"If straight Christians are so offended by Gay people, why don't they just stop having them?"

[fix]

the premise is not false. it is meant as humor. recognizing someone’s sexual identity is not imposing an agenda on them. refusing to do so as you suggest is imposing an agenda on them. ask any gay person when they realized that they were gay. typical answers range from age 4 to age 10. before puberty or adolescence.

It is false and there is nothing funny about it. It is a complex topic mostly because of the political agenda at play. Once people are formed in that social/political agenda it is easy to claim things.

i think the op’s point is that straight parents produce gay offspring. gay parents also raise straight kids. it doesn’t matter how much they attempt to do otherwise. hence the absurdly ironic question is posed.

I know what what he is trying to do. I am simply pointing out that it is not humorous and the posts already show the agenda at work.

 

[GEddie]

So only a female and a male can raise a child? What about single fathers or single mothers?

Physically, it requires a man and a woman to beget a child; that will never change. Biologically, the 2 are supposed to nurture them.

Women can have children without a spouse, but this will be harder on the children.

Single parentage can result from life circumstances; but should never be accepted as the norm. Nor should relationships that, by the laws of biology, can never produce children. IMNAAHO.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Gaber]

Physically, it requires a man and a woman to beget a child; that will never change. Biologically, the 2 are supposed to nurture them.

Women can have children without a spouse, but this will be harder on the children.

Single parentage can result from life circumstances; but should never be accepted as the norm. Nor should relationships that, by the laws of biology, can never produce children. IMNAAHO.

ICXC NIKA

Yes. And it is wonderful to remember that Hitler, Stalin, Ghengis Khan, all the monsters of humanity were brought up by a mother and a father. How nieve, and how simplistic can you get? Please list the works you have read on the results of same sex parenting, including interviews with such children if you don’t know any yourself, and compare them to the public at large, including orientation and religion of prison populationsf. Thank you.

 

[ekk1]

It is false and there is nothing funny about it. It is a complex topic mostly because of the political agenda at play. Once people are formed in that social/political agenda it is easy to claim things.

I know what what he is trying to do. I am simply pointing out that it is not humorous and the posts already show the agenda at work.

i can see that this is a serious matter for you. can you see the irony of accusing others of a political agenda while engaging in one yourself?

i think that keeping our sense of humility and humor makes such discussions much easier and more productive. getting too positional and amped up only alienates everyone.

 

[TarkanAttila]

I believe that you are mistaken Homosexuality has not been classified as a mental disorder for 39 years. Hooker demonstrated in well designed studies that there was no measurable pathology associated with homosexuality 55 years ago.

Such untrue statements cause harm. so, please be more cautious when it comes to spreading falsehood.

By the same psychologists who have defined a Hypoactive sexual desire disorder, but not a hyperactive one.

Furthermore, I don’t trust studies that are 50 years old - much less Kinsey’s studies (upon which these are based). Especially when more is read into them than could actually be read. To quote NARTH’s website:

Summary

Homosexuality is not formally recognized as a mental disorder in the DSM. However, some mental health professionals disagree: a few years following the removal of homosexuality from the DSM, the majority of psychiatrists in America viewed homosexuality as a pathology, and the majority of psychiatrists around the world continue to see same-sex attraction as signaling a mental illness.

Research has shown that it is not the case that all homosexuals are inherently pathological. Sometimes these findings are misrepresented to suggest that homosexuals do not experience any greater distress than heterosexuals.

Research supports a relationship between homosexuality and personal distress (e.g., rates of depression, substance abuse and suicidality), though not all homosexuals are distressed. Some view the distress as indicating something inherently wrong with homosexuality; others view homosexuals who are distressed as a reflection of societal prejudice.

Research on maladaptiveness is inconclusive primarily because of the lack of agreement as to what constitutes maladaptiveness. The clear evidence of relational instability and promiscuity among male homosexuals must figure as problematic for Christians.

Homosexuality violates societal norms; however, mental health organizations have taken the formal position that societal norms have to be changed toward accepting homosexuality as a normal sexual variant.

Research on whether homosexuality is a pathological condition is not formally relevant to the moral debate in the church. Psychological abnormality and immorality are two different things, although sometimes they overlap.

I don’t mean to hurt any homosexuals’ feelings. I mean to show them that, like all of us, they’ve got problems, and, like the rest of us, they need to fix them. They can’t hide from their problems, or that will only perpetuate their suffering, pain, and anger.

Pretending homosexuality is normal and acceptable will not solve anything. Unfortunately, it will only create massive problems for society as a structure and for the individuals within it.

Of course, the root of all of these problems is not homosexuality. It is in failing to understand our human bodies and our sexuality, and their part in God’s creation and plan for salvation. Click on that video link in my signature for a cursory introduction to the Theology of the Body. You may be surprised to find out why we say what we do.

 

[TarkanAttila]

Yes. And it is wonderful to remember that Hitler, Stalin, Ghengis Khan, all the monsters of humanity were brought up by a mother and a father. How nieve, and how simplistic can you get? Please list the works you have read on the results of same sex parenting, including interviews with such children if you don’t know any yourself, and compare them to the public at large, including orientation and religion of prison populationsf. Thank you.

Actually, Hitler’s mother died when he was young. At the hands of a Jew IIRC.

The “monsters of humanity” were raised by parents who had psychological disorders. Not saying how severe they were, but they were there. (I’ll bet you didn’t know this, but all of us were given, accidentally, psychological disorders that have roots in our upbringing.) The psych problems they developed manifested themselves in… well, history. They were rare people within history. Not everyone becomes a Chingiskan or a Stalin, with all that power, you know.

Far more people act out in less public ways. Murder. Drug abuse. Sexual abuse. Emotional abuse. Verbal abuse. Rage. Temper tantrums. Even apathy.

Did you know that, while of course not all children do, far more children who are raised by two gay parents become homosexual than those who are raised in a straight family (all other psychological issues off the table)? While two homosexuals might be fairly clean of all other psychological problems, they still have that one that threatens society.

Eddie was speaking on a biological level. You need a man and a woman to create a baby. That’s cold, hard fact. Even for the children of so-called “gay” couples, they must either borrow the womb AND egg of another woman, OR they must borrow another male’s sperm. It’s a lie to say “we made this baby”, or “it’s our baby” because it is not a product of their love for each other.

The baby becomes a commodity for the buying.

 

[nagyszakall]

Parents have children and some of them, about 3.5%, are gay. How is that political?

When you call them homosexual, it is less political. People who like to use the word “gay” (which used to mean happy, merry) to refer to homosexuals are usually pushing a political agenda.

BTW where did you get your percentage? I think you are exaggerating a bit, and I would insert the word “become”, so your sentence from my mouth would say, “…some of them become homosexual…” The difference between this and yours is very political.

 

[Gaber]

When you call them homosexual, it is less political. People who like to use the word “gay” (which used to mean happy, merry) to refer to homosexuals are usually pushing a political agenda.

BTW where did you get your percentage? I think you are exaggerating a bit, and I would insert the word “become”, so your sentence from my mouth would say, “…some of them become homosexual…” The difference between this and yours is very political.

I’m sorry, Bigbeard, (mine is close-cropped), we differ on this. Politics is the means we use to adjust public behavior in inequitable situations. Women having the right to vote, despite thier nearly property-like status not so long ago here and “back home,” slavery, and other things relative to recogniton of individuals as fully equal and human are, in an increasingly civilized world, accomplished through politics. So why are you and others reviling the system we fight wars to uphold as a fault of those who wish to use it for their equal and rightful place amongst us in the face of bigotry and ignorance, as did women and slaves, or those speaking on their part? Maybe we should, as well, revisit conveniencing the crippled and lame, and also go back to stoning women who are not virgins as, God speaking through Deuteronomy recommends?

As for numbers, I’m reporting what I got from stats on self-identified GLBT demographics from a few sources. Why would I exagerate? I suggest you look them up for yourself and see if we differ there too. If I am reporting wrongly, I need to know that.

You sound very much like you believe that homosexuality is a decision? Is that your take?

Hmmmm… I wonder if TarkanAttila is Magyar.

 

[cecilia97]

Homosexuality is not a sin, anymore than hetrosexuality is a sin. The sin is the sex act outside of the sacrament of marriage, whether homosexual or hetrosexual. Therefore, a homosexual practicing chastity, is not in a sinful condition. But, many seem eager to chastise the homosexual while turning a blind eye to adultery and fornication by the hetrosexual.

This is the teaching of the Church. In my discussions on this topic, I often find that the Catholic understanding of homosexuality and homosexual acts is lumped in with the understanding of other Christian groups. Gay PEOPLE are creations of God. Homosexual ACTS are sinful. Heterosexual people are creations of God. Heterosexual ACTS outside of marriage are sinful. Another example: we all have violent thoughts and tendencies. Those are inborn as a result of original sin. It’s violent actions that are sinful.

As a heterosexual woman, I’ve committed many sexual sins that are every bit as serious as homosexual acts. We’re all sinners. We have to have respect for each other as children of God. But we do not - cannot - condone or cooperate in the sins of others.

Saying that Christians should stop having gay babies is a gross oversimplification of the issue. It’s setting up a straw man. It’s an immature argument.

 

[Gaber]

Actually, Hitler’s mother died when he was young. At the hands of a Jew IIRC.

The “monsters of humanity” were raised by parents who had psychological disorders. Not saying how severe they were, but they were there. (I’ll bet you didn’t know this, but all of us were given, accidentally, psychological disorders that have roots in our upbringing.) The psych problems they developed manifested themselves in… well, history. They were rare people within history. Not everyone becomes a Chingiskan or a Stalin, with all that power, you know.

Far more people act out in less public ways. Murder. Drug abuse. Sexual abuse. Emotional abuse. Verbal abuse. Rage. Temper tantrums. Even apathy.

Did you know that, while of course not all children do, far more children who are raised by two gay parents become homosexual than those who are raised in a straight family (all other psychological issues off the table)? While two homosexuals might be fairly clean of all other psychological problems, they still have that one that threatens society.

Eddie was speaking on a biological level. You need a man and a woman to create a baby. That’s cold, hard fact. Even for the children of so-called “gay” couples, they must either borrow the womb AND egg of another woman, OR they must borrow another male’s sperm. It’s a lie to say “we made this baby”, or “it’s our baby” because it is not a product of their love for each other.

The baby becomes a commodity for the buying.

Thanks for the update, TarkanAttila. I always appreciate an education. That’s how I became a therapist and Senior Peer Counselor. Darn, though, if I did very well in history. Thanks.

I’m sorry, though, that you percieve Michalangelo, Dag Hammerschold, Proust, Nureyev, Nijinski, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Aristotle, Rock Hudson, Margaret Fuller, Herman Mellville, T.E. Lawrence, Tchaikovsky, Erasmus, Socrates, Richard the Lionhearted, Lord Byron, Francis Bacon, Walt Whitman, Cole Porter, Leonardo da Vincie Michalangelo(OHGODHEDIDTHESISTINECHAPELINTHEVATICAN!!!) etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, as such threats to society. And God save us from that horrible Alan Turing. He shorted WWll by an estimated 2-4 years with his incomparable work in breaking the enigma code, thereby saving many lives and possibly the world from Nazism. He commited suicide after being treated the way he was when outed for his sexual orientation. Or all the recent teen suicides exacerbated by the kindness of thier peers. Yep, gotta watch out for them weirdos!!!

And your idea of babies as commodities might need some developing and context as well.

Thanks for your contributions.

 

[Gaber]

As a heterosexual woman, I’ve committed many sexual sins that are every bit as serious as homosexual acts. We’re all sinners. We have to have respect for each other as children of God. But we do not - cannot - condone or cooperate in the sins of others.

Saying that Christians should stop having gay babies is a gross oversimplification of the issue. It’s setting up a straw man. It’s an immature argument.

I truly appreciate your honesty and candor. That’s what we need here. Thanks.

And yes, of course it is an immature argument. But it got us talking, and you to add your valuable bit. I appreciate that.

 

[GEddie]

There is no doubt that some very gifted human beings have been homosexuals. That is no surprise. Whatever some may say, we are far more than our sexual predilections, or indeed, sexuality generally.

It is also true that civil societies have treated some persons who were homosexual, e.g. Alan Turing in England, very shamefully. Whatever form someone’s sexuality takes, they should not be persecuted.

There is still, however, no call to adapt social norms to accommodate alternative sexuality.

ICXC NIKA

 

[adv]

I think people who consider themselves homosexuals are being diverted and distracted by their true calling. Their energies should be towards a sacrificial love through celibacy and doing service such as caring for the elderly, caring for the poor, being involved in missionary, maybe going into the priesthood or religious life. Our culture is so messed up and upside down that those vocations are not even considered or mentioned to people struggling with this temptation. I think Satan tries to confuse people about their sexuality so that they are distracted and fail to listen to their true calling. (my 2 cents)

 

[Credo_in_Deum]

Your thoughts?

I’m not offended by gay people; however, I can only speak for myself and not all Christians. I’m sure there are some who are offended by gay people. As for parents having gay people, I don’t believe any parent chooses to have gay children or that it is even possible to have gay children. I believe parents simply choose to have children and that’s it.

 

[nagyszakall]

You sound very much like you believe that homosexuality is a decision? Is that your take?

Absolutely not. Even if certain decisions could (and I believe they have in certain individuals personally known by me) contribute to the development of homosexual tendency in a person, I would not identify those decisions with the tendencies they have contributed to.

As for politics, you must well know that political powers are tools that can be used for evil as well as for good.
The legalization of abortion was achieved through politics, as well as divorce, the widespread availability of easily accessible contraceptive and abortion (day after pill) drugs, the “population control” policies of so many nations.
Although I respect persons with homosexual tendencies, and lament the fact that they are not respected always as their dignity as human persons demands, and that occurs unfortunately due to their tendencies as well, I don’t appreciate the hijacking of the beautiful English word “gay”, and I even less appreciate the political tendencies of those advocating such usage of the word. For they want homosexual acts (which we used to call sodomy) to be accepted on equal footing as the sacred acts of holy matrimony. Mind you, my judgment of homosexual acts is not even slightly graver than that of other disordered sexual acts between persons of the opposite sex.
So, no, I do not get “offended” by “Gay people” but I believe that human sexuality has its order and beauty according to the plan of God. And when you mess with that, it is going to have serious consequences (and I don’t just mean final judgment and hell fire, but the destruction of family and society… why don’t you read up on such numbers as the increase of single parent homes, divorces, etc?)

 

[fix]

i can see that this is a serious matter for you. can you see the irony of accusing others of a political agenda while engaging in one yourself?

i think that keeping our sense of humility and humor makes such discussions much easier and more productive. getting too positional and amped up only alienates everyone.

I am not engaging in a political agenda any more than anti slavery folks were being political in the sense you intend.

 

[fix]

And,because hetrosexuality is ordered toward the good and homosexuality is not, adultery, or rape, is less evil than homosexual sex.
.

Just as the ordering of right reason proceeds from man, so the order of nature is from God Himself: wherefore in sins contrary to nature, whereby the very order of nature is violated, an injury is done to God, the Author of nature. Hence Augustine says (Confess. iii, 8): “Those foul offenses that are against nature should be everywhere and at all times detested and punished, such as were those of the people of Sodom, which should all nations commit, they should all stand guilty of the same crime, by the law of God which hath not so made men that they should so abuse one another. For even that very intercourse which should be between God and us is violated, when that same nature, of which He is the Author, is polluted by the perversity of lust.”

Gravity of a sin depends more on the abuse of a thing than on the omission of the right use. Wherefore among sins against nature, the lowest place belongs to the sin of uncleanness, which consists in the mere omission of copulation with another. While the most grievous is the sin of bestiality, because use of the due species is not observed. Hence a gloss on Genesis 37:2, “He accused his brethren of a most wicked crime,” says that “they copulated with cattle.” After this comes the sin of sodomy, because use of the right sex is not observed. Lastly comes the sin of not observing the right manner of copulation, which is more grievous if the abuse regards the “vas” than if it affects the manner of copulation in respect of other circumstances.

Whether the unnatural vice is the greatest sin among the species of lust?

 

[Gaber]

There is no doubt that some very gifted human beings have been homosexuals. That is no surprise. Whatever some may say, we are far more than our sexual predilections, or indeed, sexuality generally.

It is also true that civil societies have treated some persons who were homosexual, e.g. Alan Turing in England, very shamefully. Whatever form someone’s sexuality takes, they should not be persecuted.

There is still, however, no call to adapt social norms to accommodate alternative sexuality.

ICXC NIKA

Great. Then don’t do those activities and keep out of God’s and someone else’s business!

 

[Gaber]

Absolutely not. Even if certain decisions could (and I believe they have in certain individuals personally known by me) contribute to the development of homosexual tendency in a person, I would not identify those decisions with the tendencies they have contributed to.

As for politics, you must well know that political powers are tools that can be used for evil as well as for good.
The legalization of abortion was achieved through politics, as well as divorce, the widespread availability of easily accessible contraceptive and abortion (day after pill) drugs, the “population control” policies of so many nations.
Although I respect persons with homosexual tendencies, and lament the fact that they are not respected always as their dignity as human persons demands, and that occurs unfortunately due to their tendencies as well, I don’t appreciate the hijacking of the beautiful English word “gay”, and I even less appreciate the political tendencies of those advocating such usage of the word. For they want homosexual acts (which we used to call sodomy) to be accepted on equal footing as the sacred acts of holy matrimony. Mind you, my judgment of homosexual acts is not even slightly graver than that of other disordered sexual acts between persons of the opposite sex.
So, no, I do not get “offended” by “Gay people” but I believe that human sexuality has its order and beauty according to the plan of God. And when you mess with that, it is going to have serious consequences (and I don’t just mean final judgment and hell fire, but the destruction of family and society… why don’t you read up on such numbers as the increase of single parent homes, divorces, etc?)

Thanks for your comments, Nagyszakall.

Yes, I have personal expereince with the phenomenon of broke homes. Some of them are as bad as those resulting from unbroken bur hugely disfunctional homes. But overall, things seem to be statistically improving. According to a remarkable report from NPR, there is graphic evidence that we are living in the least violent age in recorded history. Other similar indicators are likely down, too, as tragic dynamics are being outed and dealt with and can no longer hide in the shadows. So things are changing, and all the pleas for 'world peace" are not as unanswered as we seem to think.

Yes, I’ve often wanted to use “gay” in its former innocent usage, and felt thwarted. And that is an example of one of many words that have evolved. We don’t, save for a few scholars, speak Chaucerian English.* Wouldn’t that be a hoot? I was actually personally insulted at one point when certain words were misued according to my understanding. “Dude” is another one, I hated, lividly, being called “dude.” It used to mean “an incompetent, awkward, ignorant Easterner pretendcing to be a cowboy for a week or less.” Pretty much that. So you are not alone. You might enjoy reading The Mother Tongue, by Bill Bryson eyrie.org/~eagle/reviews/books/0-688-07895-8.html

And yes. political power can be used for evil. A whole nation, more, actually, was boiled like a frog by creeping Nazism not too long ago. But we are in an ascending age in terms of awareness, and are in the midst of the very difficult lesson that heart is not a matter of material form. Things are a bit different from the time that “God” in Deuteronomy told us to stone a woman if she was not a vergin when she married. or was that the middle East today? Yea, a whole passle of such has gone by the wayside. Mostly.

But because we are so emotionally entrenched in our materialism, even if we call it “religion” or “spirituality,” many project their emotional fears onto others not like them. How many cases have ther been of ultra homophobe who were outed as to their own preference? Betcha can’t name just one…

Same goes for such a materialist take on birth control. Dear God, what an unfortunate thing we have going there with our Church! Bt institutions move far more slowly in their state of comprehension of awareness than do individual. So if someone’s identity rests in an institution, well, there’s bound to be some lag. But that is why we have a brain capable of teleology, yes?

*thisblogrules.com/2011/09/how-english-language-has-changed-over-the-years-infographic.html

 

[GEddie]

Great. Then don’t do those activities and keep out of God’s and someone else’s business!

Sure, to the extent that they don’t make their desires the government’s business.