Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes, but:It takes a sperm and an egg to fulfill coupulation. Neither two eggs nor two sperm can unite to begin the procreation process. Such attempts are futile.
It takes a sperm and an egg to fulfill coupulation. Neither two eggs nor two sperm can unite to begin the procreation process. Such attempts are futile.
Two points. I don't think that in most cases the point of copulation is to conceive, nor is conception a necessary outcome of copulation. Second point: Sex is no longer required for procreation. There are a few different artificial routes to conceive.It takes a sperm and an egg to fulfill coupulation. Neither two eggs nor two sperm can unite to begin the procreation process. Such attempts are futile.
But, the ONLY way two homosexuals can have a baby is if they go OUTSIDE their sexual interaction and inlist another party. Any baby MUST involve both male and female in some form or another. Homosexuals may produce babies, but not by performing as a homosexual. Either their egg must be inseminated outside that union, or they must pass their sperm so that an egg is fertilized outside their union. Either way, such a person is not being true to his/her supposed "natural" orientation.I'm not altogether sure that anyone has tried to make babies using two eggs or two sperm. What's your point, LN? Gay people can, and do have children.
And so do infertile hetero couples. So do people with horrific recessive genetic defects in their families. Are these people not afforded the same rights because they cannot bear offspring naturally?But, the ONLY way two homosexuals can have a baby is if they go OUTSIDE their sexual interaction and inlist another party. Any baby MUST involve both male and female in some form or another. Homosexuals may produce babies, but not by performing as a homosexual. Either their egg must be inseminated outside that union, or they must pass their sperm so that an egg is fertilized outside their union. Either way, such a person is not being true to his/her supposed "natural" orientation.
But, the ONLY way two homosexuals can have a baby is if they go OUTSIDE their sexual interaction and inlist another party. Any baby MUST involve both male and female in some form or another. Homosexuals may produce babies, but not by performing as a homosexual. Either their egg must be inseminated outside that union, or they must pass their sperm so that an egg is fertilized outside their union. Either way, such a person is not being true to his/her supposed "natural" orientation.
But, the ONLY way two homosexuals can have a baby is if they go OUTSIDE their sexual interaction and inlist another party. Any baby MUST involve both male and female in some form or another. Homosexuals may produce babies, but not by performing as a homosexual. Either their egg must be inseminated outside that union, or they must pass their sperm so that an egg is fertilized outside their union. Either way, such a person is not being true to his/her supposed "natural" orientation.
I suggest you read Matthew 15:1-20 once again, or perhaps you must simply read it, and quit making up excuses or try to shift the blame to others that are only holding a lamp so you might see. Wearing a blindfold, attempting to break the lamp, or blow out the flame, will be of no avail.
Since you cannot discribe the "in vitro fertilization" process as ASEXUAL, it is most certainly not homosexual in nature. We still need a female's egg and a male's sperm. We still need a host female to carry the baby to term (certainly more "convenient" for a woman.). It is as simple as that. Try not to rationalize sin.Yes, but:
In vitro fertilisation is not sex, so it is not heterosexual per se.
Both the egg and the sperm could be from gay people.
So, how is the process heterosexual?
Sorry, the truth rings clear. There is no getting around it. You must simply ignore such offending verses, or question the inerrancy of scripture. Both of which compulsive sinners do, if they cannot stand to face the truth..... The chapter says what it says."Pot, meet kettle" award, anyone?
You cannot describe the fertilization of an egg as heterosexual, either. It is either sexual or asexual. Those are the two options. And please, try not to rationalize bigotry.Since you cannot discribe the "in vitro fertilization" process as ASEXUAL, it is most certainly not homosexual in nature. We still need a female's egg and a male's sperm. We still need a host female to carry the baby to term (certainly more "convenient" for a woman.). It is as simple as that. Try not to rationalize sin.
Wow! Two "Pot, meet kettle" awards in a row!Sorry, the truth rings clear. There is no getting around it. You must simply ignore such offending verses, or question the inerrancy of scripture. Both of which compulsive sinners do, if they cannot stand to face the truth..... The chapter says what it says.
Honestly, I have reservations with such rationalizations. If the parents only need help in the process (the use of his sperm and her egg) that is one thing. There are far too many orphan children in this world for people to be needing to find surrogates to have (their baby). If that is what it can really be called. I like to think of it as GOD's baby.And so do infertile hetero couples. So do people with horrific recessive genetic defects in their families. Are these people not afforded the same rights because they cannot bear offspring naturally?
My point is that you need to decide what is important. Is your sexual orientational practices important (you cannot live without them) OR is being a father or mother important (and you want to nuture a child in the way of GOD). You cannot have both and be consistant or fair to that child. To be a parent one must be willing to place himself /herself in second place. I do not feel homosexuals have what it takes and remain in that "lifestyle."Wrong. A homosexual's natural orientation is homosexuality. Duh. Still, I ask.. what's the point? Don't go into a natural/unnatural debate here. We both know that won't work. I'm simply dying for you to get to your point.
My point is that you need to decide what is important. Is your sexual orientational practices important (you cannot live without thaem) OR is being a father or mother important (and you want to nuture a child in the way of GOD). You cannot have both and be consistant or fair to that child. To be a parent one must be willing to place himself /herself in second place. I do not feel homosexuals have what it takes and remain in that "lifestyle."
And you've proven exactly what?Wow! Two "Pot, meet kettle" awards in a row!
You attempt to practice both. The future will tell exactly how well you did. But if you are a parent, if isn't because of being a homosexual ---- it is in spite of it. The same cannot be said of me, my wife and OUR son.This never ceases to amaze. I can have both. I do have both. You are the one saying I can't, yet the reality of my life says quite the opposite.
And please, stop using that "lifestyle" nomenclature. It's been repeatedly pointed out that the only difference in lifestyles between hetero's and homo's is that one prefers the opposite sex, and one prefers the same. It isn't a lifestyle. Get that through your skull. IT ISN'T A LIFESTYLE.
So the fact that my parents were gay automatically makes them bad parents? My mother was/is not willing to makes sacrifices for me? Since you know so much about how I was raised by my homosexual parents, perhaps you can help me figure out why I have an overwhelming fear of sharks? I could potentially save some cash on some future therapy bills, thanks.My point is that you need to decide what is important. Is your sexual orientational practices important (you cannot live without them) OR is being a father or mother important (and you want to nuture a child in the way of GOD). You cannot have both and be consistant or fair to that child. To be a parent one must be willing to place himself /herself in second place. I do not feel homosexuals have what it takes and remain in that "lifestyle."
Don't homosexuals rationalize their begotry towards heterosexual "Bible thumpers?"You cannot describe the fertilization of an egg as heterosexual, either. It is either sexual or asexual. Those are the two options. And please, try not to rationalize bigotry.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?