B
BlackPuma
if you suspect your child might be gay or lesbian?!
how would you guys go about dealing with it?
how would you guys go about dealing with it?
Originally posted by thackl
Wouldn't be my first choice, but then again, it's not my choice and I would be OK with it. My wife, she is another story and I think it woul dbe a lot tougher on her.
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
why would it be tougher on her?
Originally posted by trauma_junky
Kids, I never had any kids. Just joking. For the ease of his life, societal acceptance I hope he is straight. But, I love him so much that I don't think it would have any serious impact, if he chose not to have that super alternative, massively promiscuous lifestyle.
Originally posted by thackl
She's a bit more conservative and generaly more turned off about homosexual lovemaking. Grandkids would be nice too.
She's certainly not anti-gay, but it would be hard if were someone close to her.
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
if your son or daughter was infertile? would you still want them to have grandkids?
I don't think your children plan on having homosexual lovemaking in front of you, will they? do your heterosexual children make out in front of you?
I'm just setting you up for the future...just a hypothetical "if"...
if your children were blind, would you love them any less because they can't see?
if your childrewn were deaf, would you love them any less because they can't hear..
if your children were born gay, would you love him or her any less?
love your children for who they are and not WHAT they are...
Originally posted by thackl
Are you just trying to set people up for rants. That's irritating. I'll love them no matter what.
Originally posted by mommd2b
wathca,
If one of my children is gay, I will support them in the same manner that I would my non-gay children. Sexual orientation is not something that you choose....So...my children would be free to bring their partner to our home for all family events and would be welcomed into the family like any other.
Did we just stumble upon a topic that we can agree on?
kris
Originally posted by 12R34Y
I disagree. sexual orientation is a choice. There are countless people who USED to be gay and are not anymore. They have amazing testimonies.................THIS IS NOT A RELIGIOUS VIEWPOINT!
There has been no research to show any biological differences in gays/straights. people keep on lookin' for anything to hang their hopes on, but nothing has come out of it.
having said that..........i love my child regardless of anything that she may choose.
I also wouldn't not love anyone for being gay either. I don't have to agree with it, but I wouldn't hate them for it.
later
Originally posted by 12R34Y
I disagree. sexual orientation is a choice. There are countless people who USED to be gay and are not anymore. They have amazing testimonies.................THIS IS NOT A RELIGIOUS VIEWPOINT!
There has been no research to show any biological differences in gays/straights. people keep on lookin' for anything to hang their hopes on, but nothing has come out of it.
having said that..........i love my child regardless of anything that she may choose.
I also wouldn't not love anyone for being gay either. I don't have to agree with it, but I wouldn't hate them for it.
later
Originally posted by 12R34Y
I'm a straight male.......i know where you are going with this.
bring it on.
later
Originally posted by JJF
I am Christian, and honestly I'm embarrassed that my church has such a narrow and ignorant view. I have too many gay friends being emotionally hurt by the church's view. I also know that there are many Christians that disagree with the church's position.
I ask my friends why they tolerate it. Why remain Christian when you feel like a major part of you is rejected. Their answer is similar to my thinking. The church has to change, and we are not the ones that are wrong. Hopefully the narrow views of the orgqanizers of the Christian churches will wake up. If not, I think there will be new groups of Christians breaking away from formal Christianity in support of organized groups of Christians that accept and embrace homosexuality.
Sorry to go on and on, but the issue bothers me. My church is an embarrassment on this issue.
Originally posted by immediatespring
The Bible clearly labels homosexuality as a sin, its not about rejection or being right or wrong. I agree that sometimes the church should be supportive and not turn against them, after all, "let he who has not sinned be the first to cast a stone" , nonetheless, the church should not have to compromise its belief that homosexuality is a sin.
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
however, having said that, the church also believes that women should obey their husbands, and that slavery is ok...
nope, the bible says to discipline children, not "stone them"Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
the punishment for rebellious kids is stonding to death too..
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
religous doctrine, also persecuted and torchered galileo galilei for believing that the sun was teh center of the universe
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
as such, I would love my children even if they decided to be religious and I would not hold it agains them, since that is a choice unlike homosexulaity, which isnt...
Originally posted by immediatespring
so you don't think women should obey their husbands? and where does the bible say slavery is okay?
nope, the bible says to discipline children, not "stone them"
eh, okay
if you say so...
Originally posted by immediatespring
those are in the old testament, In the new testament, the aim of Jesus was to prevent all that from happening again, so...
and when i mean a woman should obey her husband, of course i don't mean for her to be a slave, there should be mutual agreement definitely. but you say a woman should not have to obey her husband? thats why the value and importance of marriage has gone downhill
Originally posted by vagusbaby
http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cach...gene990422.html+gay+gene+study&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
"Where Did the Gay Gene Go?
Study Finds No Evidence of Homosexuality in DNA
Six years ago, researchers uncovered a genetic sequence linked to homosexuality. But a new study casts doubt on that finding. (ABCNEWS.com)
By Claudine Chamberlain
ABCNEWS.com
April 22 ? It?s a seemingly endless debate: Why are some people attracted to the opposite sex, while others are drawn to their own gender? Thanks to new research published today, that question just got even harder to answer.
A team of researchers at the University of Western Ontario in Canada has found no evidence of the so-called ?gay gene,? directly contradicting studies from 1993 and ?95 that pinpointed a specific genetic marker on the X chromosome linked to homosexuality in men.
Whether genes play a part in sexual orientation has long been a hot button topic for people who support or oppose gay rights. If gays and lesbians are biologically predisposed to homosexuality ? through their genes or some other way ? that makes for a stronger case against discrimination.
That?s why the gay community welcomed the 1993 study by biologist Dean Hamer of the National Cancer Institute. Hamer found that in 40 pairs of gay brothers, 33 had the same set of DNA sequences in a region of the chromosome called Xq28.
Dueling Studies
Attempting to replicate those findings, Ontario neurologist George Rice examined the DNA of 52 pairs of gay brothers, and found that their Xq28 sequences were no more similar than what might be expected from sheer chance.
Rice?s results appear in today?s edition of the journal Science.
?What we have here is a scientific controversy,? says Michael Bailey, a Northwestern University psychologist who has studied homosexuality in twins. The latest research effort ?is a good study and it certainly raises questions about whether Hamer was right, but I don?t think it proves him wrong either.?
That?s because both studies were relatively small, and because specific genes are difficult to find. ?A definitive study,? says Bailey, ?would entail substantially larger numbers of people.?
Maybe the Gene Is Elsewhere
Rice himself doesn?t discount the idea of a genetic link to homosexuality. He just doesn?t think Xq28 is the spot. ?The search for genetic factors in homosexuality should continue,? he says, adding that he?s currently searching for other genes that could be linked to sexuality.
But Hamer stands by his earlier findings, especially since two subsequent studies (one of which has not yet been published), found the same thing. ?All this proves is that not every case of homosexuality is because of Xq28,? he asserts. ?I expect we?ll find that many genes are involved. One of them will be on Xq28.?
Biological Links to Homosexuality
1991: Northwestern University's Michael Bailey and others find greater homosexual correlation among identical twins than fraternal.
1991: Salk Institute?s Simon LeVay discovers that a tiny section of the hypothalamus in the brain is smaller in gay men than in straight men.
1992: Laura Allen and Richard Gorski of the University of California at Los Angeles discover that a section of the fibers connecting the right and left hemispheres of the brain is one-third larger in gay men than straight men.
1993: National Cancer Institute?s Dean Hamer study finds possible location of ?gay gene? on the X chromosome, inherited from mothers.
1995: Geneticists Shang-Ding Zhang and Ward Odenwald of the National Institutes of Health discover that a single transplanted gene can cause fruit flies to display homosexual behavior.
1995: Hamer repeats his 1993 findings with a follow-up study.
Twin studies, like those done by Bailey, have fueled the search for such genes. In 1991, he studied the twin brothers of gay men and found that 52 percent of identical twins were also gay, while only 22 percent of fraternal twins were. Among women, 48 percent of identical twins were also lesbian, while the rate dropped to 16 percent for fraternal twins.
As with all twin studies, a greater similarity among identical twins usually indicates a genetic link. But because the connection wasn?t 100 percent, researchers know that genes aren?t the whole picture. Environment ? family, friends, society ? could also be an important influence.
Does It Really Matter?
Gene or no gene, gay rights groups maintain that what ?causes? homosexuality isn?t really important. ?The vast majority of gay people will tell you that same-sex orientation is an innate part of who you are and is not changeable,? says David Smith, a spokesperson for Human Rights Campaign. ?But in the final analysis, is really shouldn?t matter. Public policy should treat all people equally and fairly.?
Conservative groups, on the other hand, say Rice?s study proves that homosexuality is a learned, chosen behavior that doesn?t deserve legal protection.
?Dean Hamer?s study has been used by gay activists for years,? says Yvette Cantu, policy analyst for the Family Research Council. ?We?re saying you can?t grant someone special minority status for something that?s just a sexual behavior, a choice.?
For now, though, the scientific debate is far from over. Sex, says Hamer, ?is one of the most interesting things we do. And biologically, it?s the most important thing we do.? That?s why we?ll always wonder why some people do it differently than others."
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
oh come on, isn't the old testament part of the bible, you said the bible never said children should be stoned...
1) I proved you wrong
2) you asked me for slavery and bible references, again I provided it for you
if you are one of the old "old testament doesnt count" crowd, and I only believe in the new testament, and you are an adherent of Jesus' teachings, then how many times has Jesus refered to homosexuality?
like zilch...can you tell me why today's christians have an infatuation with castigating and admonitioning gays, but apparently have no problem with adultery, fornication, stealing, etc...
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
then how many times has Jesus refered to homosexuality?
like zilch...
Originally posted by vagusbaby
http://www.queerbychoice.com/gaygenelinks.html
http://eserver.org/bs/14/Sartelle.html
Rejecting the Gay Brain
(and choosing homosexuality)
Joe Sartelle
Bad Subjects, Issue # 14, May 1994
"... The biological account is being accepted more and more as a kind of common sense, something which most people take for granted. The prevailing wisdom is increasingly that it is no longer a question of whether homosexuality is caused by biological differences, but only a matter of when the full proof of such differences will be available.
[...]
But as any racial or ethnic minority will tell you, just because you didn't "choose" your identity by no means guarantees that people will tolerantly accept your identity. And I think that most gays and lesbians know this, even when they are defending themselves with the no-choice argument. So why do so many cling to it as their best hope? Whenever we find people repeatedly insisting upon something, we need to ask just who it is they're seeking to convince. Think for a moment about the implications of the very language of the no-choice defense. To justify a behavior by saying "I can't help it" is to imply that if you could help it, you would. I think that the popularity of biological accounts of homosexual desire among gay people has to be understood as a way of coping with deeply-rooted homophobia. What else can it be when we defend ourselves by saying things like, "Do you think anybody would choose to be this way?" This is a defensive position, one that implicitly accepts that there is something wrong with homosexuality, that it is indeed an abnormality which demands to be explained. It suggests that if we did have a choice in the matter, we would choose to be heterosexual. The position is both totally understandable and completely unacceptable.
[...]
Those are the difficult questions confronting a society in which diversity is valued and old normative standards are falling down all around us. The fantasy of the essentially and biologically homosexual body is, among other things, a fantasy about abdication of responsibility for our feelings and actions. It is about the wish to escape from responsibility, to let someone or something else make the decisions for us -- in this case, by holding our biology responsible for our behavior. It is dangerous because it encourages us to forget that what is most human is our ability to choose what we do with our bodies, sexually or otherwise. Since homosexual desire is perfectly normal, there is no need to account for it, and there is no reason to repress it. Who cares what causes it? Just say yes. Homosexual relations should be accepted for the same reasons as any other consensual form of sexual expression: as an affirmation of our human freedom, and a celebration of the pleasures of being a body among other bodies. "
Originally posted by immediatespring
On the contrary wacha, the bible also says to discipline children. the old testament is very much a part of the bible, it allows us to see what would have continued to happen had Jesus not come to save us. I am not trying to preach to you about christianity, neither am i telling you from my own opinion whether homosexuality is wrong or not so stop being so darn defensive. I would show you bible scriptures, but what would be the point, you are not a christian. and no i am not one of the "old testament crowd" or whatever, but it is CLEARLY stated in the bible that homosexuality is a sin, and in the new testament too.
...and you asked for it:
Matthew 15
19:For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.
1 Corinthians 6:13
"Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"?but God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.
1 Corinthians 6:18
Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body.
19: Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
i don't know where you heard that christianity does not admonish stealing etc, the only diffrence is that homosexuality is being accepted, adultery , stealing and the others are still sin and everyone knows that
Originally posted by immediatespring
1 Corinthians 6
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
Romans 1
27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
and the number of times that homosexuality appeared in the bible is by FAR LESS than adultery, divorce, stealing and murdering etc etc
watcha didn't say a word about the bible or christianity until you brought it up. even then, he only used biblical passages to assert certain christians only use the bible to defend their personal beliefs, but ignore many other parts of the bible.Originally posted by immediatespring
i thought we were arguing about homosexuality not christianity, and your above statement, well thought
whatever watcha, you asked for opinions yet you can't seem to respect other people's opinion, if you want to be gay, hey, just in case you forgot, you live in America, land of immora... oops sorry i mean, eh freedom
Originally posted by immediatespring
i thought we were arguing about homosexuality not christianity, and your above statement, well thought
whatever watcha, you asked for opinions yet you can't seem to respect other people's opinion, if you want to be gay, hey, just in case you forgot, you live in America, land of immora... oops sorry i mean, eh freedom
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
do you automatically assume that all homosexual s have a super alternative massively promiscous lifestyle?
I'm not at all attacking your beliefs...I'm just curious as to why you think homosexuals tend to have a massive promiscuous lifestyle? (of course, maybe i'm interpreting wrong) but isn't a massive promiscous lifestyle an individual thing rather than a sexual orientation issue?
Originally posted by mommd2b
wathca,
If one of my children is gay, I will support them in the same manner that I would my non-gay children. Sexual orientation is not something that you choose....So...my children would be free to bring their partner to our home for all family events and would be welcomed into the family like any other.
Did we just stumble upon a topic that we can agree on?
kris
Originally posted by DAL
watcha didn't say a word about the bible or christianity until you brought it up. even then, he only used biblical passages to assert certain christians only use the bible to defend their personal beliefs, but ignore many other parts of the bible.
Originally posted by 12R34Y
I disagree. sexual orientation is a choice.
Originally posted by WatchaMaCallit
respecting other people's opinions? I respect the fact that you think gays are going to hell or not, it doesn't matter to me...
1) I created this thread to create a discussion with parents
2) someone brought up christianity
3) I said whatever christianity thinks is irrelevant, they also think stoning children, and slavery is ok
4) you said it was not true
5) I showed you passage which showed that it was INDEED true
6) you said, it was old testament doesnt count, and gave me passages from romans and corinthians
7) so I gave you new passages from the new testament
8) you can't back up your "holy book"...so you say, I don't respect your opinions or beliefs
I'm glad you are not applying to law school. I'm not criticizing christianity...I'm criticizing christians who "thinkg" they are morally superior to everyone else, by puttind down gays for instance..
it's funny, when I show you passages which are frightening in the bible, absolutely absolutely frightening, you accuse me of not respecting other people's opinions!
listen, if you are going to use christianity as a line of defense by saying homosexuality is wrong, then I can use your own book, passage and verse to show that christianity SHOULD not be a moral authority in judging other people...I've only USED ur own bible against you...that HAS nothing to do with respecting pple's beliefs or not..
my roomate is a strict christian, goes to church every sunday...he hasnt the slightest clue that I'm gay, since I dont bring gay friends home...but that DOESNT mean I dont respect or love him as a friend..
and if you ave a problem with american being the land of the "immoral" then I suggest you move to another country where your views are more accepted, peace
funny, how you can't defend your views, you just make a statement and then run
oh and vagus baby, keep posting the same article buddy
Originally posted by immediatespring
The Bible clearly labels homosexuality as a sin, its not about rejection or being right or wrong. I agree that sometimes the church should be supportive and not turn against them, after all, "let he who has not sinned be the first to cast a stone" , nonetheless, the church should not have to compromise its belief that homosexuality is a sin.
Originally posted by Teufelhunden
The bible also states that slaves should obey their masters.
The bible states that mixing different fabrics is a sin.
Give it a rest.
Oh...let me guess...that's one of the parts thats not to be taken literally, right? How convenient that you all can decide which parts of the bible you choose to take literally and which you choose to ignore.
Oh, BTW...how many times did Jesus mention homosexuality as being a sin?
Originally posted by immediatespring
1 Corinthians 6
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
Romans 1
27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
Very true Teuf. They need to quit worrying about it, and they need to quit JUDGING it!Originally posted by Teufelhunden
Damn...religious whackos need to get a life and quit worrying about what everyone else is doing in their bedrooms.