Mass. Bishops to oppose adoption by gays

  • Thread starter Thread starter Riley259
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
mpeacock:
To liberalsaved—AMEN.
Come on people, I’ve been reading this thread and most of you are the most small-minded and bigoted people–you should be ashamed to call yourselves the children of a loving God.
I’ve been a natural mother of 4 and the adoptive mother of one and know all kinds of families and the good and successful families have one thing in common----LOVE!
Isn’t that what we are taught- to love one another? Not just those that fit our personal political/sexual/moral code?
Get your brains out of your pants and grow hearts! ❤️ :gopray2:
Click to expand...
Perhaps we need to define what love is? Just calling something love does not make it so.
 
40.png
Liberalsaved:
Apparently funny-stupid movie quotes are not a central form of study here.
Click to expand...
???

Not only does you post make no sense whatsoever I am wondering who apointed you as to the abirter of who decides what is appropraite form of study and what is not.

The difference between you and i is i want to help sinners see the errors of their way by explaing to them the teachings of the One True Church. You want to give them a BIG HUG and send them on their way.

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/6/6_15_11.gifHappy St Daivds Day.
 
estesbob said:
???

Not only does you post make no sense whatsoever I am wondering who apointed you as to the abirter of who decides what is appropraite form of study and what is not.

The difference between you and i is i want to help sinners see the errors of their way by explaing to them the teachings of the One True Church. You want to give them a BIG HUG and send them on their way.

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/6/6_15_11.gifHappy St Daivds Day.
Click to expand...

sigh

The Spanish Inquisition thing was a quote.

And you’re right, I’m not arrogant enough to beleive I’m always right, not to mention I’ve never attacked you as you are doing to me although you’ve given me innumerable reasons.
 
Liberalsaved said:
sigh

The Spanish Inquisition thing was a quote.

And you’re right, I’m not arrogant enough to beleive I’m always right, not to mention I’ve never attacked you as you are doing to me although you’ve given me innumerable reasons.
Click to expand...

Monty Python is neither watched nor appreciated by most conservatives. Made me spew beer out my nose though. 🙂
 
As an aside…it is so clear to me, as my dh and I raise our children, why it is so important to have a mom and dad. Each of us bring a different perspective to parenting. A feminine and masculine perspective. In single parent households, only one perspective is presented. In a gay parent family, the perspectives are confused–a man who is feminine, a woman who is masculine. The problems this can cause may not be evident for years. I know my brothers suffered in not having Dad around during their pre-teen and teen years. I have insecurities related to not having a Dad around. My old neighbor has a lesbian mom and lived with various lovers. I can not even begin to tell you the problems that this woman has, as well as her siblings. My question again is this…why, from the get go, not give an adoptive child the best start. Why put them in a situation that has proven not to be the best when there are many other homes that are available to provide the best.
Click to expand...
I was a single parent. My son’s father walked out on us when he was 6 months old. However, through the grace of God, I met my husband a year later, dated chastely for three years and we were married when my son was almost five. Looking back on our marriage a few years later, my son explained " I didn’t want a dad, I wanted a Dad who would live with us". To me, that remark has always reflected a desire to have both a mother and a father raising him and not just a “male role model”.
So despite my poor choices earlier in my life and his infant years, I have come to see the wisdom of his remarks. A child deserves to have both a mother and a father.
 
Just because they can’t have them, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to raise them. I’m sick of this debate.
 
40.png
jennifer101:
Just because they can’t have them, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to raise them. I’m sick of this debate.
Click to expand...
Those “them” are your fellow citizens, dear. In the US, citizens can and do exercise our civil rights. If you do not like this, you can always move.
 
The “them” I was referring to were “unwanted” children. Unwanted by their biological parents. Gays should be allowed to adopt children. Bishops have no say in the matter. It’s a state matter and should not be influenced (in America) by any religion.
Quit it with the “dear”, garbage. Who are you fooling? If you want to be rude, have the guts to do so without throwing in a patronizing “dear”. It’s so Jr. high.
 
40.png
jennifer101:
Just because they can’t have them, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to raise them. I’m sick of this debate.
Click to expand...
Many of us are also sick of this debate but for profoundly different reasons than you. The church sees homosexual unions are morally illicit and thus by extention adoptions by homosexuals as morally illicit. This is church teaching and it is morally correct - if you don’t believe that than I guess you don’t believe that the Magisterium is correct in their teaching about homosexual unions. The church should not be compelled to offer adoptions to gay couples and if that means that Catholic charities has to get out of the adoption business than so be it. I think it could be easily resolved by granting the church an exemption for religious reasons because there are plenty of other adoption agencies who would allow gay adoptions. It probably won’t be granted because the ideological modus operandi in this state is tolerance at all costs. You may be sick of but I’m afraid this debate has only just begun.
 
40.png
Riley259:
Many of us are also sick of this debate but for profoundly different reasons than you. The church sees homosexual unions are morally illicit and thus by extention adoptions by homosexuals as morally illicit. This is church teaching and it is morally correct - if you don’t believe that than I guess you don’t believe that the Magisterium is correct in their teaching about homosexual unions. The church should not be compelled to offer adoptions to gay couples and if that means that Catholic charities has to get out of the adoption business than so be it. I think it could be easily resolved by granting the church an exemption for religious reasons because there are plenty of other adoption agencies who would allow gay adoptions. It probably won’t be granted because the ideological modus operandi in this state is tolerance at all costs. You may be sick of but I’m afraid this debate has only just begun.
Click to expand...
So only heterosexuals are morally equiped to be parents? Even the alcoholics, the recreational drug abusers, the smokers, the liars, the porn viewing masturbators, the atheists, … hey, what about Jewish folks and Muslims…? Do they qualify as morally unfit according to you??? They don’t believe in Jesus, so you must have issues with them. There are plenty of unfit “parents” out there. Short of drooling, comatose drug addicts and the molesters that get caught, nearly everyone else on the planet gets a shot at being a “parent”. I hardly believe that the gay couple constitutes the worst of the worst. JMO. And No, I don’t care what the Magisterium has to say about the bedroom relationship of a gay couple. Gay doesn’t equal bad parent.
 
40.png
jennifer101:
So only heterosexuals are morally equiped to be parents? Even the alcoholics, the recreational drug abusers, the smokers, the liars, the porn viewing masturbators, the atheists, … hey, what about Jewish folks and Muslims…? Do they qualify as morally unfit according to you??? They don’t believe in Jesus, so you must have issues with them. There are plenty of unfit “parents” out there. Short of drooling, comatose drug addicts and the molesters that get caught, nearly everyone else on the planet gets a shot at being a “parent”. I hardly believe that the gay couple constitutes the worst of the worst. JMO. And No, I don’t care what the Magisterium has to say about the bedroom relationship of a gay couple. Gay doesn’t equal bad parent.
Click to expand...
Stick to the issue. I’m only talking about gays adopting - you’re making quite an unfair leap when you gave a laundry list of others who had no connection to the original subject. A serious and faithful Catholic does care what the Magisterium has to say about matters of faith and morals because that authority was granted by Jesus himself. I’d suggest reading Theology of the Body Explained by Chris West and Male and Female He made Them by Mary Jo Anderson for good explanations of why the Church believes that gay marriage and by extention gay adoptions are not morally licit and ultimately harmful.
 
40.png
jennifer101:
So only heterosexuals are morally equiped to be parents? Even the alcoholics, the recreational drug abusers, the smokers, the liars, the porn viewing masturbators, the atheists, … hey, what about Jewish folks and Muslims…? Do they qualify as morally unfit according to you??? They don’t believe in Jesus, so you must have issues with them. There are plenty of unfit “parents” out there. Short of drooling, comatose drug addicts and the molesters that get caught, nearly everyone else on the planet gets a shot at being a “parent”. I hardly believe that the gay couple constitutes the worst of the worst. JMO. And No, I don’t care what the Magisterium has to say about the bedroom relationship of a gay couple. Gay doesn’t equal bad parent.
Click to expand...
It seems all the true Catholics follow and agree with the teachings of the Church because they understand the teachings. Your view here clearly indicates that you don’t understand. Either you are ignorant on the moral teachings of the Church and therefore don’t understand, or you are a dissenter. If the former, again, you should read the Catechism of CC if being a Catholic mean anything to you.
 
40.png
cathgal:
It seems all the true Catholics follow and agree with the teachings of the Church because they understand the teachings. Your view here clearly indicates that you don’t understand. Either you are ignorant on the moral teachings of the Church and therefore don’t understand, or you are a dissenter. If the former, again, you should read the Catechism of CC if being a Catholic mean anything to you.
Click to expand...
I follow the catholic church teachings until THEY dissent from Jesus’s teachings of Mercy. There is nothing wrong about gays or lesbians being adoptive parents. I stand by my previous posts.
 
40.png
jennifer101:
I follow the catholic church teachings until THEY dissent from Jesus’s teachings of Mercy. There is nothing wrong about gays or lesbians being adoptive parents. I stand by my previous posts.
Click to expand...
It seems that pride may be driving your cafeteria theology.
 
40.png
jennifer101:
I follow the catholic church teachings until THEY dissent from Jesus’s teachings of Mercy. There is nothing wrong about gays or lesbians being adoptive parents. I stand by my previous posts.
Click to expand...
The teachings are never at odds as they come from Christ.
 
40.png
jennifer101:
I follow the catholic church teachings until THEY dissent from Jesus’s teachings of Mercy. There is nothing wrong about gays or lesbians being adoptive parents. I stand by my previous posts.
Click to expand...
What big ego you have to make such claim. The problem with you is you don’t study your catechism and other good sources to seek understanding but only persist in your ignorance. A humble person would seek rather than arguing tediously against the teachings of the Church on these forums.
 
Is it better to have no parents at all, than to have gay parents?

To be shuffled from foster home to foster home, never know the security of a home and adults who love and protect you?

Morally, the Church may be right, but practically there may be better answers.
 
40.png
LeahInancsi:
Is it better to have no parents at all, than to have gay parents?

To be shuffled from foster home to foster home, never know the security of a home and adults who love and protect you?

Morally, the Church may be right, but practically there may be better answers.
Click to expand...
It is NEVER right to do evil to justify the good.
 
40.png
LeahInancsi:
Is it better to have no parents at all, than to have gay parents?

To be shuffled from foster home to foster home, never know the security of a home and adults who love and protect you?

Morally, the Church may be right, but practically there may be better answers.
Click to expand...
The choice is not a real choice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top