

    Yet there are many Muslims and other groups that have lived in America freely as you put it and in other countries that wouldn't dare want to commit any violence against Americans and Jews. If your fear is based on paranoia that's one thing but if you are really intelligent you know that just because someone does something harmful from one group isn't concrete proof of how the whole culture acts. Did every white person in the country attack the black man when the Ku Klux Klan started? No.

    I don't feel threatened by Muslims so please stop trying to say what America believes in because what America believes in the moment is not what I believe in. Right now it believes in waging a war for clear economical interest which if you've done any sort of homework on US History know that Is very much part of our culture.

    The problem is that there is no way to differentiate. Thats why wars with soldiers are accepted. You can differentiate a soldier from a civilian. The attack that occurred in Israel a couple days ago was by a worker, helping to build the train system in Jerusalem. In middle of work he veered off course and started crushing anything that came in his path!! He killed 3 people and injured 44. He had been working there for a while, he worked with Jews before. And yet one day he just went around killing CIVILIANS in the CITY center. So tell me now, who should I be scared of and who shouldn't I?

    I said America as a Majority, the Muslim definitely is not afraid of the other Muslim and people like you are not either. But when planes come and knock down civilian office building and stores are blown up by a group that can only be identified as Muslim, yes I feel threatened by them. I'm not saying that there are no good Muslims as I told you before, I am just more cautious around them until I know that there is nothing to worry about.

    The war is for ECONOMICAL interests??? Are you kidding me? Look at America's economic situation right now? This war NEVER helped America's economic situation.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    Because if women are equal as men as we say they are (even though they didn't actually get the right to vote until the 19th amendment then clearly why should anyone let alone a religion (which you don't want to comment on its many hypocrisies) be against a woman being a priest? Especially given how the reputation of a priest has falling down considerably since all these cases of child molestation. Women have many jobs? Like cleaning in the kitchen? Once again you can be ignorant and say one thing and do another or your so called beliefs apply to everybody. Just like the gay issue, you can't you respect gays or women and then say crap like "well women have other jobs so what's the big deal if they can't be priests". Again the fact that's being passed down is a long history of discrimination and you just pointed out that with the "women have other jobs" comment.

    Once again, I am not a Christian and can therefore not argue on Christian beliefs. As a Jew we don't believe in woman being a Rabbi either. Not because she is inferior but rather because she has other work that is suited for her. Some jobs are suited for men and some are suited for woman. Once again the position as Rabbi or Priest was given to us by G-d. And he told us that it is a Males job. I can definitely respect woman and gays, without putting them in positions where they are not suited. Once again instead of FIXING the problem you are looking for alternatives. If there are many unlawful or immoral priests then they should be punished and dealt with. That does NOT mean that therefore a woman should become a priest. The world was working beautifully before woman became priests or gays started marrying, what has changed. And is this change really better for our existence? At the end of the day, I believe that G-d knows better than you, what is better for the world. And he said that woman should not be priests and that gays should not get married. And I believe that he knows what hes talking about a hell of a lot more than I believe in you. He sees the world as a whole, he knows everything, and with that knowledge this is the conclusion that he came too; are you better then G-d? Do you know better than him? If you say yes, than you are an immoral ignorant......... Or you just don't believe in G-d in which case the only morals that you have are your own which you can change until they become immoral, in essence causing you to be immoral.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    If you say that you what they are doing is immoral or wrong you are condemning them. Dude you can't have it both ways. You either respect or you don't. I'am not sorry that America has a bad image so why should you be? Clearly that's America's doing. I've been around the world too and talked to many people and it's not really just my opinion that America has a bad image. Heck turn on the news and you'll hear especially around these political times how America must improve it's image and diplomacy against other countries. If America had a "good image" such talk wouldn't even be discussed. The sanctity of marriage is once again something that like American "good" image can be seen a joke. I know what you are saying is of the pure belief, the sanctity clearly is changing and it's not just an agreement or relationship between a man or woman. I'am not gay I'am 100% heterosexual. Clearly as well some states are changing their laws and allowing marriage to be defined in a much different fashion from what the old days defined it as. That is America right there being able to change with the times and not discriminate against somebody because of what they believe to morally wrong.

    Condemnation and being wrong are VERY different. I've went over this about four times already. I disagree with their actions just like I do a theif. I wouldn't kill a theif as I wouldn't hurt a gay person. Both of their actions are wrong. That doesn't make them bad people. A child who ruins their life with drugs is not a bad kid, they are a kid doing the wrong thing. I don't condemn the kid. I help them change!!

    By the way, WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING IN AMERICA? From what you've written so far you hate this country. GO move somewhere better. I on the other hand love America. I believe that it has its faults and I hope that they are corrected but there are very few other places in the world where I would like to live!!

    Your right again, the media bashes America for the hell of it. I hate the media. They are political and don't just say the news. They dont give you any good news only the bad. I trust what people say, and many of the people that I know from outside of the united states would do anything in the world to be able to live here. I'm happy that I am able too!!

    I love the way that America stands up for itself. Obviously because I believe they are doing the correct thing. You are right, if the soviets did the same, I would have a problem. But thank G-d most of 300 Million people agree with me!!

    Marriage comes from G-d!! Without G-d and without religion MARRIAGE DOES NOT EXIST. Call it what you want, be a "partner" but MARRIAGE is reserved for the holy matrimony of man and wife. Can you not think up another term for whatever you want to call that "union". Why must you use Marriage. Are you really trying to pick a fight? Why? Stop trying to change something that is carved in concrete from thousands of years ago. MARRIAGE is the union of a MAN and a WOMAN PERIOD. Its like me saying that a circle is now a square!?!?! I cant do that, you cant change marriage. Not even America can change a fact.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of yroston

    yroston

    [35]Jul 13, 2008
    • member since: 09/05/04
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 11

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    I did watch the last episode and clearly what Morgan was trying to say (and he in fact did say it) is that America has lost a lot, He also clearly felt guilty for what this country to the Native Americans . The values this country have therefore have significantly gone down, that's been one of the main themes of the shows if you've been watching from "The MinuteMan" episode to the episode about "minimum wage laws" and of course the episodes about Same Sex parenting. I think you misunderstand what he is saying.

    The "facts" so far say that several countries and states are allowing same sex parenting and marriage. The facts so far proved that this has have little negative effect as far as our morals go. Thus what we have left is opinion, if you disapprove or approve of the changes then that's clearly up to you. All these talk of a higher power well rather is ridiculous because the higher power sees everyone as God's children. If Jesus loves everybody, do you think he would discriminate against gays like some mortals on this earth especially when it's their time to go to heaven? Probably not.

    Yes just because we are God's children doesn't mean we are behaving properly and clearly discrimination is a sign that certain children of God are behaving improperly.

    There isn't much to add over here. I disagree with you. And I believe that the people instating these laws are either gay themselves or have lost there own morals. Hence my point that all of America is loosing its morals. You can believe that you can commit a sin and then go to heaven. I obviously don't. I'm sure that we'll find out when the time comes.

    Until then I wish you all of the best. But quite frankly I don't believe that America is the land for you? Unless everyone over her loses there morals in which case it is obviously not the land for me!!

    Take Care.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of yroston

    yroston

    [36]Jul 13, 2008
    • member since: 09/05/04
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 11
    windseeker15 wrote:

    "In god we trust" was only put on American currency in the 1950's during the Cold War, simply as contrast propaganda against "the godless Soviets."

    The original motto of the founding fathers was "E pluribus unum" (Out of Many, One).
    And I feel I should point out quite a few of those founding fathers weren't Chrisitan, namely (but not limited to) Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin (they were Deists).
    Thomas Jefferson established the separation of church and state. There are no references to god in the Constitution, nor is there a reference to the Christian god in the Declaration of independence (which refer's to "Nature's God").

    Thank you very much for this information.

    It is still a very interesting quote to put on a bill of a country with no religion.

    I find it to mean that Americans believe in a higher power.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of marvelfan89

    marvelfan89

    [37]Jul 14, 2008
    • member since: 06/15/05
    • level: 39
    • rank: Fonzerelli
    • posts: 2,677

    yroston wrote:
    I 'm not sure whether or not you have realized this yet but the majority of American homes are heterosexual. No wonder you can find hundreds of cases. Tell me, for every gay couple that you know how many hetero couples do you know? Considering that you yourself are not gay the result would be at a ratio of about 200:1 if not higher. The"fact" that so far you know that it does not have a negative effectdoes not come from enough cases to classify it. So unless you work in this area please don't tell me that you know.

    Well the argument you are posing and this insight seems to be more in support of same sex parenting because if the majority of homes are heterosexual then the negative effects of same sex parenting would seem to be minimal. It's true that gay people have the same problems as heterosexuals but you were the one that brought up the notion that there might be negative effects to same sex parenting so at this point that notion just seems to nothing more than homophobia.

    Also you can't say if an adopted kid had the same problem as the girl that's just pure nonsense. I wouldn't go by average, statistics are one of those things that doesn't quite mean illustrate a certain point. A girl would bring something different but then again every child boy or girl brings something different. You say having a girl would result in a healthy family is once again NONSENSE on your part. Once again unless you can look in the future with a crystal ball, you can't tell what's healthy for a family whether there's more boys than girls or no girls in a family. I'am not degrading girls so stop putting words in my mouth (that's something you seem to do). I'am merely saying having a girl in a family has no impact on the health, just like having an all boys family guarantees a healthy family.

    That link you gave me doesn't seem to again back your assertion about same sex parenting, yes while it does say that single mothers have tripled, one would conclude that straight marriage, heterosexual couples have a higher change of braking up thus leading to that study's conclusion about The overwhelming majority of single-parent families are headed by mothers (84% of all single-parent

    Thus this seems back up my argument and the homophobia you seem to have against same sex parenting resulting in negative effects so far what we have seen in s the negative effects of straight relationships. Likewise that link also says that fathers are more likely to gain custody, have higher standards of living than single mothers again distortion your conclusion that sons need their mothers more

    http://members.tripod.com/Daddyo100/Impact.htm

    Also take a look at that link there and you'll see more evidence to this including this key passage: "THAT SINGLE FATHERS "can 'mother' as well as women" followed by

    "Despite this, U.S. statistics reveal that 40% of American children do not live in homes where their fathers live, making fatherlessness "the most harmful trend of this generation"

    Again reading one would conclude that having a father is just as important as mother and in some cases more important. As you said it's debatable but seeing as this country has a long problem with sons not having fathers I would think you would see the relevance of this point in regards to the same sex parenting and again your question about why the Dads have only boys.

    yroston wrote:
    Did you have any sisters? Were you close with your mom? Did she love you and care for you in a different way after the divorce? Obviously there are exceptions to the rule. Granted there are way too many divorces today. That is another problem in this free society. Nowadays in America its almost accepted to commit Adultery?!?!? Should we allow that as well? They do it out of free will? Maybe we should allow Polygamy as well? You are correct, the person that is gay does not need the female as the lesbian does not necessarily need the male (which is really not true as you usually see that they have close friends from the opposite sex), But THEIR kids NEED both!! ANY straight kid NEEDS BOTH.

    Well even though this personal I'll answer it. Yes I have one sister (adopted). I was close with my mom though actually I was more closer with father because their parental decisions differed drastically. You still insist that a gay family needs both a boy and girl or a mother and father but once you are MISTAKEN. Since we both acknowledge the many cases of divorce, adultery, and neglect that seems to come in straight dysfunctional families why do you still make statements that really have no strong backing? Your point wasn't proven really don't know why are so happy you arrive at the same inconclusive points. LMAO. What you state is merely opinion. If we look at facts looking at the number of straight families we are seeing MORE PROBLEMS that happy families thus a gay family with only dads or moms right now has no negative effect . God will love a gay person and HIS ACTIONS That is what God does loves the person for who they are. . Once again there is nothing bad about being a gay unless you are straight UP homophobc person.

    yroston wrote:

    that does NOT mean that I don't disagree with their actions!! As I mentioned just before, I believe that G-d is the same way.

    God isn't the same way because God, Jesus Christ doesn't judge someone on their sexual orientation God would have no issues with gays or same sex parenting in fact he'd be in favor of it, any such disagreements about the issues would show prejudice and discrimination on not only his part but anybody who disagrees with it.

    yroston wrote:

    your theory everyone in the world is a good person because they are all G-ds children!! I believe that G-d loves them all, but HATES their actions (depending on what they do, obviously). What your saying would in your theory apply to polygamists, Child abusers, pedophiles, murderers and anyone else who commits any sin. Are you going to tell me that they are NOT G-d's children?

    Once again you don't SPEAK for God, so you can't say whether he disapproves or approves of someone's action especially on the topic of being gay that's just plain crazy talk from somebody with homophobia. Stop putting words in my mouth as well apparently you can't read well or have short term memory loss:!!!!!

    I never do say that everyone in the world is a good person because they are God's children. That's your nonsense what I clearly said was that Gays are Godl's children and hating gays because they are gays is discrimination. If you implying that God would hate the actions of a gay person then you are saying God is discriminatory and hateful. Nice try at putting words in my mouth .

    yroston wrote:

    How do you know that this war is not to help you??? Have you seen all of the intelligence that the President has seen? Please don't tell me yes!! You only see half of the puzzle, don't try and guess the other half when you don't even have the pieces!! War used to be waged to conquer land, and that was a very positive motive that people believed in. When you become president you can tell me that it is/was immoral. (Let's not get into this argument here and now).

    I can't believe you are asking these questions WHAT A JOKE. I've only seen half the puzzle? Jesus what planet are you from? Is this your best counter argument but asking me about the President's intelligence seriously that's the best joke I've heard I really hope you are joking otherwise the intelligence just dropped off in this conversation. Let me this straight, you are asking about the intelligence of a guy who endorses torture, makes bad political decisions, has the most lowest approval ratings in history, lies to the American people for over four years (eight if you want 2000) and you are asking me if I've seen everything he has to offer? Hate to break it to you but everyone has seen this guy's intelligence along with the rest of the world and please don't feed this half the puzzle crap!!!! Because there no other parts of the puzzle to fill.

    yroston wrote:

    I'm sorry but slavery was accepted around the world for thousands of years. It has nothing to do with just America. And yes, I agree that it took Americans a long time to accept the fact that black people were no longer slaves and that they are just as good as the next person, but that was the direct result of slavery. By the way, the Americans never enslaved their own people.

    Actually it does because your previous attempted point was that America had a good image apparently you seem to be blind to the truth even history doesn't close of it's eyes to the atrocities of the past. Yes slavery was around for thousands of years bur if we are talking about America, in the land that we like to boast as the best country, clearly slavery shouldn't have been allowed and stopped sooner . Actually Americans did enslave their own people because once a slave was sold to a landowner here in the states that person was their property and they had the option to release them and give them their freedom (some did most of them did it) so ANYWAYS Americans did enslave their own. Even when slaves were freed and looked as Americans they were still enslaved. Back to the main point America's good image has been wrecked a long time and is still being wrecked today whether you choose to admit or not.

    ====================================================LLike I mentioned, the punishment in the bible for gay intercourse is death, hence the hate crimes

    So Bible if we take as the absolute truth endorses murder and sexual discrimination which would be evil and the Devil's work. The bible also believed that mental illness was caused by demonic possession.....

    In the Old Testament it states:

    "All priests shall observe the regulations that I have given. Otherwise, they will become guilty and die, because they have disobeyed the sacred regulations. I am the Lord and I make them holy."

    Yes that hasn't stopped hundreds of priests over the years from molesting young boys, taking in mistresses and committing other sinful acts against the church. The bible also condemns sex been a man and a woman who aren't married (go figure)

    yroston wrote:

    The problem is that there is no way to differentiate. Thats why wars with soldiers are accepted. You can differentiate a soldier from a civilian. ell me now, who should I be scared of and who shouldn't I? I said America as a Majority, the Muslim definitely is not afraid of the other Muslim and people like you are not either. The war is for ECONOMICAL interests??? Are you kidding me? Look at America's economic situation right now? This war NEVER helped America's economic situation.

    Wars with soldiers are not accepted. The result is generally the same innocent victims get hurt (usually by soldiers-Look at Vietnam and non-soldiers). So I shouldn't be scared of a guy with a guy who could probably kill his whole platoon in a matter of seconds if he went crazy (which happens) but be scared of a measly civilian who unless he gets his hands on any weapons poses no threat whatsoever? WTF? Sorry that point makes no sense. You talk about being concerned for Muslims but other countries are concerned about American especially American policy which for right now is to establish it's military power as the number one power ruling others and telling other countries to dismantle there. Bear in mind this is the American that has backed terrorist organizations in Nicaragua, El Salvador (Death Squads) helped bloodthirsty dictators like Pinochet in Chile. While 9/11 is a sad incident you seem to forget as do other what has brought upon so much hatred and attacks against this country. Back to the topic yes the war is Economical interests, let's see you military budget goes up, defense deals go up, private contracting companies specializing in weapons warfare go up, oil prices go up, jesus Christ you'd have to be a total idiot to not see that Iraq is a gold mine for profit. Yes this was hasn't helped America's economic situation but it has HELPED the American businessman, corporations, politicians, oil executives backing it. KBR, a former Halliburton division is expected to make about 3.2 billion this year of the war. http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/CompanyFocus/WhosProfitingFromTheIraqWar.aspx?gt1=10328

    yroston wrote:

    Once again, I am not a Christian and can therefore not argue on Christian beliefs. As a Jew we don't believe in woman being a Rabbi either. Not because she is inferior but rather because she has other work that is suited for her. Some jobs are suited for men and some are suited for woman. Once again the position as Rabbi or Priest was given to us by G-d.

    If God ordained that only men be priests then why does history show evidence of women being priests and deacons of the church?

    http://www.romancatholicwomenpriests.org/

    "Epigraphic evidence exists of women bishops. Until at least the ninth century the Church gave women the full sacramental ordination of deacons. Women priests existed in the West during the 4th and 5th centuries according to literary evidence, and according to epigraphic evidece"

    http://www.romancatholicwomenpriests.org/history.htm

    yroston wrote:

    And he told us that it is a Males job.

    Well the evidence about proves otherwise doesn't it.

    yroston wrote:

    By the way, WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING IN AMERICA? From what you've written so far you hate this country. GO move somewhere better. I on the other hand love America. I believe that it has its faults and I hope that they are corrected but there are very few other places in the world where I would like to live!!

    WHAT THE HELL YOU ARE DOING IN AMERICA AS WELL? From what you have written you clearly are homophobic and display signs of aggression and discrimination against gays calling their actions "disgusting". You've been disproving your point that America is not indiscriminate by discriminating by your hate alone.

    And you telling me to move somewhere else is just plain idiotic on your part and you've lost this debate when you resort to cheap insults like that or is this your immature behavior in real life? Trust me you are no American, a real American would debate would me on this but wouldn't resort to such extreme views as your wrong, you make yourself to be a right wing hate monger of which you should follow your own advice and leave yourself because American has enough hate mongers of their own. Anyways, glad to see you helped my points you are pretty close-minded. Your arguments don't hold up much water. Yes American has its faults and you know at the top of the lists of its fault is its uncanny history for its inhabitants to show rudeness, hate speech and discriminating behavior against anyone who disagrees with their beliefs case in point you and your posts. You don't love America you live in your own world where America follows some fake image you believe. I love America. I love the freedom that I can express my views and not to worry that some extremists or some hate monger will come looking for me because he disagrees with my views. I love the fact that these country is made up of people of different races, sex, gender and life****. You apparently don't with your problem against gays.

    yroston wrote:

    Your right again, the media bashes America for the hell of it. I hate the media.

    Then don't watch it you clearly are in your little world if you don't want know what to know about the problems in the country you so called love ( but really don't care about) . . You are wrong the media doesn't bash America for the hell of it only a fool would say such things.

    yroston wrote:

    I love the way that America stands up for itself. Obviously because I believe they are doing the correct thing. You are right, if the soviets did the same, I would have a problem. But thank G-d most of 300 Million people agree with me!!

    Wrong again it's not standing up for itself it's merely going along with a corrupt administration and staining its image in the process. Most American disagree with you.

    yroston wrote:

    Marriage comes from G-d!! Without G-d and without religion MARRIAGE DOES NOT EXIST. Call it what you want, be a "partner" but MARRIAGE is reserved for the holy matrimony of man and wife. Can you not think up another term for whatever you want to call that "union". Why must you use Marriage. Are you really trying to pick a fight? Why? Stop trying to change something that is carved in concrete from thousands of years ago.

    Wrong again .

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage

    ==================================

    Marriage is a personal union of individuals. This union may also be called matrimony, while the ceremony that marks its beginning is called a wedding and the status created is sometimes called wedlock.

    Marriage is an institution in which interpersonal relationships (usually intimate and sexual) are acknowledged by the state or by religious authority

    Without religion marriage can exist and saying it comes from God is complete BS yet I would not expect less from you. You call MARRIAGE God or Satan or whatever but marriage isn't just reserved for a man and woman anymore. You can keep telling yourself but it's not true. It was concrete thousands of years ago? Jesus you show pure ignorance with every post!!!!! It be better to stop posting as this is just embarssing:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage

    "There is evidence that same sex unions have occurred since the beginning of recorded history in Egypt, China, Greece, Rome and Japan. [11] Famous lovers include the Egyptian couple Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum and the Greek couple Harmodius and Aristogiton. The first recorded use of the word "marriage" for same-sex couples occurs during the Roman Empire."

    BTW America, my America also agrees with me that marriage isn't just between a man and woman. It may be small but it dispell the IDIOTIC notion that marriage must be between a man and woman. End of story.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_same-sex_marriage#United_States

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of marvelfan89

    marvelfan89

    [38]Jul 14, 2008
    • member since: 06/15/05
    • level: 39
    • rank: Fonzerelli
    • posts: 2,677
    windseeker15 wrote:

    yroston wrote:
    As for the "In G-d we trust" on the bills, that was something that was part of the foundation of the United States of America. The amazing part about it is that it didnt make a difference which G-d you believed in (Which is what America is about). It is just about believeing in morals from a higher power.

    "In god we trust" was only put on American currency in the 1950's during the Cold War, simply as contrast propaganda against "the godless Soviets."

    The original motto of the founding fathers was "E pluribus unum" (Out of Many, One).
    And I feel I should point out quite a few of those founding fathers weren't Chrisitan, namely (but not limited to) Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin (they were Deists).
    Thomas Jefferson established the separation of church and state. There are no references to god in the Constitution, nor is there a reference to the Christian god in the Declaration of independence (which refer's to "Nature's God").

    That's not surprising at all.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of yroston

    yroston

    [39]Jul 20, 2008
    • member since: 09/05/04
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 11

    Dear marvelfan89,

    This will be my last reply as it seems like we are going in circles without an end.

    My beliefs are quite simple. Every person on this earth must believe in pretty much one thing, that there was someone or something in existence FOREVER. Since nothing can be created from nothing than we must believe that there was always something from which this world was created. Now you have two choices, you can either believe that there was "matter" in existence forever or you can believe that there was a G-d (a being that is NOT bound by time and space) that has been in existence forever. Considering that this world is so complex that after thousands or if you believe millions of years humans still aren't even close to figuring out its inner working, I come to the simple conclusion that it is actually G-d that has been in existence FOREVER.

    G-d, for whatever reason it was (we won't get into it) decided to create a world and put human beings in it. Now G-d did not want to control every human being so he decided to give the human beings something called "free choice" but what is the point of "free choice" if there is no choice? So G-d created "good" and "evil" and gave the human the choice to choose whichever one they wanted. However G-d knew simply that if you just leave a human alone then some of them will eventually choose evil and using that evil they will annihilate the remaining people who choose to be good. And indeed that is what happened, there was chaos in the world and the people were choosing whatever they wanted to do and enforcing it on others.

    So G-d offered the humans of the world a "guide book" that if kept, will keep all the people at total peace. However, most people did NOT want this guidebook. To make the long story short, eventually the people of the world realized that in order for this world to remain in relative peace there must be a guidebook as G-d had offered them in the first place. Some took G-d's book and others made their own but at the end of the day, most of the humans in this world decided that you really do need a guide book and they accepted upon themselves one of these guide books.

    Now it's simple. We as a human can only see a tiny fraction of this world at once. Even the smartest or greatest person can still only see a fraction of this world at once. However G-d can see from one end of the world to the other without pause all at the same moment. Now G-d made one guidebook and gave it to us, and some humans made other guide books and passed them on as well. I personally believe in G-d's guide book above that of others.

    Now in that guide book it says many things, but one of those things, is that "a man should not sleep with another man as one sleeps with a woman". I don't know why G-d made that law. However my guess (being the lowly human that I am) is that G-d wants this world to become fruitful and multiply, and by someone following any gay instincts that he has, is going directly against that will of G-d. For man and man cannot create another human. Therefore G-d himself calls such an act an "abomination" and sets the punishment of death. Not so much for it being carried out but rather for the human to know the severity of the sin. G-d himself will take care of any punishment when and if he sees fit. That is not anybody else's or my, will or decision.

    I understand your will for complete freedom as that is the human instinct. But you should know as well as any other decent human being that complete free will, will cause utter chaos. As some people would rather commit what we know as crimes, but are being deterred by the threat of punishment. This is why as a human society we MUST have LAW. This includes PUNISHMENT. Hence we have the prison system.

    You say that G-d loves all of his children. Which, considering the fact that G-d created the entire universe and everything inside of it, would mean that G-d loves ALL people. I agree with you on this point. But you refrained from replying to the point that I had made earlier. If you had a child and that child (G-d Forbid) started doing the wrong things (drugs, crimes (whatever you consider wrong)) would you stop loving your child??? A normal person would continue loving their child but try and show them and explain to them how what they are doing is wrong and should not be done. They would be extremely upset at their child for committing such crimes. We are all G-d's children and he loves us all, however he gets very upset when people don't listen to the rules he has given to us.

    We as humans have no proper sense of morality. If you gave people the choice to choose their own morals I can venture a guess that 99% of the time you will come out with very immoral results. Since people don't like restrictions, but rather love freedom; they would not choose morals that were really good for them. Therefore we go to a much better source to set our moral grounds. That moral source is G-d, who sees the whole universe at once and KNOWS in essence what is moral and what is immoral. Even if YOU or anybody else disagrees, you must agree (if you believe in G-d) that he knows better than you, what is moral and what is not. G-d has never changed his mind or changed his morals, only humans have tried to do that. G-d knew from the beginning until now what is moral and what is not. TIME DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING.

    I hope that I may have shed some light on my opinion in a way that you understand. My beliefs aren't up for debate, I've spent my whole life reaching them, and I trust them %100.

    I don't have much time but I will try and reply to some of what you have written.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    Well the argument you are posing and this insight seems to be more in support of same sex parenting because if the majority of homes are heterosexual then the negative effects of same sex parenting would seem to be minimal. It's true that gay people have the same problems as heterosexuals but you were the one that brought up the notion that there might be negative effects to same sex parenting so at this point that notion just seems to nothing more than homophobia.

    There is no arguing that at the moment there are fewer gays then heterosexuals so that the actual amount (number wise) of gay cases is fewer. The point is to stop the problem before it gets out of hand. Since there are very few actual Muslim terrorists in the world, you would be paranoid to be worried about them in your opinion. Now I'm starting to understand you. You believe that things only need to be taken care of when they get out of hand or in reality when it's already too late. Take Iran right now for example, they have been talking about annihilating Israel and attacking the U.S. Italy and Britain. They will have nuclear capabilities within ONE year and they have just perfected rockets that can reach long distances. But you think that we should wait until they actually shoot the nuclear missile before we take any action, correct? After all, the whole world seems to think so. Who cares if Israel is annihilated? If they are, then we know that we need to take care of the Iranian threat, and then only because the United States is the next target!!

    Now hopefully you see my point. Until now being Gay was something that was done in private and quietly. In which case it is none of my business and I wish them all well. However now it is becoming a national problem, one that affects this entire nation.

    Once again, I am not trying to hurt or change a gay person. Whatever he does that doesn't hurt me is between him and G-d. However this whole marriage and adoption thing affects the entire nation, and should be prevented before it becomes a disaster.

    marvelfan89 wrote:

    Also you can't say if an adopted kid had the same problem as the girl that's just pure nonsense. I wouldn't go by average, statistics are one of those things that doesn't quite mean illustrate a certain point. A girl would bring something different but then again every child boy or girl brings something different. You say having a girl would result in a healthy family is once again NONSENSE on your part. Once again unless you can look in the future with a crystal ball, you can't tell what's healthy for a family whether there's more boys than girls or no girls in a family. I am not degrading girls so stop putting words in my mouth (that's something you seem to do). I am merely saying having a girl in a family has no impact on the health, just like having an all boys family guarantees a healthy family.

    Why is it nonsense that someone else would have the same problem? You were talking about the heterosexual problems and over there they were all the same, but all of a sudden here they cannot be the same problem???

    What's the point of statistics if not to illustrate a point?

    Every single psychologist that you ask would tell you that to create a completely healthy family you would need a mother, father, sister and brother since everyone brings a unique insight into life. Obviously they would all have to behave like a guy/girl etc. and they would all have to get along. But that is what a healthy family is made up of.

    More to come.....

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of marvelfan89

    marvelfan89

    [40]Jul 20, 2008
    • member since: 06/15/05
    • level: 39
    • rank: Fonzerelli
    • posts: 2,677

    yroston wrote:

    Dear marvelfan89,

    This will be my last reply as it seems like we are going in circles without an end.

    My beliefs are quite simple. Every person on this earth must believe in pretty much one thing, that there was someone or something in existence FOREVER. Since nothing can be created from nothing than we must believe that there was always something from which this world was created. Now you have two choices, you can either believe that there was "matter" in existence forever or you can believe that there was a G-d (a being that is NOT bound by time and space) that has been in existence forever. Considering that this world is so complex that after thousands or if you believe millions of years humans still aren't even close to figuring out its inner working, I come to the simple conclusion that it is actually G-d that has been in existence FOREVER.

    Well there is no argument there.

    yroston wrote:

    G-d, for whatever reason it was (we won't get into it) decided to create a world and put human beings in it. Now G-d did not want to control every human being so he decided to give the human beings something called "free choice" but what is the point of "free choice" if there is no choice? So G-d created "good" and "evil" and gave the human the choice to choose whichever one they wanted. However G-d knew simply that if you just leave a human alone then some of them will eventually choose evil and using that evil they will annihilate the remaining people who choose to be good. And indeed that is what happened, there was chaos in the world and the people were choosing whatever they wanted to do and enforcing it on others.

    So G-d offered the humans of the world a "guide book" that if kept, will keep all the people at total peace. However, most people did NOT want this guidebook. To make the long story short, eventually the people of the world realized that in order for this world to remain in relative peace there must be a guidebook as G-d had offered them in the first place. Some took G-d's book and others made their own but at the end of the day, most of the humans in this world decided that you really do need a guide book and they accepted upon themselves one of these guide books.

    Now it's simple. We as a human can only see a tiny fraction of this world at once. Even the smartest or greatest person can still only see a fraction of this world at once. However G-d can see from one end of the world to the other without pause all at the same moment.

    Again no argument there, the only thing that needs to be accepted in that several of God's guidebook contains scenes of prejudice, intolerance and evil...it doesn't portray God in the positive light that we'd expect him to.

    yroston wrote:

    Now in that guide book it says many things, but one of those things, is that "a man should not sleep with another man as one sleeps with a woman". I don't know why G-d made that law. However my guess (being the lowly human that I am) is that G-d wants this world to become fruitful and multiply, and by someone following any gay instincts that he has, is going directly against that will of G-d. For man and man cannot create another human. Therefore G-d himself calls such an act an "abomination" and sets the punishment of death. Not so much for it being carried out but rather for the human to know the severity of the sin. G-d himself will take care of any punishment when and if he sees fit. That is not anybody else's or my, will or decision.

    You do realize that in the same guidebook God endorses slavery? Apparently not:

    "Passages referencing and condoning slavery are common in the Old Testament. In one place, we read:

    When a slave owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner's property." (Exod. 21:20-21)<

    This is an abomination in itself, what kind of God would not only bash gays but would endorse slavery? An evil God certainly not the God the Catholic church believes in thus making such passages to be rather unrealistic.. Again remember that this guidebook was not written by God but by men. It's entirely feasible that God did not speak these words and like many works the bible is one of many so called "true" books that have been fiddled with to fit someone's prejudices. Certainly the church itself has been full of prejudice, child molestation and other godless things for centuries. So if you accept what this passage and other passage as abominations, it seems you accepting not God, but the Devil as God would not encourage such hatred and suffering in the world, it's that simple. .

    yroston wrote:

    . If you had a child and that child (G-d Forbid) started doing the wrong things (drugs, crimes (whatever you consider wrong)) would you stop loving your child??? A normal person would continue loving their child but try and show them and explain to them how what they are doing is wrong and should not be done. They would be extremely upset at their child for committing such crimes. We are all G-d's children and he loves us all, however he gets very upset when people don't listen to the rules he has given to us.

    We as humans have no proper sense of morality. If you gave people the choice to choose their own morals I can venture a guess that 99% of the time you will come out with very immoral results.

    Once again you input something that you cannot really prove which makes this argument weak. While it's true that some people given the choice to have their own morals would choose immoral results, not everyone would that's just flat out ridiculous and closeminded but again in the end we as human beings tend to believe what we want to believe.

    yroston wrote:

    . That moral source is G-d, who sees the whole universe at once and KNOWS in essence what is moral and what is immoral. Even if YOU or anybody else disagrees, you must agree (if you believe in G-d) that he knows better than you, what is moral and what is not. G-d has never changed his mind or changed his morals, only humans have tried to do that. G-d knew from the beginning until now what is moral and what is not. TIME DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING.

    Then you must also know that God if he as merciful and loving as Jesus Christ would NEVER ENDORSE SLAVERY OR DISCRIMINATION OF ANYBODY. You seem to ignore that fact which poses a big loophole in Christianity which boasts itself as one of the most moral religions ever. If God is Good and Loving therefore what HAS BEEN WRITTEN about which doesn't suit this image is wrong. Plain and simple.

    yroston wrote:

    There is no arguing that at the moment there are fewer gays then heterosexuals so that the actual amount (number wise) of gay cases is fewer. The point is to stop the problem before it gets out of hand. Since there are very few actual Muslim terrorists in the world, you would be paranoid to be worried about them in your opinion. Now I'm starting to understand you. You believe that things only need to be taken care of when they get out of hand or in reality when it's already too late.

    This ISN'T A PROBLEM it's only a problem if you are true discriminating person in the same way that whites discriminated blacks not too long ago. Whites or should I say stupid white bigots believed that blacks were here to take away their jobs and pollute the land. That same mind can be said for heterosexuals who say they respect but really are disgusted by them. Like I said YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. This isn't a problem really. The problem is the discriminating attitude that like racism seems to clouder the minds of people who know about the subject. Therefore making the claims that same sex parenting would have a negative effect on children is quite stupid.

    yroston wrote:

    Now hopefully you see my point. Until now being Gay was something that was done in private and quietly. In which case it is none of my business and I wish them all well. However now it is becoming a national problem, one that affects this entire nation.

    Once again, I am not trying to hurt or change a gay person. Whatever he does that doesn't hurt me is between him and G-d.

    Not really I just disproved most of them. Furthermore being gay was done privately because of homophobia and the increasing number of hate crimes brought upon by ignorance and fear (most people who committed such crimes I doubt were catholic to begin with thus believing any nonsense that Gays were going against God). Gay marriage doesn't affect the nation if gays are in the minority as you put them to be. A recession affects the nation, a costly war affects the nation when taxpayers pay high gas and incur the costs of the war. Gay marriage as seen in this episode would actually help the adoption and foster problem this nation has.

    yroston wrote:

    Why is it nonsense that someone else would have the same problem? You were talking about the heterosexual problems and over there they were all the same, but all of a sudden here they cannot be the same problem???

    What's the point of statistics if not to illustrate a point?

    Every single psychologist that you ask would tell you that to create a completely healthy family you would need a mother, father, sister and brother since everyone brings a unique insight into life. Obviously they would all have to behave like a guy/girl etc. and they would all have to get along. But that is what a healthy family is made up of.

    More to come.....

    Speculation when you are trying to make a strong case (which you haven't made) is nonsense. Saying what happened to one person will surely happen to another is nonsense. Every single psychologist would never give the same answer, once again if you are going to post something back it with some facts. So far this is just one opinion. Most psychologist at least the good ones would say the most important thing for a child is to have loving parents- In this day and age most psychologists have accepted same sex parenting at the same level as a mother and father relationship. The only person saying you need a brother, sister , mom and father are the old traditional and rather closeminded kind. Especially if it's likely that this perfect family is likely to end up dysfunctional or divorced. The odds of that happening are about 50/50 which would make any assumption that a child needs a specific family wrong. If that were the case there wouldn't bee a need for same sex couples to adopt children now wouldn't it? The two dads in this episode would never have adopted so many sons if your theory held up which it didn't. Again this is about having the best interess of the child at heart, it's not about some guys homophobia that straight parents would be the ideal candidate or that they are the only outlets for a loving family, it's about whether this child can be loved period which is something that same sex parents can give.

    Edited on 07/20/2008 6:35pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.