A war on gay persons still at school

[floo]

Oh Leo, how could you? I apologize if my belief in knowing and following the rules and never signing something you don't agree with has put a wrinkle in you panties. Nothing good comes from teens having sex, ANY kind of sex. And I won't apologize for believing that Mr. Leo.

Matty, whatever, you are what you are. Too funny you!

As long as a teenager is over the age of consent, and in a steady relationship there is no harm in having  sexual relationship with a partner, gay or straight. In fact if one is intending to marry the person concerned, it is daft not to know if you are sexually compatible before tying the knot! I married at 19.

[Anchorman]

Hmmmmm;
Nothing good?
You mean the LORD jesus wasn't good?
Necause ,ost scholars - evangelical scho;lars at that - reckon Mary was a young teenager at best when her firstborn - Jesus - was born.
The rest of Jesus' siblings - by Joseph, would have followed soon afterward...if Mary and Joseph were normal human beings living in Judea at the time we know they were.

To be fair, I don't think any sex was allegedly involved in this gods incarnation of himself in the avatar Jesus, was it? The later siblings, yes...

O.

-
OK, leaving out the virgin birth which I accept. whilst you don't - but that's another thread - if Mary were an average girl in first century Palestine, then early pregnancy would be the norm. Anything else would be a cause celebre in the local area.
Late preganancies were very much the exception.

[Owlswing]

The problem they [Christians] have is that trying to maintain the nonsense that the best guide to social and/or sexual morals in current times is a book about an element of middle-eastern culture in antiquity, which is about as sensible as asking NASA to plan their first manned mission to Mars based on the 1953 edition of the 'Boys Book of Space' and a big box of Meccano.   

Beautiful comparison! I wish that I had thought of that!

[OH MY WORLD!]

Matty,
Your stunted title is "A war on gay persons still at school" Duh! A parents reaction to their gay children is NOT a school's problem. Duh. So if a parent can't love their gay child, that parent shouldn't be a parent. If some suggest a parent can only love a child if they accept that child's life style, well those people are stunted.  And if a student enrolls in a school that has certain rules but that kid goes right ahead and lies and then breaks rules, I expect the school to enforce their rules. Most schools have no anti gay policies so that kid should be attending a school where he agrees to and actually does obey the rules.

Oh yes Floo and Gordon, that sexual revolution has been such a wonderful thingy hasn't it. The steep increase in STDs, single moms ending up living off others tax dollars cause daddy ran, and the murdering of babies in the womb. Ya that Bible is so old fashioned, what a wonderful world we have now with sex restrictions done away with. Either one of ya been to Vegas? It's sickening what is peddled along the streets in brochures handed out by the sex industry to adults walking along with their children. What a great thing your sex revolution has given us.

So floo, I get that sex is nothing but that to you, but to billions of people it is something more and it is something shared between husband and wife. That's a beautiful thing. Your view is cheap and clinical.

[Shaker]

So if a parent can't love their gay child, that parent shouldn't be a parent.

How do you propose that such a parent finds out that their child is gay before they have a child?

An astonishingly stupid statement even by your usual standards, canoe, which is saying something.

[Rhiannon]

So if a parent can't love their gay child, that parent shouldn't be a parent.

How do you propose that such a parent finds out that their child is gay before they have a child?

An astonishingly stupid statement even by your usual standards, camoe, which is saying something.

Doesn't he mean that if you can't love a child regardless of their sexual orientation then you shouldn't have children at all? Not just have them and hope they turn out the way you want?

My bestest mate at school was gay and when his adopted mother found out she said, 'why couldn't we have been given a straight one?' I think that's what JC is alluding to. We don't get to choose our kids and if we can't love and accept them for who they are we shouldn't be parents. Unfortunately though many parents can't accept their kids for all kinds of stupid reasons. 

[Shaker]

Doesn't he mean that if you can't love a child regardless of their sexual orientation then you shouldn't have children at all? Not just have them and hope they turn out the way you want?

He may have meant that - but then, the obvious solution for such a person is to put their Bible down and stop being a dick, I'd have thought.

[OH MY WORLD!]

Shaker, are you suggesting that a child is indeed a child before it's birth? Well praise the Lord if you have had a change of heart!

[Shaker]

Shaker, are you suggesting that a child is indeed a child before it's birth? Well praise the Lord if you have had a change of heart!

No, I'm not. Can't you read?

[OH MY WORLD!]

My parents loved me unconditionally, and they would have asked me to leave if I was up to something they could not condone. Wouldn't make me stomp my feet and cry that they don't love me anymore. Wouldn't make me scream, it's all about me therefore they have to change their beliefs. People need to grow up and find some spine donors.

Shaker, at least a monkey on a rock has a heart and doesn't fear the warmth of the sun. And they are good critters, never going on a dirty Marxist rants calling people holding their Bibles dicks. You are so disgusting and I pity you.

[Owlswing]

My parents loved me unconditionally, and they would have asked me to leave if I was up to something they could not condone. Wouldn't make me stomp my feet and cry that they don't love me anymore. Wouldn't make me scream, it's all about me therefore they have to change their beliefs. People need to grow up and find some spine donors.

Shaker, at least a monkey on a rock has a heart and doesn't fear the warmth of the sun. And they are good critters, never going on a dirty Marxist rants calling people holding their Bibles dicks. You are so disgusting and I pity you.

When, if ever, "people holding their Bibles" start to actually obey the Bible IN ITS ENTIRETY I will stop thinking of them as Dicks, sanctimonious, overbearing, unpleasnt hypocritical Dicks who preach one thing and do another.

You and others like you run for the Bible when it suits you and forget it when it doesn't.

You cannot have it both ways!

[Outrider]

And if a student enrolls in a school that has certain rules but that kid goes right ahead and lies and then breaks rules, I expect the school to enforce their rules. Most schools have no anti gay policies so that kid should be attending a school where he agrees to and actually does obey the rules.

How many students enrol themselves in schools? In the main, children are educated at the establishment either of their parents' or the state's selection.

Oh yes Floo and Gordon, that sexual revolution has been such a wonderful thingy hasn't it. The steep increase in STDs, single moms ending up living off others tax dollars cause daddy ran, and the murdering of babies in the womb.

The increase in STDs has been a proliferation - there are more varieties, more widely known - but the actual increase in incidence isn't far outside of the growth of population. Single parent families are more an issue of marital breakdown and the availability of divorce, which is only an issue if you presume that single-parent families are intrinsically a problem. Babies are never 'murdered' in the womb - in the majority, abortions aren't conducted on babies without extreme justification, foetuses and blastocysts are terminated in the womb.

Ya that Bible is so old fashioned, what a wonderful world we have now with sex restrictions done away with.

Perfect, no. Better? Absolutely.

Either one of ya been to Vegas? It's sickening what is peddled along the streets in brochures handed out by the sex industry to adults walking along with their children. What a great thing your sex revolution has given us.

So the fact that some Americans have switched worship of God for worship of money (or mixed the two, in some cases) means that sexual liberation is bad?

So floo, I get that sex is nothing but that to you, but to billions of people it is something more and it is something shared between husband and wife. That's a beautiful thing. Your view is cheap and clinical.

Or husband and husband. Or wife and wife. Or husband and wife and wife. So long as no-one is deceiving or co-ercing anyone, where's the problem?

O.

[Leonard James]

Or husband and husband. Or wife and wife. Or husband and wife and wife. So long as no-one is deceiving or co-ercing anyone, where's the problem?

O.

The problem is the width of the mind that is trying to work it out, and minds a notoriously susceptible to the vice-like grip of religion narrowing them.

In some cases squeezing them to become a one-way street.

[Owlswing]

Or husband and husband. Or wife and wife. Or husband and wife and wife. So long as no-one is deceiving or co-ercing anyone, where's the problem?

O.

The problem is the width of the mind that is trying to work it out, and minds a notoriously susceptible to the vice-like grip of religion narrowing them.

In some cases squeezing them to become a one-way street.

Moderator: content removed.

[Outrider]

Come on guys, aren't we better than this? 

O.

[Shaker]

I'm not 

[Outrider]

I'm not 

Shouldn't we be trying to be, then? 

There's a thread sprang back into action today about why the forum isn't attracting new members... I wonder...

O.

[Shaker]

I'm not 

Shouldn't we be trying to be, then? 

There's a thread sprang back into action today about why the forum isn't attracting new members... I wonder...

O.

I suspect I know why the forum isn't attracting new members, and it's quite simple - because the forum is tiny and because it's a closed shop known only to those who are already members (i.e. ex-Beebers). It's completely lost amongst the bazillions of online forums/discussion boards. It's not known; it needs to be publicised and advertised to get the name around.

[Rhiannon]

To attract new members we'd need to be active on social media (Twitter etc) and that would mean someone volunteering to take the job on. And can you imagine how exciting that'd be?

I don't think we can say it's just that some people here are rude that deters new members. Mumsnet is mahoosive and it's also the most terrifying forum out there. We do have a big issue with crazy volumes of spammers on a daily basis though - I reckon Gordon checks thirty a day, maybe more.

[Owlswing]

I'm not 

Shouldn't we be trying to be, then? 

There's a thread sprang back into action today about why the forum isn't attracting new members... I wonder...

O.

I am an ex-Beeber and I think that the small number of members results in a lot of threads, threads on subjects which could be provocative of thought and extensive in discussion, lasting about three posts before they become repeats of dozens of other similar threads with exactly the same protagonists posting exactly the same pro and con posts and achieving nothing positive.

Under the haeding of "Religion" I can read an OP and predict, almost word for word, what Hope, Sassy, Floo, Nearly Sane, Bashful Anthony, Johnny Canoe, Shaker, Leonard James and some others are going to post to the thread.

Without wishing to be rude, I think the reason there are so few new members ids that possible new members will read a few threads that might interest them, see what has been posted and decide that the ongoing repetition of 'cast-in-concrete' opinions is, quite frankly, boring!

Also the quite obvious derogatory attitudes and comments of some posters to and about other posters when their religion or religious beliefs are questioned and/or criticised is unpleasant in the extreme, regardless of how appropriate the questioning/criticism may be, and in this regard I must freely admit my own guilt.   

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Might help to not equate gay s*x to murder as you have done multiple times in the past.

But I have also equated it to lying, failing to fulfill promises, cheating and many other forms of what society would regard as low-level wrong-doing, NS.  Its only people like you who seem determined to equate it specifically to more high-level wrong-doing.

That you are here quite brazenly equating what sexually-active consenting homosexual adults do with 'low-level wrong-doing' astonishes me - it confirms, as if it needed confirming, that some elements within Christianity are intrinsically homophobic no matter how much they bleat that they aren't.

There is a bright side though - since attitudes like this are no doubt assisting the on-going decline of Christianity.

Oh yes .... a dispute between Gays and Christians is mere cannon fodder for
Antitheists like Gordon.

[Shaker]

Yup 

[Leonard James]

Under the haeding of "Religion" I can read an OP and predict, almost word for word, what Hope, Sassy, Floo, Nearly Sane, Bashful Anthony, Johnny Canoe, Shaker, Leonard James and some others are going to post to the thread.

Ouch!