should gay couples be allowed to adopt and have kids?

Pandaemoni said:
If more Americans read their Bibles, they'd also realize that the same book that says homosexuality is "abomination" (actually it's "a man lying with a man as he would with a woman"...so lesbian sex is A-Okay!!!) also says that eating shellfish is an abomination to the Lord (Leviticus 11:10-11) . So are all flying insects...not even eating flying insects, mind you, just the insects themselves...and so is practicing divination (like reading horoscopes) or sorcery. If you sacrifice to God a bull or ram that has a blemish, that is also abomination (according to Deuteronomy), so too is a woman who dresses in mens' clothes (Deut 22:5), and if you sell someone a dog, you are not allowed to bring the money they pay you into a church, because that's "abomination" too (Deut 23:18).

They threw that word around pretty lightly.
Click to expand...

Well said, it seems modern Christians have adopted abominable lifestyles, but think it OK to criticise others for their transgressions of the OT declarations.

A little odd they should cling to some OT stuff, when the JC of NT never mentioned anything about this. In fact, he said very little, which I guess, is why Christians up make so much stuff themselves!
 
phlogistician said:
Says who? You? Homosexuality is OK. If you grow up you may get enough confidence in yourself to realise this.
Just because they themselves do not want it, does not give them the right to deny it to others. The constitution states "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.", there is no clause about robbing homosexuals of rights bestowed upon heterosexuals. If you were a good citizen, you'd have read and understood your constitution, and support true freedom.'special', no, equal yes.Sounds a bit biblical to me. Eating shellfish and wearing clothes made from two differerent types of cloth is also an abomination in the OT.
Yeah, some spout homophobic rants on web forums, and are confused about their own gender and identity, for instance.
Waht do they need, hellfire and brimstone?
Click to expand...


This was almost too retarded to even respond to. I have plenty of confidence. Homo is not ok. It's freakish. Supporting freedom does not mean giving queer freaks the same rights as normal, decent Americans. I am not homophobic. I have no fear of them. Just disgust. That entire post was completely ridiculous.:rolleyes:

And there is plenty of evidence that Americans do NOT want homo marriage. We've voted it down plenty of times. The freaks on the east coast keep sneaking it through.:(
 
sandy said:
This was almost too retarded to even respond to. I have plenty of confidence. Homo is not ok. It's freakish. Supporting freedom does not mean giving queer freaks the same rights as normal, decent Americans. I am not homophobic. I have no fear of them. Just disgust. That entire post was completely ridiculous.:rolleyes:

And there is plenty of evidence that Americans do NOT want homo marriage. We've voted it down plenty of times. The freaks on the east coast keep sneaking it through.:(
Click to expand...

hahaha.
i think that you would do a lot more damage to a child than any gay couple could.
 
sandy said:
This was almost too retarded to even respond to. I have plenty of confidence. Homo is not ok. It's freakish. Supporting freedom does not mean giving queer freaks the same rights as normal, decent Americans. I am not homophobic. I have no fear of them. Just disgust. That entire post was completely ridiculous.:rolleyes:

And there is plenty of evidence that Americans do NOT want homo marriage. We've voted it down plenty of times. The freaks on the east coast keep sneaking it through.:(
Click to expand...
Is everything you say ignorantly satirical?
 
sandy said:
This was almost too retarded to even respond to. I have plenty of confidence. Homo is not ok. It's freakish. Supporting freedom does not mean giving queer freaks the same rights as normal, decent Americans. I am not homophobic. I have no fear of them. Just disgust. That entire post was completely ridiculous.:rolleyes:

And there is plenty of evidence that Americans do NOT want homo marriage. We've voted it down plenty of times. The freaks on the east coast keep sneaking it through.:(
Click to expand...

'Sandy', you are clearly immature.

Supporting freedom means letting others do as they please even if you don't like what they do. You need to check up on your Voltaire.

Being homosexual is 'normal'. There are homosexual animals, and there are homosexual humans. It happens in nature, it is therefore 'natural' and 'normal'.

It's not 'Americans' that object to homosexual marriage, it's constitution twisting religious types. In fact, attempting to make Christian viewpoints law is un-American, you should be ashamed of yourself.
 
Homosexuality is a choice. A bad one.

And stop the name-calling and personal attacks. They're unnecessary.:(
 
a choice?
can you consciously decide that you are going to start being attracted to mexican people?
 
so you would say that your sexual preference is pretty hardwired?
could you change who you found attractive by will power?
 
My sexual preference is for the opposite sex because I am normal. I haven't chosen to be a freak.
 
but within the opposite sex do you think you could change your preference?
 
You mean could I change my attraction to dark/graying-haired, tall, slender guys into an attraction to fat, bald, short guys? Um, no.
 
can you see how the same thing might apply to people who find members of the same sex attractive?

and that to a gay man having sex with a woman would be as unappealing as having sex with a woman is to you?
 
sandy said:
Homosexuality is a choice. A bad one.
Click to expand...

That is not true. Do dogs choose to be homosexual? Did you know that Drosophila can be made gay in the lab? No, I bet you didn't because you probably don't know what Drosophila are, and probably don't read scientific publications.

And stop the name-calling and personal attacks. They're unnecessary.:(
Click to expand...

Oh, the penultimate bastion of the scoundrel. I have not called you a 'name', and I have not attacked you. I have merely pointed out that you are immature. You on the other hand are thowing names like 'freak'.

Maybe you are a sock puppet out for satire. I'd prefer to think so, rather then you were a small minded hate monger.
 
I never called you a freak. I never called you any names. I refer to homos as freaks because that's what they are.

We're not talking about dogs. We're talking about human beings. Big diff.:rolleyes:

I am not a sock puppet or hate monger. I know what is right and I obey the law. I do not do anything that God calls an abomination.
 
sandy said:
I never called you a freak. I never called you any names. I refer to homos as freaks because that's what they are.

We're not talking about dogs. We're talking about human beings. Big diff.:rolleyes:

I am not a sock puppet or hate monger. I know what is right and I obey the law. I do not do anything that God calls an abomination.
Click to expand...

Sock puppet.
 
kenworth said:
can you see how the same thing might apply to people who find members of the same sex attractive?

and that to a gay man having sex with a woman would be as unappealing as having sex with a woman is to you?
Click to expand...

Don't mean that they have to act on it!

I can see how men might be attracted to 12-13 year old girls, but when they act on those attractions, it's a big, big no-no, ain't it?

Oh, I know ye're going to come back with the tired ol' line of "consenting adults", but that's not addressing the issue of attraction, is it? Nope. Nor does it address the human ability to resist his impulses and attractions.

Baron Max
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top