Adoption Rules Changed

[The_Barmecide]

I haven't seen any evidence that the prohibition includes divorcees who remarry. Or couples who eat shellfish.

the first rule of using the Bible to discriminate against people is that we do so SELECTIVELY. The Bible is a good rule of thumb until it speaks against something we are OK with.

 

[Elle12]

The Bible, however, says different.

It seems your argument centers around, "The federal government should sponsor discrimination because I've interpreted the Bible to say that it's right."

 

[Hammster]

I haven't seen any evidence that the prohibition includes divorcees who remarry. Or couples who eat shellfish.

Okay.

 

[Hammster]

It seems your argument centers around, "The federal government should sponsor discrimination because I've interpreted the Bible to say that it's right."

Sounds good.

 

[Speedwell]

Sounds good.

Do you understand why it is unacceptable in a secular republic?

 

[Elle12]

Sounds good.

Thank God you're the minority on this one.

 

[Hammster]

Do you understand why it is unacceptable in a secular republic?

Do you understand that I don’t think that children should be put in abhorrent situations such as same-sex couples?

 

[Hammster]

Thank God you're the minority on this one.

Thank God He will judge justly.

 

[Speedwell]

Do you understand that I don’t think that children should be put in abhorrent situations such as same-sex couples?

Yes, I do. What I don't understand is why you expect a federal subsidy for your religious prejudices.

 

[Hammster]

Yes, I do. What I don't understand is why you expect a federal subsidy for your religious prejudices.

Not prejudice. Conviction.

 

[Elle12]

Yes, I do. What I don't understand is why you expect a federal subsidy for your religious prejudices.

There's your answer - he doesn't have a reason.

 

[Speedwell]

Not prejudice. Conviction.

OK, conviction. What makes your "conviction" superior to anyone else's that you expect a pass on rules that everyone else has to abide by to get federal funds?

 

[Hammster]

OK, conviction. What makes your "conviction" superior to anyone else's that you expect a pass on rules that everyone else has to abide by to get federal funds?

The discussion is about changing the rules.

 

[Elle12]

The discussion is about changing the rules.

Why should the rules change?

 

[The_Barmecide]

Do you understand that I don’t think that children should be put in abhorrent situations such as same-sex couples?

Who are YOU to sit in judgement?

 

[The_Barmecide]

Thank God He will judge justly.

Judge not lest he be judged.

 

[charsan]

The Bible, however, says different.

I do not think they care at all. They say to themselves "Who cares what the Bible says, it's antiquated and we know so much more than God. Let us eat, drink, and be merry and every love who they want. There is no 'Christian' law"

 

[GACfan]

I do not think they care at all. They say to themselves "Who cares what the Bible says, it's antiquated and we know so much more than God. Let us eat, drink, and be merry and every love who they want. There is no 'Christian' law"

There shouldn't be Christian law because the United States of America is not a Christian nation and the federal government should never endorse or promote Christianity and its biblical tenets. In fact, the federal government should never endorse or promote one specific religion over other religions.

 

[GACfan]

Judge not lest he be judged.

I think it's ironic that most of the Christians who stand in judgment against homosexuals don't judge adulterers with the same level of condemnation and one result of that is Trump is the President.

 

[Hammster]

Why should the rules change?

Well, if you don’t know my answer, then all of my other responses have been in vain, and there’s no need to continue.