“I am the mother of a gay son and I’ve taken enough from you good people”

moparguy

New member
You have the audacity to talk about protecting families and children from the homosexual menace, while you yourselves tear apart families and drive children to despair. I don’t know why my son is gay, but I do know that God didn’t put him, and millions like him, on this Earth to give you someone to abuse. God gave you brains so that you could think, and it’s about time you started doing that.

Sad that seemingly all that we can get on this topic is mostly interaction on the level of ignorant and possibly bigoted strawmaning.

I wonder if the person that originally wrote this stuff is aware of people who don't fit the common stereotype: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/10/this_lesbians_daughter_has_had_enough.html

At the core of all your misguided beliefs is the belief that this could never happen to you, that there is some kind of subculture out there that people have chosen to join. The fact is that if it can happen to my family, it can happen to yours, and you won’t get to choose. Whether it is genetic or whether something occurs during a critical time of fetal development, I don’t know. I can only tell you with an absolute certainty that it is inborn.

Stating something she doesn't have the means to know, and than basing conclusions upon it. Sad, considering she just told everyone to start thinking.

If you want to tout your own morality, you’d best come up with something more substantive than your heterosexuality.

...as if the argument from "natural law" (there is no such thing) is the only counter argument out there. For an example of a decent counter-argument to, say the gay christian movement, for example: http://aomin.org/podcasts/GayChristianityRefuted.mp3

You did nothing to earn it; it was given to you. If you disagree, I would be interested in hearing your story, because my own heterosexuality was a blessing I received with no effort whatsoever on my part. It is so woven into the very soul of me that nothing could ever change it. For those of you who reduce sexual orientation to a simple choice, a character issue, a bad habit or something that can be changed by a 10-step program, I’m puzzled. Are you saying that your own sexual orientation is nothing more than something you have chosen, that you could change it at will? If that’s not the case, then why would you suggest that someone else can?

It doesn't matter if the desires are chosen or not, for the simple reason that desires can in no way provide a moral justification. Nor a legal one.

It's not right to do something just because you really, really, really want to and you can't even conceive of life without doing that thing.

You religious folk just can’t bear the thought that as my son emerges from the hell that was his childhood he might like to find a lifelong companion and have a measure of happiness. It offends your sensibilities that he should request the right to visit that companion in the hospital, to make medical decisions for him or to benefit from tax laws governing inheritance.

Kleptomaniacs who are forced to not steal have a "childhood of hell" too. But, of course, we can't make that comparison. That would require thinking like a human with the "brains God gave you" in order to realize that the comparison is perfectly valid.

Again, just because someone really wants something, their desire doesn't justify any given behavior. Or way of thinking, for that matter.

Shockingly, all it means is that ... they have that desire.

You use religion to abdicate your responsibility to be thinking human beings. There are vast numbers of religious people who find your attitudes repugnant. God is not for the privileged majority, and God knows my son has committed no sin.

She ought to have taken her own advise. She and her son and society would be far better off for it.

I seriously doubt she has any good and necessary justification for claiming to know what God is for and what God knows.

Humans can't change themselves. Thankfully, God can:

1 Corinthians 6:11
And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
 

musterion

Well-known member
Not really. Ape-human rape happens when frustrated young adult males cannot find a partner of their own species, so they pick one based on how similar the pheromones of an individual are to their own. Humans have pheromones nearly identical to chimps, orangutans, and bonobos, so if you set up a bad situation, sonetimes bad things will happen. Honestly, that cook should probably prosecute that researcher for putting her in such a risky situation.

Rape AND homosexuality both occur naturally. The difference between the two in humans, is that rape is non-consensual and traumatic, while homosexuality is consensual and something that the participants enjoy.

How long have you been in favor of ape rape?
 

musterion

Well-known member
Your honor, yes i raped that women, but its a natural thing so how can you hold me accountable - i was born that way and animals do it too so it must be ok, right?

Birds do it
bees do it
even dolphins and monkeys
do it
let's do it
let's rape someone...
 

Kdall

BANNED
Banned
Your honor, yes i raped that women, but its a natural thing so how can you hold me accountable - i was born that way and animals do it too so it must be ok, right?

Oh look! You took a part of a quote out of context! How honest!



I thought I was on ignore?
 

alwight

New member
Your honor, yes i raped that women, but its a natural thing so how can you hold me accountable - i was born that way and animals do it too so it must be ok, right?
Why should any of that mean that two people of the same sex should not be allowed to have sexual intercourse if they both are willing?
A rape victim can be presumed to be an unwilling participant I think.:plain:
 

musterion

Well-known member
Why should any of that mean that two people of the same sex should not be allowed to have sexual intercourse if they both are willing?

No one here, except maybe ACW and Naz, are playing the "allow" game so you can drop that angle. We oppose it being accepted as an alternative norm because it never will be. It is unnatural and totally perverts and violates the purpose and design of either God or of evolution, you pick which.
 

Kdall

BANNED
Banned
No one here, except maybe ACW and Naz, are playing the "allow" game so you can drop that angle. We oppose it being accepted as an alternative norm because it never will be. It is unnatural and totally perverts and violates the purpose and design of either God or of evolution, you pick which.

Actually, evolution has a purpose for it. Back before civilized society, when people were in small tribal communities, it was beneficial for some men to not have children of their own so that they could instead watch and protect their relatives' children. This would serve evolution's purpose of furthering their genetic line by better ensuring their nieces'/nephews' survival. They couldn't play the role of caretaker to relatives nearly as much if they had their own children to worry about
 

moparguy

New member
Actually, evolution has a purpose for it.

Fail.

Evolution is not a person and has no mind and no goal, not even the survival of the fittest.

Properly, it's just whatever happens.

Saying why or ascribing a goal is anti-evolutionary.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
Oh look! You took a part of a quote out of context! How honest!



I thought I was on ignore?

You are, i jumped in and opened the little ignore box on the page after seeing what people were quoting you saying to respond to your outrageous argument to have some fun. Ive never seen more ridiculous reasoning in my life.

Please do continue.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
No one here, except maybe ACW and Naz, are playing the "allow" game so you can drop that angle. We oppose it being accepted as an alternative norm because it never will be. It is unnatural and totally perverts and violates the purpose and design of either God or of evolution, you pick which.

:thumb:
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Ok, whether she believes it or not, has no bearing on hell being there just the same - nor does it affect what i believe, note the part of what i said there says "to me".


Where was any of the sort suggested by me? She should love him as much as she would love any child of hers, even when they are wrong and tell them that its wrong.

Do you believe saying something is wrong = abuse? Lets say he was addicted to drugs and it was destroying him -Would she need to call her child a low life junkie loser, in order to tell him drugs are wrong and that he needs help, would that be more effective in your mind?

Or were you just trying to trash me for no reason since i didnt say or suggest or even think anything like you suggested i think?

Well, if she doesn't believe in the hell that you do then she's hardly walking her son into the place is she? There's plenty of Christian's who don't believe in the abhorrent notion of eternal torment or some such equivalent so it's hardly a case of her lacking love for her son.

Where it comes to protecting people and loved ones then I fail to see the comparison between a sexual orientation and a drugs habit. AFAIC if somebody's gay then they're simply gay and that's it. I don't think sexual attraction is something that's particularly under most people's control as I certainly didn't choose to be heterosexual in my own life, I simply am and that's just the way it is. The mother in the article made a salient point regarding just that very thing.

I apologize if you thought I was targeting you with the 'faggots/queers' comment as I don't believe you do go in for that sort of pathetic thing, but unfortunately there's plenty of "conservatives" on here that do act like morons in that respect, and there's nothing remotely loving about that type of asinine behaviour.
 

Kdall

BANNED
Banned
Fail.

Evolution is not a person and has no mind and no goal, not even the survival of the fittest.

Properly, it's just whatever happens.

Saying why or ascribing a goal is anti-evolutionary.

It is a process with the purpose of further adapting organisms' to their environments by promoting positive change and eliminating deficient organisms. That doesn't mean it's alive, dummy. The only way to change a population is to have the positively affected organisms pass on their genes. You really want to go toe-to-toe on evolution?
 

Kdall

BANNED
Banned
You are, i jumped in and opened the little ignore box on the page after seeing what people were quoting you saying to respond to your outrageous argument to have some fun. Ive never seen more ridiculous reasoning in my life.

Please do continue.

Gladly. I don't run from what scares me
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
Why should any of that mean that two people of the same sex should not be allowed to have sexual intercourse if they both are willing?
A rape victim can be presumed to be an unwilling participant I think.:plain:

I don't care what 2 adults do in their own bedroom provided they keep it there and they arent married to someone else or involve anyone else and don't demand i accept it or agree with it or push it on me to say its ok or insist that God thinks its ok or demand i cater to it and demand i cant say God is certainly NOT ok with it.
 

Kdall

BANNED
Banned
I don't care what 2 adults do in their own bedroom provided they keep it there and they arent married to someone else or involve anyone else and don't demand i accept it or agree with it or push it on me to say its ok or insist that God thinks its ok or demand i cater to it and demand i cant say God is certainly NOT ok with it.

If you want to deny homosexuals the right to marry, then you actually are butting into their private lives. The American Constitution separates church and state. What God wants, or more properly what you think He wants, doesn't matter. If it's based in religion (ANY religion), it doesn't apply
 

musterion

Well-known member
I don't care what 2 adults do in their own bedroom provided they keep it there

That's not loving.

and they arent married to someone else
That's oppressive.

or involve anyone else
That's judgmental.

and don't demand i accept it
That's unreasaonable.

or agree with it
That's bigoted.

or push it on me to say its ok or insist that God thinks its ok
That's bitter clinger talk.

or demand i cater to it
That's legally actionable now.

and demand i cant say God is certainly NOT ok with it.
That's hateful, and will soon be a legal offense too.
 
Top