Discussion about heterosexual only reproduction.

[Richard.20.12]

I have no clue what category to put this. We really need a homosexual category as this demographic is growing and growing whereas the Bible clear talks about it in no uncertain terms.

Anyway, it occurred to me that God only gives child rearing possibilities to heterosexual couples because He doesn't want gay people to reproduce and have more of an influence on society than they already have. He blesses hetero couples only with children. Gay couples have no natural options and thereby foist themselves into a barren existence with no chance of natural offspring.

Single heteros have the option but may not exercise it of course. But having that option is nice, something they can always use in the future. We all like options.

One could also make the point that only couples that get along reasonably well tend to have many children so making that effort for the spouse is extremely important. It usually involves swallowing our pride, something human nature tends to resist but God wants us to work at as it hugely increases our general humility which helps us in many other areas. An arrogant person is rarely humble in anything.

So what do you think?

 

[PloverWing]

I think I want to keep the question of who can be a good parent separate from the question of who is biologically able to reproduce.

Of course the two are related, and the most common kind of family is one in which the children are the biological offspring of two married opposite-sex people.

However: Infertile couples can make good adoptive parents. A widowed person can remarry, and the new spouse can be a loving parent (a more common situation in earlier days when people died younger of infectious diseases, injuries, or childbirth). Grandparents who are past childbearing age sometimes help raise children.

And: Abuse in a relationship does not prevent conception.

Personally, I think of same-sex couples as similar to infertile opposite-sex couples, when it comes to parenting. As adoptive parents, they'll likely experience the same joys and successes and blunders that opposite-sex parents experience.

(Note that I am carefully not addressing whether same-sex couples are morally permitted to marry, or exist, as CF rules forbid that discussion. I am also not addressing the question of which churches allow same-sex couples as members, since Google can easily tell us that.)

 

[Richard.20.12]

"I think I want to keep the question of who can be a good parent separate from the question of who is biologically able to reproduce."

That's not the subject of this discussion though. Because God never allowed same sex couples to procreate so that's rather indicative of how well He feels same sex couples can raise children. If He was OK with it same sex couples would be able to reproduce. He can do anything, after all. What we see around us is how He chose to make the world. Gravity at a certain power, the sun at a certain brightness, the current temperature and wind extremes and on and on. All designed long ago. Along with procreation parameters.

"Of course the two are related, and the most common kind of family is one in which the children are the biological offspring of two married opposite-sex people."

Yes that does seem to be the norm. This is proceeding splendidly!

"However: Infertile couples can make good adoptive parents. A widowed person can remarry, and the new spouse can be a loving parent (a more common situation in earlier days when people died younger of infectious diseases, injuries, or childbirth). Grandparents who are past childbearing age sometimes help raise children.

Absolutely true. I'm 1000% for encouraging adoption. It will help lower abortion rates like nothing else. If the birth couple likes and respects a prospective couple they are far more likely to entrust the upbringing of their child to them when they are in no position to raise that child themselves. They are choosing what is best for the child. The type of adoption is important. It should be open 100% with frequent visits. Some adoptive parents resist this but that is wrong: Wrong for them, wrong for the birth parents and wrong for the children. Transparency is everything. Much like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Never lie to children. Even if it seems so UNfun to stick with the truth 100%. Most of us remember when we were told the truth about Santa. Not a good feeling. Trust broken. Bad move on mommy and daddy's part. You never want any wall between you and your children. That wall may prevent them from listening to you much when you really need them to later in their teenage years.

"And: Abuse in a relationship does not prevent conception."

True again though it probably won't encourage a lot of procreation!

"Personally, I think of same-sex couples as similar to infertile opposite-sex couples, when it comes to parenting. As adoptive parents, they'll likely experience the same joys and successes and blunders that opposite-sex parents experience."

If God says no to something I tend to respect that! Of course one can read Biblical passages and interpret a variety of things which is what "gay" Christians do. I feel Biblical guidance is for OUR benefit though. So it's silly to ignore it or purposely misinterpret it. All that advice is there to help us. We humans are an ungrateful bunch sometimes!

"(Note that I am carefully not addressing whether same-sex couples are morally permitted to marry, or exist, as CF rules forbid that discussion."

To me that seems wise as it's really more of a political and moral discussion. One could also argue that a gay Christian is closer to God than an atheist though! And many see the light after a while, after spending time in the Word and prayer. I think the main impediment to this is the realization that almost all of their friends will reject them if they change their sexuality. So much for tolerance! That's why we Christians must never give up on anyone because you just never know when their eyes will open to spiritual logic.

"I am also not addressing the question of which churches allow same-sex couples as members, since Google can easily tell us that."

Yes. So let's get back to the question posted: Do you think that God is showing His choice by only letting hetero people procreate? Or....why did He NOT let same sex couples procreate? They profess to love each other (though very few maintain their relationships for very long) so why not give everyone the freedom to procreate? There is a reason for everything. There's one here I'm sure.

 

[PloverWing]

More directly answering the original question, then.

Anyway, it occurred to me that God only gives child rearing possibilities to heterosexual couples because He doesn't want gay people to reproduce and have more of an influence on society than they already have.

Yes. So let's get back to the question posted: Do you think that God is showing is choice by only letting hetero people procreate?

This way of phrasing the question seems to treat gay people like an ethnic group we wish didn't exist, so isn't it great that they can't reproduce more gay children like themselves. I am not comfortable with that framing of the situation, for many reasons. One is that gay people are people -- scientists and poets and teachers and musicians and so on -- many of whom have had positive influences on society (and all of whom are beloved children of God). Another is that straight people can have gay children, so God's alleged method of eliminating homosexuality from the population isn't working very well.

A couple of last comments:

To me that seems wise as it's really more of a political discussion. One could also argue that a gay Christian is closer to God than an atheist though! And many see the light after a while, after spending time in the Word and prayer. I think the main impediment to this is the realization that almost all of their friends will reject them if they change their sexuality. So much for tolerance!

I'd say it's an ethical discussion, more than a political discussion, but, alas, one we can't have here on CF.

I will say, though, that there's more going on with sexual orientation than merely what one's friends will think.

They profess to love each other (though very few maintain their relationships for very long) so why not give everyone the freedom to procreate.

The apples-to-apples comparison would be to compare the divorce rates of same-sex couples to that of opposite-sex couples. Do you have a source that says same-sex couples have a higher divorce rate than opposite-sex couples?

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I have no clue what category to put this. We really need a homosexual category as this demographic is growing and growing whereas the Bible clear talks about it in no uncertain terms.

Anyway, it occurred to me that God only gives child rearing possibilities to heterosexual couples because He doesn't want gay people to reproduce and have more of an influence on society than they already have. He blesses hetero couples only with children. Gay couples have no natural options and thereby foist themselves into a barren existence with no chance of natural offspring.

Single heteros have the option but may not exercise it of course. But having that option is nice, something they can always use in the future. We all like options.

One could also make the point that only couples that get along reasonably well tend to have many children so making that effort for the spouse is extremely important. It usually involves swallowing our pride, something human nature tends to resist but God wants us to work at as it hugely increases our general humility which helps us in many other areas. An arrogant person is rarely humble in anything.

So what do you think?

I think that’s a bizarre and arbitrary way to look at relationships and parenting that says more about your judgment of LGBTQA+ people than it does Gods.

 

[Richard.20.12]

I think that’s a bizarre and arbitrary way to look at relationships and parenting that says more about your judgment of LGBTQA+ people than it does Gods.

"Judgement"? The Bible is clear on its judgement of this. That's not the topic here. I sure wish we could get back on topic.
We're talking about why God only gave procreation abilities to hetero couples. C'mon people. Input needed! Because you know same sex couples COULD have been procreative if God wanted it to occur. But that's not what happened back at Creation. Is it?

 

[Richard.20.12]

"Another is that straight people can have gay children, so God's alleged method of eliminating homosexuality from the population isn't working very well."

Sin is sin, right? You reduce it as much as you can. Gay parents will have far more of a gay influence on their children than hetero parents will in terms of them making decisions later which way to lean. Maybe you are OK with gay and don't read it's condemnation in the Bible like most of us do. To me it's clear that the Bible is clear that it's wrong. If it wasn't we'd have clear examples of gay couples in the Bible but that is conspicuously absent. Something gay Christians conveniently sidestep. And I think if God was OK with gay, same sex couples would be able to naturally procreate. Because God could definitely make it happen if He wanted to. Right?

"Do you have a source that says same-sex couples have a higher divorce rate than opposite-sex couples?"

I find this question odd because almost no gay couples ever get married! They are far more promiscuous than hetero couples in general so that doesn't encourage marriage. Many gay men have THOUSANDS of liaisons over several decades. Ponder that. A lot of them, not a tiny sliver. When you see guys cruising they ain't looking for a spouse! And a far higher percentage of gay men are far more aggressively sexual in their quest than hetero guys. You see this everywhere. Sure there are the few that are more stable. It's just far more rare than in the hetero community where most men crave stability and monogamy at least in some part of their short lives.

 

[PloverWing]

And I think if God was OK with gay, same sex couples would be able to naturally procreate.

I think this is an unjustified assumption.

Whether or not God is "OK with gay" is not something we are allowed to discuss here. But saying "If I were God, I would have created the world this way" is merely telling us how you would set things up if you got to create a universe. God has not told us all the reasons why the world was created the way that it is.

I find this question odd because almost no gay couples ever get married!

I probably have a skewed perspective, because most of the gay couples I know are married. Perhaps I'm in an older demographic, with friends who tend to be at the age where they're ready to "settle down".

 

[Richard.20.12]

"Whether or not God is "OK with gay" is not something we are allowed to discuss here."
I didn't realize that. Why would they care? It's certainly discussed in the Bible. Is it perceived as possibly offensive to some readers?

 

[PloverWing]

"Whether or not God is "OK with gay" is not something we are allowed to discuss here."
I didn't realize that. Why would they care? It's certainly discussed in the Bible. Is it perceived as possibly offensive to some readers?

I'm going by the rules as stated here: Statement of Purpose - Christian Philosophy & Ethics Statement of Purpose

I don't know the reason behind the rule. Possibly the debates were leading too easily to flame wars.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

"Judgement"? The Bible is clear on its judgement of this. That's not the topic here. I sure wish we could get back on topic.

It is the topic, but ok.

We're talking about why God only gave procreation abilities to hetero couples. C'mon people. Input needed! Because you know same sex couples COULD have been procreative if God wanted it to occur. But that's not what happened back at Creation. Is it?

God didn’t give procreation abilities to women after menopause or women pre-puberty, and there are plenty of women and men with infertility throughout their reproductive lives. I guess God is sending a message that children, women, and infertile people shouldn’t have influence on things in the world.

The rest of the “logic,” that only couples that get along have children, that because you have children you must have the ability to be more humble, more giving, less prideful… It’s inane. That’s just you looking at LGBTQA+ people with your bias, identifying biological differences, and then self-applying and assuming good qualities to heteronormative people to further justify your bias.

The ability to procreate is not hard, nor does it denote some sort of moral superiority or gift of righteousness. It means two people had sex or underwent medical treatment and had a baby. Plenty of awful people with no life skills and no redeeming qualities have babies. Plenty of amazing people have no kids.

Look at the Duggars. They had 20+ kids and don’t have what I’d call a good or healthy relationship, nor any particular parenting gifts or aptitude. They made the children they had (and the raising of them) a task for the oldest children to manage and they were hands-off, especially the father. They had at least one, and rumor is two, of their children sexually molest/rape their own sisters, and both parents covered up, shielded him from the law, and lied to the court when he was caught doing it again. Their ability to have 20 kids did not make them better people.