Should the state marry gay lovers?

[cathguy]

pathia has encouraged no such thing. Don’t blame the victim for your attack. You, sir, are responsible for your own actions.

I have attacked no one.

You are being dishonest.

Have a nice day.

 

[pathia]

Why on earth does your profile say you’re unemployeed? You should be writing a book!

I don’t get paid to write! I have fiddled with a book, yes, way ahead of you

 

[thewalrus]

I don’t get paid to write! I have fiddled with a book, yes, way ahead of you

Well hurry it up! I’m trying to write a novel myself so I understand the perils of writing.

 

[pathia]

Well hurry it up! I’m trying to write a novel myself so I understand the perils of writing.

I’m only 28. The parts that aren’t traumatic in my life are tremendously DULL. I need more before I can make it reasonable

 

[Bennie_P]

Ah… I SEE.

However, you should know that one of the weaknesses of this mode of conversation is that you will get new people in the discussion, and you need to bring them up to speed.

You can’t simply say “I have said time and time again” because many people haven’t read.

I apologize for my error.

I think Portia, that you need the help of a qualified, highly sensitive, and solidly Catholic health care / psychological care professional who will carefully and methodically help you out.

God created you to be who you are… and unfortunately your cross is heavy. Discerning these gender issues requires the sort of help an internet chat-room can never provide.

I do not think an internet chat room is a good place to seek fellowship on this. The issue is too complex, and you are opening yourself up to misunderstanding and attack. You may even be encouraging it.

I am done dialoging here. Please feel free to start a new thread in this discussion.

I recommend 1) Prayer, and 2) Competent and sensitive (and orthodox) professional care.

Warmest Regards.

This discussion has been going on year after year and it is the same false arguments over and over and over. Sometimes they just come back with different user names. I even suspect that at times it is the same person using several user names in the same thread. Of course I’m just paranoid Well, according to the doctor, my wife and … a few others…

The horror of it all…images-partners-tbn.google.com/images?q=tbn:E362OiVGvIY9hM:neuropolitics.org/apocalypse-brando2.jpg the horror…

 

[pathia]

This discussion has been going on year after year and it is the same false arguments over and over and over. Sometimes they just come back with different user names. I even suspect that at times it is the same person using several user names in the same thread. Of course I’m just paranoid Well, according to the doctor, my wife and … a few others…

The horror of it all…images-partners-tbn.google.com/images?q=tbn:E362OiVGvIY9hM:neuropolitics.org/apocalypse-brando2.jpg the horror…

I think the world would implode if there were another me

 

[Benadam]

That’s the thing, in many places I don’t appear to qualify as human. I have been thrown out of my apartment because of my ‘lifestyle’, I have been fired, I have been assaulted, the list goes on and I have no legal recourse, none.

Not in the state it happened in anyway, I have sense fled that awful place. Things are much better now, I will say that. My horror stories are years ago, I simply don’t go to Church anymore. It’s too traumatic.

I hope you find healing. There are Church’s that are able to welcome you with sincerity. My heart goes out to you.

 

[David_Poem]

No.And its all our fault that we let so much evil in our world .We know what is true.We stand by and talk about it but do noting while women think they have the right to have sex,kill off their own.belive it or not this is anti family.and Gay people only love each other.No kids there,Anti family. people living together without marrage? anti family.Does not brother them ,Why do gay people need to be married?Jesus says the way to Hell is wide.The Antichrist has and already here and has been here 4 /2000 years. Every sin we do is antichrist.We need to repent more and stop talking about it.We need to save ourselfs.When jesus comes agin to rule everone will be able to hear what we been thinking .familys will be rent apart.As jesus was in the Bible he read peoples minds and knew what anyone was thinking.We will have this same power when he returns .Only jesus will 4give and make you clean .Everthing that is dark will be broth to light

 

[The_Smiter]

Good…you understand your beliefs in the matter are not absolute…there are circumstances where same sex adoption is allowed…and since you are ascenting to the same sex adoption…are you also agreeing that this same sex couple also has the right to be together to raise this special needs child…you were speaking from your heart…and not your religious beliefs at the time… That was meant not as a slight by the way…but to acknowledge your statement…it was one of compassion and I commend you…to make such an admission took courage.

It is not copurageous to state a truth that one believes it is simply stating the truth.

My beliefs ARE absolute in that traditional families and parents are the IDEAL when adoption is an issue.

Circumstances where same sex adoption could be allowed - yes. That it is preferrable - no. That it is needed in light of the many traditional different sex couples who are refused as adoptive parents every year - no. I come from a social work background and have seen the changes in the acceptance (and in many areas, preference) of same-sex couples adopting when there are traditional parents who are waiting to adopt a child. It is my contention that there are no children who are difficult to adopt - only those children who the social services deem are unadoptable. The reasons for excluding different sex couples has been because of their religious beliefs, or because they are choosing private or home schooling, - any number of frivilous reasons. Again I harken back to the IDEAL being the most preferable and best situation for the child.

No - I do not believe that a same sex couple has a right to raise any child - special needs or otherwise. My statement was intended as a hypothetical (which I do not believe has ever been the situation oin the United States - that is a shortage of willing and capable traditional couples) - and not as assent to your interpretation of my words.

I would like to think that whenever I speak it is with my religious conciction. I can’t separate it from my thinking because it has indeed formed my thinking. I also reject the idea that anyone would or should be speaking from the heart about this or any other issue. It is the heart that leads us astray. It is our head, mind, and intellect (logic, if you will) that we should be listening to.

I do accept and understand your statements to me regarding compassion and such. It is one of the chief actions we are called to as Christians. But do not mistake compassion for a situation that has arisen in an imperfect worl as acceptance of a situation that is disordered as a result of that imperfect world being the place in which we live. We all do the best we can, and it would be good if everyone did express such compassion to everyone. God created us all for Heaven and it is always my hope that everyone gets there.

All of this discussion and cebate in this world is a distraction from the real work of this world - which is to order that which has been disordered. I know that some here will takethat as some kind of insult, but hpoefully I have shown by my verbosity(!) and actual statemsnts that I am merely sharing my beliefs.

I tried to answer each of your points in the response and hope I hit them all.

As always , I welcome responses.

 

[The_Smiter]

It’s fine man I’m just saying that you kind of jumped in on what I was saying to him when you didn’t know what you were talking about. I never asked you to mindread anything.

Understood. But your response seemed to indicate that I would find statement of his that you were referencing on this forum and not another closed forum to which I had no access.

But we are on the same wavelenght now. I hope he PMs me or makes clkear his position. now.!!

Thanks.

 

[Sair]

Are you perchance a writer by profession or hobby? You have some lovely turns of phrase

I’m pretty much in agreement with what I have read of your arguments. It’s always nice to see a demonstration of genuine, human compassion and understanding applied to the knotty problems of society.

I think the issues involved here are both more simple and more complex that many people seem to believe. Live and let live might be a simple phrase, but it certainly seems to be complex in the execution! I don’t see any reason to assume that if legal homosexual marriage is permitted, it diminishes the status of marriage in general. I rather feel it promotes marriage as a stable and committed means of building and maintaining a relationship - a relationship which, at its core, is about two people who love each other, whatever other purpose it might be bent towards.

The idea that if people are permitted to live as they wish without hindering others from doing the same, then the foundations of social morality will crumble, is one I find baffling. Religion and law are not the only things that provide a check to human behaviour. The very clause without hindering others from doing the same should be enough of a check for any intelligent, compassionate person. It is those attitudes that belittle intelligent thought and discourage compassion that we should be striving against.

 

[Spire]

Wow…

There are so many prejudices inherent in this post. I’ll address a few.

Lol.

Sexual intimacy is possible for any couple - it doesn’t have to be penetrative, penile/vaginal sex to qualify as intimacy, and thus an act of bonding.

All you did is wrap ‘sexual intercourse’ up in a different package(sexual intimacy)

Either way sexual intimacy is only applicable and available to heterosexual couples.

Marriage ought to be a recognition of a couple’s commitment to stay loyal to each other for life - it’s an acknowlegement of their love for each other, and that alone is the force that binds them, whether man and woman, woman and woman, or man and man.

Love and marriage are two different things. I’ve always acknowledged the love my family has for me. Am I married to each member of my family?

No.

And we have already ‘filled the earth’ - almost to the point of bursting. How do the ‘fruitful’ marriage advocates propose to support all those offspring?

To the point of bursting…

 

[Bennie_P]

I think the world would implode if there were another me

I know there is only one of you, love you for it .

 

[Bennie_P]

No.**And its all our fault that we let so much evil in our world .**We know what is true.We stand by and talk about it but do noting while women think they have the right to have sex,kill off their own.belive it or not this is anti family.and Gay people only love each other.No kids there,Anti family. people living together without marrage? anti family.Does not brother them ,Why do gay people need to be married?Jesus says the way to Hell is wide.The Antichrist has and already here and has been here 4 /2000 years. Every sin we do is antichrist.We need to repent more and stop talking about it.We need to save ourselfs.When jesus comes agin to rule everone will be able to hear what we been thinking .familys will be rent apart.As jesus was in the Bible he read peoples minds and knew what anyone was thinking.We will have this same power when he returns .Only jesus will 4give and make you clean .Everthing that is dark will be broth to light

David not really, we can only take care of the actions done by ourselves, not others.

 

[Bennie_P]

lol see Smiter, there you have it. Now gay rights came from Nazi’s and is rooted in anti-Semitism. Still waiting on cannibalism to pop up.

In reality you have the whole progressive movement taking its cues from fascism, so why would it be hard to believe what I wrote about the tactics of fascism and the tactics of the “gay” right movement? Is not the “gay” rights movement a liberal and or progressive movement?

nysun.com/arts/americas-fascist-moment/68954/

Some will rightfully take issue with Mr. Goldberg when he describes the administrations of Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, and Clinton as fascist. On this, he strains and pushes his evidence too far to convince the reader that these paragons of liberalism can be called fascist in any sense of the term. Mr. Goldberg makes a stronger case when he accuses the New Left of classic fascist behavior, when its cadre took to the streets and through action discarded its early idealism for what Mr. Goldberg correctly calls “fascist thuggery.” Even if one does not consider the liberal administrations of the recent past fascist, Mr. Goldberg is correct to see the liberalism of today to be state worship, which built upon the original statist liberalism of the Wilson administration.
Mr. Goldberg has, unlike the leftists who yell the term, made the strongest possible case that Americans today live in a soft form of fascism, a statist liberal society whose citizens are unaware of the roots of ideas they hold. Echoing Susan Sontag, who pointed out that fascist ideas “are vivid and moving to many people,” Mr. Goldberg ends with a humorous look at the cult of organic foods, vegetarianism, and animal rights, all programs and policies first instituted in Nazi Germany. “We are all fascists now,” he concludes. Disagree if you must, but go out and read this brilliant, insightful, and important book.

liberalfascism.nationalreview.com/

Buy the book amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0385511841

ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31hln2qFpWL.BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA240_SH20_OU01.jpg

Hey The Smiter; I PM you back, but I don’t know if it went through I kept getting an error message - blessings.

 

[Publisher]

It is not copurageous to state a truth that one believes it is simply stating the truth.

My beliefs ARE absolute in that traditional families and parents are the IDEAL when adoption is an issue.

**Circumstances where same sex adoption could be allowed - yes. **That it is preferrable - no. That it is needed in light of the many traditional different sex couples who are refused as adoptive parents every year - no. I come from a social work background and have seen the changes in the acceptance (and in many areas, preference) of same-sex couples adopting when there are traditional parents who are waiting to adopt a child. It is my contention that there are no children who are difficult to adopt - only those children who the social services deem are unadoptable. The reasons for excluding different sex couples has been because of their religious beliefs, or because they are choosing private or home schooling, - any number of frivilous reasons. Again I harken back to the IDEAL being the most preferable and best situation for the child.

No - I do not believe that a same sex couple has a right to raise any child - special needs or otherwise. My statement was intended as a hypothetical (which I do not believe has ever been the situation oin the United States - that is a shortage of willing and capable traditional couples) - and not as assent to your interpretation of my words.

I would like to think that whenever I speak it is with my religious conciction. I can’t separate it from my thinking because it has indeed formed my thinking. I also reject the idea that anyone would or should be speaking from the heart about this or any other issue. It is the heart that leads us astray. It is our head, mind, and intellect (logic, if you will) that we should be listening to.

I do accept and understand your statements to me regarding compassion and such. It is one of the chief actions we are called to as Christians. But do not mistake compassion for a situation that has arisen in an imperfect worl as acceptance of a situation that is disordered as a result of that imperfect world being the place in which we live. We all do the best we can, and it would be good if everyone did express such compassion to everyone. God created us all for Heaven and it is always my hope that everyone gets there.

All of this discussion and cebate in this world is a distraction from the real work of this world - which is to order that which has been disordered. I know that some here will takethat as some kind of insult, but hpoefully I have shown by my verbosity(!) and actual statemsnts that I am merely sharing my beliefs.

I tried to answer each of your points in the response and hope I hit them all.

As always , I welcome responses.

None the less, even entertaining the possiblility that same sex couples can parent with love and support for the “child of their heart” was one of courage…sometimes stating “a truth” takes a great deal of courage…I continue to hold you in the Light Friend.

 

[The_Smiter]

None the less, even entertaining the possiblility that same sex couples can parent with love and support for the “child of their heart” was one of courage…sometimes stating “a truth” takes a great deal of courage…I continue to hold you in the Light Friend.

At the tisk of losing your kind words, I will explain.

I am not disputing that same sex parents can parent with love and competence. Grandparents can raise children when necessary - aunts, uncles , friends who have been stated in wills, and even good foster parents. But none of those situations is the IDEAL. Neither are same-sex couples. I am stating that they (same-sex parents) parent incompletely, and without the fullness offered by the IDEAL of the mother and father working in unison.

For me their (or anyone’s) ability to love or parent is not in question. It is, rather that there is an IDEAL, it should be preferred, and that the best interest of the child (needing a mother and a father) should always trump anyone’s rights to be an adoptive parent.

 

[Benadam]

At the tisk of losing your kind words, I will explain.

I am not disputing that same sex parents can parent with love and competence. Grandparents can raise children when necessary - aunts, uncles , friends who have been stated in wills, and even good foster parents. But none of those situations is the IDEAL. Neither are same-sex couples. I am stating that they (same-sex parents) parent incompletely, and without the fullness offered by the IDEAL of the mother and father working in unison.

For me their (or anyone’s) ability to love or parent is not in question. It is, rather that there is an IDEAL, it should be preferred, and that the best interest of the child (needing a mother and a father) should always trump anyone’s rights to be an adoptive parent.

If a child has two dads who live as a dad and mom does, it is exposed to an environment that at the very least requires that the child is informed of the man woman composition as the norm for the living environment it experiences. Although this won’t correct the effects that exposure to a disordered parental environment presents.

I think if same gender couples adopt they put the child’s sexual identity at risk if it is exposed to the sexual nature of the couples relationship.

It’s not just what I think since there is evidence that children raised by homosexual couples become confused about their own sexual identity.

 

[pathia]

If a child has two dads who live as a dad and mom does, it is exposed to an environment that at the very least requires that the child is informed of the man woman composition as the norm for the living environment it experiences. Although this won’t correct the effects that exposure to a disordered parental environment presents.

I think if same gender couples adopt they put the child’s sexual identity at risk if it is exposed to the sexual nature of the couples relationship.

It’s not just what I think since there is evidence that children raised by homosexual couples become confused about their own sexual identity.

If having monogendered parents made people queer, then every single child who grew up in a single parent home would be gay. Kids walk in on their parents all the time, period. I know I disturbed my parents more than once, while they were making love.

 

[Benadam]

If having monogendered parents made people queer, then every single child who grew up in a single parent home would be gay. Kids walk in on their parents all the time, period. I know I disturbed my parents more than once, while they were making love.

I probably shouldn’t post on research data I remember reading but can’t remember where and who. That being said I’ll bet dollars to donuts that there is eneogh research data to support the hypothesis that a sexual environment that confuses the biological function of gender will inherently cause gender identity confusion for a child.