Proposition 8 in California must pass!

[Dogbean]

Tackleberry:

We are all still waiting for you provide us an equivalent number of published, peer reviewed studies providing evidence for your claim that “children raised by gay couples have a higher chance of having emotional and mental issues”

Yeah, did you read the article I posted? I stopped digging when I found out that they were improperly conducted. The people that conducted them were clearly biased toward promoting a gay agenda.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Ah, the good ol' "anyone who disagrees with me is promoting an agenda" defence.

Scientific rigour be damned! I'm not changing my mind because of all these so called "facts" and "evidence"

 

[Dogbean]

Ah, the good ol' "anyone who disagrees with me is promoting an agenda" defence.

Scientific rigour be damned! I'm not changing my mind because of all these so called "facts" and "evidence"

Arguing against you is fun; you get so worked up and you seem to be so full of anger.

1 Corinthians 13:5
It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.

Ephesians 4:31
Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice.

Colossians 3:8
But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips.

1 Timothy 2:8
I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing.

James 1:20
for man's anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Arguing against you is fun; you get so worked up and you seem to be so full of anger.

1 Corinthians 13:5
It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.

Ephesians 4:31
Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice.

Colossians 3:8
But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips.

1 Timothy 2:8
I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing.

James 1:20
for man's anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires.

Um... thats all nice, none of it has anything to do with whether or not homosexuals are more or less likely to make fit parents than anyone else.

 

[BigBadWlf]

Yeah, did you read the article I posted?

Your “article” offered nothing in the way of evidence to support your claim that “children raised by gay couples have a higher chance of having emotional and mental issues.”

I stopped digging when I found out that they were improperly conducted. The people that conducted them were clearly biased toward promoting a gay agenda.

In other words there is no evidence to support your claim that “children raised by gay couples have a higher chance of having emotional and mental issues.”

In fact the evidence shows the opposite is true.

So why did you make this claim in the first place?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

So why did you make this claim in the first place?

Because he'd really, REALLY like it to be true, and maybe if he shuts his eyes and wishes really REALLY hard, while ignoring all contrary evidence, it will be?

 

[Andreusz]

Yeah, did you read the article I posted? I stopped digging when I found out that they were improperly conducted. The people that conducted them were clearly biased toward promoting a gay agenda.

The first 3 articles you referred to all suggest that gay parenting is as good as straight parenting. The article that criticizes 'studies' does not specifically mention any of these three articles. And it does not provide any evidence for the opposite case. Also, it appears in a journal that is clearly biased toward promoting a Christian agenda.

 

[pgp_protector]

Tackleberry. I see you either missed or avoided my question.

Such children are not going to be raised with a proper view of what a solid Christian family is, since there are no examples in the Bible of gay families raising children. No doubt you'll be loving couples/parents and can meet the children's basic needs, but God's design of a family will not be modelled. As has been stated before on CF, studies have shown that children raised by gay couples have a higher chance of having emotional and mental issues as they grow up.

So if the standard is a Christian family, I take it you would have the exact same objections to non Christians adopting children ? After all if a non Christian family has or adopts children, they also wouldn't have a proper view of a what a "solid Christian Family" is.

 

[Dogbean]

Tackleberry. I see you either missed or avoided my question.

I never said a Christian family was the "standard," but it certainly is the best. In this discussion, I should have specified a non-gay, two-parent family where normal sexual roles/values are taught and modelled.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I never said a Christian family was the "standard," but it certainly is the best. In this discussion, I should have specified a non-gay, two-parent family where normal sexual roles/values are taught and modelled.

Why non-gay? Whats wrong with just a "two-parent family where normal sexual roles are taught"?

as for modelling... you are aware that heterosexual parents create homosexual children, right? The sexual orientation of the adults one is raised around have little to nothing to do with the eventual sexual orientation of a child. I assume that is your big concern? That homosexual parents will encourage their children to grow up homosexual?

Look at me, My parents were heterosexual, and there were no homosexuals in my immediate family... but here I am... utterly sure of my sexuality. I'm sure that whether I had had homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual swingers for parents, I would be homosexual, just as I am sure that no matter the orienatation of your parents, you turned out in the sexual orientation you have today, and would have regardless of your parents' orientation.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Oh, and a definition of "best" couldn't hurt here.

 

[Dogbean]

Why non-gay? Whats wrong with just a "two-parent family where normal sexual roles are taught"?

as for modelling... you are aware that heterosexual parents create homosexual children, right? The sexual orientation of the adults one is raised around have little to nothing to do with the eventual sexual orientation of a child. I assume that is your big concern? That homosexual parents will encourage their children to grow up homosexual?

Look at me, My parents were heterosexual, and there were no homosexuals in my immediate family... but here I am... utterly sure of my sexuality. I'm sure that whether I had had homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual swingers for parents, I would be homosexual, just as I am sure that no matter the orienatation of your parents, you turned out in the sexual orientation you have today, and would have regardless of your parents' orientation.

My big concern is I want my children to grow up learning God's Word and a Biblical worldview. I have a problem with gays, but no more than I have a problem with killers, and liars, and adulterers, and thieves, and idolaters, etc. It just so happens this thread is about gays, but I'm not any more hung up on them as I am on other sinners. And I'm a sinner myself, so I'm not excluded. Nobody is perfect except Jesus Christ. But I have a bigger problem with hypocrites. I'll define hypocrite to be a person who preaches against a sin and then willfully commits that sin. I don't mean they slip up, I mean they live a life characterized by that sin. A hypocrite is also a person who claims to be a Christian yet lives in sin. If you just take the Bible for what it says, a practicing gay Christian is by definition a hypocrite. Therefore, a child growing up in such a situation may or may not come to a point through their study of the Scriptures that their parents are hypocrites. That's a tough place to be in, because they'd be torn between respecting their parents and adhering to God's Word which would say to rebuke them lovingly in the Lord. They would not be under that obligation if the gay parents were not professing Christians; in that case, if the children were believers they should be sharing Christ with their parents, saying that everyone is a sinner and needs the blood of Christ to wash them of their sin.

 

[BigBadWlf]

My big concern is I want my children to grow up learning God's Word and a Biblical worldview. I have a problem with gays, but no more than I have a problem with killers, and liars, and adulterers, and thieves, and idolaters, etc. It just so happens this thread is about gays,

Again this same tactic is and has been used by racists for generation. A racist will compare a person of color to a criminal, substance abuser or as a sexual deviant in order to try to justify their own petty personal prejudices and hatreds.

But I have a bigger problem with hypocrites. I'll define hypocrite to be a person who preaches against a sin and then willfully commits that sin. I don't mean they slip up, I mean they live a life characterized by that sin. A hypocrite is also a person who claims to be a Christian yet lives in sin. If you just take the Bible for what it says, a practicing gay Christian is by definition a hypocrite.

What of the sin prejudice? You have no problem calling yourself a Christian while practicing that



or is it somehow not hypocritical when you do it?

Therefore, a child growing up in such a situation may or may not come to a point through their study of the Scriptures that their parents are hypocrites. That's a tough place to be in, because they'd be torn between respecting their parents and adhering to God's Word which would say to rebuke them lovingly in the Lord. They would not be under that obligation if the gay parents were not professing Christians; in that case, if the children were believers they should be sharing Christ with their parents, saying that everyone is a sinner and needs the blood of Christ to wash them of their sin.

what would happen if a child were raised in the home of a conservative Christian couple that took them to church, and taught them that God says its OK to hate and discriminate and later on the child, through personal study of the Scriptures, accepted Christ and then came across passages that convinces him/her that bigotry is a sin and God has no issues with gays and lesbains? I wonder what the child would think about his/her parents, if they were hypocrites or not. I imagine that would be a tough situation to be in.

 

[Dogbean]

The first 3 articles you referred to all suggest that gay parenting is as good as straight parenting. The article that criticizes 'studies' does not specifically mention any of these three articles. And it does not provide any evidence for the opposite case. Also, it appears in a journal that is clearly biased toward promoting a Christian agenda.

Just as the articles posted before were clearly from journals promoting a gay agenda.

Now what? Back to square one I guess.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Even if it is defeated in the state as a whole, it will not be defeated in all counties. As I wrote previously, my state is not uniform. Nor is the US.

That's true enough, but places like Kern County and Tulare County will have to perform same gender marriages if Prop. 8 is defeated whether they like it or not.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Texas Lynn wrote:

She glossed over the differences in my state as well as the country as a whole. There is no way the majority in each region of my state supports gay "marriage," let alone each state. If you removed the wretched hive of scum and villainy known as San Francisco, as well as LA and the East Bay, this state would be Republican, and gay "marriage" would not have a snowball's chance.

Where you at, Modesto? You know, Scott Peterson's a heterosexual, right?

 

[Texas Lynn]

As I posted previously:

Homoeroticism is irrational, contrary to order, contrary to our telos, and bestial.

Specifically, I base it on what is usually referred to as "natural law."

IOW, you don't wike it!

 

[Brennin]

Where you at, Modesto? You know, Scott Peterson's a heterosexual, right?

No, I'm in San Diego. And, yes, I know Scott Peterson is heterosexual.

 

[Texas Lynn]

I have no desire to be confrontational here but in fact most scientifically conducted polls indicate the opposite.

The most recent national poll on same-sex marriage in the United States was conducted in July 17, 2008 by Quinnipiac University, with 55 percent opposed, and 36 percent in favor.[1] An ABC News poll found that the majority (58%) of Americans remained opposed to same-sex marriages, while the minority (36%) support them. However, on the question of a constitutional amendment, more are now opposed than for it. The majority (51%) of Americans say the issue should be left for the states to decide, while 43% would agree with amending the Constitution.[2]


This is from Wikipedia which I realize is not a strong source but I checked the Quinnipiac and ABC, and CBS polls and indeed this information is correct.

Additionally I would add that your theory as presented above ignores the fact that the majority of states have passed a constitutional amendment preventing same-sex marriage, thus it seems your conclusion that homosexual marriage is the will of the people is not accurate.

Your information about polls is accurate, or was, at the time the polls were conducted. But I was referring to how the polls on such things translate into votes and the Cali Prop 8 imbroglio, which is losing in state polls, more so now than before.

Obviously you can say when asked specifically right now Americans tend to oppose same gender marriage, but no legislator who ever favored it was defeated. Now, part of that is of course because of the quality of the legislators and so forth, but, the assertion people are so slap dab against it is at best wishful thinking. Sure, they say that, but they aren't going to revolt over this. We'll have gay marriage all over in 20 years and you'll like it.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Wow, I see what you mean BigBadWlf. Racists can get a lot of mileage out of the following verses:

Acts 8:26-40

26Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, "Rise and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza." This is a desert place. 27And he rose and went. And there was an Ethiopian, a eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasure. He had come to Jerusalem to worship 28and was returning, seated in his chariot, and he was reading the prophet Isaiah. 29And the Spirit said to Philip, "Go over and join this chariot." 30So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, "Do you understand what you are reading?" 31And he said, "How can I, unless someone guides me?" And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. 32Now the passage of the Scripture that he was reading was this:

"Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter
and like a lamb before its shearer is silent,
so he opens not his mouth.
33In his humiliation justice was denied him.
Who can describe his generation?
For his life is taken away from the earth." 34And the eunuch said to Philip, "About whom, I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?" 35Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus. 36And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, "See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?" 38And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. 39And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord carried Philip away, and the eunuch saw him no more, and went on his way rejoicing. 40But Philip found himself at Azotus, and as he passed through he preached the gospel to all the towns until he came to Caesarea.

Not to mention Galatians 3:28

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.


Such naked racism!

You know what a eunuch is, right? Chances are the guy was a Friend of Dorothy.