Most reasonable people would agree Homosexuals have a right not to be prejudiced against. But, not being allowed to adopt children is not a form of prejudice. Lots of people aren't permitted to adopt children and for much less obviously harmful reasons than living in an unnatural partnership practising deviant sexual acts.
Before anyone protests about these comments any sexual act not directed towards procreation (or strengthening the natural bond between couples capable of procreation) is by biological definition 'deviant' and 'unnatural'.
It seems to me the [Catholic] church is right, children have a right to be protected from such things until they are capable of making their own decisions.
29 comments
According to the Declaration of Indepedance and the Consitution, no one in America has the right to be prejudiced against. Seriously, if you hate the idea of giving other people equal freedom, go to Saudia Arabia.
Again, someone should point out to this mental midget the long list of animals that engage in homosexual behaviour.
I'm in my 50's, my wife is too. We enjoy sex A LOT! We're both well past the "procreation" age, so we're "sinning", too? Wow, should add a little zip to our next debauchery!
Well, okay, if you want to define 'deviant' and 'unnatural' in that way... okay, there are two tacks against that argument.wrong , so you've just re-defined yourself out of an argument. But I like the second one better.
The second one goes, as long as we're redefining terms, let's redefine "procreation". Most of what makes a person who he is is a function of his upbringing, rather than his parentage; so let's define "procreation," for humans and other animals that indulge in primarily learned behavior, as rearing and educating a child, rather than merely contributing zygotes to it. In that case, gay couples who are capable of adopting children are, by your definition, behaving "naturally"... why are you forcing these people to be deviants?
What about the infertile or sterile? Are they no longer allowed to have sex now? Come on, now, "Dr" Mike, don't expect us to believe you don't have "deviant sexual acts" of your own. I think somebody's projecting.
Before anyone protests about these comments any sexual act not directed towards procreation (or strengthening the natural bond between couples capable of procreation) is by biological definition 'deviant' and 'unnatural'.
I find particularly offensive, because you´re calling unnatural the relationship of my neighbour, a widow in her sixties who married last year a widower in a similar fashion. They are adorable grandparents and I would willingly leave my kids to them, believe me. Besides, you´re tearing the whole adoption process down, because you´re not allowing sterile couples to adopt, you know, they can´t have kids. By the way, before I married, I adopted my godson and we lived in a monoparental family for 5 years, wrong again?
"It seems to me the [Catholic] church is right, children have a right to be protected from such things until they are capable of making their own decisions."
@Legendary Dr Mike
Before anyone protests about these comments any sexual act not directed towards procreation (or strengthening the natural bond between couples capable of procreation) is by biological definition 'deviant' and 'unnatural'.
"...children have a right to be protected from such things..."
So the child waiting to be adopt have the right to either have two paths in life.
One is to be lucky enough to be adopted by the PERFECT family of your standards and the PERFECT childhood of your standards. Even if it mean shrinking the pool of parental candidates down to an outright trickle more so then it already is.
Or the child NEVER getting adopted at all and stays in foster care which is suppose to be TEMPORALLY since the gov't most times can't really afford to take care of such children until they're forced to work at the age of eighteen.
WOW! Nice to know the welfare of children is such a priority for you!!
@Darth Fury: I'm pretty sure the clergy has one of the lowest incidence of child abuse. Don't be so quick with the generalisations.
I'd go further than Mike. I think kids should be protected from religion until they are capable of making their own decisions.
/Most reasonable people would agree Homosexuals have a right not to be prejudiced against. But, not being allowed to adopt children is not a form of prejudice. Lots of people aren't permitted to adopt children and for much less obviously harmful reasons than living in an unnatural partnership practising deviant sexual acts./
Who, pray tell? Face it, with the way adoption laws are in most states, it's easier for a straight alcoholic to get back his child than a sober homosexual. The only reason people should not be allowed to adopt children is if they are proven to be abusive or unfit to have them.
/Before anyone protests about these comments any sexual act not directed towards procreation (or strengthening the natural bond between couples capable of procreation) is by biological definition 'deviant' and 'unnatural'./
So my great-uncle shouldn't have remarried because both he and his current wife were above childbearing age? When will you get it through your thick skulls that sex is not always about producing a child? You don't think that love has anything to do with it? And by that, I don't mean that the couple loves each other enough to want to have a child together.
/It seems to me the [Catholic] church is right, children have a right to be protected from such things until they are capable of making their own decisions./
It seems to me the church is wrong, children have a right to be in a loving home no matter what the gender/race/religion/etc. of their adoptive parents is. End of story.
You don't think being barred from giving blood in the UK counts as prejudice?
Mind you, the chance of a reasonable opinion being expressed on Have Your Say is about the same as finding one on Rapture Ready.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
