Replies

Sorry guys,,this may get me kicked off Free Republic but I don’t share the views of most posted here.

It can never be a bad thing if a child is wanted. Ever. There are plenty of hetero couples that have royally screwed up their children, harmed them or even killed them. I’ll leave the rest for God to judge.

I’m sure the tolerance flames will be burning me alive any minute now.

Unlike Liberals we tolerate dissenting views (even when we disagree, and I do with your point), so you shall not be attacked at least by most.

I disagree because this is not the natural plan that God had for the family. (Can he use this, and what happens in this person’s life-even being raised by homosexual “dads” (neither are since neither had intercourse for this baby to be created), sure God can and does care about this person, but they’ll be saved inspite of their circumstances not because of them, because they’re not God honoring.

-JS

I’m sure the tolerance flames will be burning me alive any minute now.

...not likely...but the drama queen flames might...

Austin, I would never dispute that two men or two women could do a good job at many parenting tasks--- in the sense of being able to feed, clothe, shelter and educate a child, be warm and responsive, shield him from danger, and foster his God-given gifts. These competencies may be found in SS couples as in mom & dad couples... as well as in orphanages, group homes, mother-grandmother households, or any number of permutations and combinations of caregivers. Clarence THomas was raised by his grandfather: so even a single-parent home can produce well-raised kids.

But the very fact that the child is set up for a planned adoption by two men or two women, means they -- or the agency that set it up --- think that there is nothing particularly desirable about natural fatherhood and motherhood and/or that a child has no right to his mother.

They're deficient in the very area where diversity and balance counts: diversity in relating to a father AND a mother, and balance in experiencing day by day the affective complementarity of marriage: of a man and a woman in a good marital relationship.

Walker Percy and his two younger brothers were raised well by their homosexual but singleton second cousin, William Alexander Percy, when their parents both (apparently) committed suicide. God protect those who are thrust by happenstance into a broken situation. Bless the caregivers, imperfect as they may be, who do as well as they can. Sometimes --- often --- a child could get stuck in a an unbalanced situation by tragedy or chance.

But it should not be imposed on any child by choice.

That's what's wrong with this whole situation. These homosexual men are not responding to the felt needs of a motherless child who needed somebody, some generous person to step into his broken situation and help him. No. They CREATED the broken situation by plan. They MADE that child motherless; they signed a contract that will KEEP him motherless; they paid the money and, via a tech team and a rented woman, they concocted a boy.

Though they may treat him well, as an expensive pet, they have already violated his dignity as a human being.

I frankly wouldn't have bothered to respond to your post until I read on your "about" page where you make a point of claiming: "I love God"

If you truly loved God, you would wholeheartedly rejoice in and defend His created order: "Male and Female He created them...", instead of defending those who reject and seek to pervert the God-ordained natural family.

You apparently choose to ignore the words of Jesus: "Why do you say that you love me, when you do not do as I say?" (this same Jesus who defined marriage as the union of a man + a woman).

One gets the impression that your professed religiosity is a sham, for you refuse to acknowledge God's ordained plan for the natural family consisting of a man and a woman united in lifelong marriage. It is God's wonderful design for the rearing of children and the continuance of society.

Did it not occur to you to ask: "What's wrong with this picture? Where is the child's mother?" Or to grieve: "That poor child will grow up without a mother!"

Instead, you make the wholly specious argument that "It can never be a bad thing if a child is wanted. Ever."

Huh? Are you serious? Never? As you must know, there is no shortage of pedophiles that "want" to have children (and tragically sometimes are able to adopt - and abuse - them). Nothing wrong with that?

You claim that "there are plenty of hetero couples that have screwed up their children" Serious? Do the math: homosexual couples the very definition of instability, and are MUCH MUCH more likely to break up, leaving the children even more "screwed up." But the high break-up rate of homosexual couples is apparently no concern to you (unlike all those nasty hetersexual couples).

"I'll leave the rest for God to Judge." Indeed, a fearsome judgment awaits those who trample His truth underneath their feet. If you claim to be a person of faith, you would do well to heed the warning: "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil."

Regarding your final comment: "I’m sure the tolerance flames will be burning me alive any minute now" - it will not be so-called "intolerance" of those who seek only to uphold God's standards, that will be the cause of anyone being "burned alive." A word of warning to the wise.

It can never be a bad thing if a child is wanted. Ever.

Only if you redefine the fact that homosexuality is a sexual deviancy with a long history of corrosive character traits that put it at odds with a well adjusted family environment.

Eating bugs may be preferable to starving, but that doesn't make eating bugs good for you, and certainly not something to be promoted, emulated, or celebrated.