[quote=Keeper of the Light™]Jack: to paraphrase the whole mythos of GWAR.....
As plausible as the bible, matrix, and the flying spaghetti monster.
The Matrix... How is it that in the "future" all that's available are green screen monitors? What happened to color? Don't get me started...
Didn't know there was a biblical story behind GWAR. All that has to happen now is a few generations to be told the stories of GWAR's lives, then someone writes it down and a cult becomes a full-blown legimate religion.
I especially like the line about Aqua Net burning the ozone and melting the polar ice caps... Scientifically untrue for about 80 more years (it takes about 100 years for chemicals on the surface to reach the ozone), but damn funny!
So according to the Gwar bible, will gays be approved for adopting?
.
John Wilken
2002 Cavalier
2.2 Vin code 4
Auto
Well, John, according to the Slave Pit Funnies issue...4 i think, when they took on Cardinal Syn, And the Sexocutioner delivered Oderous' and Slymenstra Hymen's Baby, it did have a footnote of "(Oderus') idea of "Child Rearing" involves anal intercourse."
So, i don't think they'd have an issue with this
. I can just picture in 500 years from now someone finds issues 1-7 of the Slave Pit Funnies and a whole religion gets built upon it...
Besdies, anything, withing thje bounds of probablility, is possible, however, most concepts may be improbable.
So the matrix is possible---however unlikely it may be.
Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
I would worry about the adopted kid of the gay couple. The kid would grow up to believe that gay is acceptable, which would make him/her more intolerable to receiving the goodnews. It's the wrong definition of family and sinful to say the least. The kid would need a good mother and father, but that's a whole other issue in today's agenda of divorce and broken upbringings. We can't look to blame a Christ centered church for that, because it's the families of today who are avoiding God all together. Unfortunate, but its the truth to why we have obscured the definition of marriage and have followed each other into this pit. I believe if men could have babies by producing an offspring of their own biology, then they should be able to keep it, but since that is not possible, I would have to say no.
Smile, Jesus loves you!!!!! <><
Manchild-ProPain, out now, Sphereofhiphop.com
Oh great...
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
jbody4jc wrote:I would worry about the adopted kid of the gay couple. The kid would grow up to believe that gay is acceptable, which would make him/her more intolerable to receiving the goodnews. It's the wrong definition of family and sinful to say the least. The kid would need a good mother and father, but that's a whole other issue in today's agenda of divorce and broken upbringings. We can't look to blame a Christ centered church for that, because it's the families of today who are avoiding God all together. Unfortunate, but its the truth to why we have obscured the definition of marriage and have followed each other into this pit. I believe if men could have babies by producing an offspring of their own biology, then they should be able to keep it, but since that is not possible, I would have to say no.
I never said a married couple I said a GAY COUPLE. I agree that the word marraige should be used only when referring to the joining of a man and a woman. But why should a deprived child be held back for having a good life because a gay couple want to adopt them ? Shouldn't the childs best interest come first ? And if that were to mean he or she would be placed in a gay couples home that he / she may recieve all the food / attention / love that they need why shouldn't they be allowed to ?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
jbody4jc wrote:I would worry about the adopted kid of the gay couple. The kid would grow up to believe that gay is acceptable, which would make him/her more intolerable to receiving the goodnews. It's the wrong definition of family and sinful to say the least. The kid would need a good mother and father, but that's a whole other issue in today's agenda of divorce and broken upbringings. We can't look to blame a Christ centered church for that, because it's the families of today who are avoiding God all together. Unfortunate, but its the truth to why we have obscured the definition of marriage and have followed each other into this pit. I believe if men could have babies by producing an offspring of their own biology, then they should be able to keep it, but since that is not possible, I would have to say no.
to quote a movie i rather enjoy... "your god doesn't live here"
R.I.P. Brian St.Germain
Good quote Laura.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
jbody4jc wrote:I would worry about the adopted kid of the gay couple. The kid would grow up to believe that gay is acceptable, which would make him/her more intolerable to receiving the goodnews. It's the wrong definition of family and sinful to say the least. The kid would need a good mother and father, but that's a whole other issue in today's agenda of divorce and broken upbringings. We can't look to blame a Christ centered church for that, because it's the families of today who are avoiding God all together. Unfortunate, but its the truth to why we have obscured the definition of marriage and have followed each other into this pit. I believe if men could have babies by producing an offspring of their own biology, then they should be able to keep it, but since that is not possible, I would have to say no.
then what is the "right" definition of family? a father who commits suicide and a mother who sues you based on a lie? because thats what i got for parents. hell, i wish i had a gay couple raise me, wish i could have been lucky enough to have a loving family.
and on the "grow up to beleive gay is acceptable" WTF does that mean, gay is acceptable, its perfectly acceptable. its two people loving eachother. what is wrong with that? this is why i get confused when christans who say we should love eachother complain about gays. they love eachoter and don't hurt anyone. what the hell is the problem??
you know...its kinda funny how the people who aren't christain understand peace, forgiveness, and respect more than christains seem to
You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan
(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)
Robby002 wrote:"God does live here."
-Rob
god is a figment of the human mind, created to make themselves feel better about the direction they take in life.
R.I.P. Brian St.Germain
Many many Christians are confused about what the Bible and the Universal church say about the matter. It is clear, if you read it.
Simply being homosexual is not sinful. Co-habitating, and loving in a homosexual relationship is not sinful. The actual sexual act of a homosexual couple (or whatever) is sinful. It is sinful in much the same way as masterbation is sinful. It is a waste of life creating resources. Sperm with no chance of fertalizing an egg. Cast to the wind so-to-speak. Therein lies the sin.
Better than that, many, many Christians do not understand the nature of sin, in so much as its main purpose is to remind us that we are not perfect and that we must be humble in the eyes of the Lord and recognise the perfection we cannot attain. Sin is not irrevrsable, or unforgivable, in fact it is the foundation upon which we can improve ourselves. The first step is recognising your own sin so that you may do the truely ritous act of forgiving others their offences against you.
Take the sex away and you have two people (likely) in a loving relationship caring for a child the best way they know how. I'm confident that Jesus would not frown upon that. How different is it from two war widows or two sisters raising a child left orfanned by their father or a father and son working together to raise a child who's mother died of a disese?
Remove the sex act and it all becomes rather innocuous doesn't it?
To quote one of the more famous Canadians "The government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."
PAX
hmm i didn't realize that about the bible regarding homosexuals. I was led to beleive that the bible said that homosexuality was wrong plain and simple. thanks for clearing that up.
and yes it becomes quite innocuous once sex is removed. its the same thing as if my brothers wife died and me and my brother raised his kids, it would be no different than a homosexual couple
You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan
(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)
I think the government wants us to believe gay is a choise.
But the Government has a place in the bedroom when a 30 year old wants to have sex with a 13 year old
and God might be a figment of the human mind but it does exist if you believe it.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think Catholics are the ones who believe Gay is a sin.
Maybe is because they strongly believe you should pray to Mary and all girls
should be like her.
Let's see if I understand the general concensus...
1. If you take religion and the word "marriage" out of the equation, a "gay civil union" couple should be allowed to adopt.
2. Being "gay" isn't a sin, but having gay sex is. (doesn't the bible also say heterosexuals having anal is also a sin?)
3. Having straight parents doesn't automatically mean having a good upbringing
Did I miss anything?
.
John Wilken
2002 Cavalier
2.2 Vin code 4
Auto
What I posted is the official Catholic stance on the matter as explained to me by a priest.
There wouldn't be any children to adopt if all girls were like Mary. God only did that little trick once
PAX
lilbit01 wrote:Robby002 wrote:"God does live here."
-Rob
god is a figment of the human mind, created to make themselves feel better about the direction they take in life.
There not being a God is a figment of YOUR immagination to make you think you have control over everything.
Works both ways!
damn it Tristan,
you need to finish reading page 2, page 3, page 4, and page 5.
Lazy butt
damn it Tristan,
you need to finish reading page 2, page 3, page 4, and page 5.
Lazy butt
damn it Tristan,
you need to finish reading page 2, page 3, page 4, and page 5.
Lazy butt
The universal church is not the bible believing church. I wouldn't trust a source that doesn't preach from the living word. In the eyes of the God of the bible, being gay is a sin, end of discussion, whether you practice it through sex or not. Sinful thoughts preclude sinful actions. God knows your very thoughts.
Smile, Jesus loves you!!!!! <><
Manchild-ProPain, out now, Sphereofhiphop.com
jbody: So is apostacy, eating swine/cloven hooved animals, working on the Sabbath (which is STILL Friday, lest you believe a pagan interpretation of the bible) and several HUNDRED other miniscule things that aren't workable 2000 years on.
Being gay isn't expressly forbidden... God made the homosexuals that way. And yes, you did type this:
jbody4jc wrote:In the eyes of the God of the bible, being gay is a sin, end of discussion, whether you practice it through sex or not.
So, I suspect you've read Leveitcus, where it is instructed that man shall not lay down with man as he would with a woman, shaving one's beard and locks, eating non-kosher foods (ie, shrimp and other non-scaled fish), and committing fashion faux-pas by wearing clothes of 2 different fabrics.
It's also notable that Leveticus and Soddom & Gommorah are also in the same tome where Moses destroyed the 2 tablets with God's commandments on them.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm
I understand that you're coming at the issue from an inheirently closed-minded and conservative view of things, but the thing you need to know is that Homosexuals are NOT in and of themselves evil, no matter what was written 2000 years ago. Keep in mind the way that things were codified in the old testament, you'd be committing sin just by LOOKING at another woman, buying a razor with the intent to use it on your face or going to the barbers... instead of admiring another person (not inheirently lusty), keeping yourself shaven and hair trimmed neatly in order to keep yourself hygenic.
You need to also remember that The Old Testament was the division point, the difference between the end of a tyrannical, hateful and spiteful God, and the beginning of a new and (dare I say) enlightened God. It's like when a parent gets tired of yelling at a child and instead of expecting them to just know what to do, actually lets you do your thing, and learn how to do what you need to do. Jesus didn't just die for our sins, he lived so we could learn. I don't think Jesus ever said: Love thy God, Love thy neighbour as thyself... except if they're faggots.
You say you love your neighbour, but you don't let them live and let live. What would Jesus do?
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Robby002 wrote:damn it Tristan,
you need to finish reading page 2, page 3, page 4, and page 5.
Lazy butt
Holy triple post batman! Umm, i finished reading all the posts in this thread. No lazy butt here, but what are you getting at? The fact that i haven't posted since page 2 or 3? If so, I havent posted because I've no need to repeat the same thing over and over.
jbody4jc wrote:The universal church is not the bible believing church. I wouldn't trust a source that doesn't preach from the living word. In the eyes of the God of the bible, being gay is a sin, end of discussion, whether you practice it through sex or not. Sinful thoughts preclude sinful actions. God knows your very thoughts.
Bah. Just because
your god thinks homosexuals are sinful evil people, doesn't mean the rest of us should subscribe to your intolerant views. Luckily we don't have to because we live in a free country, one which is supposed to protect the minority from the majority. Thus there is no need to legislate your religious dogma. It's interesting that you can claim to be a good christian while preaching your hate and allowing children to grow up as wards of the state, unloved and just another number. But hey, at least you can keep them away from them there dirty homoooosexuaaaaals. Sinful evil people. Bah. -end rant-
Tristan wrote:Bah. Just because your god thinks homosexuals are sinful evil people, doesn't mean the rest of us should subscribe to your intolerant views.
Thus there is no need to legislate your religious dogma.
X2. I don't remember ever hearing about divorce being in the bible, but there's sure a lot of people getting divorced. And people even get re-married in a church after getting divorced, where is that chapter? Or is it acceptable because it's easier to understand than being gay?
.
John Wilken
2002 Cavalier
2.2 Vin code 4
Auto
Emor8t wrote:lilbit01 wrote:Robby002 wrote:"God does live here."
-Rob
god is a figment of the human mind, created to make themselves feel better about the direction they take in life.
There not being a God is a figment of YOUR immagination to make you think you have control over everything.
Works both ways!
very true...but that, in and of itself, SHOULD make a person stop and rethink anything they are going to say about other people. what they hold true does not necessarily mesh with the ideals of others.
R.I.P. Brian St.Germain
