LGBT Figures From Left-Leaning Group

[Johnny Tremain]

There isn't enough information on the gay adoption thing yet. Although one story I read by someone who was raised that way, paints the outlook for straight kids brought up by gay parents to look very promising for the kids development.

Once you cross the line with adoption--you have committed a crime of incalculable depth.
A kid who is in the situation of needing adoption--needs a better shot at life than this.
A two-parent home--a mother and a father--is the answer.
Not to be a social experiment by two selfish people.

Children--are for heterosexuals. Period. Is that not where they come from?

Worse still--lesbians who get pregnant "some other way" to have a social experiment they can parade around a LGBT meetings and make a mockery of life. I have seen this--with my own eyes. An abomination.

Want to be a 'parent'--go volunteer at a decent and good orphanage.
Don't wangle a human to "play" with like a little "dolly" or a Chihuahua.
They are NOT made of plastic and vinyl.

 

[Dr.Who]

Are you going to be okay with bigamy? Child & adult marriages?

Does it really matter in a legal sense if I am ok with it? Laws should not be made to dictate one persons preference for the social order. They are made to protect kids when it comes to marriage.

Bigamy. Well it was good enough for Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon. Christians are told to have one wife but there are an awful lot of people out there that are not Christians.

Children can't enter into contracts.

 

[Dr.Who]

I think the main reason for marriage is how to deal with any possible children.

This is obviously not a gay issue, so why would it be needed--in the same way as in heterosexual unions.

Now--gay "marriages" want to adopt children--which is another issue entirely and if you have ever seen what two lesbians do to a male child--you know the meaning of the word "abomination".

Some are good and great--it is true--but make it a RIGHT--and I can assure you it will be devastating to many defenseless children.
We should never subsidize and promulgate people who want to vent their hatreds and frustrations and mental illnesses upon a child as their way to "get back" at the world that they perceive "wronged" them.

Decent "orphanages" of some sort should be within our reach to deal with the massive amount of children who get no guidance or care from their horrible parents. Drug addicts, drunks, crack-heads, perpetual felons--you name it.

Remove their children--or you doom them to the exact same lifestyle and swell the criminal population even more.

It happens fare too often that politicians make laws based on similar sentiments rather than on what we can all agree on.

 

[Cruella]

Bigamy. Well it was good enough for Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon. Christians are told to have one wife but there are an awful lot of people out there that are not Christians.

Children can't enter into contracts.

What does the practice of ancient customs have to do with this? The Mayans believed in human sacrafices to their fertility and moon gods. This is about the perversion of social norms and it's debilitous effect on society as a whole. There are already groups out there pushing for bigamy, incest and child union changes to our laws. Are they a small segment of society? Yes. Can they get these laws passed over time? Apparently so.

 

[Dr.Who]

What does the practice of ancient customs have to do with this? The Mayans believed in human sacrafices to their fertility and moon gods. This is about the perversion of social norms and it's debilitous effect on society as a whole. There are already groups out there pushing for bigamy, incest and child union changes to our laws. Are they a small segment of society? Yes. Can they get these laws passed over time? Apparently so.

IMO perversion is an alteration of norms from what is right (or intended by God) to what is (not origianlly intended) wrong not merely from what is traditional to what is alternative.

"perverting" social norms against bigamy would therefore be a change that is neither right nor wrong from a judeo-christian heritage when applied to non-christians. God does not oppose bigamy except for Christian leaders. In fact, bigamy was an important part of the social safety net of the bible to provide for widows or poor woman who needed a provider.

"perverting" accepted social norms from what is presently accepted but wrong to what is right would be welcome. For example it is right to love ones neighbor as oneself. But the vast majority of Americans love themselves far more than their neighbor. This is a social norm that should be "perverted"

 

[Johnny Tremain]

IMO perversion is an alteration of norms from what is right (or intended by God) to what is (not origianlly intended) wrong not merely from what is traditional to what is alternative.

"perverting" social norms against bigamy would therefore be a change that is neither right nor wrong from a judeo-christian heritage when applied to non-christians. God does not oppose bigamy except for Christian leaders. In fact, bigamy was an important part of the social safety net of the bible to provide for widows or poor woman who needed a provider.

"perverting" accepted social norms from what is presently accepted but wrong to what is right would be welcome. For example it is right to love ones neighbor as oneself. But the vast majority of Americans love themselves far more than their neighbor. This is a social norm that should be "perverted"

Pleads a strong case for bestiality, as well.

 

[Cruella]

"perverting" social norms against bigamy would therefore be a change that is neither right nor wrong from a judeo-christian heritage when applied to non-christians. God does not oppose bigamy except for Christian leaders. In fact, bigamy was an important part of the social safety net of the bible to provide for widows or poor woman who needed a provider.

I don't know of one woman who would share a husband with another woman. Most commune living I've heard of ended in disaster.

 

[dogtowner]

I don't know of one woman who would share a husband with another woman. Most commune living I've heard of ended in disaster.

made more sense in different times when women prized security quite a lot more than they have to do these days.

 

[Cruella]

made more sense in different times when women prized security quite a lot more than they have to do these days.

How far back are you going to find this was common practice or ever acceptable to women?

 

[dogtowner]

How far back are you going to find this was common practice or ever acceptable to women?

well now for some. more commonly 1850's through early-ish 1900's here. Probably still in effect in the third world. life and death has a way of opening up whats acceptable.

 

[Cruella]

well now for some. more commonly 1850's through early-ish 1900's here. Probably still in effect in the third world. life and death has a way of opening up whats acceptable.

I've been doing genealogy for a long time, going back into the 1600's, and have never ran across a situation where there was bigamy involved. Not in this country or even into Europe.

 

[dogtowner]

I've been doing genealogy for a long time, going back into the 1600's, and have never ran across a situation where there was bigamy involved. Not in this country or even into Europe.

Lookin for love in all thr wrong places Cru.look west not east. security came early to europeans. have to look to wilder places and ones with urgent needs for numbers. obviously I mean the american west parts of which were/are famously known for it.

 

[dogtowner]

before I lost the ability to edit I would have added that you could find it right on a cable channel near you.