Same-Sex Couples Could Create Children

This is great news for the many responsible same-sex couples who want to be parents. Great news

reply to post by rizla


I couldn't agree more!

I agree with other members that there is the concern of deformalities as a result. But there is always risk invloved with medical achievements. Hopefully they will "figure it all out" before it becomes mainstream.

A child doesn't necessarily need a male and female parent - that's just society talking. What a child needs is loving parents, so it could be guy-guy, girl-girl, guy-girl, guy-girl-girl, guy-guy-girl-girl, etc. It doesn't matter.

Excellent news to read!

And after all the drama the Christian-Right(wrong) created over gays adopting children, I am frankly not surprised to see them flying back down from the belfry shrieking when this comes up.

Thing is, whether those same people like it or not, technology is moving forward, this is going to happen, and there really isn't much that they can do about it.

reply to post by niteboy82


So, you're ALL for cloning???
GMO crops are wonderful, too?

reply to post by Clearskies


I don't plan on eating my babies, I am not very Dahmer-esque.

And for the record, GMO foods do not concern me all that much. I smoke cigarettes like a freight train, so GMO is not really on the top of my list. I also use saccharin in my iced coffee, and cook with Magnalite (aluminum) pans.

I never said that people have been saying hetrosexuals shouldn't procreate. Except well for China and NWO type peoples that would find a larger population impossible to controll..

My opinion... yeah it is and Im sure a few other people share it as well. We have been designed that way for a purpose.

Im illustrating that if he can attack me for being "close minded" I can in turn show how ignorant he are if you sit idle by and let people do what they want and think there wont be consequences. Either that or he doesn't care.

I get the feeling we wont see eye to eye on this and people hold to darely to thier own beliefs to look at something objectively. This may be me calling the kettle black but just think about something before you welcome it with open arms.. It is wonderous what science can do and I am open to new discoveries but some things should not be fukt with.

I can see the headlines now on Craig's list; Whomb for sale barely used. Apply within.

How bout a kid with just yourself? MrsCartman style! Oh yeah!

reply to post by MrsEsterhouse


Far too funny! On craigslist, I am surprised that it isn't already there somewhere!

I must say, I like your avatar.

reply to post by MrsEsterhouse


Who is MrsCartman?
Just curious.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by Yosimitie Sam
You are just pointing out the bad without giving credit for the good. If the churches didn't do it NOBODY would be doing it.

When determining the overall value of something you have to weigh the pros versus the cons. In this case, many of us feel, myself included!, that the good things the Churches do, is far outweighed by the abuse and ignorance it breeds.

BTW what good thing are you speaking of that the Church does that NOBODY else is doing? I am curious.

[edit on 033030p://16u46 by Lucid Lunacy]

I guess you would have to get involved and see for yourself. Food drives, collecting old eyeglasses and refurbishing frames then donating them to kids that can't afford them. Donating out time and teaching inner city kids how to refit old homes using sustainable materials. We have housed and cared for hundreds and hundreds of Aids victims and not one complained about having religion forced down their throats.

Not one report of someone being water boarded into accepting Christ. They knew we didn't approve of the lifestyles many were living but we didn't harp on it and eventually they realized the kind of caring people most Christians are were no differen't than anyone else as we all know we are a very weak and easily tempted flawed people.

While many ridicule the money we give to our churhes justifying that ridicule is typically done by taking some extreme circumstance where a Church has a corrupt leader, and he bilks everyone making himself rich.

Yeah it happens in rare case where the Church doesn't have a Church Government but those are the exceptions to the rule and most Atheists take that, sensationalize it, embellish to the point where now we see History getting re-written where the salem witch trials killed thousands when 20 was the number. They bring up the crusades over and over and over and when you ask, what is the point of this, they say religion is evil. That's just bull, While Atheists make their lifes mission picking out the faults in this religion or that one, they seem to pay an inordinate amount of time, pre-occupied with Christians and Christianity.

They claim so much evil was done in the name of Christianity then deny the millions and millions of Christians. Churchs generally do a lot more good then most people know. The evil done in Religions name can convict religious as participants of conspiracy to do this or that, but that is all you will hear about. Most Christians believe in the combined efforts of the Church as an effective leverage for getting better results.

Atheists do nothing for the world and believe in nothing, having no agenda other than to persecute Christians. Since it is their argument, they didn't kill anyone in the name of Atheism, then they cannot claim the credit for any good they do either.

ha ha "any good they do"


as if!


- Con

I've tried to resist wading into this quagmire of a thread. But as the saying goes "Resistance is futile".

Although I recognize the species imperitive to reproduce or perish, I am personally more concerned with the quality of life issues presented by an increasingly unsupportable global population.

That having been said, I acknowledge the basic instinct, (I, personally would argue however, that the instinct is not Universal; merely dominent) Humans, both gay and straight, are, by-and-large "driven" to reproduce.

In my opinion, much like sexual orientation itself, attempting to deny a certain segment of the human species an opportunity to procreate infringes dangerously close upon the basis of humanity, and civilization.


If certain individuals within the human population might be benefited by technology (which one might argue is, itself, a product of humanity's over-arching fecundity) in their personal efforts to contribute to the ever-growing gene pool...so be it!


Diversity insures survivability. The origin of that diversity is to be celebrated, in that it ultimately contributes to the survival of the whole.


As to Homosexuality, I do not think in matters whether one is "born" gay or "Chooses" to be gay. Sexuality is a personal expression: it is intrisic to the individual and as inseparable in its immediate expression from the individual as one of the person's limbs. You are what you are, by choice or Nature. As long as you harm no one willing to risk harm, or be harmed, no one has the right to invalidate who you are.


Homophobia is, in my opinion, more the product of truama induced by poor potty training, than any moral imperative.


Just consider the implicit/explicit focus of those most vehement in their condemnation of the orientation.

In the spirit of this thread I think MrsCartman will play the part of the spouse of the OP, who even considering his advanced age is once again, thru medical science able to maintain erections and desperatly wants a child. Unfortunatly, this was impossible until recently, you see MrsCartman is a transexual. Now thanks to the wonders of Science, they can have a child.


After the birth of this child, they will be moving into the closest sock drawer of the first Christian Conservative they can find. Seems someone needs to replenish their sock puppets.





[edit on 16-4-2008 by pavlovsdog]

Originally posted by ka0s69
Im illustrating that if he can attack me for being "close minded" I can in turn show how ignorant he arehow ignorant he are if you sit idle by and let people do what they want and think there wont be consequences. Either that or he doesn't care.

Bolding is mine. "How ignorant he are"? I can't make this stuff up, it's just amazing.

I get the feeling we wont see eye to eye on this and people hold to darely to thier own beliefs to look at something objectively. This may be me calling the kettle black but just think about something before you welcome it with open arms.. It is wonderous what science can do and I am open to new discoveries but some things should not be fukt with.

Sorry, kaOS69, but because of the way you present yourself, it appears you have not done your research. Or maybe English isn't your second language? If so, I sincerely apologize.

reply to post by Clearskies


From the show South Park. Mrs. Cartman is one of the main characters mom's until a show where you find out she also was the dad. Strange I know. But funny!

reply to post by niteboy82


I like yours as well.

reply to post by MrsEsterhouse


Thank you so much!
So much more weird stuff than when I was a child! (the 70's)

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy


As it indeed should! As Jesus Christ didn't say anything on the issue of homosexuality. They always post the words of others in the Bible to support that notion, and indeed, it's almost always from the OT that the New Convenant supposedly saved them from. Hipocracy. They bathe in it.

Oh really?? First of all,, the New testament makes patent in the present what the old testament prophesied in the future. The new covenant doesn't give anyone of us a get out of jail free card NOR does it change Gods position on sin and yes Homosexuality is a Sin Period, Ipso Facto!

You believe you can get cute shuffling the conextual circumstances playing situational politics and circular semantics but while not everything the Bible says,, the Bible endorses, one thing it is absolutely clear about is that Homosexuality is an ABOMINATION in Gods eyes.

That means the reader is assumed he has the common sense to know Jesus wouldn't HAVE to be asked such a stupid question as to whether he "personally" genuinely thinks so too.

This isn't traffic court and you don't get out on such a flimsy technicality. Not that it would matter anyway, because frankly,, Homosexuals would just rationalize another reason they just can't help themselves.

The would and they think they must make what they do in bed everyone elses business and make it a political football when they are a smaller minority with a sexual bent that I not only have every right to disagree with but when they piss me off calling me a bigot, they pretty much become stupid enough to get just what they asked for.

I see the same kind of lousy salesmanship used by them all the time and then they wonder why and think it REALLY is about the kind of sex they have LOL.

They must continue to live their lives centred around their right to make sex an issue when it isn't. It is about the self centered idea we need to put the sexualist on a pedastal for their selfish indulgence.

All about their favourite loved ones.

Themselves.

- Con


[edit on 16-4-2008 by Conspiriology]

reply to post by forestlady


Actually ForestLady I was running out the door and didnt get a chance to spell check. Engilish is my first language. OH NO I MADE A SPELLING MISTAKE haha poor me.

Im are at work haha

Originally posted by niteboy82

And for the record, GMO foods do not concern me all that much. I smoke cigarettes like a freight train, so GMO is not really on the top of my list. I also use saccharin in my iced coffee, and cook with Magnalite (aluminum) pans.

lmao...

well you can't say this one is in denial!! hahaha