Should Homosexuals Adopt Children ?

[Lewis]

If that is the whole of your argument, that kids won't grow up with a cultural bugaboo against homosexuality, I'm afraid it isn't a terribly convincing argument. The fact that some of them might be gay themselves (which is completely unlike growing up in a heterosexual couple's house as we all know those kids can never wind up being gay) and realize/embrace this rather than hide from it in a self destructive manner even less so.

Man some of you just don't get it do you ? What does the Bible say about being gay ? I don't have to go no further.

 

[moniker]

“You know what homosexual New Agers say?

Why am I homosexual? Because I have a female soul from a previous life trapped in a male body and I can’t help it.â€Â

:-D

"You know what a homosexual Christian says?"

Ask Ted Haggard.

 

[moniker]

Man some of you just don't get it do you ? What does the Bible say about being gay ? I don't have to go no further.

Is it the same thing it says about shellfish and cheeseburgers?

PS Jgredline, I'm not gay. You aren't coming on to me, are you?

 

[Rick W]

"You know what a homosexual Christian says?"

Ask Ted Haggard.

He'll tell you he erred and asked for forgiveness.
Hey, at least someone admits the practice of homosexuality is a sin.

 

[moniker]

Wasn't long ago many books were published, lectures given, seminars held in various scientific circles proclaiming the worth of a father and mother in a child's development. These people were indisputably the gurus of children phychology, child rearing etc. Revered for their education and knowledge they were regarded with the highest esteem from their colleagues , educators and parents from all walks of life. They also had the evidence through studies, case histories and surveys throughout the freeworld.

Well, I suppose all that is a bunch of hooey now in the face of homosexuals endevouring to adopt.

Thrown out? No. But you also don't blind yourself to more recent data and the current times. That's how scientific fields operate and self correct. It's the same reason you don't go to a barber for some leaches if you think you've got the flu. I'm curious how much of those old studies would contradict having 2 homosexual couples raising a child as opposed to promote it over a single, working mother/father as well as the amount of conflict they'd have with regards to newer studies. I suppose I'll have to take a spin 'round the interwebs after I finish up a few pages of my paper and/or design.

 

[jgredline]

He'll tell you he erred and asked for forgiveness.
Hey, at least someone admits the practice of homosexuality is a sin.

YES, YES AND YES.... This is what I am saying. Love the sinner and hate the the sin... He is no longer at peace with his sin, but at war with it now. Infact we need to and I will as well pray for this man...and his family, Now that he has repented of this.. Praise God. May God use this testimony to bring more to himself and may Ted use this testimony to lead people away from this sin...

 

[moniker]

He'll tell you he erred and asked for forgiveness.
Hey, at least someone admits the practice of homosexuality is a sin.

I believe the exact quote is: "Homosexuality is genetic."

 

[Rick W]

Thrown out? No. But you also don't blind yourself to more recent data and the current times. That's how scientific fields operate and self correct. It's the same reason you don't go to a barber for some leaches if you think you've got the flu. I'm curious how much of those old studies would contradict having 2 homosexual couples raising a child as opposed to promote it over a single, working mother/father as well as the amount of conflict they'd have with regards to newer studies. I suppose I'll have to take a spin 'round the interwebs after I finish up a few pages of my paper and/or design.

Yes, yes. I've heard all that before.
So truth depends on the era in which you live? Nothing is immune from self correction as far as scientific conclusion is concerned. What's true today may not be tomorrow.
Got it! :smt023

 

[moniker]

Yes, yes. I've heard all that before.
So truth depends on the era in which you live? Nothing is immune from self correction as far as scientific conclusion is concerned. What's true today may not be tomorrow.
Got it! :smt023

In terms of the observable, of course. Would you say that planets and stars were holes in a great canvas that covered the sky or that they precisely followed the laws of Newton now that we have grasped relativity? That illness is caused by bad luck and not appeasing God rather than germ theory? I mean Newton might be able to get us to the moon and back but that doesn't make his theories perfect.

 

[Rick W]

These aren't planets, these are our children. Can we afford to be wrong?

 

[moniker]

So, no response to Kiwimac? Or just not one yet?

 

[Lewis]

Ted has repented' so lets not beat that brother down. We are to build him up

Galatians 6:1-2

1Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

2Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

 

[Rick W]

So, no response to Kiwimac? Or just not one yet?

Patience moniker.
Some of us do other things than sit around pounding on a keyboard. I myself find I may reply to a thread and have to go to work. Or I need sleep or any of a vast majority of reasons. I've found you yourself may take some hours or more to reply.
Patience.
You'll get your argument in due time. Relax. It's not that bad. Really.

 

[moniker]

These aren't planets, these are our children. Can we afford to be wrong?

And sociology and related fields have had just as many advancements. Perhaps not as many watershed moments as Newton, Copernicus, Marie Curie, Einstein et. al. had compared with physics but they are there.

Mind pointing to something supporting how a child would be better off bouncing around between foster homes rather than being raised by two people in a committed relationship?

 

[jgredline]

Ted has repented' so lets not beat that brother down. We are to build him up

Galatians 6:1-2

1Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

2Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

Amen.

Moniker
I did not see anything from kiwimac since I sent the rebuke.....
I am surprised you have not thrown the numberone liberal response to me.
''Why am I judging'' Or why are you judging, Or your so judgmental

 

[moniker]

Patience moniker.
Some of us do other things than sit around pounding on a keyboard. I myself find I may reply to a thread and have to go to work. Or I need sleep or any of a vast majority of reasons. I've found you yourself may take some hours or more to reply.
Patience.
You'll get your argument in due time. Relax. It's not that bad. Really.

Granted, yet he took all the time to post that ad hom and a few others afterwards. Just seems like a rather deafening silence.

 

[Rick W]

And sociology and related fields have had just as many advancements. Perhaps not as many watershed moments as Newton, Copernicus, Marie Curie, Einstein et. al. had compared with physics but they are there.

Mind pointing to something supporting how a child would be better off bouncing around between foster homes rather than being raised by two people in a committed relationship?

Nice ad hom there Jgredline. Mind arguing against his point, rather than dismissing him with a logical fallacy, though?

Nice strawman moniker. all that can do is go off on a tangent about divorce then on to something else.
I won't bite. Sorry.
Science is progressive, I'll grant you that. But even prudent scientists take time to observe before rushing off to present a paper on their theories or findings.
Social engineering is a vague endeavor at best. Being wrong may well have irreversible consequences.

 

[moniker]

Moniker
I did not see anything from kiwimac since I sent the rebuke.....
I am surprised you have not thrown the numberone liberal response to me.
''Why am I judging'' Or why are you judging, Or your so judgmental

A rebuke? You committed a logical fallacy, rather than actually debate his points, and then ignored him as if that would make your stance any more justified.

 

[jgredline]

Matthew 24:37
But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Like Noah, you and I are end times believers. Noah lived before the Flood, we before the fire. Noah spoke of coming rain, we of the coming reign. And just as it was in Noah’s day, so it will be in the day of Jesus’ coming. What was it like in Noah’s day? In Genesis 6, we see four parallels between Noah’s day and the days in which we live.
In the days of Noah, there was a population explosion (Genesis 6:1). Due to the fact that in Noah’s day, men lived for eight or nine hundred years, there were probably five to six billion people on the planet during the time of the Flood.
In the days of Noah, abnormal sexual practices abounded (Genesis 6:4). Most Bible scholars believe that Genesis 6:4 is a reference to fallen angels having sexual relationships with human women. So, too, we live in a time of abnormal sexual practices. Things that were unthinkable a generation ago are now commonplace and accepted.
When the hierarchy of the Episcopal Church is encouraging homosexual union as a pathway to personal holiness (Newsweek: 2/90), we are indeed living in dark, dark days.
In Noah’s day, the imagination of man was evil continually (Genesis 6:5). Seeing that men’s hearts were only evil continually, God decided to lovingly put them out of their misery. Thus, the Flood accomplished quickly and mercifully the destruction their sin and perversion would bring about inevitably. So, too, the imagination of people in our society is evil continuallyâ€â€as evidenced by the fact that in our country, legal pornography is now a multi-billion dollar industry.

 

[moniker]

Nice strawman moniker. all that can do is go off on a tangent about divorce then on to something else.
I won't bite. Sorry.
Science is progressive, I'll grant you that. But even prudent scientists take time to observe before rushing off to present a paper on their theories or findings.
Social engineering is a vague endeavor at best. Being wrong may well have irreversible consequences.

Strawman? I'm asking you for your justification. Burden of proof, and all that.