Two lesbians raised a baby and this is what they got.

[LJH_80]

I will, however, rephrase my bias to say “Homosexuals can be as good, or as bad of parents a heterosexuals,” if that makes you happier.

I will also say that I am open to proof of a convincing nature.
The proof that I would like, if you can find it, are studies about a significant number of homosexual parents compared to a significant number of heterosexual parents, that shows a marked difference in favor of the heterosexual parent. The report would have to conform to the exclusion criteria listed in the article reviewed above (or the dozens of studies they rejected would be fair game to make a counterpoint).

Find me that, and I will entertain the notion that I am wrong on this.

 

[speakttruth]

karoleck;9116854:

i will first critique this review.
If, after i am done, you can provide better support for this book, i would love to.

See, I’m going to have to stop you right there. I have three adopted siblings, all taken from destitute families, and raised by a loving set of affluent parents. I don’t think a single one of them would have been better off for being left in the predicament they were in.
I am personally a step father. My daughter (i never refer to her as my stepdaughter) knows her father, and knows that he is a man child whose idea of family bonding is for her to sit on the couch quietly and watch him play video games. I say that she is much better off in her current state, and she agrees; she doesn’t want to go spend time with her dad, she wants to stay and play board games/learn about diseases/get horsey rides/etc. With me.
This book makes a bold, insulting, and unfounded assertion and states it as if it were a commonly-known fact. That already seems quite shady, scientifically.

But let’s look at what evidence is provided for the denunciation of homosexual parenting on the whole:

I’m going to stop here for a minute and ask you to read this thread

about a man raised in a heterosexual, home by his two biological, “catholic” parents. He had really bad parenting. Ergo, heterosexual parenting should not be allowed. The experiences of one individual do not condemn the entire concept. If i tell a story about how my dog went rabid and bit my sister, does that mean dogs should not be allowed in any household ever? If i tell a story about a bad parent named “tom” does that mean nobody named “tom” should be a parent?
Of course not. You’re smarter than that. If someone experienced bad parenting by tom, it would not be because the person was named tom, it would be because tom happened to be a horrible person. If your argument is that horrible people should not have kids, then i’d agree with you. This father was a homosexual and a horrible person, but that doesn’t mean the two are related.

I fixed that for you.

Implied in here is that this has happened to other people, too. Fair enough.
There’s a book i think you should read, “sin against the innocents: Sexual abuse by priests.” since catholic priests have abused kids, kids should not be allowed in the catholic church.
Obviously, this position is faulty; the catholic church has one of the lowest sexual abuse rates of any religion. But it did happen, and there are individuals who have horror stories about it, and who form groups to help others who have been through it.

]

It doesn’t matter what study you read out there our faith says it’s wrong. Genesis proves it. God made them male and female for a reason. This site is a Catholic site and if anyone thinks having homosexuals as parents doesn’t harm the children they can go argue on another site. Look at the depravity of homosexuality as this poor child has witnessed. It is against our teaching period. It will never change as long as their is a God that has created us. Homosexuals cannot create anything end of story. It’s a fake marriage and fake parents, we should be promoting to helping parents with problems not making more, by pushing SS parenting. You still are forcing a child to have only one parent. God created us to have marriages, SSM is not a marriage it a like having fake currency. Why wouldn’t we want the real thing for a child. You cannot tell me that they are thinking about the child. They want what is best for themselves, not what is best for a child.

It is a horrible life and I have a loved one with Same sex attraction and it’s horrible for the families and it’s not a nice little happy life the way the media pushes it. I wasn’t a faithful Catholic and I thought I was a good parent too, but the media has poisoned our children and fortunately this is what brought me back to my faith to help the salvation of myself and my family. That is what we are suppose to do as Catholics.

As far as bad heterosexual parents verses nice homosexual parents your talking apples and oranges.
That doesn’t justify homosexual parents. The majority of the world are heterosexuals, so every bad parent means you should opt for a homosexual parent? What about bad homosexual parents? I mean if we are going to talk about our faith which is the point of this site here, the point is this is not our teachings, learn your faith if your a catholic if you don’t know that. Their are bad catholics out there, so that makes it OK to have homosexual parents? That should justify your argument? Just because you may have some bad apples in parenting, you don’t throw away what parents are supposed to be or even having bad priests, we don’t throw away our Catholic faith either. We are all sinners that have to repent. You improve what God has established. If your a faithful catholic you don’t encourage it period. Your argument on SS parenting is not valid on here, no matter how nice you think a homosexual person is, it doesn’t matter. We don’t change God’s rules based on feelings period. Our intelligence tells us how we were created biologically. If you don’t know this, ask one of the moderators on here they will explain it to you. Remember this is a Catholic Forum to help us understand the truths of our faith.

 

[LJH_80]

Speaktruth,

I acknowledge that the Catholic church teaches homosexuality is wrong, and if your proof is the Bible, then I back off.

My enemy isn’t Catholic teaching, my enemy is bad arguments.

If you argue that a Corolla gets better gas mileage than an Explorer because it’s painted red, then I will point out that paint color has nothing to do with gas mileage.

In the case here, I started by stating my bias not to try and convince people, but because I wanted to give an honest assessment of the research, and part of being honest is admitting your bias so that others can know your analysis might be tainted.
For instance, if someone were trying to convince you that a Corolla was a great car, wouldn’t you want to know that the person worked for Toyota, and might be biased? It doesn’t make what they’re saying automatically wrong, but it lets you listen to their case with a more appropriate skepticism.

Again, my enemy is faulty logic. I would much rather have someone oppose SSM for a good reason than support it for a bad reason. With that said, saying “there is this one person who was raised by a _________, and her childhood was horrible.” is not an argument against ________ being good parents, whatever you fill in that blank with. It’s just a bad argument.
If you don’t see how that specific argument was bad, please let me know, and I’ll try and make it clearer.

If you look through my posts, you’ll see I’ve taken the Catholic side in many arguments where the antagonistic atheist was using faulty logic.

Maybe I need a signature.

 

[karoleck]

Speaktruth,

I acknowledge that the Catholic church teaches homosexuality is wrong, and if your proof is the Bible, then I back off.

My enemy isn’t Catholic teaching, my enemy is bad arguments.

If you argue that a Corolla gets better gas mileage than an Explorer because it’s painted red, then I will point out that paint color has nothing to do with gas mileage.

In the case here, I started by stating my bias not to try and convince people, but because I wanted to give an honest assessment of the research, and part of being honest is admitting your bias so that others can know your analysis might be tainted.
For instance, if someone were trying to convince you that a Corolla was a great car, wouldn’t you want to know that the person worked for Toyota, and might be biased? It doesn’t make what they’re saying automatically wrong, but it lets you listen to their case with a more appropriate skepticism.

Again, my enemy is faulty logic. I would much rather have someone oppose SSM for a good reason than support it for a bad reason. With that said, saying “there is this one person who was raised by a _________, and her childhood was horrible.” is not an argument against ________ being good parents, whatever you fill in that blank with. It’s just a bad argument.
If you don’t see how that specific argument was bad, please let me know, and I’ll try and make it clearer.

If you look through my posts, you’ll see I’ve taken the Catholic side in many arguments where the antagonistic atheist was using faulty logic.

Maybe I need a signature.

–maybe just a change of heart?

This foward written by Dr.Scott Lively hit the nail on the head–this is not about some philosophical debate—but sin and its’ consequences.

Foreword ** REDEEMING THE RAINBOW** A Word About Sin

I believe that the purpose of life is to be conformed to the character of Jesus Christ,
through a life-long series of challenges uniquely designed for each person by God Himself.
How we face our challenges defines us eternally, and in the end is the only thing that matters.A thousand years from now, the earthly impact of the choices we have made and t
the work we have done will be virtually meaningless. Yet the Bible tells us that each of us
will still exist as an individual person in the presence of God or in hell. The person we will be is the product of our choices here on earth.

The challenges we face in life are not punishments sent by God. They are tests. They are
our opportunities to choose between good and evil, between spiritual life and death.
Challenges come in many forms but each one is tailored to meet our specific strengths
and weaknesses as individuals.
Same-sex attraction is a challenge faced by many. It is no more or less immoral than the
temptation to steal or to commit adultery. It is just one of many forms of testing that
human beings can encounter. As with any other temptation, one must choose whether to indulge in it or struggle to overcome it.

What distinguishes homosexuality (the indulgence of same-sex attraction) from other sins
is that some of those who practice it have created a social and political movement to
normalize and legitimize it. They deny that homosexuality is a sin and insist (militantly)
that society embrace homosexual relationships as equivalent to marriage and the natural family.

That is the reason for this book. It is not written to define homosexuality per se as a
greater sin than others that plague our society (although we will address the relative gravity of homosexual sin in these pages. Neither is it written to single out homosexuals for condemnation. Indeed, there but for the grace of God goes any of us.
Nor does this book intend to imply that the author in any way esteems himself personally
above any of those who define themselves by their homosexual inclinations. I too am a sinner,saved only by my acceptance of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross for my sins (John 3:16-18).

From the eternal perspective, the only difference between them and me is that I admit that my sin is sin,while they claim that their choice to give in to same-sex attraction is an act of righteousness (or is morally neutral).
However, this book does condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the homosexual
movement and its destructive agenda for social change. As the Scripture warns: “Woe unto them that call evil good,and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet
for bitter!
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!” (Isaiah
5:20-21).

How should we respond to a movement whose fruit, the Bible warns, is a society “filled
with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness…envy,
murder,debate ,deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud,
boasters,inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenant
breakers,without natural affection, implacable [and] unmerciful”? (Romans 1:26-32) How can we love these “enemies”
(Mathew 5:44) while at the same time “overcoming evil with good”? (Romans 12:21).

The rise of this “gay” movement represents one of the toughest moral (and political)
challenges the church has ever faced, and we cannot confuse our duty to love the sinner
with tolerance for the evil institution that movement has created. The Christian response to
its agenda must be one of uncompromising opposition. Our duty to be salt and light to society, and to love our neighbors as ourselves,compels us.

This book is written to equip believers for this work.

 

[Tigress]

Knowledge is not all genes, I believe environment plays a part as well as the dedication of his parents. His father played a crucial role in conception, yes, but from zygote onwards he was a raised by two wonderful, loving mothers and they are responsible for the way he turned out

A girl in my classes is fourteen like me and was raised by two women. She is honestly one of (if not the absolute) sweetest, kindest, and smartest girls I’ve ever known! I don’t think we all have rights to be raised by a father, I think that gender doesn’t always matter though biologically speaking maybe you’re right. Chemically the two genders are different and obviously respond differently to different situations. So I’m a little stumped on this one

 

[Tigress]

I think it’s mean to judge someone over sexual preference, even if the Bible tells us to… :nope:

I am proud to live in a state where gay marriage is legalized, and I guess that’s just one of the things me and the church will never see eye-to-eye on

 

[speakttruth]

I think it’s mean to judge someone over sexual preference, even if the Bible tells us to… :nope:

It isn’t mean to want people to go to heaven, for goodness sake. We judge right from wrong actions, not the person himself, or condemnation of anyone, That is God’s job. Do you judge murder to be wrong? Your talking about feelings we don’t go by our feelings one day their up, one day their down. We use our intelligence. Go buy a little book the daily bread and you will learn how to love God and follow Jesus. Do you tell someone it’s OK to do anything so that they can be damned to hell? If you love them you tell the truth. God didn’t make rules because he is mean, he made them because he loves us and he knows better for all eternity, you love him, you don’t fornicate the temple. Sex outside of Marriage between only a man and women is wrong. It’s about loving him, not yourself. Go back to your Catechism . Proud is a sin in this case and if your for gay marriage, then your in mortal sin right now. That means you know better than God? I would run to confession. I want you to go to heaven too. Think about it, it is lent. He died so you can be saved from yourself. Because you need him.
God bless

I am proud to live in a state where gay marriage is legalized, and I guess that’s just one of the things me and the church will never see eye-to-eye on

 

[LJH_80]

–maybe just a change of heart?
“Choosing to engage in homosexual activity is sinful, and Catholics have an obligation to preach against it.”

I summarized that review, and view it almost entirely as logically valid. I accept that you think it’s sinful, and want to convince other people it is. You even have the right to try and vote to give them any rights. You can vote on laws that will deprive them of the right to be parents, and can even protest military funerals with signs that say “God Hates Fags,” if you want.

But where I stepped in was when you used a poor argument to support your case. Do you understand the distinction?

Do you understand the difference between a logical argument and an emotional statement? I’m asking this seriously. Not all schools teach this, and not everyone does know the difference.

 

[sw85]

What amazing **** in this thread.

Folks, homosexuality is a grave moral evil even apart from its consequences.

Therefore it is not necessary to say “but homosexuality leads to X, Y, and Z bad things” to justify your stance against it.

Homosexuality is itself a bad thing.

It is a bad thing even homosexuals make wonderful foster parents and even if their children grow up to be intelligent, successful people.

All that’s important to know is that homosexuality is a mortal sin, and the scandalous acceptance of homosexuality is also a mortal sin. The kid who was the object of this post (who it seems everyone has forgotten, leftist star-of-the-moment that he was – and here some were panicking he was a mortal blow to the Church’s opposition to SSM!) is not on the path to Heaven. He is convinced the Church evil and his parents are good. So, if absolutely nothing else, growing up with two lesbians has warped his moral sensibilities and very likely damned his soul.

It may well be true that homosexuality leads to other things, like STDs and pedophilia. You can even adduce studies to that effect. Doesn’t matter, because they aren’t essential to the argument. By arguing on those grounds you are playing into the left’s consequentialist zeitgeist, where a thing is only evil if it promotes pain and good if it promotes pleasure. This a nonsensical and evil principle and we shouldn’t cave in to it.

I think it’s mean to judge someone over sexual preference, even if the Bible tells us to… :nope:

I am proud to live in a state where gay marriage is legalized, and I guess that’s just one of the things me and the church will never see eye-to-eye on

In other words, your true religion is liberalism (which you make clear in your first sentence, when you say you’d rather be “nice” than true to the scriptures of your faith!).

Liberalism doesn’t save people. Christ does. I hope you repent of your heresies before it’s too late. I cannot imagine being so flippant in disregarding the teachings of the Church!

As for “judging” people, this is damnable nonsense. You have a duty in Christ to speak truth and to chastise sinners. This means telling them that they are sinning when they are sinning and calling them back to the path of righteousness. This is not mere “judging people,” it is doing your duty – and failure to do your duty is itself a mortal sin.

 

[LJH_80]

sw85

While I don’t agree with all of your positions, they are logically consistent and well spoken. Thank you for helping me, from the other side, to frame the argument in its correct context.

 

[severus68]

What amazing **** in this thread.

Folks, homosexuality is a grave moral evil even apart from its consequences.

Therefore it is not necessary to say “but homosexuality leads to X, Y, and Z bad things” to justify your stance against it.

Homosexuality is itself a bad thing.

It is a bad thing even homosexuals make wonderful foster parents and even if their children grow up to be intelligent, successful people.

All that’s important to know is that homosexuality is a mortal sin, and the scandalous acceptance of homosexuality is also a mortal sin. The kid who was the object of this post (who it seems everyone has forgotten, leftist star-of-the-moment that he was – and here some were panicking he was a mortal blow to the Church’s opposition to SSM!) is not on the path to Heaven. He is convinced the Church evil and his parents are good. So, if absolutely nothing else, growing up with two lesbians has warped his moral sensibilities and very likely damned his soul.

It may well be true that homosexuality leads to other things, like STDs and pedophilia. You can even adduce studies to that effect. Doesn’t matter, because they aren’t essential to the argument. By arguing on those grounds you are playing into the left’s consequentialist zeitgeist, where a thing is only evil if it promotes pain and good if it promotes pleasure. This a nonsensical and evil principle and we shouldn’t cave in to it.

In other words, your true religion is liberalism (which you make clear in your first sentence, when you say you’d rather be “nice” than true to the scriptures of your faith!).

Liberalism doesn’t save people. Christ does. I hope you repent of your heresies before it’s too late. I cannot imagine being so flippant in disregarding the teachings of the Church!

As for “judging” people, this is damnable nonsense. You have a duty in Christ to speak truth and to chastise sinners. This means telling them that they are sinning when they are sinning and calling them back to the path of righteousness. This is not mere “judging people,” it is doing your duty – and failure to do your duty is itself a mortal sin.

I do not know why this thread is still on but I will just respond to two things you have said:

1. Homosexuality itself is not a mortal sin etc to the Catholic Church. The sin is in homosexual acts;
2. You have no right to condemn anyone and say his soul is damned. Only God decides.

 

[sw85]

sw85

While I don’t agree with all of your positions, they are logically consistent and well spoken. Thank you for helping me, from the other side, to frame the argument in its correct context.

Thanks for the kind words!

I do not know why this thread is still on but I will just respond to two things you have said:

1. Homosexuality itself is not a mortal sin etc to the Catholic Church. The sin is in homosexual acts;
2. You have no right to condemn anyone and say his soul is damned. Only God decides.

1. Homosexual acts are what I meant, though I admit my language was imprecise; I am not ignorant of the relevant theological issues here, having posted on them a number of times. Thanks for the clarification, though, which is one I should’ve made in my own post.
2. I have not condemned anyone. I made the extremely qualified statement that the person referred to in the OP is not on the path to Heaven, being outside the Church and mortally sinning, and moreover that condition is due to his upbringing. This is not a remarkable statement: unrepented mortal sins damn souls. This is true even if we cannot know if any particular mortal sin has damned any particular soul.

 

[kelcca]

Being homosexual is a sin, have homosexual thoughts is a sin and being involved in the homosexually life style is a sin. Regardless of what the church say’s or what the CCC say’s it is a grave sin, and for some one to be referring to themselves as a celebrate homosexual christian or catholic is a sin and totally delusional on there part. For a man to lust after a woman in thought or action is a sin say’s Jesus, so therefore for a gay man to lust after another man in thought or in action is a sin. But this is how the new catholic church and new ccc twist the words of God and the faith. There is no place for people who are openly supporting or practicing homosexuality in the church, and I should know I was a militant, left wing, bisexual man and I can tell you from experience it is a life style from hell.

 

[speakttruth]

Amen:thumbsup:

What amazing **** in this thread.

Folks, homosexuality is a grave moral evil even apart from its consequences.

Therefore it is not necessary to say “but homosexuality leads to X, Y, and Z bad things” to justify your stance against it.

Homosexuality is itself a bad thing.

It is a bad thing even homosexuals make wonderful foster parents and even if their children grow up to be intelligent, successful people.

All that’s important to know is that homosexuality is a mortal sin, and the scandalous acceptance of homosexuality is also a mortal sin. The kid who was the object of this post (who it seems everyone has forgotten, leftist star-of-the-moment that he was – and here some were panicking he was a mortal blow to the Church’s opposition to SSM!) is not on the path to Heaven. He is convinced the Church evil and his parents are good. So, if absolutely nothing else, growing up with two lesbians has warped his moral sensibilities and very likely damned his soul.

It may well be true that homosexuality leads to other things, like STDs and pedophilia. You can even adduce studies to that effect. Doesn’t matter, because they aren’t essential to the argument. By arguing on those grounds you are playing into the left’s consequentialist zeitgeist, where a thing is only evil if it promotes pain and good if it promotes pleasure. This a nonsensical and evil principle and we shouldn’t cave in to it.

In other words, your true religion is liberalism (which you make clear in your first sentence, when you say you’d rather be “nice” than true to the scriptures of your faith!).

Liberalism doesn’t save people. Christ does. I hope you repent of your heresies before it’s too late. I cannot imagine being so flippant in disregarding the teachings of the Church!

As for “judging” people, this is damnable nonsense. You have a duty in Christ to speak truth and to chastise sinners. This means telling them that they are sinning when they are sinning and calling them back to the path of righteousness. This is not mere “judging people,” it is doing your duty – and failure to do your duty is itself a mortal sin.

 

[speakttruth]

Homosexuality means acts, that is a mortal sin. The inclination to Same sex attraction is not a sin. The courage web site gives you a much better picture of how we should view homosexuality. No one is condemning the person to hell, only God can do that, but we are to judge right from wrong. You can judge the actions are immoral and speak the truth. Do you judge pornography to be wrong.? You are obligated to do that. What is wrong with some of you? Ask one of the moderators on here if you don’t understand your faith. There is also a priest on here. Are you on here to learn your faith or argue for homosexuality. Go to another site if you don’t want to follow the Catholic faith, we are not here to hear heresies. We don’t follow the world, we are Catholics. This is a Catholic Forum.
God have mercy on us all!

I do not know why this thread is still on but I will just respond to two things you have said:

1. Homosexuality itself is not a mortal sin etc to the Catholic Church. The sin is in homosexual acts;
2. You have no right to condemn anyone and say his soul is damned. Only God decides.

 

[Tigress]

It isn’t mean to want people to go to heaven, for goodness sake. We judge right from wrong actions, not the person himself, or condemnation of anyone, That is God’s job. Do you judge murder to be wrong? Your talking about feelings we don’t go by our feelings one day their up, one day their down. We use our intelligence. Go buy a little book the daily bread and you will learn how to love God and follow Jesus. Do you tell someone it’s OK to do anything so that they can be damned to hell? If you love them you tell the truth. God didn’t make rules because he is mean, he made them because he loves us and he knows better for all eternity, you love him, you don’t fornicate the temple. Sex outside of Marriage between only a man and women is wrong. It’s about loving him, not yourself. Go back to your Catechism . Proud is a sin in this case and if your for gay marriage, then your in mortal sin right now. That means you know better than God? I would run to confession. I want you to go to heaven too. Think about it, it is lent. He died so you can be saved from yourself. Because you need him.
God bless

What? I don’t judge people by right or wrong actions as a person. I’ve known sweet, loving, kind, intelligent, and overall wonderful people who’ve made horrible choices (having sex from age eleven up, stealing, etc) but even though they’re not the ideal human I still love them for who they really are.

I said that I will not judge someone, I will not hate someone, and I will not deem someone evil for something as trivial as sexual preference. I am proud to live in a society where someone doesn’t have to become a victim of prestigious just for being open and for accepting that of which they can’t control. If people like that are going to Hell, the people who are open minded and forgiving enough to love someone for who they are not the simplest of choices they make, then bring me to Hell. I’m sure, by that logic, that I’ll get along just fine.

I’m sorry, but if “loving thy neighbor” without limitation makes me a sinner, well…

But hey, maybe it’s because I’m new to this. Maybe it was because I was born and raised without religion. Because of that I was raised to love freely without limitation. I was raised not to judge. I was never told homosexuality is “bad”, I was simply taught that we are all humans. So sorry if not wanting to judge someone makes me a bad person and means I’m heading to the gates of hell.

God didn’t make rules because he is mean

I’m not talking about God, I’m talking about me. I find it wrong for a human to judge and hate an other human over sexuality.

 

[speakttruth]

The CCC does say it is an intrinsic evil, and teaches homosexuality is wrong, unfortunately they should use the word Same sex attraction, not homosexual, when they talk about the IINCLINATION. Meaning the attraction, they can’t help the attraction, that is not a sin. But no where does it say it not a grave sin to act out. Temptation is not a sin, only when we start to entertain and enjoy those thoughts they become sinful. What Catechism are you reading?
:

Being homosexual is a sin, have homosexual thoughts is a sin and being involved in the homosexually life style is a sin. Regardless of what the church say’s or what the CCC say’s it is a grave sin, and for some one to be referring to themselves as a celebrate homosexual christian or catholic is a sin and totally delusional on there part. For a man to lust after a woman in thought or action is a sin say’s Jesus, so therefore for a gay man to lust after another man in thought or in action is a sin. But this is how the new catholic church and new ccc twist the words of God and the faith. There is no place for people who are openly supporting or practicing homosexuality in the church, and I should know I was a militant, left wing, bisexual man and I can tell you from experience it is a life style from hell.

 

[Tigress]

In other words, your true religion is liberalism (which you make clear in your first sentence, when you say you’d rather be “nice” than true to the scriptures of your faith!).

Liberalism doesn’t save people. Christ does. I hope you repent of your heresies before it’s too late. I cannot imagine being so flippant in disregarding the teachings of the Church!

As for “judging” people, this is damnable nonsense. You have a duty in Christ to speak truth and to chastise sinners. This means telling them that they are sinning when they are sinning and calling them back to the path of righteousness. This is not mere “judging people,” it is doing your duty – and failure to do your duty is itself a mortal sin.

What isn’t a mortal sin!?

Honestly I have no idea what any of that means.Honestly I have no knowledge on anything at all when it comes to the stricter part of religion as I was raised loosely within the confines of Christianity. I was taught that good people who are nice and forgiving go to Heaven and evil people like killers and blokes of the sort go to Hell. Simple.
Then I go to this forum and everything about my belief system has been turned on its head. I guess I’m going to Hell, then, even though I donate to charities, pray every night, volunteer and local animal shelters, work as a foster owner, and volunteer at the zoo- all at the age of fourteen. So be it. No, I’m not trying to commit vanity or anything; I’m not saying I’m perfect, but I’m saying something like being “pro-marriage” (is that the term?), but I’m trying to make a point- I do just as many good things as I do bad.

 

[rturner76]

TIgress, you aren’t going to hell and neither is any person for their sexual prefrence. I challenge anybody to show where Christ addresses sexuality directly in the Bible. He doesn’t. In fact he says “Judge not lest you be judged.” He says “Let he who is without sin cast the first stine.” He says something like before you tell your brother about the spec in his eye, take the plank out of your own eye." Don’t let some self richeous hipocrite tell you who not to love. Jesus Christ left us with 2 commandments. Love God and Love your neighbor period. God bless you for being willing to love someone enough to withstand punishment for them because that is what Christ did. These so called do gooders don’t care about anybody but themelves thinking they are so holy. They are no better than any other sinner just like me. I’m no better than them. We are all under sin and that’s why we need a savior.

GOd bless you Tigress, I just had to say that.

 

[Tigress]

TIgress, you aren’t going to hell and neither is any person for their sexual prefrence. I challenge anybody to show where Christ addresses sexuality directly in the Bible. He doesn’t. In fact he says “Judge not lest you be judged.” He says “Let he who is without sin cast the first stine.” He says something like before you tell your brother about the spec in his eye, take the plank out of your own eye." Don’t let some self richeous hipocrite tell you who not to love. Jesus Christ left us with 2 commandments. Love God and Love your neighbor period. God bless you for being willing to love someone enough to withstand punishment for them because that is what Christ did. These so called do gooders don’t care about anybody but themelves thinking they are so holy. They are no better than any other sinner just like me. I’m no better than them. We are all under sin and that’s why we need a savior.

GOd bless you Tigress, I just had to say that.

Thank you so much… I appreciate this post more than you’d think.

It’s hard for me to explain my thoughts on this without it looking like I’m disrespectful of God. I’d like to think I’d withstand punishment if it means loving others fairly without judgement, but at the same time, does that mean I’m rebelling against God by forcing myself away from his grace? Agh! Ever since I’ve joined simple decisions have become so much harder :banghead: