Close Twins Mother decieving Homosexual

[Cristiano]

What do you mean how do I know that? Well technically if he was straight then maybe he would have just had a baby with his partner and this wouldn’t have happened. But from what I understand, this is the basic story:

Man pretends he is going to raise a child with a woman. Man and woman get in vitro fertilization and woman gives birth. Man claims woman is surrogate and tries to take the babies. Woman wants the children back.

If the man was gay or straight, the story would still be the same.

Anyway, I wonder if the woman or man is actually lying. I wonder if there was a surrogacy agreement and the woman is going back on it. I don’t know either of these people personally so I have no idea.

You are not proving your statement you are simply saying that things could have been done similarly by other people in different conditions and I agree with you on that. Just to make sure here I am not discussing the fact that a person has a specific sexual attraction, I am referring to a person that is in the habitual practice of homosexual behaviors.

 

[Cristiano]

Please tell me how consensual homosexual activity is intrinsically based on the use of another person? I personally believe that homosexuals can show their love physically just as my wife and I can.

Natural law! I guess that you do not believe in natural law.

 

[Lochias]

Please tell me how consensual homosexual activity is intrinsically based on the use of another person? I personally believe that homosexuals can show their love physically just as my wife and I can.

Homosexual activity has no intrinsic purpose. It is used as a tool for pleasure, which is something sex was never ultimately meant for.

Sex is for making babies. There is no if, and, or but to that statement.

Deprived of it’s purpose, sex becomes meaningless, and destructive.

Homosexual activity is destructive because it attacks the propagation of the species, because it has a higher likelihood of spreading disease, and because it creates chemical bonds which never meant to be shared between non-reproducing partners, with significant and detrimental results.

Knowing this, homosexuals who have sex use their partners for their own pleasure, whatever else they want to call it, because that’s what they want to do.

Wanting something has never been a solid rationale on its own for getting that something.

 

[Joe_5859]

What do you mean how do I know that? Well technically if he was straight then maybe he would have just had a baby with his partner and this wouldn’t have happened. But from what I understand, this is the basic story:

Man pretends he is going to raise a child with a woman. Man and woman get in vitro fertilization and woman gives birth. Man claims woman is surrogate and tries to take the babies. Woman wants the children back.

If the man was gay or straight, the story would still be the same.

Anyway, I wonder if the woman or man is actually lying. I wonder if there was a surrogacy agreement and the woman is going back on it. I don’t know either of these people personally so I have no idea.

I actually agree with you. The story wouldn’t really change if the guy was straight. And, for us reading the random news article over the internet, it’s really just a matter of “he said / she said”. Hopefully the courts can figure it out and reach a just and equitable solution for the sake of the children involved.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

The dad is using them, probably as a way of keeping his much-younger gay honey.

Can I ask where you’re getting any of that? His partner’s age wasn’t even mentioned, unless it was in the video. It seems like you’re being uncharitable for the sake of it.

 

[interestedman]

Sex is for making babies. There is no if, and, or but to that statement.

Deprived of it’s purpose, sex becomes meaningless, and destructive.

I didn’t realize that it was church teaching to abstain from sex after menopause.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Homosexual activity has no intrinsic purpose. It is used as a tool for pleasure, which is something sex was never ultimately meant for.

Sex is for making babies. There is no if, and, or but to that statement.

Deprived of it’s purpose, sex becomes meaningless, and destructive.

Homosexual activity is destructive because it attacks the propagation of the species, because it has a higher likelihood of spreading disease, and because it creates chemical bonds which never meant to be shared between non-reproducing partners, with significant and detrimental results.

Knowing this, homosexuals who have sex use their partners for their own pleasure, whatever else they want to call it, because that’s what they want to do.

Wanting something has never been a solid rationale on its own for getting that something.

No, I don’t think that homosexuals “know” that. And I really think that its a pretty off the wall statement to say that homosexuals are inherently selfish people who use others to get what they want. With statements like that I can’t believe that people wonder why homosexuals think Christians look down on them.

I have gay friends and relatives. All are very kind, loving, and extremely generous. One even opened his home to a homeless woman to get her off drugs and out of prostitution.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I didn’t realize that it was church teaching to abstain from sex after menopause.

I didn’t realize that sex lacked meaning beyond babies.

 

[superamazingman]

So you’re saying that every single homosexual out there is a liar.

I guess if one Catholic lies, an atheist is justified in saying we all do.

What I said is that the unrepentant person who is engaging in homosexual acts is intrinsically selfish and immoral. I don’t see how you get “liar” out of that.

 

[interestedman]

What I said is that the unrepentant person who is engaging in homosexual acts is intrinsically selfish and immoral. I don’t see how you get “liar” out of that.

Every person that has this view of those that engage in homosexual acts is intrinsically selfish and immoral.

 

[Lochias]

No, I don’t think that homosexuals “know” that. And I really think that its a pretty off the wall statement to say that homosexuals are inherently selfish people who use others to get what they want. With statements like that I can’t believe that people wonder why homosexuals think Christians look down on them.

I have gay friends and relatives. All are very kind, loving, and extremely generous. One even opened his home to a homeless woman to get her off drugs and out of prostitution.

I think, on some level, that homosexuals do know that. I don’t know a single active homosexual who’s had a partner that lasted beyond a couple of months, and I know a few (many of my friends being in the theater biz).

Yes, homosexuals can be as kind and loving as the rest of us, but it doesn’t excuse the selfishness of their actions (if they choose to undertake those actions). Their actions directly affect me and my plans for the future, and the fact that many, MANY of them are loud, obnoxiously rude, and intrusive into my day-to-day affairs and plans means I can’t just live and let live. They’re being selfish in many, many ways.

 

[LaMusicaSenior]

Every person that has this view of those that engage in homosexual acts is intrinsically selfish and immoral.

As Catholics, we believe those engaged in the sexual activity of homosexuality are acting out of God’s divine plan for the natural world.

Do we hate homosexuals? NO! As goes the old saying, “Hate the sin, love the sinner.”

The Chuch is loving and accepting of all God’s children. It’s like a little kid saying “I want to play in the street!” and the parent saying: “No. That is not safe or good for you.” The child naturally responds: “Ah! You hate me! I hate you! You don’t love me!” But we can see that the parent is simply providing rules for protection of their child.

For instance: If your child is doing drugs, you still love your child. But you don’t love the fact that they are addicted to drugs. And becasue you love them your not going to enable them to do drugs. Because their practice of drug addiction is hurting their bodies, minds, and souls.

Everyone on this earth struggles with some form of temptation. We are all human, after all. God calls us each to carry our cross though, and follow Him. Just as I shouldn’t lust after guys, some with a homosexual attraction shouldn’t lust after another of the same gender.

As Catholics, we do not hate homosexuals. We love their souls, just as God does.

 

[fix]

A gay couple is no different than a heterosexual couple where one or both people are sterile.

The difference is vast and undeniable.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

If she signed any form of contract, she may well lose her children. If not, then the father will not retain custody. It’s all about Texas law that requires any surrogacy agreement to be signed by a MARRIED couple, and homosexual “marriage” is not recognized in Texas. This case may be set up to challenge a couple of different areas of the law - both homosexual “marriage,” as well as surrogacy laws.

The news today is suggesting that there was, in fact, some sort of written agreement, but that Close did not have a lawyer review it, nor did she read it very closely.

The whole thing is horrible for the children. Right now it seems they are in the custody of the gay man’s lover, who is not biologically related to them. So why does HE get custody when Ms. Close does not?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Can I ask where you’re getting any of that? His partner’s age wasn’t even mentioned, unless it was in the video. It seems like you’re being uncharitable for the sake of it.

Not for the sake of it, unfortunately this whole thing is taking place where I live, so I get a lot of stuff that you don’t.

 

[superamazingman]

The difference is vast and undeniable.

For one, they’re different genders.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

Oh, dear. Here it comes… :doh2:

Homosexual acts are, by their very nature, oriented towards the self. It would stand to reason that any person with SSA who regularly engages in homosexual acts are predisposed to being selfish or using others for their own pleasure.

Oh, no…

that’s pretty much the definition of a practicing homosexual. Their relations are 1) immoral and 2) simply for selfish pleasure. There’s nothing self giving about them.

Mercy…

That sounds a pretty normal part of the culture, just use other people for their own benefit, nothing new.

Sigh…

Seriously? You’re going to paint all homosexuals with that brush?

Yes! Some sense!

It’s odd that, isn’t it? The motives of the homosexual agenda are ever changing, it seems. One guy does something and now they’re all evil, villainous, self-centred scumbags who take advantage of the law to create deviant families. Other times they’re promiscuous and don’t actually want marriage, or families, but instead advocate for “gay rights” simply because they want to change the views of homosexuals and make everyone think they’re great. Which one is it?

One man did this. His sexual orientation is irrelevant. You can’t use the actions of this one man to suddenly create some kind of propaganda, and paint all homosexuals as being villainous and evil. I’d also like to know how, even if their sexual acts are selfish (I don’t see how they’re any more selfish than any heterosexual sexual acts), this means they must be all round selfish people, who only do anything for their own good and not for other people. If a man engages in sexual acts purely for his own pleasure (let’s say, masturbation) does that mean every action he does is only for his own pleasure? Of course not. Don’t be absurd.

The reactions to this on this forum were just so irrational. So unjustified. I’m not sure I want to live on this planet anymore…

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Not for the sake of it, unfortunately this whole thing is taking place where I live, so I get a lot of stuff that you don’t.

Then by all means post a link to that info. But right now it looks like you’re just posting snarky assumptions.

 

[interestedman]

I think, on some level, that homosexuals do know that. I don’t know a single active homosexual who’s had a partner that lasted beyond a couple of months, and I know a few (many of my friends being in the theater biz).

Yes, homosexuals can be as kind and loving as the rest of us, but it doesn’t excuse the selfishness of their actions (if they choose to undertake those actions). Their actions directly affect me and my plans for the future, and the fact that many, MANY of them are loud, obnoxiously rude, and intrusive into my day-to-day affairs and plans means I can’t just live and let live. They’re being selfish in many, many ways.

lol, what are you talking about? Just because your gay friends are jerks doesn’t mean they all are jerks.

 

[interestedman]

As Catholics, we believe those engaged in the sexual activity of homosexuality are acting out of God’s divine plan for the natural world.

Do we hate homosexuals? NO! As goes the old saying, “Hate the sin, love the sinner.”

The Chuch is loving and accepting of all God’s children. It’s like a little kid saying “I want to play in the street!” and the parent saying: “No. That is not safe or good for you.” The child naturally responds: “Ah! You hate me! I hate you! You don’t love me!” But we can see that the parent is simply providing rules for protection of their child.

For instance: If your child is doing drugs, you still love your child. But you don’t love the fact that they are addicted to drugs. And becasue you love them your not going to enable them to do drugs. Because their practice of drug addiction is hurting their bodies, minds, and souls.

Everyone on this earth struggles with some form of temptation. We are all human, after all. God calls us each to carry our cross though, and follow Him. Just as I shouldn’t lust after guys, some with a homosexual attraction shouldn’t lust after another of the same gender.

As Catholics, we do not hate homosexuals. We love their souls, just as God does.

And a lot of you resent them too. Actually, I would say most of the Catholics on this forum resent gays for bringing on the downfall of the family and society.