A serious request for information regarding gay relationships of any sort

[dr.p]

Volos -- thumbs up for sheer tenacity. I'm pretty much on the same page as Clarity, informedForGod, and straybullets when it comes to the main issues that originated this thread.

I go from the standpoint of "the Bible is right, the word of God, infallible." Men can definitely muddy it up by misinterpreting it; but it, in it's essence, has not proven itself false in anything to me... and I take it on faith that it never will.

Since I hold that view, it should be obvious that when the Bible says people defile themselves when they have sex with a same-sex partner, I believe that. It should also be obvious that when the Bible says don't judge, I'm always going to try my best not to pass judgement on others -- but I will disagree with you . And when the Bible says love everyone and forgive them all things always, I have to, will and want to do that.

I feel threatened by same-sex marriage because it means if I ever have a child, I'm further burdened in explaining to them why two men are married when I'm teaching him that God says it's wrong. But, if I trust God with that, it will be of no consequence.

The second and greater reason is that in Canada now, I believe, you are not allowed to say in public that homosexuality is wrong. And worse, in Sweden, in church even, you are not allowed to say that. And that's my main fear.

None of you can deny that there will be unforseen effects when something as old and culturally significant as the definition of marriage changes. I can absolutely see, with the world as it is, a minority calling for constitutional changes to allow same-sex marriage. And once that's passed, a call to disallow public criticism (non-violent, of course). Then to disallow private criticism.

I could not go to a Bible-teaching church that allowd and condoned gay marriages or gay pastors/leaders in the church, because it wouldn't be based solely on the Bible anymore. That's not to say I couldn't go to a church that had gay attendees, or even state-married gay couples attending. They need to hear the Word as much much as I do... but there is a clear line to be drawn.

Regardless, the type of marriage that God intends and commends, that type will never change and will never be taken away... because it has nothing to do with worldly governments, nor other people's opinions... it's all about Him and the man and woman. That, finally, being said, no Godly marriage will be truly hurt by any state laws.

I saw a couple posts in this thread that said, in effect, "Homosexual marriages are between two sex people of the same sex who love eachother and commit for life"... this is just as untrue as saying "Heterosexual marriages are between two people of the opposite sex who love eachother and commit for life." Naturally, you should know most marriages (of either type) aren't based in real love because real love doesn't forget the meaning of that commitement. And that's really just another way for me to say that marriage in the U.S. is a tax benefit, and disregards whether actual love is involved...

<sarcasm>So let anyone get married by the state. Let Johnny have 5 wives and a goat... who cares? He can do whatever he wants -- he is human.</sarcasm> But, if God says there are consequences for what he does, it doesn't matter what anyone says -- as Clarity said before, those consequences stick.

Lastly, in the news about a month ago, I think, I saw an article about a convicted pedophile who had his lawyer file an appeal citing "oppression of personal preference" (something along those lines) as the invalidating reason for his conviction. Don't you just love the effect that the "be who/whatever you are" propaganda has on people?

I'm not being overly critical, am I?

 

[Clem is Me]

You know, in a free country persuading someone to argue something for you in a court of law is a good thing. Even stupid stuff like that. It does not mean that he will be successful. It just means he will be heard.

 

[Volos]

I don't think it's right. It should be between a man and a woman.

So millions of law abiding citizens should be denied equal civil rights and legal protections based on your personal prejudice?

 

[Volos]

Volos -- thumbs up for sheer tenacity. I'm pretty much on the same page as Clarity, informedForGod, and straybullets when it comes to the main issues that originated this thread.

I go from the standpoint of "the Bible is right, the word of God, infallible." Men can definitely muddy it up by misinterpreting it; but it, in it's essence, has not proven itself false in anything to me... and I take it on faith that it never will.

Since I hold that view, it should be obvious that when the Bible says people defile themselves when they have sex with a same-sex partner, I believe that. It should also be obvious that when the Bible says don't judge, I'm always going to try my best not to pass judgement on others -- but I will disagree with you . And when the Bible says love everyone and forgive them all things always, I have to, will and want to do that.

It is not tenacity, it is honesty.



Personally I (and I believe most of us) don’t really care one way or the other about an individuals interpretation of any book. What we do care about is civil rights.

I feel threatened by same-sex marriage because it means if I ever have a child, I'm further burdened in explaining to them why two men are married when I'm teaching him that God says it's wrong. But, if I trust God with that, it will be of no consequence.

And I feel threatened by discrimination.



In a few weeks Alex and I will become parents. At this point in time because of discriminatory laws only one of us can be the legal parent of our child. And because we are adopting through he tribe that will be Alex. No amount of advance directives or wills will change the fact that if Alex were to die in the next 18 years I would have no legal standing as parent and will have to spend months or even years in adopting our child. You are left with the prospect of explaining to your child that tow people love each other enough to commit to each other for life, I am left to explain to our child that because some people choose to embrace prejudice he legally has only one parent.

The second and greater reason is that in

Canada now, I believe, you are not allowed to say in public that homosexuality is wrong. And worse, in Sweden, in church even, you are not allowed to say that. And that's my main fear.

you are grossly misinformed.



The law in question is Criminal Code of Canada(Sections 318 & 319)

It covers hate speech and protects against hate propagandadirecting hatred against persons the basis of their color, race, religion, ethnic origin and/or sexual orientation.

(Please note that heterosexuals are protected under this law just as homosexuals.)

Hate Propaganda" is defined by the Criminal Code of Canada(Section 318 & 319) as the expression of hatred against or the advocacy of genocide of an identifiable group: specifically people distinguished by their "color, race, religion, ethnic origin and/or sexual orientation.”

Individuals and organizations would be exempt form prosecution if:
- The hate speech was expressed during a private conversation.
- If, "in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject." This would give clergypersons immunity from conviction for a hate-based sermon, for example.
-If the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, and if, on reasonable grounds, the person believed them to be true. This would give additional protection for the clergy.
- If he/she described material that might generate feelings of hatred for an identifiable group "for the purpose of removal" of that hatred.



As you can see Canadian Christians are free to preach hatred and intolerance all they wish. However they are not legally allowed to promote violence and/or genocide.



It is sad that many Christians and many Christian Churches do advocate such violence.

None of you can deny that there will be unforseen effects when something as old and culturally significant as the definition of marriage changes.

as of yet no one has been abole to show that the effects are necessarily negative or even personally negative.

I saw a couple posts in this thread that said, in effect, "Homosexual marriages are between two sex people of the same sex who love eachother and commit for life"... this is just as untrue as saying "Heterosexual marriages are between two people of the opposite sex who love eachother and commit for life." Naturally, you should know most marriages (of either type) aren't based in real love because real love doesn't forget the meaning of that commitement. And that's really just another way for me to say that marriage in the

U.S. is a tax benefit, and disregards whether actual love is involved...

why in the world would you believe that same sex marriages are based differently in any way than opposite sex marriages?

Lastly, in the news about a month ago, I think, I saw an article about a convicted pedophile who had his lawyer file an appeal citing "oppression of personal preference" (something along those lines) as the invalidating reason for his conviction. Don't you just love the effect that the "be who/whatever you are" propaganda has on people?

] the old “if I can’t come up with an actual argument I will imply a connection between homosexuals and child sexual abuse as justification”

 

[Jetgirl]

I feel threatened by same-sex marriage because it means if I ever have a child, I'm further burdened in explaining to them why two men are married when I'm teaching him that God says it's wrong.

There will always be things in this world that people are doing that your religion teaches is wrong.

It's your job to teach your children values, even in circumstances where no one else on the planet shares them.

It's not right to want to enforce your values on others to make your job as a parent easier.



Besides, look at it from the other point of view, I'll be farther burdened with explaining to MY children why some people are so offended and can be so cruel about what other adults do in their private lives.

 

[morningstar2651]

There is no connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. All of the legitimate scientific evidence shows that. Sexual orientation, whether heterosexual or homosexual, is an adult sexual attraction to others. Pedophilia, on the other hand, is an adult sexual attraction to children. Ninety percent of child abuse is committed by heterosexual men. In one study of 269 cases of child sexual abuse, only two offenders were gay or lesbian. Of the cases studied involving molestation of a boy by a man, 74 percent of the men were or had been in a heterosexual relationship with the boy's mother or another female relative. The study concluded that "a child's risk of being molested by his or her relative's heterosexual partner is over 100 times greater than by someone who might be identifiable as being homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual.

All of the available evidence demonstrates that the sexual orientation of parents has no impact on the sexual orientation of their children and that children of lesbian and gay parents are no more likely than any other child to grow up to be gay.See Bailey, J.M., Bobrow, D., Wolfe, M. & Mikach, S. (1995), Sexual orientation of adult sons of gay fathers, Developmental Psychology, 31, 124-129; Bozett, F.W. (1987). Children of gay fathers, F.W. Bozett (Ed.), Gay and Lesbian Parents (pp. 39-57), New York: Praeger; Gottman, J.S. (1991), Children of gay and lesbian parents, F.W. Bozett & M.B. Sussman, (Eds.), Homosexuality and Family Relations (pp. 177-196), New York: Harrington Park Press; Golombok, S., Spencer, A., & Rutter, M. (1983), Children in lesbian and single-parent households: psychosexual and psychiatric appraisal, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 24, 551-572; Green, R. (1978), Sexual identity of 37 children raised by homosexual or transsexual parents, American Journal of Psychiatry, 135, 692-697; Huggins, S.L.

Right now there is a critical shortage of adoptive and foster parents in the United States. As a result, many children have no permanent homes, while others are forced to survive in an endless series of substandard foster homes. It is estimated that there are 500,000 children in foster care nationally, and 100,000 need to be adopted. But last year there were qualified adoptive parents available for only 20,000 of these children. Many of these children have historically been viewed as "unadoptable" because they are not healthy white infants. Instead, they are often minority children and/or adolescents, many with significant health problems. There is much evidence documenting the serious damage suffered by children without permanent homes who are placed in substandard foster homes. Children frequently become victims of the "foster care shuffle," in which they are moved from temporary home to temporary home. A child stuck in permanent foster care can live in 20 or more homes by the time she reaches 18. It is not surprising, therefore, that long-term foster care is associated with increased emotional problems, delinquency, substance abuse and academic problems.

Like other adults in this country, the majority of lesbians and gay men are in stable committed relationships. Of course some of these relationships have problems, as do some heterosexual relationships. The adoption and foster care screening process is very rigorous, including extensive home visits and interviews of prospective parents. It is designed to screen out those individuals who are not qualified to adopt or be foster parents, for whatever reason. All of the evidence shows that lesbians and gay men can and do make good parents. The American Psychological Association, in a recent report reviewing the research, observed that "not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents," and concluded that "home environments provided by gay and lesbian parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable children's psychosocial growth." That is why the Child Welfare League of America, the nation's oldest children's advocacy organization, and the North American Council on Adoptable Children say that gays and lesbians seeking to adopt should be evaluated just like other adoptive applicants.

Researchers estimate that the total number of children nationwide living with at least one gay parent ranges from six to 14 million.

 

[Volos]

Well researched morningstar.





I can tell you from personal experience that the adoption process is long expensive and disturbing. Alex and I made it worse for ourselves because we went through two separate adoption routs. Twice the interviews, twice the inspections, twice the cost. While I understand the reasoning the red tape involved is disheartening to many.



I have a friend who works in adoption placement. She tells me she actively recruits same sex couples to adopt because they are not only willing to adopt less than desirable children but more importantly they provide a stable loving home.

 

[dr.p]

Now you get a thumbs down.

why in the world would you believe that same sex marriages are based differently in any way than opposite sex marriages?

Read what I said again, please:

"Homosexual marriages are between two sex people of the same sex who love eachother and commit for life"... this is just as untrue as saying "Heterosexual marriages are between two people of the opposite sex who love eachother and commit for life." Naturally, you should know most marriages (of either type) aren't based in real love because real love doesn't forget the meaning of that commitement.

I said that heterosexual and homosexual marriages are THE SAME in the respect I was talking about.

It is not tenacity, it is honesty.

I gave you a thumbs up and still you protest. Sheesh! And whether you know it or not, you are tenacious... which can be good... but not if you're going to misquote me.

you are grossly misinformed.

You are 100% right about that, and thank you for correcting me. I'd never looked at the details of that law. Guess I was swayed by the conservative misrepresentations. Sorry.

I wasn't able to find any details on the laws in Sweden I referred to, but I found several references to a preacher who was jailed for "hate speech" because of a sermon... the quotes I saw, which I'd seen before, didn't look like hate speech to me, though I can't deny that emphatics wouldn't care.

It is sad that many Christians and many Christian Churches do advocate such violence.

I haven't seen one yet... and if a church did advocate violence, it wouldn't be Christian.

as of yet no one has been abole to show that the effects are necessarily negative or even personally negative.

Just to make sure we're on the same page here, I was talking about the effect that the change of standard would have. When standards change, people react.

the old “if I can’t come up with an actual argument I will imply a connection between homosexuals and child sexual abuse as justification”

Very sorry if it sounded like I was implying something. I honestly wasn't. I was, again, using that as an example of changes in law affecting us.

I'll try to make this clearer: I'm concerned with the laws changing in such a drastic way with no compensation that instead of everything ending up fair-and-balanced, the previously safe end up oppressed. I don't want anyone to be oppressed for anything... I'd rather we all figure out how to live with our differences so that we can concentrate on helping and encouraging eachother.

 

[dr.p]

There will always be things in this world that people are doing that your religion teaches is wrong.

It's your job to teach your children values, even in circumstances where no one else on the planet shares them.

It's not right to want to enforce your values on others to make your job as a parent easier.

Besides, look at it from the other point of view, I'll be farther burdened with explaining to MY children why some people are so offended and can be so cruel about what other adults do in their private lives.

You're not insinuating that I want to enforce my values on others to make my job as a parent easier, are you?

Nah, you can't be. 'Cause I know you read the only part of the paragraph you left out of that quote... where I said "But, if I trust God with that, it will be of no consequence."

And did you miss the second paragraph in my post? Here:

"It should also be obvious that when the Bible says don't judge, I'm always going to try my best not to pass judgement on others -- but I will disagree with you . And when the Bible says love everyone and forgive them all things always, I have to, will and want to do that."

That whole "not judging" and loving thing includes not imposing my values on others.

 

[Jetgirl]

I haven't seen one yet... and if a church did advocate violence, it wouldn't be Christian..

But, of course, THEY'D tell us that you're the one who's not Christian, so... *shrug*

 

[Jetgirl]

That whole "not judging" and loving thing includes not imposing my values on others.

Well fantastic!

Does this outpouring of goodwill extend to people with differing sexual interests that you?

Are we going to see you walk this talk by not voting for amendments to the consitution regarding marriage, or bills that limit legal power/ tax benefits for same-sex couples?

 

[stray bullet]

Well fantastic!

Does this outpouring of goodwill extend to people with differing sexual interests that you?

Are we going to see you walk this talk by not voting for amendments to the consitution regarding marriage, or bills that limit legal power/ tax benefits for same-sex couples?

There is a bit of difference between "not judging" someone and promoting behavior by passing laws in favor of it.

 

[Jetgirl]

There is a bit of difference between "not judging" someone and promoting behavior by passing laws in favor of it.

Yes, but if you vote to pass laws against behavior that you feel is improper for others, are you not tacitly judging them, and/or imposing your morality on them?

Edited to add: I'm not talking about laws in favor of x, I'm talking about new laws created to prevent x.

 

[stray bullet]

Yes, but if you vote to pass laws against behavior that you feel is improper for others, are you not tacitly judging them, and/or imposing your morality on them?

Edited to add: I'm not talking about laws in favor of x, I'm talking about new laws created to prevent x.

If it is outlawing a certain behavior? Sure, that is judging it and you better have a good reason to do it. Now, if it is changing current policy to normalize a behavior, that goes from "tolerance" to "acceptance".

If a man wants to be in love with a toaster, I'll tolerate that... whatever. But, the minute he wants to be legally wed to that toaster, or have the toaster added to his healthcare policy, I have a problem.

 

[Sphere]

If a man wants to be in love with a toaster, I'll tolerate that... whatever. But, the minute he wants to be legally wed to that toaster, or have the toaster added to his healthcare policy, I have a problem.

A toaster is not a legal consenting adult.

 

[Sphere]

There is a bit of difference between "not judging" someone and promoting behavior by passing laws in favor of it.

People will 'convert' to homosexuality then?






No.

 

[morningstar2651]

A toaster is not a legal consenting adult.

Nor is it a living organism...let alone human.

Humans have rights...toasters don't.

 

[stray bullet]

A toaster is not a legal consenting adult.

The issue wasn't what the person wants to do. The example is about tolerance versus acceptance.

 

[Sphere]

Since I hold that view, it should be obvious that when the Bible says people defile themselves when they have sex with a same-sex partner, I believe that.

The bible also asks you not to eat shellfish. However, is this behavior being pressed in society as much as homosexuality? Of course not.

I feel threatened by same-sex marriage because it means if I ever have a child, I'm further burdened in explaining to them why two men are married when I'm teaching him that God says it's wrong. But, if I trust God with that, it will be of no consequence.

The problem here is, you are trying to restrict equal rights to a group of people simply because you are burdened in explaining to your child that homosexuality is wrong. A very light argument against same-sex marriage.

The same can be said for groups against african americans, in which they are burdened to explain to their children that interracial marriages is wrong.

Trying to justify discrimination is very hard, isnt it?

I could not go to a Bible-teaching church that allowd and condoned gay marriages or gay pastors/leaders in the church, because it wouldn't be based solely on the Bible anymore. That's not to say I couldn't go to a church that had gay attendees, or even state-married gay couples attending. They need to hear the Word as much much as I do... but there is a clear line to be drawn.

Right, because in your eyes they need to hear god just like you, but don't deserve the same rights as you. Speaking of the bible, and what it teaches, please show some verses in which the bible asks you to advocate discrimination against homosexuals. And no, merely saying its wrong doesnt count. Please show where the bible asks for discrimination to be promoted.

Lastly, in the news about a month ago, I think, I saw an article about a convicted pedophile who had his lawyer file an appeal citing "oppression of personal preference" (something along those lines) as the invalidating reason for his conviction. Don't you just love the effect that the "be who/whatever you are" propaganda has on people?

nonsense

 

[Sphere]

The issue wasn't what the person wants to do. The example is about tolerance versus acceptance.

No one is asking for acceptance, they are asking for equality.