NationStates Jolt Archive

How would you react? Would you treat them any differently than if they were straight? Would you tell them they were going to hell? (if you are evangelical, that is) Honestly, I really wouldn't treat them any differently, and I certanly wouldn't disown them. I guess I'd need time to think about how to deal with them coming home and talking about having a crush on someone of the same gender. If they got picked on because they were gay though, I'd arrange a meeting with the kid's parents and raise hell. If my children are picked on for things they cannot control, well I don't put up with bs like that. Anyways, how would you out there handle this situation if it happened to you? I'm not trying to make it sound weird, it's just that different challenges come for parents that have gay children and yes, I know people who have gay children.

I wouldn't treat them differently. If one of my kids is gay I really hope gay marriage and adoption/IVF is legal so that they can have the same chances in life as anyone else.(And I can have grandkids! :p) I'll probably have to be more supportive in case they face any discrimination or whatever.

I can only hope that I've raised them to be strong, resilient and independent to cope with the extra challenges that they will face.

My only disappointment would be that my grandkids won't resemble me at all.

Other than that, no problem with me!

My only disappointment would be that my grandkids won't resemble me at all.

Other than that, no problem with me!
In my case, I think it'd be better for my grandkids NOT to resemble me!
The possibility that one of my own children (if and when they come to exist) will be a homosexual, is actually part of the reason I support gay rights. When it comes down to it, gays being allowed to marry doesn't affect little old straight me at all, but I can't be sure that it won't affect someone I care about in future.

I'd day "Damn, that took you long enough to notice."

I'd react how I hope my parent'd react if I met them with such an announcement. With understanding and praise for being open about it.

I would be deeply ashamed and disown them.

I would be deeply ashamed and disown them.



Serious or sarcastic?

The same way I'd react if my kid bought a Mac instead of a PC, or started listening to country music. "Whatever." Well, I might be a little more upset about the country music thing...

I would be deeply ashamed and disown them.
What do you look like? I'll take em from ya

I would just do what my parents would do if I was , start setting them up with girls or boys.I wouldn't really care it's thier love life not mine so let them deal I really couldn't care less.

Serious or sarcastic?
Serious.

I would be deeply ashamed and disown them.

Then I will pray to God tonight you'll never have kids.

Serious.

Can't ya feel the love? Geez, who could do that to there own flesh and blood?

I definitley couldn't

I would be deeply ashamed and disown them.
Would you disown a child who was mentally ill? I mean, according to most homophobes, it's a disease like mental illness right? You can surely see where I'm going with this...

Serious.



Yes because hetrosexual children are so perfect.

Disown.

I'd make sure he/she would never be able to come to my funeral and he would recieve nothing from my will when I do die.

Disown.

I'd make sure he/she would never be able to come to my funeral and he would recieve nothing from my will when I do die.



Wow but if he were straight you wouldn't disown him, right?

Would you disown a child who was mentally ill? I mean, according to most homophobes, it's a disease like mental illness right? You can surely see where I'm going with this...
Put it up for adoption.
Yes because hetrosexual children are so perfect.
Yes, they are.
Disown.

I'd make sure he/she would never be able to come to my funeral and he would recieve nothing from my will when I do die.
Amen.

I'd feel special. They seem to be much nicer, and I like to be a supporter to almost everything but atheletes. Who wants to be called an athletic supporter?

Put it up for adoption.

Yes, they are.



If you've ever been to an average High School in North America, you'd know they are far from perfect.

Wow but if he were straight you wouldn't doisown him, right?

Depends.

If he became a drunk/druggie, he'd suffer the same fate.

If you've ever been to an average High School in North America, you'd know they are far from perfect.
I go to one of these average high schools. Anyone who is not straight is heavily discriminated against.

Personally, I would NOT disown them or anything like that. But I would do my damnedest to show them the way that God intended things to be. God intended for one man/one woman to be what is right. Marriage between a man and a woman is God's idea for a relationship. How do I know? It says so right in the Bible.

I go to one of these average high schools. Anyone who is not straight is heavily discriminated against.


I am in High School and are a teenager and yes, there are gay students at it. Some descriminate against them although I chose to go after people for things they say or do to me, not who they like.

Personally, I would NOT disown them or anything like that. But I would do my damnedest to show them the way that God intended things to be. God intended for one man/one woman to be what is right. Marriage between a man and a woman is God's idea for a relationship. How do I know? It says so right in the Bible.

News Flash...


God isn't real. Try again.

News Flash...


God isn't real. Try again.



How do you justifty it being wrong without God?

I go to one of these average high schools. Anyone who is not straight is heavily discriminated against.
And judging by your remarks, you believe that's perfectly OK?

How do you justifty it being wrong without God?

I didn't say it was wrong.

I have gay friends and I am indifferent towards gay marriage. However, if it was my Child I'd be extremely pissed. I want to see grand children. And no, adopted ones I won;t consider my grand children.

News Flash...


God isn't real. Try again.
News flash, He is real, and one day every man, woman and child will bow down on their knees and confess that He is the one true God. You wait, you will see. I know this to be so, cause I read the end of the book, and Jesus Christ wins in the battle over satan. He defeated sin by dying on the cross for us, so that we don't have to pay the ultimate price, death, for our sins.

I go to one of these average high schools. Anyone who is not straight is heavily discriminated against.Discriminated against by people like you? I bet you're proud, having continued the noble tradition of picking on anyone who's different from you. The world definitely needs more people like you!

News flash, He is real, and one day every man, woman and child will bow down on their knees and confess that He is the one true God. You wait, you will see. I know this to be so, cause I read the end of the book, and Jesus Christ wins in the battle over satan. He defeated sin by dying on the cross for us, so that we don't have to pay the ultimate price, death, for our sins.

Proof that the Bible is true please?

Do you know why teenagers discriminate so easily? Because they have weak minds that are easily molded by the media and their friends and so if your friends say being gay is weird and that you should pick on the gay kid, chances are you will.

I didn't say it was wrong.

I have gay friends and I am indifferent towards gay marriage. However, if it was my Child I'd be extremely pissed. I want to see grand children. And no, adopted ones I won;t consider my grand children.



I don't even want kids to be honest, so this may not effect me in the end.

Disown.

I'd make sure he/she would never be able to come to my funeral and he would recieve nothing from my will when I do die.

Why? For being his/herself? Homosexuality is just as natural as heterosexuality, in fact. Roughly, 10% of all animalia exhibit homosexual or bisexual behavior--and the cases have been well documented.

Disowning a child for homosexuality is as sensibile as disowning he or she on the criteria of hair color, skin tone, blood type, etc.

Your stupidity and ignorance is far beyond alarming.

And no, adopted ones I won;t consider my grand children.That's a gross attitude. What if your children have medical problems that cause them to have to adopt? Do you feel no compassion whatsoever for these kids, abandoned/whatever by their real parents, suffered through various homes, and finally found a place without understanding or caring adopted relatives?

I'm beginning to believe more and more that the term 'compassionate conservative' is a complete fallacy. You're all being really cruel. I can only hope you're going for shock value and don't really mean it.

News flash, He is real, and one day every man, woman and child will bow down on their knees and confess that He is the one true God. You wait, you will see. I know this to be so, cause I read the end of the book, and Jesus Christ wins in the battle over satan. He defeated sin by dying on the cross for us, so that we don't have to pay the ultimate price, death, for our sins.

Religious people are funny, ain't they?

Personally, I would NOT disown them or anything like that. But I would do my damnedest to show them the way that God intended things to be. God intended for one man/one woman to be what is right. Marriage between a man and a woman is God's idea for a relationship. How do I know? It says so right in the Bible.

No it doesn't. It says it in Levitcus. That isn't a bible. It's a 3000 year old political document.

It's something for me to consider, since my daughter's mother is a lesbian. But hey, I get along fine with her mother, and I can guarantee you that there's nothing my daughter could do to cause me to stop loving her.

The Bible has been corraberated by archeology. The findings that have been made over the years have proven that many of the stories in the Bible are true. The Bible says that it is the word of God, that He is sinless, (therefore He cannot lie) and if some of the Bible has been proven, then it all must be true.
The Dead Sea scrolls were found in a cave, and they have been authenticated as being accurate, and they describe some of the same things that the Bible does.
That is how I know that the Bible is true.

The Bible has been corraberated by archeology. The findings that have been made over the years have proven that many of the stories in the Bible are true.

Such as the part claiming that the Earth was founded almost 2,000 years ago, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary?

Uhhh, kthnxbye.

The Bible has been corraberated by archeology. The findings that have been made over the years have proven that many of the stories in the Bible are true. The Bible says that it is the word of God, that He is sinless, (therefore He cannot lie) and if some of the Bible has been proven, then it all must be true.
The Dead Sea scrolls were found in a cave, and they have been authenticated as being accurate, and they describe some of the same things that the Bible does.
That is how I know that the Bible is true.

Except that God didn't write the bible. Or the Dead Sea scrolls. Man did. ANd man isn't sinless and can therefore lie.

And judging by your remarks, you believe that's perfectly OK?
Nah, but I don't like homos. They make me uncomfortable.

News flash, He is real, and one day every man, woman and child will bow down on their knees and confess that He is the one true God. You wait, you will see. I know this to be so, cause I read the end of the book, and Jesus Christ wins in the battle over satan. He defeated sin by dying on the cross for us, so that we don't have to pay the ultimate price, death, for our sins.
Bringing religious rhetoric that no one else agrees with into this discussion to justifiy a position you can't support any other way is doing you absolutely no good. You just sound silly.

Nah, but I don't like homos. They make me uncomfortable.
I don't like intolerant bigots. They make me lose hope in humanity.

Nah, but I don't like homos. They make me uncomfortable.

Someone's insecure about their own sexual orientation, eh?

Bringing religious rhetoric that no one else agrees with into this discussion to justifiy a position you can't support any other way is doing you absolutely no good. You just sound silly.

He doesn't sound silly. I know silly. I recognize my own kind. :)

He sounds brainwashed.

Nah, but I don't like homos. They make me uncomfortable.



Homophobes make me uncomfortable.

Homophobes make me uncomfortable.

He's uncomfortable about himself--that's why he's homophobic.

I wouldn't treat them any different. At this point, I don't even know if I want kids, so I guess my point wouldn't probably be as valid as someone who might have kids, but I personally see nothing wrong with it. That's also why I support gay rights, for future generations and for my friends who are gay or my friends who have kids that may be gay in the future.

The Bible has been corraberated by archeology. The findings that have been made over the years have proven that many of the stories in the Bible are true. The Bible says that it is the word of God, that He is sinless, (therefore He cannot lie) and if some of the Bible has been proven, then it all must be true.
The Dead Sea scrolls were found in a cave, and they have been authenticated as being accurate, and they describe some of the same things that the Bible does.
That is how I know that the Bible is true.

First time for everything. Someone actually offering some sort of proof, and not just claiming that the Bible is true because it is the Bible.

Unfortunately, you have erred. Part of the Bible being true does not automatically mean it is all true. Not to say that it definitely is not all true, but you can't be certain.

He doesn't sound silly. I know silly. I recognize my own kind. :)

He sounds brainwashed.
I figured "silly" was a better word than the various other words which sprung to mind, and are definitely inappropriate and against the TOS here. Trust me, silly wasn't what I typed in this box at first.

First time for everything. Someone actually offering some sort of proof, and not just claiming that the Bible is true because it is the Bible.

Unfortunately, you have erred. Part of the Bible being true does not automatically mean it is all true. Not to say that it definitely is not all true, but you can't be certain.

The vast majority of the bible can be successfully debunked by science. The Bible does make references to historical events that occured around its publication. That, however, does not give any of its prophecies any credence.

No it doesn't. It says it in Levitcus. That isn't a bible. It's a 3000 year old political document.
Not so, it says in Romans, 1 Corintians, and several other books in the NEW testament that it is a sin.

Not so, it says in Romans, 1 Corintians, and several other books in the NEW testament that it is a sin.



Yet Jesus Christ, whom the religion is named after and the main difference between us, Jews and Muslims, never once mentions it, never mind condones it.

Not so, it says in Romans, 1 Corintians, and several other books in the NEW testament that it is a sin.

I can't think of any phrase in the Bible that makes me believe that GOD thinks homosexuality is a sin. All I have seen is where other men have said it. Maybe you know these books better than I do. But I want to see where God or Jesus says that homosexuality is a sin.

Damn. I feel so sorry for all those kids who have parents who don't love them.

Seriously. If you wouldn't accept your kids for who they are, then you don't really love them, gay or straight.

Hate is an abomination.

Damn. I feel so sorry for all those kids who have parents who don't love them.

Seriously. If you wouldn't accept your kids for who they are, then you don't really love them, gay or straight.

Hate is an abomination.

Well, you know how it goes. The parts of the bible that say that homosexuality is a sin are much more important than the ones about unconditional love. ;)

Not so, it says in Romans, 1 Corintians, and several other books in the NEW testament that it is a sin.

I want specific passages.

I didn't say it was wrong.

I have gay friends and I am indifferent towards gay marriage. However, if it was my Child I'd be extremely pissed. I want to see grand children. And no, adopted ones I won;t consider my grand children.

So the only purpose children have to you is as grandbaby factories? Christ. Would you disown them if they were barren/impotent? If they just didn't care to have kids?

Not so, it says in Romans, 1 Corintians, and several other books in the NEW testament that it is a sin.
By disciples of Christ, not Christ himself. I'm sorry but the "sin" of homosexuality is a myth, used to control people.

As I understand it, Christianity calls for a spirit of compassion and charity applied to all living beings. So how is it that people use Christianity to justify discrimination and cruelty? Disowning your own child certainly couldn't be called anything else. I'm curious as to how those of you who would disown your own children reconcile these two aspects of your religion.

EDIT: Actually, what I would like to suggest is that you go ask your priest what he thinks of the issue. I doubt many priests would think disowning a child is the right thing to do in any case. It just doesn't make sense, and I think someone who's actually spent some time thinking about christianity might have a more balanced view on matters. I'll admit that I don't know many priests, but those I have met, even if they disaproved of homosexuality would never suggest something as extreme as disowning a gay son.

Nah, but I don't like homos. They make me uncomfortable.

You are the weakest troll. Goodbye.

How would you react? Would you treat them any differently than if they were straight? Would you tell them they were going to hell? (if you are evangelical, that is) Honestly, I really wouldn't treat them any differently, and I certanly wouldn't disown them. I guess I'd need time to think about how to deal with them coming home and talking about having a crush on someone of the same gender. If they got picked on because they were gay though, I'd arrange a meeting with the kid's parents and raise hell. If my children are picked on for things they cannot control, well I don't put up with bs like that. Anyways, how would you out there handle this situation if it happened to you? I'm not trying to make it sound weird, it's just that different challenges come for parents that have gay children and yes, I know people who have gay children.

Wouldn't be happy but if that's the way the Gods work let it be.
Poor old Dick Cheney ... :)

no, I couldn't disown my child for that.

I'm a Christian, so I can't say that I am 100% comfortable with homosexuality. but what I do know is this: I never made a choice to be straight. that's just the way that I am. that is the way that God made me. and if a child of mine turned out to be gay, I feel confident in saying that that's not a choice he made. it's just the way that he is. the way God made him.

Originally Posted by Evinsia
Nah, but I don't like homos. They make me uncomfortable.
As people have said, are you a little insecure there?

Seriously, my parents have threatened to disown me, over my relationship with my partner and even though I'm sure they wouldn't do it, it really really hurts. All of you people who are seriously saying that's something you would do, well I feel sorry for you that you're so small.

I will never understand why people tend towards the attitude "different is bad"(until THEY are the ones being hurt due because of that). At any rate, I wouldn't change my view of the kid at all if s/he was gay. It's not my place to condemn them for something that they might not even have chosen. And having no religion that's telling me to hate other people because of the way they are(which is what it boils down to when evangelicalsts say that homosexuality is wrong because god or the bible says so), I have no excuse to treat them differently because they are gay. They are a person. They may be different, but they are a person.

I dislike idiots. But that does not give me the right to demand that idiots be shot. I also dislike evangelicalsts. But I can't demand that religion be outlawed because of it. I REALLY hate people like those who want to ban gay marriage, or like those who were responsable for things like the holocaust, slavery, etc.(yes, I'm aware that a gay marriage ban is nowhere near as bad as the killing of thousands of people, or forcing people into slavery because of skin color is) But I can't demand that prejudiced views be censored in the news, on the internet, etc. It's not my place to have my personal views imposed on others. I can advocate them, but I can't FORCE them on you.
Similarly, just because YOU are prejudiced against gays does not give you the right to ruin their lives.

I'd support them through life as I would any child of mine. I want any children I have to be good self-confident people, whatever lifestyle they have. I'd be deeply dissapointed in any parent who would do otherwise. Parent/child love is meant to be unconditional.

Mikorlias of Imardeavia

Personally, I think it's a sad thing that there even needs to be a topic about this. Unless we live in a society that would ask a question like "If you had a child that was short, what would you do?", it is a mark of a society that has refused progress that this question needs to be asked.

Seriously, my parents have threatened to disown me, over my relationship with my partner and even though I'm sure they wouldn't do it, it really really hurts. All of you people who are seriously saying that's something you would do, well I feel sorry for you that you're so small.
What's funny is that they are insensitive enough to feel that they are the ones being attacked... :rolleyes: Macnesia (did I get the name right) said it best: Hate is a big, serious Sin too. Well put, friend.

I'm really sorry about your parents. It's sad how people can be so scared of differences that they have to dislike their own child like that.

I can't think of any phrase in the Bible that makes me believe that GOD thinks homosexuality is a sin. All I have seen is where other men have said it. Maybe you know these books better than I do. But I want to see where God or Jesus says that homosexuality is a sin.
Exactly.

I'm a Christian, so I can't say that I am 100% comfortable with homosexuality.
Miamistan, you're obviously not a homophobe or anything, but Christianity says a lot of things. The Bible says eating fish is a Sin. It says wearing clothes of two different garments is a Sin. So... if you look away from the Bible, what's there to dislike about gays?

Nobody's 100% comfortable about everything, and I understand that. But I feel there's something more to your feelings of gays here. I'm not asking you to share it, as it's none of my business, but think about it: Are you sure you aren't fooling yourself when you say it's the Bible that's your reason for disliking gays?

However, if it was my Child I'd be extremely pissed. I want to see grand children. And no, adopted ones I won;t consider my grand children.
I have an adopted cousin. She's three and I consider her as much a part of the family as my biological cousin. Why would I not?

And yeah, what's with this whole "gotta spread my genes" attitude...?

Do you know why teenagers discriminate so easily? Because they have weak minds that are easily molded by the media and their friends and so if your friends say being gay is weird and that you should pick on the gay kid, chances are you will.
Why teenagers discriminate so easily (while adults don't, huh?)? Ex-cuse you. Think before you talk next time... :rolleyes:

"Weak minds".. huh, thanks for the stereotype. For your information, I'm as strong-minded as ever and so are many of my friends. And the adults I know...

I'm really sorry about your parents. It's sad how people can be so scared of differences that they have to dislike their own child like that.
Thanks mate. And the sad thing about my parents is it's over something as silly as race. I'm of Indian descent, and my partner is white. And you know, for us as a couple, that never even comes into it.

they are insensitive enough to feel that they are the ones being attacked...
I've noticed that too, in my personal experience. They turn this on you and blame you for thir own prejudices.

And on adoption, the notion of family is so much more than blood. I mean if I personally adopted a child I'd love them as my own, why should that be any different if my son or daughter couldn't have a child, for whatever reason?

First time for everything. Someone actually offering some sort of proof, and not just claiming that the Bible is true because it is the Bible.

Unfortunately, you have erred. Part of the Bible being true does not automatically mean it is all true. Not to say that it definitely is not all true, but you can't be certain.


Actually, he is still using the Bible as proof. After all, the logical assumption premised is that if some stories have found some corroberation in archeological finds, then the whole bible is true. This is based on the assumption that God cannot lie. This assumption is, of course, derived from the Bible.

Just another example of circular reasoning.....

How would you react? Would you treat them any differently than if they were straight? Would you tell them they were going to hell? (if you are evangelical, that is) Honestly, I really wouldn't treat them any differently, and I certanly wouldn't disown them. I guess I'd need time to think about how to deal with them coming home and talking about having a crush on someone of the same gender. If they got picked on because they were gay though, I'd arrange a meeting with the kid's parents and raise hell. If my children are picked on for things they cannot control, well I don't put up with bs like that. Anyways, how would you out there handle this situation if it happened to you? I'm not trying to make it sound weird, it's just that different challenges come for parents that have gay children and yes, I know people who have gay children.
Children, of whatever color, race, creed, sexual orientation, etc., deserve to be loved and cherished, and I have and would. :)

The Bible has been corraberated by archeology. The findings that have been made over the years have proven that many of the stories in the Bible are true. The Bible says that it is the word of God, that He is sinless, (therefore He cannot lie) and if some of the Bible has been proven, then it all must be true.
The Dead Sea scrolls were found in a cave, and they have been authenticated as being accurate, and they describe some of the same things that the Bible does.
That is how I know that the Bible is true.

Logic train! *zooms past Slobbering Idiots*

I would love them and cherish them and overcome obstacles for them.

The Bible says that it is the word of God, that He is sinless, (therefore He cannot lie) and if some of the Bible has been proven, then it all must be true.


Or, maybe, if some bits are disproven, it must be all false. And I don't know any gay people who've had the things in Deuteronomy 28 happen to them. Especially the betrothing a wife part.

i am late to this discussion
but i would like to add for those of you in this (hypothetical) situation,
i guarantee you would feel much more conflicted and far less staunch
about your beliefs once you were in the situation
the thing about your gay child is, you don't usually find out about the
gay part for 11 or 12 years or so, after you already love them
you can't just shut your love off like a tap
i have a child, and i can tell you that my child's sexuality isn't relevant
to me
they will not be sharing that part of their life with me
just as i would not share mine with him
so really, for me, either of us passing judgement on the other's sexuality is not relevant to our relationship
but i ask you, how would you feel, if your child, the one that you nurtured
and supported for years, disowned you because they disapproved of some aspect of your sexuality?

How would you react? Would you treat them any differently than if they were straight? Would you tell them they were going to hell? (if you are evangelical, that is) Honestly, I really wouldn't treat them any differently, and I certanly wouldn't disown them. I guess I'd need time to think about how to deal with them coming home and talking about having a crush on someone of the same gender. If they got picked on because they were gay though, I'd arrange a meeting with the kid's parents and raise hell. If my children are picked on for things they cannot control, well I don't put up with bs like that. Anyways, how would you out there handle this situation if it happened to you? I'm not trying to make it sound weird, it's just that different challenges come for parents that have gay children and yes, I know people who have gay children.

I won't lie and say that I wouldn't be dissapointed, but I would still love the child because he/she would be my own.

I won't lie and say that I wouldn't be dissapointed, but I would still love the child because he/she would be my own.

Dissapointed by what? If it is a thing to be dissapointed about, as you say, then it'd be either your fault or your partners, because it is a genetic difference, just like height, hair colour, skin colour etc. However, at least you'd have the decency to continue loving them and caring for them unlike some hateful bigots on the thread. When will people realise everyone is human and should be treated with respect to who they are, not what they are?

Mikorlias of Imardeavia

I'd be more disappointed if they turned out to be interested in something completely banal like... I dunno... novels by John Grisham.

I'd beat the gayness out of it with my patented "old-testament-inna-sock"...

I'd be more disappointed if they turned out to be interested in something completely banal like... I dunno... novels by John Grisham.
Or if they got addicted to something really nasty.... like Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time .

I actually had this conversation with a friend recently.

Personally I hope I wouldn't treat them any differently, and would actually be pleased if they told me (rather then hearing it through someone else), as it would mean they trusted me not to pass judgement.

Actually, on the subject of John Grisham, I think I would disown my kid if he/she came up to me and said, "Dad, I have something to tell you... I'm a Lawyer."

I would disown them and claim that they were not my child but not before telling them how much I hated them for what they had done.

i would disown my child, seriously.

Actually, on the subject of John Grisham, I think I would disown my kid if he/she came up to me and said, "Dad, I have something to tell you... I'm a Lawyer."

Your kid wouldn't tell you. You'd just start getting weird and unclear bills in the mail that state you owe someone alot of money for talking with your kid.

I really could care less. I think I'd feel a little awkward, but who doesnt in situations like that? You'd grow to accept it anyways. I do think I'd express a lot of fear for AIDS though, simply because of the high risk factor. But otherwise, really, homosexuality has been around for centuries. It's even found in nature. Let them do what they'd like.

probably wouldn't care

Wouldn't give a second toss. I'd be slightly pissed that I wouldn't have anything of me in my grandchild, but thats why I intend to have two children anyway... ; ) Seriously, homophobia needs to be shot. Like Racism.

I would disown them and claim that they were not my child but not before telling them how much I hated them for what they had done.



Well, the hate would be mutual from them if you did that.

Well, the hate would be mutual from them if you did that.

Well if they turned queer I wouldn't care if they hated me. I might even go crazy wondering what I did wrong to cause such a horrible mind disorder.

Congratulations Enodscopia, you have officially been added to the list of people that need to be shot!

Expect a bomb to arrive at your house in approximately three days. £59.99, plus Postage and Package, will be charged to your family after your death.

Well if they turned queer I wouldn't care if they hated me. I might even go crazy wondering what I did wrong to cause such a horrible mind disorder.


"Turned Queer", you make it sound like they have a choice and they chose homosexuality. I don't ever remember being offered this choice?

"Into the cellar or I'll shoot punk!"

-first words out of my mouth if I had a gay kid

(I know sarcasm doesn't translate well over the internet, but this was too funny to not post.)

Your kid wouldn't tell you. You'd just start getting weird and unclear bills in the mail that state you owe someone alot of money for talking with your kid.

Damn that little worm! And after I paid for that sex-change operation! I hate the little bastard already, and it doesn't even exist!

How would you react? Would you treat them any differently than if they were straight?.

I'd be very concerned and worried about how they would be treated by intolerant people, but I would love them no matter what, and as much as I would love any other child of mine. They're my kids, for pete's sake!

I would do what any good Christian would do - throw them out in the cold with no clothes or food until they got a hard on to a picture of a girl.

But how could you tell if they weren't thinking of a guy? :p

I'd be very concerned and worried about how they would be treated by intolerant people, but I would love them no matter what, and as much as I would love any other child of mine. They're my kids, for pete's sake!
I KNEW there was SOME reason I liked you so much! :D

If I ever had a child, and that child ended up being gay/bi, I wouldn't disown them or love them any less (and yes, I am a Christian). But I would have a huge problem with it and tell them that. I would have a problem if they had any sexual relationship outside of marriage, and they would know that. I would still not support gay marriage or adoption, because I don't think it's healthy for society.

I would feel very, very sad about it.

If I ever had a child, and that child ended up being gay/bi, I wouldn't disown them or love them any less (and yes, I am a Christian). But I would have a huge problem with it and tell them that. I would have a problem if they had any sexual relationship outside of marriage, and they would know that. I would still not support gay marriage or adoption, because I don't think it's healthy for society.

So... you don't want them to have sex outside of marriage, and you won't let them get married.

Why should they have a life of celibacy forced upon them because they're gay? And how on earth is gay marriage harmful for society?

I guess I'll never have to worry about having a gay kid, what with being gay and all, and I'm hardly qualified to make an objective opinion. But some day, I will have kids, adoption or something, and I don't care if they're gay, straight, bi... i admit I'm still a little creeped out by transgenders, but if they were my kid that's all that matters. My prejudices are my own, and not to be taken out on other people.

I would disown them and claim that they were not my child but not before telling them how much I hated them for what they had done.

"Done"? They haven't "done" anything.

So... you don't want them to have sex outside of marriage, and you won't let them get married.

Why should they have a life of celibacy forced upon them because they're gay? And how on earth is gay marriage harmful for society?

I would hope s/he'd accept a commited relationship even if it isn't technically marriage.

I wouldn't hope that if I were you, you're likely to be disappointed.

It's sad that this question is even a question.

Even if you're christian and say that glbt relations are wrong, i think I remember jesus saying something like "love your enemy" -and dont forget, the golden rule.

Being bi, i face discrimination many times. Since im a REAL person, my child's sexuality wouldn't affect me at all.

It would be funny to see how hetero people would feel if the tables turned tomorrow. How would you like to be looked down upon for being hetero? And not allowed to marry? I'm sure you wouldn't like it.
What are you people so scared of?
Stop thinking your beliefs are better than everyone else's. And stop imposing your so called "morals" on everyone.
This is just as pathetic as when african americans were discriminated against. What a sad country this turned out to be. :(
I'll believe freedom when i see it.

If I had a gay kid my first thought would be "How the hell do I have a kid, I haven't even slept with a girl yet!" then I'd think "Ah, crap. Now I need to find a job." then "Okay, I'll need my own place to raise the kid" then........then it'd be "Okay, now I need to find a way to pay for college" and then.........

I think I might eventually get around to considering his gayness, but there are a lot more important things to take care of first.

To be honest I would probably just shrug slightly, and then ask if there was anything else my child wanted to talk about. I do not see it as a big deal really, pretty much the same as if my child said they were more attracted to brown hair than black.

Of course, if anyone gave my child problems about their orientation, I would get into the classic parent defending child mode. I do not care who you are, nobody hurts my kids.

If I had a gay kid my first thought would be "How the hell do I have a kid, I haven't even slept with a girl yet!" then I'd think "Ah, crap. Now I need to find a job." then "Okay, I'll need my own place to raise the kid" then........then it'd be "Okay, now I need to find a way to pay for college" and then.........

I think I might eventually get around to considering his gayness, but there are a lot more important things to take care of first.

In an extremely strange way, that was very insightful.

How would you react? Would you treat them any differently than if they were straight? Would you tell them they were going to hell? (if you are evangelical, that is) Honestly, I really wouldn't treat them any differently, and I certanly wouldn't disown them. I guess I'd need time to think about how to deal with them coming home and talking about having a crush on someone of the same gender. If they got picked on because they were gay though, I'd arrange a meeting with the kid's parents and raise hell. If my children are picked on for things they cannot control, well I don't put up with bs like that. Anyways, how would you out there handle this situation if it happened to you? I'm not trying to make it sound weird, it's just that different challenges come for parents that have gay children and yes, I know people who have gay children.
I'd disown them. Honestly, I don't have a problem with other people in other families being gay, I can work with gays, I can be friends with gays. However, no child of mine will be homosexual. I refuse to allow myself to raise that type of person. (They actually recently found a gene that is part of the cause of homosexuality, you can read up on it on CNN.com, use their search function...it was reported about...1.5 months ago)

Frankly put, I for the most part am entirely tolerant of homosexuals. However, when it comes to my personal family there are some things I won't accept. I won't accept homosexuality, nor would I accept conversion to some religions (mormonism, zoroastrianism, any cult for instance), nor would I accept them to make certain choices (like not going to college if I can afford to get them there). You raise your child, and there are some things I refuse to raise.

I'd disown them. Honestly, I don't have a problem with other people in other families being gay, I can work with gays, I can be friends with gays. However, no child of mine will be homosexual. I refuse to allow myself to raise that type of person. (They actually recently found a gene that is part of the cause of homosexuality, you can read up on it on CNN.com, use their search function...it was reported about...1.5 months ago)

Frankly put, I for the most part am entirely tolerant of homosexuals. However, when it comes to my personal family there are some things I won't accept. I won't accept homosexuality, nor would I accept conversion to some religions (mormonism, zoroastrianism, any cult for instance), nor would I accept them to make certain choices (like not going to college if I can afford to get them there). You raise your child, and there are some things I refuse to raise.



Well if it is a gene, then it would be like if your child had the gene that enabled him to curl his tongue (which is passed down from either the mother o father) and you disowned him for that. If the CNN thing is true, that is.

I'd disown them. Honestly, I don't have a problem with other people in other families being gay, I can work with gays, I can be friends with gays. However, no child of mine will be homosexual. I refuse to allow myself to raise that type of person. (They actually recently found a gene that is part of the cause of homosexuality, you can read up on it on CNN.com, use their search function...it was reported about...1.5 months ago)

Frankly put, I for the most part am entirely tolerant of homosexuals. However, when it comes to my personal family there are some things I won't accept. I won't accept homosexuality, nor would I accept conversion to some religions (mormonism, zoroastrianism, any cult for instance), nor would I accept them to make certain choices (like not going to college if I can afford to get them there). You raise your child, and there are some things I refuse to raise.

So, if it is just a gene, you'd disown him for having a gene that you or your wife passed on to him?

Well if it is a gene, then it would be like if your child had the gene that enabled him to curl his tongue (which is passed down from either the mother o father) and you disowned him for that. If the CNN thing is true, that is.
If I recall correctly, it operated under certain factors that could make a person be attracted to the opposite sex, but wouldn't necessarily do so, and had some degree of choice (attraction to both sides). Curling your tongue is not something you have any control over, homosexuality is.

So, if it is just a gene, you'd disown him for having a gene that you or your wife passed on to him?
Read my above reply.

now that I think about it...I probably would disown them, and then spend years in counseling involving my failings as a father.

now that I think about it...I probably would disown them, and then spend years in counseling involving my failings as a father.
That pretty well sums up my view as well, though I'd drag the wife in as well.

Read my above reply.

I see. So you'd disown him for something which by all indications he can't control and didn't choose? And because you can't deal with the idea of "producing" or "raising" a gay child?

You realize that makes absolutely no sense and makes you sound like a total asshole, right?

As a "faggot" bi-sexual I don't hate you right now, I just feel sorry for you.

I dont know, Im really high on honor and tradicion but on the other hand I tend to be pretty liberal. But I think I would treat him like anyother person, because we all live in the same world so we all have the same rights in it. The thing I would do is hurry up and have another child. :p

Read my above reply.

But were it not for you, he would not have ever been predisposed to becoming gay. You're going to punish him for your own inadequacies?

I'd probably take up some sort of vice as well, like excessive drinking or smoking...

But were it not for you, he would not have ever been predisposed to becoming gay. You're going to punish him for your own inadequacies?
I'm going to give him the chance to be raised by someone who can do a better job than I.

well, it would be the childs dicision and I would accept it. the I would have tried to help him/her as much as i could

I'm going to give him the chance to be raised by someone who can do a better job than I.

Do you believe in God? Because, if you think about it, it's really his fault.

I'm going to give him the chance to be raised by someone who can do a better job than I.

homosexuallity has nothing to do with the upbringing.

there are people who was brought up in a neonazism family and still became gay

If my son told me he was gay, I'd be disappointed that he decided to saddle himself with an artificial label. WHo he has sex with is his business, not mine. But the idea of 'choosing a side' is contrary to everything I intend to teach him.

I would have more children, so my genes could be passed on. I would still love the kid, but he cannot produce grand-children.

I would have more children, so my genes could be passed on. I would still love the kid, but he cannot produce grand-children.
S'what I would do.

If my son told me he was gay, I'd be disappointed that he decided to saddle himself with an artificial label. WHo he has sex with is his business, not mine. But the idea of 'choosing a side' is contrary to everything I intend to teach him.

Well, it's he's not really "choosing a side." That implies this is a choice, which it isn't. By using that “label” he’s saying he's not attracted to the opposite sex.

BTW: Remember American Militarists? That was me.

If I recall correctly, it operated under certain factors that could make a person be attracted to the opposite sex, but wouldn't necessarily do so, and had some degree of choice (attraction to both sides). Curling your tongue is not something you have any control over, homosexuality is.



Ok then you contradicted what you said because if it is a gene, you cannot control it.

Still gonna disown any gay kids...and then go to therapy for years and take up a nice vice like drinking! Might join a gun club as well.

Well, it's he's not really "choosing a side." That implies this is a choice, which it isn't. By using that “label” he’s saying he's not attracted to the opposite sex.

BTW: Remember American Militarists? That was me.

Not a 'choice'. AN evolvement. The ancient greeks understood. I see no need to decide. Suppose I am more sexually attracted to men than to women? I decide that I'm gay. That's it. I'm gay. I've labeled myself gay.

NOw suppose I don't fall for that trap. I recognize that I'm also sexually attracted to women, just not to the same degree. As time goes by, I become more interested in women than in men. Does that mean I'm not sexually attracted to men anymore? No. But I've grown more attracted to women.

The 'Gay' and 'Straight' labels are nothing more than labels. It isn't about whether a person can choose to be gay or straight, or whether he or she is born that way. We allow ourselves to be duped into thinking that we have to be one or the other. Or Bisexual. For our entire lives.

Why can't we just enjoy some sex? Why can't we just fall in love? Why must we label it?

Not a 'choice'. AN evolvement. The ancient greeks understood. I see no need to decide. Suppose I am more sexually attracted to men than to women? I decide that I'm gay. That's it. I'm gay. I've labeled myself gay.

NOw suppose I don't fall for that trap. I recognize that I'm also sexually attracted to women, just not to the same degree. As time goes by, I become more interested in women than in men. Does that mean I'm not sexually attracted to men anymore? No. But I've grown more attracted to women.

The 'Gay' and 'Straight' labels are nothing more than labels. It isn't about whether a person can choose to be gay or straight, or whether he or she is born that way. We allow ourselves to be duped into thinking that we have to be one or the other. Or Bisexual. For our entire lives.

Why can't we just enjoy some sex? Why can't we just fall in love? Why must we label it?

See, the thing is, most people don't deviate a great deal from their actual sexuality (at least, once they /discover/ it.) I currently 'label' myself as gay, but I accept the fact that at some time later on in my life, I might be attracted to a woman, at which point, I would 'label' myself as bisexual.

Labels aren't the problem. It's what people /do/ with them that's the issue.

While I would certainly not disown my child or any such thing, I would be frank about how I felt about it. That would be one subject where I would not lie or twist the truth to make it less painful for a child. I would not punish them or anything, but I would tell them I though it was wrong, as well as encourage them to think deeply about it.

While I would certainly not disown my child or any such thing, I would be frank about how I felt about it. That would be one subject where I would not lie or twist the truth to make it less painful for a child. I would not punish them or anything, but I would tell them I though it was wrong, as well as encourage them to think deeply about it.

If they're even telling you about it, they've probably already gone through a great deal of mental anguish, wondering how you're going to respond and they've probably already thought deeply about it and how they feel.

Considering what they quite probably put themselves through, the worst you could do would be as nothing. But acceptance and love would soothe their soul. Congratulations on deepening existing insecurities.

Love=Yes. Always.

Acceptance=Of them? Again, always. Of the homosexuality? No. I have my beliefs, and I won’t change them because things hit a bit closer to home.

It would depend on the philosophical outlook of the parent what the response would be. To a permissive parent some sort of validation would probably be the response. To a person of faith it would be one of reaffirmation of love for the child, but condemnation of the behavior and subsequent persuasion to try to get them to stop the undesired behavior.

Homophobes make me uncomfortable.
amen

See, the thing is, most people don't deviate a great deal from their actual sexuality (at least, once they /discover/ it.) I currently 'label' myself as gay, but I accept the fact that at some time later on in my life, I might be attracted to a woman, at which point, I would 'label' myself as bisexual.

Labels aren't the problem. It's what people /do/ with them that's the issue.

I took the advice of Alex Comfort(The JOy of Sex), and chose not to choose. If I had, I would have labeled myself bisexual. But as time went on, especially in college, I began to realize that I wasn't attracted to men. I was attracted to women. I had no aversion to men, but that's not the same thing. I think that if I had labeled myself back when I was in my teens, I probably wouldn't be married to my beautiful wife and have a child that fills my day with laughter like I do now.

He(in my opinion) was right on the money. "Both flags are false". All that really matters is how you choose to fulfil your sexual desires.

Bringing religious rhetoric that no one else agrees with into this discussion to justifiy a position you can't support any other way is doing you absolutely no good. You just sound silly.

Ummmm...I agree.

Love=Yes. Always.

Acceptance=Of them? Again, always. Of the homosexuality? No. I have my beliefs, and I won’t change them because things hit a bit closer to home.

Well, frankly, I think 'love the sinner, hate the sin' is the most foolish crock of s--- ever, especially when it's not something that they can control or choose at all (I'm speaking from experience, here).

And if you think it /is/ something you can choose, when did /you/ choose to be straight? Or was it just something that you never really thought about? And could you choose to be gay if you wanted to? Think about it for a second. The revulsion you feel isn't from 'omg liek t3h bibble sayz so', it's from you being heterosexual and not really feeling comfortable with the idea of having sex with someone of the same gender. And really, that's okay. Just don't let that influence your opinion of someone that does.

Best line ever: If you don't like the idea of homosexual marriage, the solution is simple - don't marry a homosexual.

There was this rapper in the early 90's who was accused of havin anti-gay lyrics in his songs and he came up with a clever reply, "I don't care if men are homosexual, means more women for me!" I know this post will get a mixed reaction :D.

There was this rapper in the early 90's who was accused of havin anti-gay lyrics in his songs and he came up with a clever reply, "I don't care if men are homosexual, means more women for me!" I know this post will get a mixed reaction :D.


May mean more women for him, but if he messes around with the wrong ones, and gets some gay guys pissed off at him, he's better be careful cause he might get the crap beaten out of him. *laughs*

... And no, I don't mean by the ones carrying purses and wearing feather boas (those guys creep even me out), I mean the ones who are nothing but the average guy except for who they like to sleep with. Like me.

May mean more women for him, but if he messes around with the wrong ones, and gets some gay guys pissed off at him, he's better be careful cause he might get the crap beaten out of him. *laughs*

... And no, I don't mean by the ones carrying purses and wearing feather boas (those guys creep even me out), I mean the ones who are nothing but the average guy except for who they like to sleep with. Like me.



You're gay?

You're gay?
Um... yeah? *knitted eyebrows* This is a factor?

What the hell is the problem? So they'd be gay, who cares? And does this apply to both genders, so if I had a daughter with a girlfriend, would I care? Hell no. Same if my son enjoyed screwing guys, no problem. I admit I wouldn't share his tastes, although I would certainly share my daughter's tastes. :D

No, it's no problem for me. I wouldn't treat them differently, and since I was their father, I wouldn't have to worry about them being attracted to me (I hope, anyhow), so why not treat them like my child?

Um... yeah? *knitted eyebrows* This is a factor?



No, infact it's nice to hear from some people that actually are, instead of just hetros nattering back and forth at each other. Man, I'm a dumbass!

What the hell is the problem? So they'd be gay, who cares? And does this apply to both genders, so if I had a daughter with a girlfriend, would I care? Hell no. Same if my son enjoyed screwing guys, no problem. I admit I wouldn't share his tastes, although I would certainly share my daughter's tastes. :D

No, it's no problem for me. I wouldn't treat them differently, and since I was their father, I wouldn't have to worry about them being attracted to me (I hope, anyhow), so why not treat them like my child?



This applies to both but I didn't want to keep saying "If you had a gay/lesbian son/daughter....." It would take to long and I'm really lazy.

No, infact it's nice to hear from some people that actually are, instead of just hetros nattering back and forth at each other. Man, I'm a dumbass!

Oh. Well, trust me, my online political life mostly consists of me nattering at (mostly) ignorant rednecks who seem to believe that there is no correct way to live except the way that they live their life.

Either that or I rant and rave about how common sense, courtesy and compassion aren't really all that common.

Disown.

I'd make sure he/she would never be able to come to my funeral and he would recieve nothing from my will when I do die.

Well, there's unconditional parental love for you. Let's hope this never happens to you, to spare the child the failures of your parentage. Pathetic.

This applies to both but I didn't want to keep saying "If you had a gay/lesbian son/daughter....." It would take to long and I'm really lazy.

You could just say 'homosexual child' or 'gay child' although it sounds a little cold and impersonal.

Well, there's unconditional parental love for you. Let's hope this never happens to you, to spare the child the failures of your parentage. Pathetic.

*insert applause here*

I didn't say it was wrong.

I have gay friends and I am indifferent towards gay marriage. However, if it was my Child I'd be extremely pissed. I want to see grand children. And no, adopted ones I won;t consider my grand children.

So it's an entirely selfish and fear-based position...

Gay, Straight, what if there was no such thing? Perhaps God(ess) is a hermaphrodite who has stuck us with one gender or another?
Be glad if your child can find love and have it returned, and that they are happy and healthy.

Gay, Straight, what if there was no such thing? Perhaps God(ess) is a hermaphrodite who has stuck us with one gender or another?
Be glad if your child can find love and have it returned, and that they are happy and healthy.

If there was no such thing, it would require one gender.

And biologists say that the 'y' gene (the gene that causes 'maleness') is an aberration and will be eradicated within 250,000 years. How that'll affect us, I dunno. But there'll be a hell of a lot of lesbians.

Nah, but I don't like homos. They make me uncomfortable.

Why, how dare they trigger your insecurities by their mere presence?! :rolleyes:

So it's an entirely selfish and fear-based position...
Well, I mean, when you have no real reason, you'll take what you can get, right?

Honestly the earth is badly over populated so people worrying about having grandchildren should think twice if it's just to pass on the family name or genes. Personally, I could careless my wife changes her last name or not if my children inherit my name. I have no special attachment to it or my first name for that matter.

I'd feel special. They seem to be much nicer, and I like to be a supporter to almost everything but atheletes. Who wants to be called an athletic supporter?

lol

Well, there's unconditional parental love for you. Let's hope this never happens to you, to spare the child the failures of your parentage. Pathetic.

BRAVO.

Well, I mean, when you have no real reason, you'll take what you can get, right?

Heh, thought to some people only goes so far as "Hmm, what do I think?...Well, that must be right then." These are the kind of people whose children I fear for. Such hateful people can psychologically scar their children for life (or drive them to suicide), but by God, we can't let those damned homosexuals adopt!

Oh. I'd like to make a teeny-weeny observation here.

Heterosexual parents have gay children, so it makes sense that even if one of a gay couple is the biological parent of the couple's child, that they might have a heterosexual child.

I'd just like to say that typically, heterosexual parents put more pressure on their kids to be straight than gay parents do for their kids to be gay - or so it seems to me. Gay parents know what it feels like to have parents who are expecting them to play for the 'right' team - so they'll support their kid no matter how their kid feels. Kids raised in households with gay parents are, in my opinion, more free to question their sexuality than kids in heterosexual households, because they know their parents aren't 'normal' and so believe that their parents won't persecute them.

Seem more than a little correct to anyone else?

If my child was gay, I wouldn't care. I'd love them all the same, because, it doesn't matter to me, which is how all parents should act towards their children.

So... you don't want them to have sex outside of marriage, and you won't let them get married.

Why should they have a life of celibacy forced upon them because they're gay? And how on earth is gay marriage harmful for society?

Marriage is (and has been for several thousand years) a means of producing and nurturing children. Studies have shown that children do better raised in a home with one man and one woman who are married. Why should you have to live with one wife if you love more than one woman? If my child had a compulsion to kill others, should I let him/her? I mean, it is their nature. Alcohosism has a genetic component. Yet there are people with alcoholic tendencies who don't drink.

Oh. I'd like to make a teeny-weeny observation here.

Heterosexual parents have gay children, so it makes sense that even if one of a gay couple is the biological parent of the couple's child, that they might have a heterosexual child.

I'd just like to say that typically, heterosexual parents put more pressure on their kids to be straight than gay parents do for their kids to be gay - or so it seems to me. Gay parents know what it feels like to have parents who are expecting them to play for the 'right' team - so they'll support their kid no matter how their kid feels. Kids raised in households with gay parents are, in my opinion, more free to question their sexuality than kids in heterosexual households, because they know their parents aren't 'normal' and so believe that their parents won't persecute them.

Seem more than a little correct to anyone else?



This would be certanly true in certain households, although I know plenty of people who are straight that wouldn't "force" or "recommend" if their child was gay that he/she be straight.

Marriage is (and has been for several thousand years) a means of producing and nurturing children. Studies have shown that children do better raised in a home with one man and one woman who are married.

Link, plz. My post was speculation, you're presenting this as fact. So... link, plz.

Why should you have to live with one wife if you love more than one woman? If my child had a compulsion to kill others, should I let him/her? I mean, it is their nature. Alcohosism has a genetic component. Yet there are people with alcoholic tendencies who don't drink.

But alcoholism isn't going to lead to a lifelong partner and happiness with them, and unless the kid is severely f---ed in the head, killing people won't, either.

Plus, what two people do, heterosexual, homosexual, or otherwise, so long as they're consenting, has nothing to do with anyone else but those two people.

Yay for promoting ignorance and faulty comparisons.

Good job.

*rolls eyes*

BRAVO.

Thank you.

Such an attitude is nothing short of a failure of parenting. Parents are to provide unconditional love and support for their children, and to be there when the child presents life's problems to them. Some people on this thread have said they'd disown their children out of their own prejudices. This is the antithesis of what a parent should do - ducking out the back in the face of a problem that frightens them. What an act of pathetic cowardice.

Compounding this failure to help, they also scar their children with their rejection. Even parents of murderers, people who have committed the ultimate harm to another, stick by their children and visit them in prison. Yet, there are people like those in this thread who would disown their child for something that hurts no one and does not even affect them. Disowning a child for not providing grandchildren?! What is this, the 18th or 19th century? Would you disown your child for being sterile? I think there's a deeper selfishness involved here than simply being deprived of progeny.

You needn't approve of your child's lifestyle. You needn't want to meet your son's boyfriend. Your job, as a parent, is to love your child and provide guidance. IPR, you would be a miserable failure in this, and it is utterly unjustifiable. This goes for anyone else in this thread who said they'd disown their child.

Thank you.

Such an attitude is nothing short of a failure of parenting. Parents are to provide unconditional love and support for their children, and to be there when the child presents life's problems to them. Some people on this thread have said they'd disown their children out of their own prejudices. This is the antithesis of what a parent should do - ducking out the back in the face of a problem that frightens them. What an act of pathetic cowardice.

Compounding this failure to help, they also scar their children with their rejection. Even parents of murderers, people who have committed the ultimate harm to another, stick by their children and visit them in prison. Yet, there are people like those in this thread who would disown their child for something that hurts no one and does not even affect them. Disowning a child for not providing grandchildren?! What is this, the 18th or 19th century? Would you disown your child for being sterile? I think there's a deeper selfishness involved here than simply being deprived of progeny.

You needn't approve of your child's lifestyle. You needn't want to meet your son's boyfriend. Your job, as a parent, is to love your child and provide guidance. IPR, you would be a miserable failure in this, and it is utterly unjustifiable. This goes for anyone else in this thread who said they'd disown their child.

*more applause*

My child could never be straight or gay because I am not going to label him or her any useless meaning. People are who they are. You may tie your left shoe first and I may tie my right one first, so what. The idea that humans should strive to all be the same on important or unimportant lifestyle decisions is obscene robotic warped sounding ideals. God wants us all to be real by being ourselves. He don't want you to emulate another, your perfectly beautiful as you are. We all play a fool sometimes. We all become humble or become humbled sometime in ourlives or at the end of them and hopefully we get there prior to our last chance at it. That may be the one thing that buys time out there, being humble.

I would hope s/he'd accept a commited relationship even if it isn't technically marriage.

That would be she'd, since I'm female. And no, extra-marital sex is wrong. Period. Boohoo. A life of celibacy. I'm a virgin, and don't feel left out of anything. You can live a normal life without having sex, even if there's someone you really like out there. Doesn't mean you have to sleep with them.

My child could never be straight or gay because I am not going to label him or her any useless meaning. People are who they are. You may tie your left shoe first and I may tie my right one first, so what. The idea that humans should strive to all be the same on important or unimportant lifestyle decisions is obscene robotic warped sounding ideals. God wants us all to be real by being ourselves. He don't want you to emulate another, your perfectly beautiful as you are. We all play a fool sometimes.


People who don't label are abberations - they're abnormal. It's a part of human biopsychology to label others. It's just that you can choose to do many things with these labels - discard them, which means that you /did/ label them in the first place; accept them, which means that you're a judging halfwit; or simply keep the label, change it as necessary, but don't let it affect you or your behavioral process.

... *sigh* 'omg lolz dont labul mi' people make my head hurt.

Oh. I'd like to make a teeny-weeny observation here.

Heterosexual parents have gay children, so it makes sense that even if one of a gay couple is the biological parent of the couple's child, that they might have a heterosexual child.

I'd just like to say that typically, heterosexual parents put more pressure on their kids to be straight than gay parents do for their kids to be gay - or so it seems to me. Gay parents know what it feels like to have parents who are expecting them to play for the 'right' team - so they'll support their kid no matter how their kid feels. Kids raised in households with gay parents are, in my opinion, more free to question their sexuality than kids in heterosexual households, because they know their parents aren't 'normal' and so believe that their parents won't persecute them.

Seem more than a little correct to anyone else?

Very much so, well said.

Indeed, this is a good analysis of how such things play out. Some say that a gay couple would pressure their children to be gay...now, knowing that they didn't exactly have a choice to make and remembering the pressures they likely went through growing up to fit the "appropriate" gender role, I can see no reason why they would pressure their child as such. It's utter nonsense, dreamed up by fearful minds trying to fabricate reasons to justify their prejudices. The common saying is that parents want to give their children a better world than they had...so a gay couple would be far more likely to give their child a world of openness and acceptance, especially if they were not provided with such a upbringing.

[QUOTE=Evinsia]Put it up for adoption.

I think you are a horrible person who should not be allowed to have children. Anyone who could think of calling a child and it, or putting a mentally retarded child up for adoption should be sterilized.

Link, plz. My post was speculation, you're presenting this as fact. So... link, plz.



But alcoholism isn't going to lead to a lifelong partner and happiness with them, and unless the kid is severely f---ed in the head, killing people won't, either.

Plus, what two people do, heterosexual, homosexual, or otherwise, so long as they're consenting, has nothing to do with anyone else but those two people.

Yay for promoting ignorance and faulty comparisons.

Good job.

*rolls eyes*

I will work on finding a link, but I've never met a homosexual who was ultimately happy in that lifestyle. That isn't to say that all heterosexual relationships are perfect and fulfilling--they aren't. Nothing in this world will ultimately make you suddenly happy and fulfilled. Except God. How do I know? Because I've experienced God. And everyone else who has truly experienced Jesus Christ knows it as well.

I agree if you stick all labels out of your life then yes we would not have a vocabulary lol. I am speaking of people that use labels for anything on this earth. Sure there are some labels that we may not want to do without. But there are many that just have many meanings and it seems we twist the meaning of one original thought and persecute those that use it for its original reasons. Example being the latest lawsuit in chicago, a bus ad having a statement of "Got books, Get brain." Smebody complained and wanted to take the ads down becuase some people want to think it means getting a blow job, talk about political correctness run rampant.

Ps: What is normal nowadays? It seems to change every second, so just wanted to make sure I was up on being hip. Normal is a label. Labels are fake. Being real is not being a label.

I will work on finding a link, but I've never met a homosexual who was ultimately happy in that lifestyle. That isn't to say that all heterosexual relationships are perfect and fulfilling--they aren't. Nothing in this world will ultimately make you suddenly happy and fulfilled. Except God. How do I know? Because I've experienced God. And everyone else who has truly experienced Jesus Christ knows it as well.

I've experienced Jesus, as well. And I know he loves me.

That's why I spread tolerance and love, in the stead of those who claim to be his disciples who are failing in their job.

As for 'homosexuals are never happy', tell that to the couples who have been partners for fifteen years plus, longer than quite a few heterosexual couples.
And the ones that aren't happy simply aren't happy because they're told that heterosexuality is simply better than homosexuality, period. No reasoning, no thought. They're told that they're gutter trash, and they believe it because they don't have anyone else to tell them otherwise. So instead of reasoning that 'homosexuality is faulty because there are no happy gay people', you should probably try and look at /why/ gay people aren't happy rather than simply blaming it on who they are.

[EDIT] As for me, I'm happy because I know who I am and why I'm here. Most people, heterosexual or not, don't know what /they're/ here for, let alone who they are. That could have something to do with it.

Research mentioned above (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/Marriage/index.cfm)

Research mentioned above (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/Marriage/index.cfm)

From http://www.heritage.org/about/ :

Our Mission
Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institute - a think tank - whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.

They're biased, try again.

I will work on finding a link, but I've never met a homosexual who was ultimately happy in that lifestyle. That isn't to say that all heterosexual relationships are perfect and fulfilling--they aren't. Nothing in this world will ultimately make you suddenly happy and fulfilled. Except God. How do I know? Because I've experienced God. And everyone else who has truly experienced Jesus Christ knows it as well.

A homosexual life is just as fulfilling as a hetrosexual life. *puts on a happy christian church voice* Because I've experienced homoseuxality. And everyone else who has truly experienced homosexuality knows it as well. Aww doesn't Jesus just look like he needs a hug!

I've experienced Jesus, as well. And I know he loves me.

That's why I spread tolerance and love, in the stead of those who claim to be his disciples who are failing in their job.

As for 'homosexuals are never happy', tell that to the couples who have been partners for fifteen years plus, longer than quite a few heterosexual couples.
And the ones that aren't happy simply aren't happy because they're told that heterosexuality is simply better than homosexuality, period. No reasoning, no thought. They're told that they're gutter trash, and they believe it because they don't have anyone else to tell them otherwise. So instead of reasoning that 'homosexuality is faulty because there are no happy gay people', you should probably try and look at /why/ gay people aren't happy rather than simply blaming it on who they are.

I'm not saying they aren't happy because they're gay. The whole human race (including straight people) is wretched and desperate. I don't think less of them because they're gay. I think, as God does, that homosexuality is wrong, but everyone is a sinner, destined for hell unless they repent.

Disowning a child for not providing grandchildren?! What is this, the 18th or 19th century? Would you disown your child for being sterile? I think there's a deeper selfishness involved here than simply being deprived of progeny.


I agree with Anbar, especially on this point. I am currently (and have been for over half my life) planning on becoming a Catholic priest. I know I would be deeply hurt if my parents disowned me, simply because I would not be able to provide them with grandchildren.

Also, I really do not see ANY just cause for disowning your own child.

I'm not saying they aren't happy because they're gay. The whole human race (including straight people) is wretched and desperate. I don't think less of them because they're gay. I think, as God does, that homosexuality is wrong, but everyone is a sinner, destined for hell unless they repent.

Neither God, nor Jesus, ever said anything about homosexuality in the Bible. It was the Disciples who were saying things, and even then, they're mere mortals.

Regardless, the Bible was commanded by God, who is Sinless and cannot lie, but was written by Man who is riddled with Sin and /can/ lie. Therefore, if you cannot find Jesus through an instinctive love of others and the universe, you can't find him at all. The Bible is fundamentally flawed.

EDIT: Don't make me go into my 'linguistics f---ed up the Bible' argument. I will win, by hook or by crook.

They're biased, try again.

Ok...what about this one? http://www.mdrc.org/publications/386/testimony.html

I think, as God does, that homosexuality is wrong

Since i'm a Catholic, and therefore believe in the validity of the Bible (though it isn't the only source of the truth), I simply ask for you to provide a verse from the Bible, in which God condemns someone for just being homosexually inclined (as in, being a homosexual, but not engageing in homosexual activities- I hope you realize that I'm not refering to Gay Pride rallies here).

I don't think less of them because they're gay. I think, as God does, that homosexuality is wrong, but everyone is a sinner, destined for hell unless they repent.

Did God tell you that homosexuality is wrong? Cause the only words I have heard in person is no formalities, no labels, seek peace and a few other. If you look up formalties and then live your life without them. Try it only when you have a completely faithfull mind, body and soul that way you know what is truly wrong and you let mans laws humble you to an even greater length. But there are many laws that are un called for and I have faith someone will take it upon themselves to change things. Peace is without any force other than love. To gain love you have to understand and accept those around you without regard to our differences. Embrace our differences. Religion, politics all those things should not dictate who our neighbor or friends are. I can honestly say that I would love to stand next to and talk with any human on this earth. Granted a few of them would need to be unarmed hopefully lol

I personally don't have any problem with that source, because it says that a healthy marriage is a good thing for children, but doesn't specifically say that homosexual marriages are bad for children. In fact, it says that a healthy, two-parent household (not a household of a man and a woman, specifically) is the best a child can hope for, 'healthy' being defined as where the two parents express strong, positive interaction, love and affection. I'm paraphrasing, but still. There's nothing that excludes homosexuals.

Neither God, nor Jesus, ever said anything about homosexuality in the Bible. It was the Disciples who were saying things, and even then, they're mere mortals.

Regardless, the Bible was commanded by God, who is Sinless and cannot lie, but was written by Man who is riddled with Sin and /can/ lie. Therefore, if you cannot find Jesus through an instinctive love of others and the universe, you can't find him at all. The Bible is fundamentally flawed.

EDIT: Don't make me go into my 'linguistics f---ed up the Bible' argument. I will win, by hook or by crook.

2 Timothy 3:16: "All scripture is God-breathed..."

The Bible, although written down by men, is divinely inspired, meaning all information/ideas contained therein are those of God.

I will work on finding a link, but I've never met a homosexual who was ultimately happy in that lifestyle. That isn't to say that all heterosexual relationships are perfect and fulfilling--they aren't. Nothing in this world will ultimately make you suddenly happy and fulfilled. Except God. How do I know? Because I've experienced God. And everyone else who has truly experienced Jesus Christ knows it as well.

Hmm... see, to my mind, truly experiencing Jesus Christ would also involve experiencing him as a lover, correct? And, I'm very sorry, but myself being an agnostic, your statement "Nothing will make you happy and fulfilled except God" simply made me cringe. A: You said "in this world", God is not in this world. B: Not everyone believes, or will ever believe, what you do. So taking up the christian viewpoint would not make me happy and fulfilled, quite the opposite. This being becuase the only way I would ever do that is if I was forced to.

As for never having met a homosexual who was ultimately happy with their lifestyle... well, I'm afraid in those first three sentences you contradicted yourself into the ground. First you state that you've never met a homosexual who is happy and fulfilled. Ok, I'll grant you, it's absolutely possible that you may have never met anyone like that. Next you say that not all heterosexual relationships make you happy and fulfilled. Also true, but it implies that some of them do. You then go on to say that NOTHING can make you happy and fulfilled except God, which is not a heterosexual relationship. So, essentially, you just said that no-one who doesn't believe in God is happy and fulfilled. UNTRUE!! I'm perfectly happy, perfectly fulfilled. I don't believe in God. I'm 16 years old, and I live in the UK. I have two wonderful nephews, and there's another little one on the way. I love my family and my friends, I'm having a great time in college. I write, I draw, both activites that give me great pleasure. So, yeah, I'm happy and fulfilled, while believing in nothing. I don't need religion, which is simply a way to explain the (as of yet) inexplicable, to make me happy.

Neither God, nor Jesus, ever said anything about homosexuality in the Bible. It was the Disciples who were saying things, and even then, they're mere mortals.

Regardless, the Bible was commanded by God, who is Sinless and cannot lie, but was written by Man who is riddled with Sin and /can/ lie. Therefore, if you cannot find Jesus through an instinctive love of others and the universe, you can't find him at all. The Bible is fundamentally flawed.

EDIT: Don't make me go into my 'linguistics f---ed up the Bible' argument. I will win, by hook or by crook.

Just because you don't believe the Bible is a good source of moral knowledge, doesn't mean you should undermine or dismiss (offhand) the beliefs of those who do.

2 Timothy 3:16: "All scripture is God-breathed..."

The Bible, although written down by men, is divinely inspired, meaning all information/ideas contained therein are those of God.

Sorry, wrong. All scripture is God-breathed, but all that means to me is that God told them what to write - whether or not they wrote precisely what He was telling them, that's another question. God may be incapable of failure or misunderstanding, but humanity is an entirely different entity.

EDIT: Plus, there are inevitable errors in translation. Some texts can't go for more than five years with out being mistranslated, what makes you think your precious Bible is uncorrupted by time?

I would kill them.

Seriously.

I would kill them.

Seriously.

Then you truly have no heart. Why would you kill them? Give a reason, and maybe I will THEN listen to you.

Just because you don't believe the Bible is a good source of moral knowledge, doesn't mean you should undermine or dismiss (offhand) the beliefs of those who do.

The Bible has good guidelines. Moral messages rarely get screwed up and lost to translation - but if you follow them too strictly, you'll just end up unhappy, alone, and suffering because you didn't bother to make your /own/ choices about what's right and what's wrong in each circumstance - things aren't black and white... go watch Saved! to see what I mean.

EDIT: I said rarely. And Leviticus can just go out the window, plzkthx, because it's a crock. Do you eat shellfish? Do you wear polycotton blends? Some things just have to be taken with a grain of salt because it's much less than sensical.

I would kill them.

Seriously.


Congratualtions. You have been nominated for a "completely insane" award.

Do you plan on executing all homosexuals? Why not execute yourself, since, if it's something they can control, obviously, they became homosexual because of the environment they were raised in, more specifically, you. Therefore, it's your fault.

If it isn't something they can control, you can't even begin to sucessfully justify murder.

Seriously.

Congratualtions. You have been nominated for a "completely insane" award.

Do you plan on executing all homosexuals? Why not execute yourself, since, if it's something they can control, obviously, they became homosexual because of the environment they were raised in, more specifically, you. Therefore, it's your fault.

If it isn't something they can control, you can't even begin to sucessfully justify murder.

Seriously.
Decently said.

Sorry, wrong. All scripture is God-breathed, but all that means to me is that God told them what to write - whether or not they wrote precisely what He was telling them, that's another question. God may be incapable of failure or misunderstanding, but humanity is an entirely different entity.

Exactly, every single one of us are human we are no supermen. We all make mistakes, some of us are just harder headed at accepting or understanding when it happens. With what was spoken I would have to say the bible is not at all 100% accurate. How could it be 100% accurate. We as people have always limited our percentage of correct to just 100% when it could be an absolute amount of % accurate or at least Gods is. Why limit our very success of knowledge to such a low # why not strive for unlimited success in whatever good deed we do. So yes I totally agree with you, we are perfectly fine being imperfect. I am just not in denial any longer. As it sounds, you are not either lol

Exactly, every single one of us are human we are no supermen. We all make mistakes, some of us are just harder headed at accepting or understanding when it happens. With what was spoken I would have to say the bible is not at all 100% accurate. How could it be 100% accurate. We as people have always limited our percentage of correct to just 100% when it could be an absolute amount of % accurate or at least Gods is. Why limit our very success of knowledge to such a low # why not strive for unlimited success in whatever good deed we do. So yes I totally agree with you, we are perfectly fine being imperfect. I am just not in denial any longer. As it sounds, you are not either lol

I know that I am flawed, and I accept myself as I know Jesus accepts me. It's how I can plan on devoting my life to helping the homeless in an area of my province that I have never actually lived in but will shortly move to. I plan on helping as many people as I can, because I love everyone and it pains me to see people unhappy or upset.

Anyways, I have to go - I'm going to bookmark this for myself in my journal.

See, what always got to me was if God is all-powerful, why did he get other people to write it down for him? Surely he could have just created the Bible, in a special book form that changes its language to suit those reading it? Wouldn't that make sense? The Bible would then reverse the effects of the Tower Of Babel incident, proving that God exists and that the words of the Bible are true, since they automatically restructure themselves so everyone can read it.

And, to be honest, if God exists, why not prove it? Is it the argument in The Hitch-hiker's Guide To The Galaxy? Is it:
"I refuse to prove I exist, for proof denies faith and without faith I am nothing."
"Ah, but the Babel Fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it. It proves you exist, and so therefore you don't. QED."
"Oh dear, I hadn't thought of that." *disappears in puff of logic*
"Oh, that was easy." *goes on to prove black is white and is smeared across the road on the next zebra crossing*

If God knocked on my door, asked me to make him a cup of tea, and allowed me to discuss with him everything that has ever happened anywhere ever (omnipotence would allow this knowledge) then I'd believe in him. I wouldn't go to church, though.

The Bible has good guidelines. Moral messages rarely get screwed up and lost to translation - but if you follow them too strictly, you'll just end up unhappy, alone, and suffering because you didn't bother to make your /own/ choices about what's right and what's wrong in each circumstance - things aren't black and white... go watch Saved! to see what I mean.

EDIT: I said rarely. And Leviticus can just go out the window, plzkthx, because it's a crock. Do you eat shellfish? Do you wear polycotton blends? Some things just have to be taken with a grain of salt because it's much less than sensical.

"The Bible has good guidelines." -This quote merely proves that you don't believe the Bible is a good source of moral knowledge. That's fine with me. You don't have to respect it. But you shouldn't undermine those who do.
"but if you follow them too strictly, you'll just end up unhappy, alone, and suffering but if you follow them too strictly, you'll just end up unhappy, alone, and suffering" -Yes, look how unhappy the Pope is and alone the Pope is. While you're at it, you should take note of the gigantic waves of unhappiness eminating from my being, all because I try to follow my religion as closely as possible.

"because you didn't bother to make your /own/ choices about what's right and what's wrong in each circumstance" -I don't think it's possible NOT to make your own choces in some situations. For example, nowhere in the Bible does it say "if your son or daughter is discovered to be a homosexual, you..." The bible is a great source of truth, but it doesn't have ALL the answers... at least not directly.

"go watch Saved! to see what I mean." - I had to read this line twice to make sure I saw that you had typed what you had typed. Here you are, in an argument attempting to prove that the Bible is not a good source of information concerning morality, and, as a source, you cite a TV show! (or is it a movie?) If even the Bible can't show the truth, why are you citing this to prove a point?

EDIT: Who mentioned Leviticus? I certainly didn't.

"The Bible has good guidelines." -This quote merely proves that you don't believe the Bible is a good source of moral knowledge. That's fine with me. You don't have to respect it. But you shouldn't undermine those who do.


Good, I'm glad it's fine with you, but the point is that all the Bible is is moral guidelines. There is NO SUCH THING as moral knowledge. It cannot exist. Morality is based on your beliefs, experiences and conscience. None of these things are constants, and so therefore there can be no knowledge. There can only be suggestions. Hence the Bible only contains moral guidelines.

Sorry, wrong. All scripture is God-breathed, but all that means to me is that God told them what to write - whether or not they wrote precisely what He was telling them, that's another question. God may be incapable of failure or misunderstanding, but humanity is an entirely different entity.

EDIT: Plus, there are inevitable errors in translation. Some texts can't go for more than five years with out being mistranslated, what makes you think your precious Bible is uncorrupted by time?

By reading what the men wrote, you can see they were incredibly dedicated to God. It wasn't a matter of God coming down on a big puffy cloud and dictating a letter to a secretary. It was, what I would guess, more a matter of God implanting the thoughts and those selected men writing them down. You can (sort of) see specific styles of writing. The books of Moses have a different tone from the epistles of Paul. I've asked in several threads, but never gotten a real answer, to point out one contradiction/error in the Bible. It's pretty amazing how a book written and compiled over thousands of years all fits together so perfectly--all the pieces fit together. Everything is historically accurate. Catullus was a Roman poet. Only one copy of his poems has survived. Yet everyone assumes they are authentic and no one questions them. However, there are multiple copies of biblical manuscripts and they are all highly scrutinized. I have no idea where to find a link from a source you would approve of as being "non-biased", but I've heard the Bible has seen less change over the thousands of years than most other texts.

I will work on finding a link, but I've never met a homosexual who was ultimately happy in that lifestyle. That isn't to say that all heterosexual relationships are perfect and fulfilling--they aren't. Nothing in this world will ultimately make you suddenly happy and fulfilled. Except God. How do I know? Because I've experienced God. And everyone else who has truly experienced Jesus Christ knows it as well.

The APA disagrees with you: http://www.apa.org/pi/parent.html Next.

Gee, you don't know any "ultimately happy" homosexuals? You mean they don't like the persecution and discrimation they receive? Or, is it just that you don;t think that, living in sin as they do, they could possibly be happy? That sounds like a pretty subjective analysis.

Anyways, I have to go - I'm going to bookmark this for myself in my journal.

It's been nice talking with you.

Note: I did not read ANY of the posts above. I simply do not have 1 hour of free time to waste reading 14 pages of replys. The only thing I read, was the topic, and the topic's post.

Now, as for the question, I would simply disown them, and put them outdoors. I would tell them that until/unless they would change their mind and decide to be straight again, to forget that they have biological parents. It's that simple.

I've experienced Jesus, as well. And I know he loves me.

That's why I spread tolerance and love, in the stead of those who claim to be his disciples who are failing in their job.

THANK YOU!

I've grown so tired of people dragging out a festering corpse they claim to be Jesus and saying that he's justified their hatred. Let me tell you, if you're judging people, if you're treating people badly for being different, if you're not accepting people for who they are and not loving them with all your heart - then that ain't Jesus that you're following.

Note: I did not read ANY of the posts above. I simply do not have 1 hour of free time to waste reading 14 pages of replys. The only thing I read, was the topic, and the topic's post.

Now, as for the question, I would simply disown them, and put them outdoors. I would tell them that until/unless they would change their mind and decide to be straight again, to forget that they have biological parents. It's that simple.

It may be that simple to you, but your reasoning is not simple to me. Can you please explain in a rational and sane manner exactly WHY you would do this? And don't say to me "It's just wrong". Because that's not an accepatable answer.

And, to be honest, if God exists, why not prove it? Is it the argument in The Hitch-hiker's Guide To The Galaxy? Is it:
"I refuse to prove I exist, for proof denies faith and without faith I am nothing."
"Ah, but the Babel Fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it. It proves you exist, and so therefore you don't. QED."
"Oh dear, I hadn't thought of that." *disappears in puff of logic*
"Oh, that was easy." *goes on to prove black is white and is smeared across the road on the next zebra crossing*


No. Hitchhiker's Guide, while amusing, isn't the best source of good arguments.

God, I think, hasn't proven he exists in an irrefutable manner, because that would take away our free will, to choose to believe in him or not. We would be forced to believe, because of the undeniable evidence.

God gave us free will so that we could chose him out of compassion, not out of programming.

Ok...what about this one? http://www.mdrc.org/publications/386/testimony.html

This source does not even mention homosexual parenting. This source talks about the benefits of a two parent household. There is no denying that a two-parent household is the optimal situation. This article makes an argument against single parenting in particular, which is more legal at this time than homosexual couples adopting. That's quite telling, isn't it?

No. Hitchhiker's Guide, while amusing, isn't the best source of good arguments.

God, I think, hasn't proven he exists in an irrefutable manner, because that would take away our free will, to choose to believe in him or not. We would be forced to believe, because of the undeniable evidence.

God gave us free will so that we could chose him out of compassion, not out of programming.

True, it's not a source of a good argument, I was simply making a point. :)

I would have thought that free will to believe in our creator would be something s/he wouldn't want, right? They need faith, and so if the entirety of the human race believed in them, well...

If I knew that God existed, I wouldn't believe s/he existed, I'd know it. My free will would decide whether I followed his/her teachings or not. I probably would, considering that if God exists, then so does Hell, which I would go to if I didn't follow the teachings, but still - I'd have that choice.

Congratualtions. You have been nominated for a "completely insane" award.

Do you plan on executing all homosexuals? Why not execute yourself, since, if it's something they can control, obviously, they became homosexual because of the environment they were raised in, more specifically, you. Therefore, it's your fault.

If it isn't something they can control, you can't even begin to sucessfully justify murder.

Seriously.

How liberal of you.

I would not raise my children like that in the first place. It is MY OPINION that homosexuality is wrong and is equal to an act of treason. We all know what happens to people who commit treason. They get the chop and rightly so.

Execute myself? You liberals are all the same. Answering questions with questions and being so sure that your crazy opinion is the truth.

Homosexuality is wrong - there - that's my opinion and it is why my children would never even consider it.

This forum is starting to get on my nerves. Where are all my ideological brothers?

I've asked in several threads, but never gotten a real answer, to point out one contradiction/error in the Bible.

Do you believe abortion is tantamount to murder?

Good night. I shall be back....TOMORROW!

Do you believe abortion is tantamount to murder?

Yes. No time for further explanation at the moment.

I find it strange that anyone considers liberal to be a dirty word.

It may be that simple to you, but your reasoning is not simple to me. Can you please explain in a rational and sane manner exactly WHY you would do this? And don't say to me "It's just wrong". Because that's not an accepatable answer.
Of course. There are a few reasons.
#1: I am a homophobe.
#2: The Torah says homosexuality is wrong
#3: It's not like I can convince him/her not to be a homosexual. Teenagers, are too stubborn against every thing their parents tell them, and they would especially not cave in regarding their sexual preference, because the media today portrays that your sexuality is yours alone and noone else has a say.
#4: Since the Torah says homosexuality is wrong, and thus, by harboring a homosexual, I am breaking its rule, and since I cannot convince them to be straight, the only option I have is to put them out, and not associate myself with a homosexual. Yes it would be VERY painful for me, because I would be losing a child, and I would fail as a parent, but there is no other option.


If this is unclear to you, tell me and I'll format it.

Of course. There are a few reasons.
#1: I am a homophobe.
#2: The Torah says homosexuality is wrong
#3: It's not like I can convince him/her not to be a homosexual. Teenagers, are too stubborn against every thing their parents tell them, and they would especially not cave in regarding their sexual preference, because the media today portrays that your sexuality is yours alone and noone else has a say.
#4: Since the Torah says homosexuality is wrong, and thus, by harboring a homosexual, I am breaking its rule, and since I cannot convince them to be straight, the only option I have is to put them out, and not associate myself with a homosexual. Yes it would be VERY painful for me, because I would be losing a child, and I would fail as a parent, but there is no other option.


If this is unclear to you, tell me and I'll format it.

That's pretty sad.

How liberal of you.

Hollow labels...how immature of you.

I would not raise my children like that in the first place. It is MY OPINION that homosexuality is wrong and is equal to an act of treason. We all know what happens to people who commit treason. They get the chop and rightly so.

Define wrong. Better yet, define treason. This ought to be entertaining.

Execute myself? You liberals are all the same. Answering questions with questions and being so sure that your crazy opinion is the truth.

Her logic makes more sense than yours, so perhaps you'll be a man and address it, rather than just throwing out a blanket generalization in your defense.

Homosexuality is wrong - there - that's my opinion and it is why my children would never even consider it.

Oh, so your family is some kind of collective then? You all share the same mind? Here're two reasons why this isn't true - 1) your kids have different genes than you do, and 2) your kids minds aren't yours.

This forum is starting to get on my nerves. Where are all my ideological brothers?

Why, because you can't hold your own in an argument without a majority to back you up by their numbers? You don't need "ideological brothers" to win an argument. That they need to be compatriots in ideology speaks volumes about your position, in an of itself.

True, it's not a source of a good argument, I was simply making a point. :)

I would have thought that free will to believe in our creator would be something s/he wouldn't want, right? They need faith, and so if the entirety of the human race believed in them, well...


If God didn't want us to have free will... we wouldn't have free will.

The idea that God (singular, in my opinion) needs faith is completely based on the idea that if we stopped thinking about God, he would cease to exist, because he is a figment of our imagination. I understand that argument. It makes logical sense. Consider this, on the other hand: If God stopped thinking about us, we would cease to exist, because without him, we are nothing (I know this is not your opinion, rehab, but consider this argument, just as I considered yours). Because God is omnipotent, he could destroy all existence in an instant, if he desired it.

Yes. No time for further explanation at the moment.

Alright, then tell me, do you base that on scripture, and what passage?

Disclaimer: I am not hijacking this thread. I am getting around to something. Well, perhapos that something is a hijack...hmm.

Of course. There are a few reasons.
#2: The Torah says homosexuality is wrong
#4: Since the Torah says homosexuality is wrong, and thus, by harboring a homosexual, I am breaking its rule, and since I cannot convince them to be straight, the only option I have is to put them out, and not associate myself with a homosexual. Yes it would be VERY painful for me, because I would be losing a child, and I would fail as a parent, but there is no other option.
If this is unclear to you, tell me and I'll format it.

And in what passage does the Torah prescribe this course of action?

Of course. There are a few reasons.
#1: I am a homophobe.
#2: The Torah says homosexuality is wrong
#3: It's not like I can convince him/her not to be a homosexual. Teenagers, are too stubborn against every thing their parents tell them, and they would especially not cave in regarding their sexual preference, because the media today portrays that your sexuality is yours alone and noone else has a say.
#4: Since the Torah says homosexuality is wrong, and thus, by harboring a homosexual, I am breaking its rule, and since I cannot convince them to be straight, the only option I have is to put them out, and not associate myself with a homosexual. Yes it would be VERY painful for me, because I would be losing a child, and I would fail as a parent, but there is no other option.


If this is unclear to you, tell me and I'll format it.

#1: Being a homophobe does not justify disowning your child. After all, many people are irrationally afraid of Jews (I'm assuming you are one, because you refer to the Torah)

#2: It says that you should not lie with a man as with a woman. It does not say you should not have the tendency to WANT to lie with a man as a woman. The act of homosexuality is wrong, but I don't think that you can condemn someone for being especially tempted by a ceratain sin (after all, I think that everyone has a sin that they struggle with constantly)

#3: I agree with your initial statement, but not your supporting evidence. You cannot convince someone not to be a homosexual, just like you cannot convince someone not to be left-handed (and I am a lefty, trust me, people try to), without mentally scarring them. Teenagers, despite your obvious prejudice aganist them, are usually no more stubborn than most adults. The term is "rebellious". Unfortuanatly, that is a phase that most people go through as they mature.

Of course. There are a few reasons.
#1: I am a homophobe.
#2: The Torah says homosexuality is wrong
#3: It's not like I can convince him/her not to be a homosexual. Teenagers, are too stubborn against every thing their parents tell them, and they would especially not cave in regarding their sexual preference, because the media today portrays that your sexuality is yours alone and noone else has a say.
#4: Since the Torah says homosexuality is wrong, and thus, by harboring a homosexual, I am breaking its rule, and since I cannot convince them to be straight, the only option I have is to put them out, and not associate myself with a homosexual. Yes it would be VERY painful for me, because I would be losing a child, and I would fail as a parent, but there is no other option.


If this is unclear to you, tell me and I'll format it.

No, that's pretty clear. And I accept your viewpoint. I commend you on your loyalty to the Torah, I just think it's a shame that it says that. There are other options, but obviously you can't go for them.

I won't try to force my viewpoint on you, I'm not like that. I simply ask you to empathise with this hypothetical child. However painful it would be for you, think how painful it would be for them?

If God didn't want us to have free will... we wouldn't have free will.

The idea that God (singular, in my opinion) needs faith is completely based on the idea that if we stopped thinking about God, he would cease to exist, because he is a figment of our imagination. I understand that argument. It makes logical sense. Consider this, on the other hand: If God stopped thinking about us, we would cease to exist, because without him, we are nothing (I know this is not your opinion, rehab, but consider this argument, just as I considered yours). Because God is omnipotent, he could destroy all existence in an instant, if he desired it.

Ah, but I didn't quite say that God wouldn't want us to have free will, I said that the free will could be employed elsewhere, with better information to base our choice on. :)

And this is one of the philosophical arguments I've always loved. Is the reflection in the mirror the real one, and you are just their reflection? It's along the same lines. God is a figment of our imagination, and vice-versa. So, technically, if we each stopped thinking about the other at the same moment, everything would be destroyed and would never come back because God wouldn't be there to recreate the universe, and we wouldn't be here to re-establish religion.

God is omnipotent, sure. But also all-loving. So why would God destroy everything? What would s/he gain?

How liberal of you.

I would not raise my children like that in the first place. It is MY OPINION that homosexuality is wrong and is equal to an act of treason. We all know what happens to people who commit treason. They get the chop and rightly so.

Execute myself? You liberals are all the same. Answering questions with questions and being so sure that your crazy opinion is the truth.

Homosexuality is wrong - there - that's my opinion and it is why my children would never even consider it.

This forum is starting to get on my nerves. Where are all my ideological brothers?

1. If by liberal you mean "someone who voted for John Kerry", then you are putting the wrong label on me. John Kerry is a hypocrite. Note who started the "is John Kerry really Catholic" forum.

2. You say you would not raise your child that way. You can't "raise your child in that way". Homosexuality, in the eyes of the Catholic Church, is an inherit trait. It cannot be changed by environment. After all, how, therefore, can heterosexuals have homosexual children?

3. I believe that, by and large, I am one of your ideological brothers. However, I do believe that homosexuality is something that someone cannot change. I also believe that homosexual acts are sins. I do not believe that homosexuality, in and of itself, is a sin. I also believe that the purpose of marriage is to provide an environment to bear and raise children. I know that homosexual acts cannot result in children. Therefore, I support chaste civil unions between homosexual couples, but not marriages for gay couples.

Ah, but I didn't quite say that God wouldn't want us to have free will, I said that the free will could be employed elsewhere, with better information to base our choice on. :)

And this is one of the philosophical arguments I've always loved. Is the reflection in the mirror the real one, and you are just their reflection? It's along the same lines. God is a figment of our imagination, and vice-versa. So, technically, if we each stopped thinking about the other at the same moment, everything would be destroyed and would never come back because God wouldn't be there to recreate the universe, and we wouldn't be here to re-establish religion.

God is omnipotent, sure. But also all-loving. So why would God destroy everything? What would s/he gain?

At last, someone who thinks deep thoughts!

While I don't agree with your first statement, the rest I find intreguing.

I never suggested that God would stop thinking of us. It was merely a hypothetical statement to prove a point.

At last, someone who thinks deep thoughts!

While I don't agree with your first statement, the rest I find intreguing.

I never suggested that God would stop thinking of us. It was merely a hypothetical statement to prove a point.

And would you believe I'm only 16? Here is visible proof of the wonders growing up with old parents can create... I've been thinking like this since about a decade ago. Everyone was always freaked out by the way I used to argue on and on with 40 year old college professors when I was 6... except the college professor, he loved it! :D

Having been raised an agnostic/atheist/existentialist(sp?)... hey, I'm an embodiment of why Woody Allen never had a kid, he and his wife couldn't decide which religion not to bring the child up in... and having lived for my entire life in the gay capital of Europe, I like to think I'm pretty open-minded. I won't always agree with someone, but I can certainly try to see things from their point of view. Hence, I'm straight, but I blur the boundaries. I wouldn't call myself bi, because I'm not, as a rule, attracted to guys. However, every now and then, the image of having sexual relations with certain members of the same sex don't actually seem too unappealing. Then again, if offered a choice between a guy I found attractive and a girl I found attractive, I'd choose the girl.

And in what passage does the Torah prescribe this course of action?
“Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence” (Leviticus 18:22)
“If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death—their bloodguilt is upon them” (Leviticus 20:13)


You owe me 30 minutes of my life I wasted searching for it.

I'd at least tell them to adopt some kids

“Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence” (Leviticus 18:22)
“If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death—their bloodguilt is upon them” (Leviticus 20:13)


You owe me 30 minutes of my life I wasted searching for it.

I'll be abhorrent with you anytime

No, that's pretty clear. And I accept your viewpoint. I commend you on your loyalty to the Torah, I just think it's a shame that it says that. There are other options, but obviously you can't go for them.

I won't try to force my viewpoint on you, I'm not like that. I simply ask you to empathise with this hypothetical child. However painful it would be for you, think how painful it would be for them?
Yes it would be very painful on them. But they have the option to reconsider being gay, while I have no other option.

“Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence” (Leviticus 18:22)
“If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death—their bloodguilt is upon them” (Leviticus 20:13)


You owe me 30 minutes of my life I wasted searching for it.

And when was the last time such a punishment was carried out?

I'll be abhorrent with you anytime
This is THE worst post in NationStates forums history. Not only is it off topic, it's also a clear case sexual harassment. I strongly suggest you immediately retract it.

And when was the last time such a punishment was carried out?
I am not telling people to kill homosexuals, I am quoting Torah.

Yes it would be very painful on them. But they have the option to reconsider being gay, while I have no other option.

... Reconsider? When did you make the choice to be heterosexual? In order to make a choice, there has to be an option. Was the option to be gay ever really an option to you, for any reason other than religious reasons? If you hadn't have been raised the way you were, would you have had the option to be gay? Somehow, I really don't think so. And if you didn't have the option to be gay, why would your children have another option?

It's because of people like you that I feel the need to do the work that I will be doing - adopting several children, being a foster parent, et cetera.

I don't respect your opinions, and I don't respect your decision, but I respect you as a person; this is why I would never try to deprive you of any rights that anyone else does - including happiness, in whatever form it may take.

“Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence” (Leviticus 18:22)
“If a man lies with a male as one lies with a woman, the two of them have done an abhorrent thing; they shall be put to death—their bloodguilt is upon them” (Leviticus 20:13)


You owe me 30 minutes of my life I wasted searching for it.
Wasn't the whole point of Jesus to save us from the strict rules of the Old Testament? Or maybe not phrased exactly like that, but Christians certainly don't follow all the rules there about eating pork on certain days or whatever it is.

This is THE worst post in NationStates forums history. Not only is it off topic, it's also a clear case sexual harassment. I strongly suggest you immediately retract it.

Aha ha haha, I'm not retracting that. I just wanted to show you how out of place the wording and meaning of the writings were. Go stone someone.

I am not telling people to kill homosexuals, I am quoting Torah.

I know that, I'm not one to mindlessly jump on a person for quoting such a passage.

What I'm getting at is this - the Jewish community must have to deal with this issue. This is the clearly prescribed punishment for homosexual actions, yet it is not carried out. Are you not already, then, in defiance of the Torah's teachings?

I would treat them differently. For 2 reasons.

1. There are going to be many times where society makes something of him or her being gay and you nee to react to that. Also, it could make me want them to be more cautious.
2. I am going to act differently. Even in small ways. Just naturally. It wouldnt be deliberate, but I know I will act differently. I mean I might act little differently if my child was short or tall. Not that I am against short people or tall people, but I will subconciously act different.

Wasn't the whole point of Jesus to save us from the strict rules of the Old Testament? Or maybe not phrased exactly like that, but Christians certainly don't follow all the rules there about eating pork on certain days or whatever it is.

Leviticus is a useless passage. It is against polycotton blends, the consumption of shellfish, and the crossbreeding of different types of cattle. Considering the contrasts between the different things here (shellfish are impure because they're not scaled, breeding two different types of cattle result in an impure mix, polycotton blends result in an impure garment), we can use perhaps a bit of logic to deduce that because man should not like with man as he lies with woman, that if a man lies with a man, he's defiling the other man... but women can be defiled as much and as often as possible - they're already impure. (Why do you think there are no injunctions against being a lesbian?)

I have a more comprehensive post on this very topic elsewhere on another message board system. Let me see if I can find it.

When did you make the choice to be heterosexual?
When I hit puberty.

Leviticus is a useless passage. It is against polycotton blends, the consumption of shellfish, and the crossbreeding of different types of cattle. Considering the contrasts between the different things here (shellfish are impure because they're not scaled, breeding two different types of cattle result in an impure mix, polycotton blends result in an impure garment), we can use perhaps a bit of logic to deduce that because man should not like with man as he lies with woman, that if a man lies with a man, he's defiling the other man... but women can be defiles as much and as often as possible - they're already impure.

Ah, but if we are talking to a Jewish person who still follows such passages, then it is not useless. It's only useless in arguing it with Christians, who have no real basis to make the argument in the first place.

When did you make the choice to be heterosexual?
When I hit puberty.

So, you saw a man, you had feelings for him, and you said, 'No, I will not act on these feelings; I choose to not be homosexual?'

Leviticus is a useless passage. It is against polycotton blends, the consumption of shellfish, and the crossbreeding of different types of cattle. Considering the contrasts between the different things here (shellfish are impure because they're not scaled, breeding two different types of cattle result in an impure mix, polycotton blends result in an impure garment), we can use perhaps a bit of logic to deduce that because man should not like with man as he lies with woman, that if a man lies with a man, he's defiling the other man... but women can be defiled as much and as often as possible - they're already impure.

I have a more comprehensive post on this very topic elsewhere on another message board system. Let me see if I can find it.

Hmm, the thought occurs that if blending polyester and cotton together is impure, blending two opposite sexes together would be impure, wouldn't it? :D So that would mean blending the same sex with the same sex would be pure.

Hmm, the thought occurs that if blending polyester and cotton together is impure, blending two opposite sexes together would be impure, wouldn't it? :D So that would mean blending the same sex with the same sex would be pure.

*laughs* Somehow, I think that contradicts 'Be fruitful and multiply'... but meh.

When I hit puberty.

You consciously made the following choice?

"Hmm, I am equally attracted to men and women, so I must make a decision. I choose to be heterosexual."

So, you saw a man, you had feelings for him, and you said, 'No, I will not act on these feelings; I choose to not be homosexual?'
No, I looked at a few hot women, a few hot men, and decided that women are hot, but men are just men.

You consciously made the following choice?

"Hmm, I am equally attracted to men and women, so I must make a decision. I choose to be heterosexual."

Logic rules.

*laughs* Somehow, I think that contradicts 'Be fruitful and multiply'... but meh.

Actually, I'd call that quite "fruitful."

You consciously made the following choice?

"Hmm, I am equally attracted to men and women, so I must make a decision. I choose to be heterosexual."
Subconciousely.