I'm sure you'd all be glad if you had 2 fathers boinking each other.
Signs point to yes. When kids grow up in that sort of family they accept it very easily.
I'm sure you'd have a great time telling all your friends.
1. If people make fun of you because of your parents then they aren't 'friends" nor friend material and it's better to never make friends with them in the future as they are not reliable.
2. People who make fun of children with gay parents come from lousy heterosexual parents who teach corrupt morals. Your basically defending the KKK and condemning the gay people and their children because the KKK make fun of them.
I'm sure they'll be very understanding and won't call you names at all.
Why are you defending the assholes who tease children and make them commit suicide or school schootings?
Yeah...
You're messed up. I guess you never got teased before....you're probably the bully. Bullies tease people because they are trying to get attention and come from families where there is a lot of shouting and abuse. So bullies go to school and demonstrate what they learn from their home. So the real problem aren't the children of gay people, it's the children from abusive, heterosexual households.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
I'm sure you'd all be glad if you had 2 fathers boinking each other. I'm sure you'd have a great time telling all your friends. I'm sure they'll be very understanding and won't call you names at all.
Yeah...
So what exactly is your point? Should we ban same - sex parents because kids might go "Name calling"? ohh, lets take away kids who have a father with a poorly paid job, because the other kids might call those children names! the horror! or people who have ugly parents! Think of all the name calling!
My point is you're all talking about how healthy and good it would be. My point is that I'm pretty sure I'd have a hard time accepting that, and I'm sure the mocking from people around would get to me. As I pointed out, there are lots of other reasons a child could be mocked for in relation to their parents. this could be skin colour, the job of the parents, the looks of the parents (think heavy weighted parents). Besides, its something that mainly happens at young ages. they will grow out of it.
If Christian history is troll bait then yeah. Christianity in general view women as second class. It's better today than it was decades and centuries ago, but that could be because of a more secularist nation we live in and political correctness.
Just look at the time period of "I love Lucy" (not to mention the thousands of years before that). Women were second class because of beliefs that people had and if you think about the fact that Christianity was the main religion then you just connect the dots.
Here are some Chrisitian wedding vows. If you look at the women's part you will see that they regard their husband to be above them in a "Headship" role.
God is almost always referred to with masculine pronouns.
Eve was created out of the rib of Adam. Interpreters often consider this to indicate a natural inferiority of women within the creation story of the religion
It was Eve that ate the apple and was weak.
"Wives, submit yourself unto your husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their husbands in everything" (Ephesians 5:22-24) "The head of every man is Christ, and the head of every woman is man." (I Cor. 11:3)
Now go ahead and tell me how I misunderstood these because they aren't in context.
Regardless of what the Bible says, what matters is how people interpret it, and women have been treated like second class and if you deny that then you are denying a large part of history and i'm sure women would be displeased.
Like I said, specific roles to fill, but in no way are they to be treated with anything but the utmost respect. Submitting yourself to something doesn't mean your a second class citizen, because all Christians are supposed to be submitted to Jesus anyway, this would render all Christians second class citizens among ourselves, by your logic. Nothing at all in any of the things that you quoted would lead a logical and honest person to believe that somehow women aren't to be considered equals, only that they have duties that differ from those of their husbands. And I'm glad to see that you feel that you speak for women everywhere. I happen to know many women who are perfectly happy with a woman's role in a Biblical relationship...some of these women are married, some are not.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
I'm sure you'd all be glad if you had 2 fathers boinking each other.
Signs point to yes. When kids grow up in that sort of family they accept it very easily.
Okay. Just pointing out how I would feel if my mother was my father and my father still my father
I'm sure you'd have a great time telling all your friends.
1. If people make fun of you because of your parents then they aren't 'friends" nor friend material and it's better to never make friends with them in the future as they are not reliable.
True. With friends I mean classmates.
2. People who make fun of children with gay parents come from lousy heterosexual parents who teach corrupt morals. Your basically defending the KKK and condemning the gay people and their children because the KKK make fun of them.
No necessarily. How the fuck am I defending KKK? I live in Denmark, we don't have KKK here. We have a very casual relationship towards most things, and we make fun everything, white people, black people, gay, straight, you name it. I've actually seen homosexuals mock straight people.
All I'm saying, is that I'm wouldn't be comfortable with gay parents. Perhaps it would be different if I was born into it.
I'm sure they'll be very understanding and won't call you names at all.
Why are you defending the assholes who tease children and make them commit suicide or school schootings?
How am I defending them? Not justifying anyones actions. I'm just saying I'm sure it would be like, and how I would feel about it.
Yeah...
You're messed up. I guess you never got teased before....you're probably the bully. Bullies tease people because they are trying to get attention and come from families where there is a lot of shouting and abuse. So bullies go to school and demonstrate what they learn from their home. So the real problem aren't the children of gay people, it's the children from abusive, heterosexual households.
You're messed up. You've obviously been offended by me descriping how I would feel if my parents were gay. You've saying that I defend bullies and KKK, that I am a bully and that my parents are abusive. All wrong. I'm not a bully at all. But generally there aren't a lot of bullies in the schools I've been at. Everybody is being teased, no one is safe, and it's alright as long as it doesn't hurt them. I don't defend KKK, but I am somewhat right wing. My parents aren't abusive, in fact they've never ever hit me. They rarely yell and they are loving and kind.
Why are you offended?
You've called me or insinuated that:
I'm a bully My parents are abusive and shouting I'm defending KKK I'm defending bullies that cause school shootings My parents are teaching corrupt morals - My parents are actually christians and tought me to love my neighbour.
Get a grip. Not mocking gay people here. Just saying how I'm sure some people would feel, including myself.
That issue is how OTHERS, childrens and adults alike treat a child in such a family, probably not the same way as a child from a "normal" family. And allthough I am not against gay adoption I think it should weigh heavily against when deciding to whom a child should be adopted. Yes its societies faulth lots of people are narrow minded and it isnt rigth to let gays suffer for this fact, but nor is it the childs and its well being must always takes precedence.
That's pretty much the way I see it too. Children can be extremely cruel to eachother. That is no reason why gay people shouldn't be allowed to adopt children.
The problem is not at their end, it's the narrow minded, disrespectful and cruel society. The gay people shouldn't be punished for it. Society has to change.
Neither Umbrood, nor I suggested that it should be illegal for a gay couple to adopt, but until society does change, the public's reaction should be taken into account during the screening process and in the decision of where the child will live, for the sake of the child. Using the child to try to help change society is hardly fair on the child.
It's like saying heterosexuals shouldn't have kids because someone could bully them in school. That is just stupid.
Yes, that statement is stupid, but it's not really like that at all. It would be more like saying that when choosing the best parents for adoption, heterosexuals with a lifestyle which much of society disapproves of (rightly or wrongly) should be lower on the list than a couple with a lifestyle that more people would regard as "normal", to improve the child's chances of fitting into society.
A child should be given to the people best fit to take care of the child. If they are gay, heterosexual and religious etc doesn't matter.
I agree, but the child's needs should always come before the adopting couple's desires.
Using the word "punishment" is really not helpful. If a single, disabled person was rejected for adopting a child on the grounds that they were less able to tend to the child's needs than an able-bodied couple, it would hardly be reasonable to say that they were being punished for being disabled and single.
Hmm weird topic, although I used to be quite against the whole same sex couple thing, its only a passing fad.
Homosexuality doesn't bother me anymore, If they don't bother me I won't bother them. Besides, give it another century or two and genetic engineering will have eradicated homosexuality and it will become a thing of the past, hopefully along with backward religious doctrine, but that would be hoping for too much.
Comments
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
My point is you're all talking about how healthy and good it would be. My point is that I'm pretty sure I'd have a hard time accepting that, and I'm sure the mocking from people around would get to me. As I pointed out, there are lots of other reasons a child could be mocked for in relation to their parents. this could be skin colour, the job of the parents, the looks of the parents (think heavy weighted parents). Besides, its something that mainly happens at young ages. they will grow out of it.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
The problem is not at their end, it's the narrow minded, disrespectful and cruel society. The gay people shouldn't be punished for it. Society has to change.
Neither Umbrood, nor I suggested that it should be illegal for a gay couple to adopt, but until society does change, the public's reaction should be taken into account during the screening process and in the decision of where the child will live, for the sake of the child. Using the child to try to help change society is hardly fair on the child.
It's like saying heterosexuals shouldn't have kids because someone could bully them in school. That is just stupid.
Yes, that statement is stupid, but it's not really like that at all. It would be more like saying that when choosing the best parents for adoption, heterosexuals with a lifestyle which much of society disapproves of (rightly or wrongly) should be lower on the list than a couple with a lifestyle that more people would regard as "normal", to improve the child's chances of fitting into society.
A child should be given to the people best fit to take care of the child. If they are gay, heterosexual and religious etc doesn't matter.
I agree, but the child's needs should always come before the adopting couple's desires.
Using the word "punishment" is really not helpful. If a single, disabled person was rejected for adopting a child on the grounds that they were less able to tend to the child's needs than an able-bodied couple, it would hardly be reasonable to say that they were being punished for being disabled and single.
Hmm weird topic, although I used to be quite against the whole same sex couple thing, its only a passing fad.
Homosexuality doesn't bother me anymore, If they don't bother me I won't bother them. Besides, give it another century or two and genetic engineering will have eradicated homosexuality and it will become a thing of the past, hopefully along with backward religious doctrine, but that would be hoping for too much.
O_o o_O