Homosexual parents

spill_no_sick:

lyrical_mess:

What, they wanna sue the church? Are they going to sue Christianity for mentioning that homosexuality is a sin?

they can't
A. it's right to free speech
I'm sick and tired of everyone defending their slander with "the right to free speech" because that's all the right to free speech doesn't cover

yet, any nonliberal is liable for attack for what they believe in

B. THE BIBLE DIDN'T SAYING DICK ABOUT BEING GAY
holy shit, it just said, "no sex until marriage"
and when the Jews created marriage, they said, "only heterosexuals"
so that means no gay sex
but don't blame Christianity, they didn't make the rule

anyway, Christians need to shut the hell up just like liberals because neither group knows what they're talking about

as I'm not Christian, someone needs to correct me on this, but didn't Christianity come out of Judaism? Jesus was Jewish wasn't he? So aren't the religious laws kind of the same? Marriage is a religious affair.

Why does the law affect religious groups, though? I'm told there's a separation of church and state. If the Christian church doesn't "condone the homo lifestyle" then how can they be forced to allow the children in their care to be taken by people who don't follow those teachings? I assume the child was placed in a Christian orphanage to be raised by good, practicing Christians. This is not to say that there aren't Christian homos, but it really shouldn't affect the religious organizations.

What's their argument anyway? "The religion is discriminatory" ?

Mine. lovely aren't we. Tony Blair is trying to find a common ground but because he's leaving office in a couple of months his more liberal ministers are going over his head on this issue. It's a political storm brewing. It will force the adoption agencies to close in order to keep their principles without having to fave court. In the end only the children will suffer.

[off topic]In other news seeing as you brought up the US. hell has officially frozen over, picked up my paper to read that George Bush is putting a plan into action to reduce fuel emissions by 20 percent

lyrical_mess:

spill_no_sick:

lyrical_mess:

What, they wanna sue the church? Are they going to sue Christianity for mentioning that homosexuality is a sin?

they can't
A. it's right to free speech
I'm sick and tired of everyone defending their slander with "the right to free speech" because that's all the right to free speech doesn't cover

yet, any nonliberal is liable for attack for what they believe in

B. THE BIBLE DIDN'T SAYING DICK ABOUT BEING GAY
holy shit, it just said, "no sex until marriage"
and when the Jews created marriage, they said, "only heterosexuals"
so that means no gay sex
but don't blame Christianity, they didn't make the rule

anyway, Christians need to shut the hell up just like liberals because neither group knows what they're talking about

as I'm not Christian, someone needs to correct me on this, but didn't Christianity come out of Judaism? Jesus was Jewish wasn't he? So aren't the religious laws kind of the same? Marriage is a religious affair.

Why does the law affect religious groups, though? I'm told there's a separation of church and state. If the Christian church doesn't "condone the homo lifestyle" then how can they be forced to allow the children in their care to be taken by people who don't follow those teachings? I assume the child was placed in a Christian orphanage to be raised by good, practicing Christians. This is not to say that there aren't Christian homos, but it really shouldn't affect the religious organizations.

What's their argument anyway? "The religion is discriminatory" ?

because the church has to live under the rule of the state if they are not offered the chance to bypass the law then they have to abide by it. England is no longer a christian country i guess. we've turned into neo-capitilist pigs who reward the rich on the backs of the poor.

don't get me started on the government funded pensions that seemed to have dissapeared.

Guy Fawkes at the right freaking idea -_-

NeoSteph:

Mine. lovely aren't we. Tony Blair is trying to find a common ground but because he's leaving office in a couple of months his more liberal ministers are going over his head on this issue. It's a political storm brewing. It will force the adoption agencies to close in order to keep their principles without having to fave court. In the end only the children will suffer.

[off topic]In other news seeing as you brought up the US. hell has officially frozen over, picked up my paper to read that George Bush is putting a plan into action to reduce fuel emissions by 20 percent

[continuing off topic] I think it's awesome
he's doing just what Bill Clinton did ten years ago (but with more of an agenda)
Bill Clinton put into effect all of these policies that complete screwed over Bush's first term, screwed up our American economy (but of course, all of Bush Sr. and Reagan's stuff helped the economy during Clinton's reign so he wouldn't be blamed) and Bush was blamed
but, Bush was always pressured to do this incredibly liberal stuff (involving the war, Canadizing America, health care, drug stuff, catching terrorists) that were way too idealistic to work (like Communism/Socialism and Kerry)
so now, he's putting all of it into effect and it won't actually ruin the country until the next president's term

spill_no_sick:

NeoSteph:

Mine. lovely aren't we. Tony Blair is trying to find a common ground but because he's leaving office in a couple of months his more liberal ministers are going over his head on this issue. It's a political storm brewing. It will force the adoption agencies to close in order to keep their principles without having to fave court. In the end only the children will suffer.

[off topic]In other news seeing as you brought up the US. hell has officially frozen over, picked up my paper to read that George Bush is putting a plan into action to reduce fuel emissions by 20 percent

[continuing off topic] I think it's awesome
he's doing just what Bill Clinton did ten years ago (but with more of an agenda)
Bill Clinton put into effect all of these policies that complete screwed over Bush's first term, screwed up our American economy (but of course, all of Bush Sr. and Reagan's stuff helped the economy during Clinton's reign so he wouldn't be blamed) and Bush was blamed
but, Bush was always pressured to do this incredibly liberal stuff (involving the war, Canadizing America, health care, drug stuff, catching terrorists) that were way too idealistic to work (like Communism/Socialism and Kerry)
so now, he's putting all of it into effect and it won't actually ruin the country until the next president's term

XD i'm just glad that finally it's going in that direction. It felt for years that the global warming warnings were falling on deaf ears. Strange how American Policy which for the last couple of years has shaped whats happening in this country has started to work out. where as we are in total chaos...actually no thats quite shit.

The government over here backed, funded and pressured workign class families to build into work place pensions and now thousands and thousands of individuals money has gone all gone, netted down because the businesses went bankrupt. Yet even though it was endorsed by the labour party, they've washed their hands of it.

Oh and our Taxes are now one of the largest in the world and our health care is failing, education has now turned into ''how liberal and acceptiong can we make our kids, fuck whats important'' so i might jump the border.

-----
Here's some information that might intrigue you, Gordon Brown who is most likely to takeover from Blair is a bit of a argy bargy type guy and plans to withdraw a substantial amount of troops from Iraq is underway

Also Prince Harry plans to go to fight in Iraq mid march. If he's captured or killed you can quarantee even more withdrawels on pure basis of the death of third in line..

Thats all from England.
Oh we also have big terroist problems too, we are indeed little America.

-----
More and more I keep moving towards the Bush way of thinking. Although i still think he should get his speeches proof read before reading XD.

that's his major folly: he doesn't give a shit what others think
he should know that Americans are dumb enough to believe that a Texas accent makes him stupid
he has too much faith that we're smart enough to comrpehend him

that's how fucked up America is, we're in political chaos because our intelligence level isn't that of Bush's

the catholic church have said that they will not be forced into letting homosexuals adopt children, and why shoudl they cahnge 1000's of years of beliefs?

i am not homophobic but they live a life that goes against pro - creation and why should people just except that fact that they now want to adopt? but we shoudl be able to have a say without fear of retrebution

Lucifers Angel:

the catholic church have said that they will not be forced into letting homosexuals adopt children, and why shoudl they cahnge 1000's of years of beliefs?

i am not homophobic but they live a life that goes against pro - creation and why should people just except that fact that they now want to adopt? but we shoudl be able to have a say without fear of retrebution

I agree that catholic adoption agencies shouldn't be forced to let homosexual couples adopt if, and only if, Catholics are the only people that can adopt from their agencies.

If you're going to discriminate, do it fully.

Also, your "they live a life that goes again pro - creation" [which is spelled procreation, by the way] ... what about straight couples that are incapable of having children?

Sorry, just something people who use that argument tend to forget.

ofcourse they wont love the children any less but think about it, when the kid goes to school other kids will ask, "why have you got 2 mummy's/daddy's?" or your child would turn round to you and say "why do i have yo mummy's/daddy's while everyone else has a mummy and a daddy???" and how will they answer that???? and the child will probably get picked on worse than the kids that get picked on anyways. you need to see it from a childs point of view if your homosexual and want to adopt. it could make them very depressed

emo princess:

ofcourse they wont love the children any less but think about it, when the kid goes to school other kids will ask, "why have you got 2 mummy's/daddy's?" or your child would turn round to you and say "why do i have yo mummy's/daddy's while everyone else has a mummy and a daddy???" and how will they answer that???? and the child will probably get picked on worse than the kids that get picked on anyways. you need to see it from a childs point of view if your homosexual and want to adopt. it could make them very depressed

My friend doesn't have a daddy and her mummy seemed to look after her ok.

Bloodraine:

emo princess:

ofcourse they wont love the children any less but think about it, when the kid goes to school other kids will ask, "why have you got 2 mummy's/daddy's?" or your child would turn round to you and say "why do i have yo mummy's/daddy's while everyone else has a mummy and a daddy???" and how will they answer that???? and the child will probably get picked on worse than the kids that get picked on anyways. you need to see it from a childs point of view if your homosexual and want to adopt. it could make them very depressed

My friend doesn't have a daddy and her mummy seemed to look after her ok.

yea but did she loose her dad or did they divorce or something, but wat im trying to get at is that homosexual parents need to think about the childs welfare as if some one finds out that their mummy like ladies or their daddy likes men their in deep shit i no, one of my mates parents are homosexuals and she has the hardest time ever at school and at clubs all for that reason i stand up for her, but i do sometimes break down in tears for her

druscilla_nesser:

Lucifers Angel:

the catholic church have said that they will not be forced into letting homosexuals adopt children, and why shoudl they cahnge 1000's of years of beliefs?

i am not homophobic but they live a life that goes against pro - creation and why should people just except that fact that they now want to adopt? but we shoudl be able to have a say without fear of retrebution

I agree that catholic adoption agencies shouldn't be forced to let homosexual couples adopt if, and only if, Catholics are the only people that can adopt from their agencies.

If you're going to discriminate, do it fully.

Also, your "they live a life that goes again pro - creation" [which is spelled procreation, by the way] ... what about straight couples that are incapable of having children?

Sorry, just something people who use that argument tend to forget.

but straight couples do not havea lifestyle that goes against procreation,

Lucifers Angel:

but straight couples do not havea lifestyle that goes against procreation,

What about straight couples that choose not to have kids?

I'd say that was going aganst procreation.

Bloodraine:

Lucifers Angel:

but straight couples do not havea lifestyle that goes against procreation,

What about straight couples that choose not to have kids?

I'd say that was going aganst procreation.

then thats they're given right not to have kids, they're relationship doesnt go again procreation like i said before but they have a right to not want kids

Lucifers Angel:

Bloodraine:

Lucifers Angel:

but straight couples do not havea lifestyle that goes against procreation,

What about straight couples that choose not to have kids?

I'd say that was going aganst procreation.

then thats they're given right not to have kids, they're relationship doesnt go again procreation like i said before but they have a right to not want kids

But it does go against procreation.
Procreation is the creation of children. Literally.
If a man and a woman think "Hold up, we don't want kids of our own, so we'll adopt a child that has no parents", then thats going against procreation, because they aren't creating children.

emo princess:

ofcourse they wont love the children any less but think about it, when the kid goes to school other kids will ask, "why have you got 2 mummy's/daddy's?" or your child would turn round to you and say "why do i have yo mummy's/daddy's while everyone else has a mummy and a daddy???" and how will they answer that???? and the child will probably get picked on worse than the kids that get picked on anyways. you need to see it from a childs point of view if your homosexual and want to adopt. it could make them very depressed

Okay, my fiance and I aren't adopting so it's a little different than you're statement. We're carrying children through invitro fertilization and artificial semination. Anyway...

I would simply tell my child that sometimes women love women and men love men. There's nothing wrong with this. What's important is that she has two parents who love her more than anything and would do anything for their daughter.

Are you pregnant?

lyrical_mess:

Are you pregnant?

No no no.
Unfortunately.


This is in the future... after Andie graduates colleges.
Around 2011.

druscilla_nesser:

lyrical_mess:

Are you pregnant?

No no no.
Unfortunately.


This is in the future... after Andie graduates colleges.
Around 2011.

Oh. I feel kinda stupid now.

Still..awwww. So Andie is...my age. That's only four years difference. Now I feel even more stupid. When you said your parents gave you shit about her age, I thought she was like, 13 or something.