I don’t get you Rossum, to reply to your previous post, I’ll just be repeating myself.
Could you please read all of this Rossum and let me know your thoughts? sorry about it being so long.
It will help me alot to guage where you are and how you view all of this, because if it’s equality between homosexuals and hetrosexuals your aiming for, than I applaud you, because I also aim for that, however when it’s equality between homosexuality and hetrosexualy, it just doesn’t make any sense, and to equate such things through same sex marriage is just illogical I think.
My primary concern with this, is the illusion it will create between equating homosexual unions and hetrosexual unions, the illusion that a homosexual union is equal to a hetrosexual union, which obviously they are not.
Now when it comes to children, there are obvious reasons to discriminate, which would be that a childs ultimate environment is with a mum and a dad, so obviously a mum and a dad in a hetrosexual union is the best option, so therefore when it comes to adoption, it would be wrong to treat a homosexual union and a hetrosexual union eqaually in that regard because Id adopt out to hetrosexual unions as they provide a father figure and a mother figure, before I adopted out to homosexual unions wouldn’t you agree Rossum?
However this is not as much of a concern as homosexuals trying to have biological children, Im generally mortified when people speak of using sience with the use of a thrid party to provide a homosexual couple with a biological child only biologically tied to one partner.
The reason why is because I understand the removal of a biological parent for the benefit of a child, such as an abusive/dangerous mother or father, however when it comes to homosexual couples trying to have their own biological children, they use a third party and science to intentionaly bring a child into the word with intent to deprive that child of their mother or father, not because it’s what they think is best for the child, but becuase it suits themselves, I find it extremely selfish and Im generally mortified that a practice like this could be allowed, wouldn’t you agree with me Rossum?
Now once homosexual unions have the word ‘marriage’ whats to stop them from having ‘family’ too, from using what I described above to have biological children only biologically tied to one of them, I understand adoption and fostering, as long as it was after the best option of a mother and father with hetrosexual unions were exhuasted.
It is just so wrong to bring a child into the word with absolute intent to deprive that child of their mother or father, not to benefit the child but to benefit themselves, wouldn’t you agree Rossum?
Technically the who idea of homosexuality means that homosexuals cannot have biological children, as to have a child requires a mother and a father, now sience hasn’t changed that at all, every child still has a mother and a father, what sience is doing, is allowing homosexuals to have children by changing the nature of which homosexuals are inseminated, which still requires X and Y Chromosomes, which is hetrosexuality, however with science they can still be homosexual for this whole process of procreation to occur.
This is what I fear most, you tell me that when homosexual unions have marriage, they will not want ‘family’ too, the use of science to have a biological child and intentionaly bring a child into the word with intent to deprive that child of their biological mother or father not to benefit the child but to benefit themselves.
The whole idea of same sex marriage, is to play into the illusion that a homosexual union is the same as a hetrosexual union, now common Rossum, there is no way you can believe that they are equal unions, like I have said the sexual nature shows that in reality they are vastly different unions, now to legalise same sex marriage will play into this illusion even more, which will push homosexuals to do the horrors that I have mentioned above, in an effort to try and achieve ‘family’ with the use of science to procreate and have biological children and intentionaly do it in a way that removes the father or mother for no other reason but to benefit themselves and play into the illusion that homosexuality beings the same gifts as hetrosexuality.
People are using the point of procreating, to a degree they are correct, becasue once homosexuals have marriage, they will want ‘family’ which is generally procreation, homosexuals cannot procreate, instead they will use science and do the horrors that I mentioned above.
Now Rossum, if you say that the idea of homosexuals doing what I have mentioned above to children is okay, than I will give up my argument because you will be just so far from morality.
Thank you for reading
Josh
