homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Should homosexuals be allowed to adopt children? (Page 4)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Should homosexuals be allowed to adopt children?
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Marton, I think you need to study this website for a while.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marton
Shipmate
# 11332

 - Posted      Profile for Marton         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Marton, I think you need to study this website for a while.

Mmmmm looks riveting. I'll be sure to.
Posts: 89 | From: gone for good | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
TonyK

Host Emeritus
# 35

 - Posted      Profile for TonyK   Email TonyK   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Marton - apprentices are normally cut some slack for their first few posts, so this is by way of hostly advice rather than a warning.

Other Shipmates have intimated that you are in danger of breaking Commandment 8 - one of those Commandments that you agreed to when you registered. If you need a reminder click the appropriate text in the blue area on the left of your screen.

These are Discussion Boards - which require that you argue/defend/support your case. Constantly making and repeating bald statements is crusading or trolling - and not allowed here.

Please take this friendly warning in the spirit in which it is made. If it is not clear, please contact me directly by Private Message or email.

Yours aye ... TonyK
Host, Dead Horses

Posts: 2717 | From: Gloucestershire | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Righteous Rebel
Ship's Hobbit Lover
# 7524

 - Posted      Profile for Righteous Rebel   Author's homepage   Email Righteous Rebel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Certainly homosexuals should be allowed to adopt children. After all, heterosexuals don't have to go through "Childrearing 101" before they enter into sexual congress, whether or not the intent is to have children. [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
To be or not to be: is there really any question?

Posts: 223 | From: Blue Ridge Mtns., TN USA | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Rex Monday

None but a blockhead
# 2569

 - Posted      Profile for Rex Monday   Email Rex Monday   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Littlelady:


[...]

My sister has struggled with her identity in recent years but is working through it. She didn't suffer any form of racism at school or teasing/bullying for being adopted. Given that at high school she was the only non-white student in 2000 kids, I think she was extremely fortunate.

[...]


At the risk of tangentalism, I think that if you're one in two thousand you're less likely to suffer from prejudice than if you're one of two hundred in two thousand. Prejudice surfaces in response to a perceived threat, and communities rarely feel threatened by an individual.

Human behaviour and happenstance being what they are, the world is and always has been full of kids growing up outside the 'ideal' family, with all manner and combinations of carers. It seems unduly harsh and pointless to pick one particular configuration and say "although you have a loving and stable relationship, coherent and well-run lives, and a clear desire and capability for a family, Thou Shalt Not.".

I'd worry about the children in council care first...

R

--------------------
I am largely against organised religion, which is why I am so fond of the C of E.

Posts: 514 | From: Gin Lane | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Chorister

Completely Frocked
# 473

 - Posted      Profile for Chorister   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
After saying way back in 2002(!) on the early pages of this thread that I've come across this in a voluntary context (Children's Society local secretary) life has taken an interesting turn. I now know someone who has become a close friend of the family who left her birth parent under very difficult circumstances. Being very young and therefore potentially vulnerable, she was told by the social services that they were placing her with a gay couple - 'you'll be safe there', she was told. And they were right. They were very caring people and a difficult situation was put as right as it could be under the circumstances.

--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.

Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
the_raptor
Shipmate
# 10533

 - Posted      Profile for the_raptor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Righteous Rebel:
After all, heterosexuals don't have to go through "Childrearing 101" before they enter into sexual congress, whether or not the intent is to have children. [Roll Eyes]

Though they should have to pass such a course.

--------------------
Mal: look at this! Appears we got here just in the nick of time. What does that make us?
Zoe: Big damn heroes, sir!
Mal: Ain't we just?
— Firefly

Posts: 3921 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Mishkle
Shipmate
# 11381

 - Posted      Profile for Mishkle   Email Mishkle   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My opinion on this issue is: No they should not be allowed to.

I am friends with several homosexuals and have talked about this on occasion. My feelings are that having children is a privilage, not a right.
Every child has the right to have a Mother and a Father. For obvious reasons, we cannot ask children to make the choice between having a homosexual/lesbian parents and having hetrosexual parents. It would be unfair on the child.

We have no idea what the future outcomes would be. The child could be harassed at school or driven into depression or have some form of mental disruption as a result. We cannot be completely certain what the outcome would be. It could indeed be positive!

Posts: 142 | From: United States | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
John Holding

Coffee and Cognac
# 158

 - Posted      Profile for John Holding   Email John Holding   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
"Every child has a right to have a mother and a father"

So what are you going to do to deal with the large number who have one or the other, but not both?

Does having a mother AND a father guarantee anything at all about the quality of the upbringing or the home life? Sadly, but clearly, not.

So what's wrong with having two fathers or two mothers instead of a single mother (no father)?

And what's wrong with a loving, supportive two parent (same sex) household in comparison with an abusive, destructive two parent house that's okay because the two parents are of different sexes?

After all, we're not talking about forcing anyone to go and live with same-sex couples. Nor are we suggesting that all same-sex couples have a right to have kids...any more than we grant all hetero couples the right to have kids...right... You can't be saying that all hetero couples have such a right, after all, since it is manifestly untrue that simply having one parent of each sex guarantees anything at all about the quality of the child's upbringing.

John

Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Bullfrog.

Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014

 - Posted      Profile for Bullfrog.   Email Bullfrog.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
I am friends with several homosexuals and have talked about this on occasion. My feelings are that having children is a privilage, not a right.
Parenting is a privilege. So is voting. There are conditions one must meet to be a good parent. How, specifically, are homosexual couples not meeting these conditions?

quote:
Every child has the right to have a Mother and a Father. For obvious reasons, we cannot ask children to make the choice between having a homosexual/lesbian parents and having hetrosexual parents. It would be unfair on the child.
Nobody ever has a choice about what their parents are like, just like nobody can ever ask for a child with a given set of attributes (at least not now). This is true of biological and adopted children. I fail to see how being someone's child is ever a choice. And once again, I fail to see what's so abherrent about homosexual parents that makes them so specifically unfit for parenting.

quote:
We have no idea what the future outcomes would be. The child could be harassed at school or driven into depression or have some form of mental disruption as a result. We cannot be completely certain what the outcome would be. It could indeed be positive!
If you take that paragraph out of the context of homosexuality, you could say that about life for any child on the face of the planet (well, except for the going to school part). Life does that to everyone, not just the adoptees of homosexual people. Why does it apply especially to homosexual parents?

--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg

Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Caz...
Shipmate
# 3026

 - Posted      Profile for Caz...   Email Caz...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dammit mirrizin, you covered every point I want to make. And in the same order, too! [Biased]

--------------------
"What have you been reading? The Gospel according to St. Bastard?" - Eddie Izzard

Posts: 1888 | From: here to there | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
RainbowKate
Shipmate
# 9331

 - Posted      Profile for RainbowKate   Email RainbowKate   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mishkle:

The child could be harassed at school or driven into depression or have some form of mental disruption as a result. We cannot be completely certain what the outcome would be.

That pretty much describes my childhood being raised by the "All-American" middle-class, heterosexual, married Christian couple. Having heterosexual parents is certainly not the answer to a trauma free childhood.
Posts: 1227 | From: Left at the loophole | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Mishkle,
I realise you're quite new - you do know you're meant to read these threads through or in the case of the larger ones the last ten pages at least before replying?

You need to have a good look at what other posters have said before you, and engage with it. Though this is not the Hell board, these are hot button topics and posting a string of unsupported assertions is not a great idea - unless you want people down on you like a ton of bricks!

cheers

L.

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishkle
Shipmate
# 11381

 - Posted      Profile for Mishkle   Email Mishkle   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Cheers Louise. Will do next time. However, for this time, I'm just going to keep going with this and abuse my position as a Apprentice. I emplore your forgiveness.

However, I will not retract any comments made by me. Fact still remains that the natural way to have a child is for a male and female to have intercourse and conceive.

Nobody here is aware of my sexual orientation so they should not persecute me for things I am saying as I could well be stating that I would prefer to be disadvantaged through non-hetrosexual activity.

John Holding: Yes every child does have a right to a mother and father. Life has its ups and downs though and sometimes that is not fulfilled. Doesn't mean we shouldn't give each child that opportunity though does it?
And no it does not gaurantee that the child will be "problem free". It has worked for centuries though has it not?
Nothing at all wrong with having two Parents who love their child completely. Doesn't matter if one is a panda and one is a drag queen from the Artic Circle. But it goes back to that "Right's" thing.

quote:

Parenting is a privilege. So is voting. There are conditions one must meet to be a good parent. How, specifically, are homosexual couples not meeting these conditions?

I don't believe I said they would not make good parents did I?

mirrizin: You quoted my statement about children being more likely to get a hard time at school from having alternative sexually orientated parents. Forgive my rudeness, but are you honestly naieve enough to believe that children would not make fun of another child whose parents were homosexual or lesbian?

quote:

Why does it apply especially to homosexual parents?

I never said it did.

quote:

Having heterosexual parents is certainly not the answer to a trauma free childhood.

Again, I never said it was. One of my closest friends went through hell when he came out of the closet at school. Do you think if he had stood infront of a croud of students and said "Hey everyone, I had sex with this really hot Girl in the weekend" he would be harassed for it? If he said the alternate, I believe he would not enjoy school for very long.

If you want to go against the grain (And sorry, I will not be politically correct on this), and be a homosexual or lesbian, you must accept that through that choice you realise you should not be having, or adpoting children, for the childs sake. It is completely selfish. You are after personal gratification from it and have no idea what that child may think in the future.
A child of say 12 or 13 may be different I must admit, but certainly not an infant. Sweeping statement? Yes. And I'm proud of it.

I hope none of you hold anything I say against me, or have an incomplete view of who I am from these words.
This is indeed a topic that gets my blood rushing.

Posts: 142 | From: United States | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
If you want to go against the grain (And sorry, I will not be politically correct on this), and be a homosexual or lesbian, you must accept that through that choice
Erm - when did you choose to be heterosexual? You didn't. In the same way, no-one chooses to be homosexual. They find that they are.

This may underly some of your problems with this.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishkle
Shipmate
# 11381

 - Posted      Profile for Mishkle   Email Mishkle   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Perhaps you did not read my post fully. I have not claimed to be a hetrosexual or a homosexual.
I am well aware becoming a homosexual is not always a choice and is something that just happens.


By keeping this annomyous I can avoid such comments.

Posts: 142 | From: United States | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Caz...
Shipmate
# 3026

 - Posted      Profile for Caz...   Email Caz...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mishkle:
If you want to go against the grain (And sorry, I will not be politically correct on this), and be a homosexual or lesbian, you must accept that through that choice you realise you should not be having, or adpoting children, for the childs sake. It is completely selfish.

And I don't think the point is your personal orientation. That's not what Karl's saying. He's saying that it's not a choice. And you did say that it was a choice - see my italics above. Did you mean something different then? Or is it only selfish when people have chosen their orientation?

I don't actually know anyone who has chosen their orientation. Or how you would do that.

[ 19. May 2006, 09:48: Message edited by: Caz... ]

--------------------
"What have you been reading? The Gospel according to St. Bastard?" - Eddie Izzard

Posts: 1888 | From: here to there | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishkle
Shipmate
# 11381

 - Posted      Profile for Mishkle   Email Mishkle   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ah, I see what you mean. Ok, I'll have to take that one (since I can't go back and edit [now I see why that function is limited]).

I should of said "through the choice to live your life in that manner". It is selfish to think that you have the right to have a child whether you are homosexual, lesbian or alternative.

If you truely want a chid for this world, you would be prepared to sacrifice sexual activity for the rest of your life after one experience with a woman (or as many as it takes to conceive). I would sleep better at night if I knew that the man and woman in this case did truely love eachother, just didn't want the whole relationship part.

That may of not made sense, so I am expecting ridicule.

Posts: 142 | From: United States | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Caz...
Shipmate
# 3026

 - Posted      Profile for Caz...   Email Caz...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No ridicule from me [Smile]

But can I just clarify, for my own mind's sake, that the reason you don't think gay people should adopt is because of the ridicule that the child may face?

Is that the only reason?

If so, should disabled people not be able to have children either? Schoolchildren can be very mean about disabled parents. What about parents adopting a child from a different ethnicity?

And what about the alternative of leaving that child in care, either with a foster family or in a childrens home? Those would also invite ridicule from children in the playground, I have no doubt.

--------------------
"What have you been reading? The Gospel according to St. Bastard?" - Eddie Izzard

Posts: 1888 | From: here to there | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
John Holding

Coffee and Cognac
# 158

 - Posted      Profile for John Holding   Email John Holding   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mishkle:
However, I will not retract any comments made by me. Fact still remains that the natural way to have a child is for a male and female to have intercourse and conceive.

And what precisely does that have to do with whether or not same-sex couples can adopt? If you link ability to conceive with the ability to adopt, you effectively wipe out the vast majority of netero adoptions as well.

quote:
John Holding: Yes every child does have a right to a mother and father. Life has its ups and downs though and sometimes that is not fulfilled. Doesn't mean we shouldn't give each child that opportunity though does it?

The idea that a child has a "right" to anything at all, specifically to two parents of different sexes is a modern construct without a lot of basis in reality. Leaving aside conception, does it mean two of them in the child's life? If so, once again, a large number of het marriages would no longer qualify to adopt.

And how, just, do you propose to give that "right" to "all children"? You'd have to start by removing a whole boatload of children from the care of their single mothers or fathers, and from het households where one parent is usually absent.

quote:
And no it does not gaurantee that the child will be "problem free". It has worked for centuries though has it not?

No. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. And frequently, even when in place in theory, it's not there at all. Most of what "has worked2 is good parenting, and that's not a skill be definition limited to (or necessarily available in) het couples.

ns?
[/QUOTE]
mirrizin: You quoted my statement about children being more likely to get a hard time at school from having alternative sexually orientated parents. Forgive my rudeness, but are you honestly naieve enough to believe that children would not make fun of another child whose parents were homosexual or lesbian? [/quote]


Not mirrizim, and in fact out of my personal experience, but based on the evidence of people I know, including some on this SHip and indeed this thread, children do not necessarily make fun of others whose parents are gay or lesbian. At least, no more than they make fun of children whose parents are of a different colour, or who come from single parent homes, or who are mixed race, or who wear spectacles, or who look funny or who are intelligent, or who are poorer than most, or who don't like sports, or ...

quote:
One of my closest friends went through hell when he came out of the closet at school. Do you think if he had stood infront of a croud of students and said "Hey everyone, I had sex with this really hot Girl in the weekend" he would be harassed for it? If he said the alternate, I believe he would not enjoy school for very long.

Being gay is not the same as having sex with someone else. It's about who you'd want to have sex with if the circumstances allowed.

My kids seemed to have a pretty low level of tolerance for those at their school who were sexually active, regardless of which team they were playing on for the moment.

quote:

If you want to go against the grain (And sorry, I will not be politically correct on this), and be a homosexual or lesbian, you must accept that through that choice ...

Being gay is not a choice. And it's not a matter of being politically correct. It simply is not true. ANd explicit statements like this are highly insulting to all gay people. Including those of your mates who are gay. And I'll bet you have a few, even apart from the man you talked about above. Of course you may not know they are gay -- and with your attitude, I can well understand why you don't know.

John

Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Bullfrog.

Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014

 - Posted      Profile for Bullfrog.   Email Bullfrog.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:

mirrizin: You quoted my statement about children being more likely to get a hard time at school from having alternative sexually orientated parents. Forgive my rudeness, but are you honestly naieve enough to believe that children would not make fun of another child whose parents were homosexual or lesbian?

No. I never said that they wouldn't be treated unfairly, though I think that circumstance would depend largely on the neighborhood or school the kid grew up in. I would say that most kids in school get treated unfairly. There are always some kids who will find any possible excuse to pick on you.

Note, I'm not saying that it's a good idea for homosexuals to adopt merely because they can, or to make a "statement."

I just think that if two homosexual people want to adopt, especially in a world where god knows there aren't enough stable, loving, supportive straight couples out there, they should be allowed to, following the same procedures as straight couples.

Why choose, on the basis of other people's discrimination, or on the basis of one's own discimination, to deny them the privelege of raising a child? At the same time, why use the aforementioned to deny a child the right to a stable two parent household?

--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg

Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Mishkle
Shipmate
# 11381

 - Posted      Profile for Mishkle   Email Mishkle   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, I wasn't expecting such convuluted replies.

I've said what I can say, and certainly can't reply to any of these replies without more justificataion. Glad I passed by though, as you have certainly opened up my eyes to the issue significantly more.

Posts: 142 | From: United States | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Marton
Shipmate
# 11332

 - Posted      Profile for Marton         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Homosexuals need to stop being vocal - goodness knows we all know they're there already - and start realising that a sexually active human being of any gender is not behaving according to the will of god. And homosexual marriage?? That my friends is a just a joke and an idea that is truly bizarre, and ugly.

I accept that homosexuals exist obviously, and that there needs to be law changes to accommodate their needs such as pensions, house ownership and all that other "joint" stuff. But they need to leave the children alone. They cannot breed. The only way they have access to what hetero couples have in a natural god given way is through politically correct law systems.

They need to realise they are not living according to god's will if they're sexually active and pretending to be a "married couple" or otherwise. It'd be funny if it weren't so bizarre.

In the same way anyone that is sexually active and not married is not living according to god's will.

Posts: 89 | From: gone for good | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
aj

firewire technophobe
# 1383

 - Posted      Profile for aj   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Phew! Glad we've got that sorted, then. [Ultra confused]

I've just finished reading On Being Liked by James Alison. Best Christian book I've read in ages.

Posts: 2994 | From: ...on location | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marton:
Homosexuals need to stop being vocal - goodness knows we all know they're there already - and start realising that a sexually active human being of any gender is not behaving according to the will of god. And homosexual marriage?? That my friends is a just a joke and an idea that is truly bizarre, and ugly.

I accept that homosexuals exist obviously, and that there needs to be law changes to accommodate their needs such as pensions, house ownership and all that other "joint" stuff. But they need to leave the children alone. They cannot breed. The only way they have access to what hetero couples have in a natural god given way is through politically correct law systems.

They need to realise they are not living according to god's will if they're sexually active and pretending to be a "married couple" or otherwise. It'd be funny if it weren't so bizarre.

In the same way anyone that is sexually active and not married is not living according to god's will.

What I find bizarre, is how someone can think that a post like this reflects well on them and on the religion they practice. This is just a string of rambling assertions, couched in abusive language, with no attempt at argument or supporting evidence. All it provides is a great example of how not to argue a case.

L.

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And whom not to invite to your open house.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marton
Shipmate
# 11332

 - Posted      Profile for Marton         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hey I'm glad to be on the outer as far as all this "tolerance" goes.

As far as "reflecting" on my particular religion? Hahahah.

Again, happy to be a whipping boy if that's the case.

And if my views get me the bumsrush so be it.

Evidence as you call it is based on? Evidence of what? Promiscuity? Sanctity? What? See this is part of the problem with the church, the heirarchy's willingness to adopt the world's standards. And for what? To gain more converts? To appear hip or to appear relevant cause god is love? Well God is more than the world's insipid version of love and its demands on how god should be. God is also a god of war and the war is not against flesh but against powers and principalities. The church has got to regain its great state of holiness.

Posts: 89 | From: gone for good | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
samara
Shipmate
# 9932

 - Posted      Profile for samara   Email samara   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marton:
The church has got to regain its great state of holiness.

When did it have that and how could we tell?

--------------------
Bookworms will rule the world (after we finish the background reading).
Courtesy of Trouble in China

Posts: 439 | From: Canada | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
John Donne

Renaissance Man
# 220

 - Posted      Profile for John Donne     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Marton:
Again, happy to be a whipping boy if that's the case.

'Whipping boy'? That would imply you were an apologist for some sort of position. You have no position, merely unsupported opinions.

I classify you more correctly as a 'Sentient watered-down Chick tract'.

[ 20. May 2006, 04:18: Message edited by: The Coot ]

Posts: 13667 | From: Perth, W.A. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marton
Shipmate
# 11332

 - Posted      Profile for Marton         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Coot:
quote:
Marton:
Again, happy to be a whipping boy if that's the case.

'Whipping boy'? That would imply you were an apologist for some sort of position. You have no position, merely unsupported opinions.

I classify you more correctly as a 'Sentient watered-down Chick tract'.

You're right. No supported opinions. I suppose though that I support the biblical. Does that count? Probably not.
Posts: 89 | From: gone for good | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
John Donne

Renaissance Man
# 220

 - Posted      Profile for John Donne     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I would really love to meet a bible-believing Xtian. I wish they existed. Our world would be such a fantastic place of equity and social justice if even half of 1% of all the bible-believing Xtians really were bible-believing Xtians.

I trust you don't have any bank accounts earning interest and that you support the biblical notion of 'jubilee' - the wiping off of all debts after a certain number of years?

Maranatha! Come, Lord Jesus!

Posts: 13667 | From: Perth, W.A. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Psyduck

Ship's vacant look
# 2270

 - Posted      Profile for Psyduck   Author's homepage   Email Psyduck   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Marton:
quote:
and start realising that a sexually active human being of any gender is not behaving according to the will of god.
Am I the only one to find this a remarkable statement?

Not to mention unbiblical...

--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)

Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gracious rebel

Rainbow warrior
# 3523

 - Posted      Profile for Gracious rebel     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Psyduck:
Marton:
quote:
and start realising that a sexually active human being of any gender is not behaving according to the will of god.
Am I the only one to find this a remarkable statement?

Not to mention unbiblical...

Well I thought what he actually meant to say was 'a sexually active homosexual human being of any gender'.

--------------------
Fancy a break beside the sea in Suffolk? Visit my website

Posts: 4413 | From: Suffolk UK | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Psyduck

Ship's vacant look
# 2270

 - Posted      Profile for Psyduck   Author's homepage   Email Psyduck   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, I quite genuinely thought - and still wonder - if he wasn't adopting a hyperAugustinian line, that went beyond

Bonk for babies if you must
Anything else is just pure lust...

and saw all of us as by-products of sin.

--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)

Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I was under the impression (which is confirmed later in the same post) that he meant a sexually active unmarried human being.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Amy the Undecided
Shipmate
# 11412

 - Posted      Profile for Amy the Undecided   Author's homepage   Email Amy the Undecided   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My first post!* I've been lurking on these boards for 3-odd years (and odd they have been).

Marton:
quote:
I suppose though that I support the biblical. Does that count? Probably not.
You support the biblical teaching on marriage? Could you explain what that would be?

In the Bible on my shelf, God-ordained marriages include forcing one's servants to marry one, forcing women who are raped to marry their rapists, forcing women whose nations are defeated in battle to marry the conquering soldiers, and forcing men whose brothers die to marry their widowed sisters-in-law. Oh yes, and polygamy is not only allowed, it's often commanded by God.

Which of these holy definitions of marriage do you think should be enshrined in our secular laws?

And what do any of them have to do with a vow to love and take care of another person for the rest of your lives? Or is that just "the world's insipid version of love" and we should scrap it as a basis for marriage?

If a stable marriage is going to be a prerequisite for adoption** we should be a little more careful about what the definition of marriage is.

As for the idea that only people who can "breed" should be allowed to adopt, the mind boggles. One of the reasons (not the only one!) people choose to adopt children is because they cannot conceive children. Are you seriously contending that only fertile people should be permitted to adopt children?

*And I had to edit it. [Hot and Hormonal]
**Which it most certainly is not where I live--and where you live, too, Luna: single people can adopt in every state in the US.

[ 20. May 2006, 14:29: Message edited by: Amy the Undecided ]

--------------------
The world is too dangerous for anything but truth and too small for anything but love. ~William Sloane Coffin

Posts: 263 | From: Northern California | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A brilliant first post, Amy! Welcome to the SOF!

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Bullfrog.

Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014

 - Posted      Profile for Bullfrog.   Email Bullfrog.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Not to mention a fantastic nickname!

--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg

Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marton:
Homosexuals need to stop being vocal

Heterosexuals need to stop being so vocal.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rosa Winkel

Saint Anger round my neck
# 11424

 - Posted      Profile for Rosa Winkel   Author's homepage   Email Rosa Winkel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Agreed. People should speak from experience, not because of some book.

--------------------
The Disability and Jesus "Locked out for Lent" project

Posts: 3271 | From: Wrocław | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I nominate Amy there for the Best Ever First Post On The Ship.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishkle
Shipmate
# 11381

 - Posted      Profile for Mishkle   Email Mishkle   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Liverpool fan:
Agreed. People should speak from experience, not because of some book.

Some book? In that same book your talking about God does state that he does not like homosexuals (Leviticus). Thats slightly off topic, but I couldn't watch someone write "some book" and stay silent.
Posts: 142 | From: United States | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Arabella Purity Winterbottom

Trumpeting hope
# 3434

 - Posted      Profile for Arabella Purity Winterbottom   Email Arabella Purity Winterbottom   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In that same book, there are many more words of comfort than there are of condemnation. I particularly like "come unto me, all ye who are heavy laden", from Jesus, and "nothing can separate us from the love of God", from Paul.

We can play tennis with bible verses all you like, but it won't help if all you want to do is be rude to people who are doing their best to live Christian lives. I've met plenty of rude anti-gay Christians - how many lesbian and gay people have you met?

--------------------
Hell is full of the talented and Heaven is full of the energetic. St Jane Frances de Chantal

Posts: 3702 | From: Aotearoa, New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mishkle:
quote:
Originally posted by Liverpool fan:
Agreed. People should speak from experience, not because of some book.

Some book? In that same book your talking about God does state that he does not like homosexuals (Leviticus). Thats slightly off topic, but I couldn't watch someone write "some book" and stay silent.
If you check out Leviticus chapter 11, you'll find that prawns and shellfish are an abomination. (they don't count as having fins or scales) I do hope you haven't had any sweet and sour prawns or any variety of tasty crustacean or shellfish. Indeed if you have, I must demand that you not be allowed to breed or adopt children because prawn lovers are disgusting to God and their children will be taunted by all righteous people.

OK I'm teasing you about the last part [Biased] but not about the first. There are lots of things in Leviticus and other parts of the Old Testament which are not accepted by many Christians now: stuff ranging from the ban on a good prawn curry to things like raping war captives or killing civilians in war (see the Biblical Inerrancy thread for examples and more detailed discussion).

The questions about Biblical interpretation of passages like this regarding men having sex with men are complex enough that they've sparked this enormous thread on the Ship Homosexuality and Christianity, if you want to get some idea of how people think about these passages and the variety of views - then I suggest that you browse that thread.

L.

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Corpus cani

Ship's Anachronism
# 1663

 - Posted      Profile for Corpus cani     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mishkle:
God does state that he does not like homosexuals (Leviticus).

Does not. If you must indulge in proof-texting, at least quote accurately.

Cc

--------------------
Bishop Lord Corpus Cani the Tremulous of Buzzing St Helens.

Posts: 4435 | From: Trumpton | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
TonyK

Host Emeritus
# 35

 - Posted      Profile for TonyK   Email TonyK   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Marton - can I earnestly suggest that you study Louise's replies to your recent posts and take note of her comments. Although she hosts another board, her advice is very relevant here.

As I said last time - apprentices are given some leeway.

These boards are for discussion, not for preaching. Argue all you like - but support your points, don't just state them as though only you have the God-given truth, which you expect the rest of us to accept without demur.

Louise pointed Mishkle to the Christianity and Homosexuality thread on this board - and you, Marton, should look at it too. The fact that it now runs to 63 pages (each of 50 posts) is evidence that we have thrashed this subject until most Shipmates are heartily bored with it. This is not to stop you adding your few cents worth to the discussion - but some original discussion points, well supported, might result in a more positive reponse from others. We wouldn't expect you to read all 63 pages - but a reasonably careful study of the last 10 or so would give you some idea of the ground we have covered so far.

Yours aye ... TonyK
Host, Dead Horses

Posts: 2717 | From: Gloucestershire | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
TonyK

Host Emeritus
# 35

 - Posted      Profile for TonyK   Email TonyK   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Host Mode <DEACTIVATE>

Can we please keep this thread to the topic outlined in the OP, and take discussions about homosexuality in general to the Christianity and Homosexuality thread.

Thank you

Host Mode <ACTIVATE>

Yours aye ... TonyK
Host, Dead Horses

Posts: 2717 | From: Gloucestershire | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marton
Shipmate
# 11332

 - Posted      Profile for Marton         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Marton:
Homosexuals need to stop being vocal

Heterosexuals need to stop being so vocal.
Very funny. But I stand by my post. Gay pride? How many times have we seen those tired old lurid things?
Posts: 89 | From: gone for good | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Marton
Shipmate
# 11332

 - Posted      Profile for Marton         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Amy the Undecided:
My first post!* I've been lurking on these boards for 3-odd years (and odd they have been).

Marton:
quote:
I suppose though that I support the biblical. Does that count? Probably not.
You support the biblical teaching on marriage? Could you explain what that would be?

In the Bible on my shelf, God-ordained marriages include forcing one's servants to marry one, forcing women who are raped to marry their rapists, forcing women whose nations are defeated in battle to marry the conquering soldiers, and forcing men whose brothers die to marry their widowed sisters-in-law. Oh yes, and polygamy is not only allowed, it's often commanded by God.

Which of these holy definitions of marriage do you think should be enshrined in our secular laws?

And what do any of them have to do with a vow to love and take care of another person for the rest of your lives? Or is that just "the world's insipid version of love" and we should scrap it as a basis for marriage?

If a stable marriage is going to be a prerequisite for adoption** we should be a little more careful about what the definition of marriage is.

As for the idea that only people who can "breed" should be allowed to adopt, the mind boggles. One of the reasons (not the only one!) people choose to adopt children is because they cannot conceive children. Are you seriously contending that only fertile people should be permitted to adopt children?

*And I had to edit it. [Hot and Hormonal]
**Which it most certainly is not where I live--and where you live, too, Luna: single people can adopt in every state in the US.

You've taken the stance that is very acceptable and "compassionate" in todays modern politically correct climate here in the western world. Good for you. But my stance is that I reject the mores and values expressed in this politically correct western world. I believe they are anti christian in essence, and very very deceptive.

"Having a form of godliness, but denying the power" Sound familiar?

So then, rather than say that god hates homosexuals, I say that god loves all people, but we are in error if we think that all people are righteous in the eyes of god. The bible clearly states that we are new creatures in christ once we accept his name. How then can any promiscuous couple so called behave righteously?

Posts: 89 | From: gone for good | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Mishkle
Shipmate
# 11381

 - Posted      Profile for Mishkle   Email Mishkle   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Corpus cani:
quote:
Originally posted by Mishkle:
God does state that he does not like homosexuals (Leviticus).

Does not. If you must indulge in proof-texting, at least quote accurately.

Cc

My mistake. Should of realised people here would be so pedantic. I don't know many straight men who have sex with other straight men though. But for the record, I do know a fair number of non hetrosexuals. They have a way of being introduced to me. And no, I have not had shellfish. The only time I have had prawns was when I was served them by my reverend, and I threw up that night, so perhaps god was telling me something there.


The exact words are:

Leviticus 18: 22 - 23
"No man is to have sexual relations with another man; God hates that."
- Good News Bible

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination"
- King James Version

"Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable."
- Alternative Version

Are we happy now? Probably not. Very interesting that highly traditional christians who are very into traditional liturgy, vestments, and "the old ways" can take a stance like this.
Not meaning to be offensive, but isn't that a bit of a conflict? Then again, im presuming here.

But does this not suggest that God didn't want Homosexuals to have children or be parents? I know it is incredibly old fashioned, and many don't believe large chunks of the bible now because it does not "gell" with their lifestyles, but some do. I don't think there is anything wrong with a man having sex with another man. I'm not going to persecute those who do. Jesus summed up the commandments to: Love your God, and Love your Neighbour.

Before someone quotes me there, its possible to love a child without being their legal parent.

[ 21. May 2006, 00:23: Message edited by: Mishkle ]

Posts: 142 | From: United States | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools