What Would YOU Do If . . .?

[Flibbertigibbet]

But that someone would do so simply because they are under the influence of an ancient manuscript is mind boggling.

I'm under the influence of the same ancient manuscript. And I hope that my children either are (the middle two, who believed long before I did) or someday will be (my 24 yr old & 3 yr old) - but that's not up to me. Everyone has to reach God (or He reach them) on their own, and determine for themselves exactly what that ancient manuscript says to them.

 

[KCKID]

I'm under the influence of the same ancient manuscript. And I hope that my children either are (the middle two, who believed long before I did) or someday will be (my 24 yr old & 3 yr old) - but that's not up to me. Everyone has to reach God (or He reach them) on their own, and determine for themselves exactly what that ancient manuscript says to them.

So, you're yet another who would kick out their child if he/she told you they were 'gay'. Lovely. There's nothing like one making God proud of them.

You don't find God by strapping the Bible to your forehead. It's a book. I hope that your children find God - if they choose to - in their hearts. They certainly won't find Him in an ancient manuscript.

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

So, you're yet another who would kick out their child if he/she told you they were 'gay'. Lovely. There's nothing like one making God proud of them.

You don't find God by strapping the Bible to your forehead. It's a book. I hope that your children find God - if they choose to - in their hearts. They certainly won't find Him in an ancient manuscript.

You should try scrolling back up to my previous post, that you yourself quoted.

 

[wanderingone]

I have to disagree with you.
I have a good friend that was a former Catholic. He told me that when he was Catholic, he simply confessed his sin, did some penance, and it was all good. Most of it was focused on action, less so that on thought. A thought not acted upon was even rewarded.

That's "Cheap Grace" not all Christians are believers in such casual confession as the appropriate means of acting out our beliefs and following the commands of Christ. I cannot confess enough for my failures to fully love my neighbor as myself, probably the most difficult aspect of my faith is the struggle to give up the fear of what truly loving my neighbor as Christ loved me would mean.

However I must agree that this notion that being Christian is difficult is not something I really understand. Perhaps it is most difficult when one tries to force others into compliance with their own understanding of faith. Perhaps temptation is a much greater for thing for some people than it has been for me since getting past the teenage years and demanding the laws conform to their own beliefs is the only way some people are able to live according to their own understanding of their faith.

 

[roflcopter101]

Perhaps temptation is a much greater for thing for some people than it has been for me since getting past the teenage years and demanding the laws conform to their own beliefs is the only way some people are able to live according to their own understanding of their faith.

But why would they feel the need to aggressively market their faith to others instead of just living with their own faith?

 

[a.d.ivNonasNovembres]

But why would they feel the need to aggressively market their faith to others instead of just living with their own faith?

Because they believe it to be true.
I don't know about you, but when I think something is true, I think that teaching people who don't know that it is true is a good thing.
Of course we could all be wrong, we're not perfect. But I would hope where I am wrong others would correct me too. The whole "keep your head down, don't bother anyone else just shut up and mind your own business" thing seems inhuman to me.

 

[roflcopter101]

I don't know about you, but when I think something is true, I think that teaching people who don't know that it is true is a good thing.

No, as in enacting legislation in secular governments based on religious beliefs.

 

[a.d.ivNonasNovembres]

No, as in enacting legislation in secular governments based on religious beliefs.

Well in my case it would be in the hope of changing the government away from being secular.

Although technically (though no-one actually takes that seriously) we have the established church and a notionally Christian monarchy and as such are formally, if not practically, not a secular country.

 

[KCKID]

You should try scrolling back up to my previous post, that you yourself quoted.

You said that you were under the influence of an ancient manuscript. The reason I brought up the term 'ancient manuscript' to begin with was in regard to its being used to come between parent and child. And that was the only reason I brought it up. As you've seen in other posts, the Bible certainly CAN come between parent and child. This is why I automatically assumed that you would toss out your child since you, too, were admitting to being under the influence of an ancient manuscript. To save confusion, maybe it would have been better for you to have said, "No, I would not toss out my child for being 'gay'."

Incidently, with regard to the 'ancient manuscript' term ...the truth of the matter is that the Bible IS an ancient manuscript.

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

You said that you were under the influence of an ancient manuscript. The reason I brought up the term 'ancient manuscript' to begin with was in regard to its being used to come between parent and child. And that was the only reason I brought it up. As you've seen in other posts, the Bible certainly CAN come between parent and child. This is why I automatically assumed that you would toss out your child since you, too, were admitting to being under the influence of an ancient manuscript. To save confusion, maybe it would have been better for you to have said, "No, I would not toss out my child for being 'gay'."

Incidently, with regard to the 'ancient manuscript' term ...the truth of the matter is that the Bible IS an ancient manuscript.

I did. Perhaps you should examine your own preconceived notions regarding Bible-believing Christians. Although I can certainly understand why you might have them, given some of the other responses, it's generally a better practice not to assume. (this, btw, is not meant to be snarky - sorry if it comes off that way)

I slogged through the first 10 or 11 pages of this thread and just couldn't keep reading.

I cannot conceive of any circumstance that would cause me to disown my child. I cannot conceive of any circumstance, barring violence or abuse of another household member, that would cause me to remove my child from my home.

 

[selfinflikted]

I'd ask them if they want help (whatever that might be) to overcome this and if so, great. If not, they do not live under my roof. Basically, the same thing I'd do if they told me they were an alcoholic or a drug addict. Sorry if that is rude to you, but it's the truth.

I'm glad I didn't tell my parents I was gay until after I'd moved out and started a life of my own, because I probably would've met the same fate as this. Even after I came out to my parents, we have very little contact - and what contact we do have, usually turns into an argument. I have to be the "adult" in my situation. Do you think my parents called me to wish me a Merry Christmas? Ha. No. I did, however call them. Do they call me on birthdays? Nope. Have they ever once been to my home during the past six years I've lived there? Nope. Not a chance. I imagine that, because they are getting old, one day they will seriously regret all the time they've lost with me. They do not even know me anymore. They have no idea what's going on in my life, and I don't know what's going on in theirs. It's truely sad, and I sometimes wish I'd never told them.

If one of your kids is gay, angellica, I feel very sorry for them. I hope that one day you will change your mind on the matter because your kids don't deserve such horrible treatment (if they were gay). Sorry if that is rude to you, but it's the truth.

 

[wanderingone]

Because they believe it to be true.
I don't know about you, but when I think something is true, I think that teaching people who don't know that it is true is a good thing.
Of course we could all be wrong, we're not perfect. But I would hope where I am wrong others would correct me too. The whole "keep your head down, don't bother anyone else just shut up and mind your own business" thing seems inhuman to me.

Sharing your belief that we are saved by Christ is not the same as telling everyone how they have to live. We are told to share the good news, not to force everyone to then follow OUR instruction. We are also told when to give it up. You share your faith most obviously in the way you live them. Demanding that everyone who does AND does NOT share your beliefs abide by your own interpretation of how your faith requires you to live your life has nothing to do with sharing the good news.

 

[wanderingone]

To save confusion, maybe it would have been better for you to have said, "No, I would not toss out my child for being 'gay'."

She did say that, in a prior post you read and responded to.

 

[KCKID]

I did. Perhaps you should examine your own preconceived notions regarding Bible-believing Christians. Although I can certainly understand why you might have them, given some of the other responses, it's generally a better practice not to assume. (this, btw, is not meant to be snarky - sorry if it comes off that way)

So sorry, Flibbertogibbet. No real excuse but there is SO much going on on this forum that it's oftentimes difficult to keep up. Thanks for setting me right and, again, I apologize.

 

[KCKID]

She did say that, in a prior post you read and responded to.

I know. I'm an idiot!

 

[JTKIRK]

I know. I'm an idiot!

Well it's hard to argue against that statement.
HE HE HE, I just couldn't resist.

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

So sorry, Flibbertogibbet. No real excuse but there is SO much going on on this forum that it's oftentimes difficult to keep up. Thanks for setting me right and, again, I apologize.

Fahgedaboutit - no harm, no foul. Just remember, if you keep assuming the worst I'll be forced to . . .
TYPE IN BIG LETTERS!!!

 

[Beanieboy]

I've known of kids that are kicked out of their home in high school when they come out to their parents. My partner and I have talked about taking in kids like this, because no parent should kick their kid out of their home, especially before they are really old enough to get a job and live independently.

I remember a really sad episode of MySoCalledLife where Ricky was beaten and kicked out of his house. When he tried to call, his parents had changed the number, and even moved.

Cold.

And I know this kind of thing happens, and there is nothing serving God in doing this.

 

[JTKIRK]

I've known of kids that are kicked out of their home in high school when they come out to their parents. My partner and I have talked about taking in kids like this, because no parent should kick their kid out of their home, especially before they are really old enough to get a job and live independently.

I remember a really sad episode of MySoCalledLife where Ricky was beaten and kicked out of his house. When he tried to call, his parents had changed the number, and even moved.

Cold.

And I know this kind of thing happens, and there is nothing serving God in doing this.

I agree, BB. I know the friend KC talked about in his opening thread. His parents still love him as their son, sure they may not agree with his sexual preference but he is still their child.

 

[Nathan45]

a better and simpler question than the OP would be,

"What would you do if YOU were gay?"

IE, if you're male, try to imagine being irresistibly sexually attracted to men and feeling nothing at all towards women. What if God made you gay?

So, two questions:

1) Would you give in to your homosexual tendencies? or remain completely celebate?
2) Would you take seriously a religion that said that God says you shouldn't be homosexual, even though God made you how you are?

it seems to me that the people who preach against homosexuality want to preach against the one sin they have no desire to commit.

It's also different from heterosexual sexual sins, in that it is perfectly possible to have a fulfilling heterosexual sex life and still live a moral life. IE, you can get married to the person you love and fulfill most desires you want with them.

It's true, a homosexual is limited to one person that they can marry. But a homosexual has nobody.

At minimum, you'd have to agree that homosexuals are dealt a harder hand in that they can't have sex with anyone who they want to have sex with.

They can either marry someone they have no sexual attraction to whatsoever, or they can not marry at all and be completely celebate, or they can "sin".

A heterosexual should be able to fulfill most of his sexual desires with his wife. Homosexuals are basically expected to act like monks or catholic priests.

So it just seems so hypocritical to me that all of these married christians who can have sex with their wives or husbands every night, telling the homosexuals to just "suppress it and come back to God".