by Alana 91 Replies latest social family
What a vile repugnant worm of a man, someone comes here looking for help and Mr helping loving christian here beats them with scripture and tries to ram his twisted perverted views down their throats.
I wonder what Jesus would do if he met such a revolting man that was preaching in his name. Jesus that hung out with prostitutes, tax collectors and lepers that is, not the Jesus of this twisted individuals prayers
MATT
I always strongly believed the bible condemnded homosexuality and lesbianism.
Since really trying to study the Bible I've become much less sure.
Either way, I don't think the things blessedstar mentioned in her original post cause homosexuality.
Those things may contribute to an unhealthy view of sex and human relationships but that doesn't translate into homosexuality/lesbiansim. All sexual persons (regardless of orientation) can have an unhealthy view of sex and human relationships.
I'm much more open than I ever was. If my child turned out to be homosexual I would be accepting and supportive. I would however, still teach a healthy and safe view of sex.
Years ago I would have disowned my child and written them off as dead. Personally, I'm proud of the changes in my attitude.
It makes me sad that the majority of posts here seem more affronted by the idea that someone may not actually support homosexuality
Its not a question of 'supporting' homosexuality. Its a simple question of rights and respect. All people in society, regardless of sexual preference have equal rights. Of course, enlightened people will be offended when self-righteous, arrogant christian fundamentalist BIGOTS like blessed star start spewing off their malicious, vile condemnations of gay people. I have many gay friends, and as a straight guy, I am always amazed and offended at the persistent anti-gay bigotry that still takes place in the year 2006. Why? Because people like blessed star still believe in bull-shit written by dim-witted, self-appointed 'prophets' 2000 years ago.
the phase thing, i've not met anyone who had a homosexual phase, but i guess its possible. so far mine has lasted 35 years but hey that Cindy Crawford, wow, i mean maybe......nah, its still Hoss Cartwright for me.
it may be different for girls.
if any of the 14 year old guys i knew when i was 14 were going through a homosexual phase they kept it well hidden
Just before the generalisations go too far, I just want to lay out a marker that not all of us Christians are bigots
LT, of the "heterosexual, liberated, happy and he knows it" class
Today the penalty of death comes in the form of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases
Its strange though, that the safest form of sexual contact is lesbian!
steve
Qcmbr:
I know that if my child was at this age I'd be giving them a very stern talking to about sex, I think that's part of the responsibility you took when you had that child - I would be very plain about what is and what is not acceptable behaviour while she/he is a minor and within the walls of my home.
Why on earth should such a discussion be "stern"? An adolescent (a 14-year-old is hardly a child) of that age should already have been taught about sex, and should be lovingly guided by his/her parents towards a mature and responsible view of sex.
Under the guise of 'understanding' and 'freedom' many abrogate any responsibility they have for teaching children about marriage relationships and focus on the physical dangers of sexual activity.
Marriage and sex are very different subjects. It is important that adolescents are educated about the dangers of unsafe sexual practices. Teenagers have sex whether their parents allow it or not - the better educated ones are more likely to take precautions though.
No wonder so many of our children grow up utterly confused by how to act when their moral examples are off breaking all the moral laws - or at least pouring scorn on them - that their grandparents hopefully tried to teach them.
The morals of previous generations, in many cases came directly from the church. They were not based on any real understanding of human nature, but on unquestioning obedience to some ancient scribblings. Fortunately, many of us have moved on from such primitive standards.
The inherant moral decay is revealed by calling people who disagree with homosexual behaviour and /or fornication and/or adultery by silly names and treating them as though they were stupid.
If you "disagree" with an activity or lifestyle, by all means don't practise it. However, you and others here are pronouncing judgement on people who have never harmed you in any way, and whose only "crime" is to have sex with someone that you - and your god - don't approve of. You feel free to do this despite knowing none of the people involved and being aware that the activities involve only informed consenting adults. Now you don't have to be stupid to hold such opinions - but it certainly helps.
Its worrying how many to dismiss high morals with some glib comment and how few even defend them anymore.
Qcmbr, your morals are not high. They are among the basest, most nefarious morals I have ever encountered. They are founded, not on any understanding of human nature, or on concern for individuals or society, but on the mythology and law codes of ancient barbarians (and the wacky nonsense made up by a deluded 19th century conman).
Most people who teach strong morals to their children are not abusive, close minded, bigots - they are people stepping up to the plate and teaching the one thing our decadent world badly needs - control, direction and discipline.
There is a difference between "strong morals" and "high morals". You certainly have plenty of the former. Teaching someone your arbitrary views on what is right and wrong is far less helpful than teaching them how to determine right from wrong.
Some of the comments here seem to suggest that those who dare disagree with the moral liberalism of the last two generations are somehow ignorant and backward.
Damn right! The world has come a long way in the last half-century or so. Bigotry based on race, sex, sexuality is now seen by most people in the developed world as wrong. People have learned to shrug off the shackles of their grandparents' primitive belief systems and embrace a new morality of understanding, tolerance and compassion.
It makes me sad that the majority of posts here seem more affronted by the idea that someone may not actually support homosexuality than by the thought of a 14 year old making sexual choices without anything more definate than some sexual tips and clean up routines.
I think most people here believe that the 14 year old should be educated on the emotional and psychological aspects of sex, as well as the mechanics of the act. It seems she is comfortable talking to her mother about her feelings, for which the mother should be applauded. Don't mistake a refusal to conform to your backward ideals as a lack of morality or parental concern.
14 is not the age to be experimenting with any form of sex IMO.
Nonsense, by 14 most people are sexual beings and have already experimented with some form of sexual activity (if only solo). Denying this can only be harmful.
I have two girls and even though they are very young I constantly reinforce the idea of love and respect within a strong family and even though they see utter garbage on TV I always try and point out how unusual and incorrect such behaviour is.
What behaviour? Love and respect outside "a strong family"? Tolerance for other people's lifestyles?
When the time comes for them to make their own decision it will be from a position of definition rather than confusion.
You really think so? Maybe they'll be confused that you have told them certain behaviours and practices are wrong, dangerous and immoral while they can see that many who behave that way are good people who lead happy and successful lives. Maybe they'll be confused if their sexual preferences don't conform exactly with what you told them they should be.
Whatever decision they make I'll still love them and I'll spend just as long worrying, hoping, loving and praying for them.
I hope that's true and that you would accept your children even if they turned out to be homosexuals, or to follow a different set of standards to the ones you gave them.
i've not met anyone who had a homosexual phase, but i guess its possible.
Uh yeah...been there and done it for 6 months and yet I am still straight and was never once struck with lightning.
14 is not the age to be experimenting with any form of sex IMO
Wow, if you mean with other people, then Qcmbr, for once, you and I agree!!! But I do think we should be able to talk about the subject, and lovingly.
Now, I'm not insinuating YOU would do this, but in more than one instance of folks in your faith (LDS) I've seen girls that when they declared that they were confused sexually, the response was that they were drugged, and shipped off to an, ironically, all girl lockup facility in Utah until they could learn to be straight. Put in a paid PRISON for questioning their sexuality. Church approved and mandated.
Do YOU think that this is a viable solution?
Blessed
up until your post about Aids being God's punishment for homsexuality, I was willing to read your posts. You really have stepped over the line, that is just sheer ignorance.
You don't have to accept homeosexuality, you just have to be respectful of others. I believe everyone has a rtight to their opinion, but if expressing your opinion will be hurtful, perhaps it is best left unsaid.
weds
