Christian couple lose their High Court battle to foster children because they are against homosexual

Originally posted by Sicksicksick

Babies should be given both a mother and a father, not two mothers or two fathers.

They only thing babies should be given is love.

Originally posted by Sicksicksick

Babies should be given both a mother and a father, not two mothers or two fathers.

Opposite gender parents is completely unnecessary.

Babies/children need love and nurturing. They don't care what the gender is.

The only people who have a problem are "outsiders" like you.

Church is no place to be talking about cunnilingus, anal sex, or any kind of sex. Many Christian organizations have become hate groups. They are listed among the neo-nazis. They should go back to being a love group. Leave the sex, violence and politics out of church.

reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist


Very interesting. Isn't a member of nearly any Abrahamic religion, "anti" other religions also? Think about it. If you're a christian you would raise the kid not to be a muslim. If you're a muslim you would raise the kid not to be a jew. If your'e a jew you would raise the kid not to be either, etc. So what's next? Anybody that has any religious belief is too intolerant to raise a child? We're becoming an anemic civilization (Western Civilization). We used to value robust freedom of speech and a market place of ideas, now we preach the same 'values' but its just a hollowed out version that encourages a society that believes in nothing.

reply to post by The Djin


My take on gay marriage is that a man and a man or woman and woman should they choose to be life partners should be granted the same institutional (meaning government) privileges as a hetero sexual couple.

However, I don't condone homosexuality. We need to define marriage. There is a spiritual/religious definition of it and there is the government/institutional definition. The two should be distinguished.

And to your point, no matter how much man an man have relations, they cannot have a natural child. They have to defy nature via science to do so.

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun

And to your point, no matter how much man an man have relations, they cannot have a natural child. They have to defy nature via science to do so.

Yet the married couple in church who has been childless - - - and is now able to conceive through modern technology is blessed and prayed for.

Often an egg or sperm is from a donor. Making the child not their natural child.

reply to post by Annee


I don't agree with that. I understand what your saying but trust me when I say I am as critical of the institution of church as the non Christians.

People want children so bad, they can't accept that they are incapable of doing so. Adopt a child. Plenty of kids who are parent-less.

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
reply to post by Annee

 

I don't agree with that. I understand what your saying but trust me when I say I am as critical of the institution of church as the non Christians.

People want children so bad, they can't accept that they are incapable of doing so. Adopt a child. Plenty of kids who are parent-less.

What part don't you agree with?

A hetero couple going through medical procedures to have a child - - - will be celebrated in their church.

These same people condemn a gay couple for doing the same thing - - - saying they are incapable of having a natural child.

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
Adopt a child. Plenty of kids who are parent-less.

Why is there like a 10 year wait to adopt an infant?

There are laws in many states against gay adoption.

reply to post by Annee


I don't know enough about the law to comment on the adoption law. But I was commenting first on the Christian using technology to have kids. That's what I don't completely agree with

However, there is a difference I think between scientific assistance and flat out tune babies.

With the couple that can't have a child, they're using science to assist what is natural.

But with a homosexual couple, they have to bring in a third party (usually of the opposite sex) to make children.

So I guess the question is, what do you consider ok for the kinds of technology for a gay couple to have kids? Like designer babies? Take the DNA from the parents and create a baby in a tube?

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun

However, there is a difference I think between scientific assistance and flat out tune babies.

With the couple that can't have a child, they're using science to assist what is natural.

But with a homosexual couple, they have to bring in a third party (usually of the opposite sex) to make children.

So I guess the question is, what do you consider ok for the kinds of technology for a gay couple to have kids? Like designer babies? Take the DNA from the parents and create a baby in a tube?

Many hetero couples need to bring in a third party as well. I made that point in previous post.

So - let me get this straight. You are saying: If a hetero couple and a gay couple go through the exact same procedures to produce a baby - - - the gay couple is still wrong - - because they can't produce a baby naturally.

Is that really what you are saying?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Leave the designer baby and DNA for another discussion.

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
reply to post by Annee

 

I don't know enough about the law to comment on the adoption law. But I was commenting first on the Christian using technology to have kids. That's what I don't completely agree with

However, there is a difference I think between scientific assistance and flat out tune babies.

With the couple that can't have a child, they're using science to assist what is natural.

But with a homosexual couple, they have to bring in a third party (usually of the opposite sex) to make children.

So I guess the question is, what do you consider ok for the kinds of technology for a gay couple to have kids? Like designer babies? Take the DNA from the parents and create a baby in a tube?

That is so ridiculous. If a heterosexual couple can't have a baby, using technology to assist them to have one is natural but a for homosexual couple who have an egg with the came technology it's unnatural?

Honestly how much stupidity do I have to read before I can just say, "that's stupid"?

It's one or the bloody other! Natural or unnatural! Not one rule for these guys and another for those guys.