What is being proposed and pushed upon us by the gay lobby is an all-new family unit, consisting of a mother-and-mother or a father-and-father with or without children.

A choice is set before us : that of sacrificing to the gods of political correctness, or of considering the most innocent and fragile members of our society - our children. If we choose the former, it is the children who will be that sacrifice. Why?

Because the family is the building block of society. When the building block of society falls, society falls with it. Western society is under threat.

There is sufficient evidence that gays and lesbians are far too volatile and unstable as a group to justify risking our society and especially the safety of our children.

The negative impact children may suffer simply from having two parents of the same sex - or having friends and neighbours in that predicament - is alarming considering the historical significant higher rates of suicidal tendency, promiscuity, pedophilia, drug abuse, aids, multiple partners, and domestic violence among homosexuals.

The question we should be asking ourselves is society really willing to risk its future for the sake of political correctness and tolerence?

We have not yet seen the end of the domino effect of societal deterioration caused by humans unwillingness to follow God's ways and truths...

Coach

Those relationships (M/M & F/F with or without children) are already in existence. Back in the late 1970s I had as neighbours a lesbian couple, the older of whem had previously been married and had children. Her marriage 'failed' but the lesbian relationship was working. Her children were not preteens however.

The idea of two women living together in this sort of relationship did not shock or distress me in the slightest. As I said, this was 30 years ago.

Do I think that this is the idea situation for the raising of children? Well, no. However I also do not see the bickering that happens in a percentage of heterosexual relationship breakdown being conducive to the raising of children either. I particularly detest either parent trying to exclude the other parent from their children's lives out of spite or because it is more convenient for the residential parent's new partner to be called 'mummy' or 'daddy'.

Modern marriage really cannot be held up as the magnificient institution that some people think. Heterosexual marriage can be good, even great, it can also stink. Before Christians start thumping the idea of gay marriage, maybe we should be removing the log from our own eye before dealing with the mote in some-one esle's.

I would hope that people in general, both gay and straight, and transgender (and there are more transgender people with children out there than many people would realise), would actually be trying to do the best by their children.

Coach. Have you tried getting a life, outside your own narrow insulated exsistence. Is preaching hatred and damnation all you have to offer humanity. You have your extreme "religous beliefs", live with it and you will be respected. Impose your medieval beliefs on others, then be prepared for a harsh response to your bigotry and demeaning of your "religous beliefs".

Hamlet
Thank you once for attempting to prove that God hates homosexuals [&/or their behaviour], however the quote you’ve provided does no such thing & is irrelevant to the point I was making.

Allow me to quote a theologian on the verses from 1 Corinthians 6 you’ve quoted OUT OF CONTEXT!

“The two Greek words translated "male prostitutes" and "sodomites" in v. 9 of the NRSV are malakoi and arsenokoitai. Malakoi means "effeminate," "weak," or "soft" and is the word used of "call-boys" whom older men (arsenokoitai) took to bed. (The latter term is also the one used in 1 Tim. 1:10, which appears in another list of vices.) The context here in 1 Cor. is one of HETEROSEXUAL immorality; homosexuality as such is NOT the topic at hand. Paul simply mentions the sort of abusive, exploitative homosexuality that goes on between young "call-boys" and their customers as one example of the sort of immorality Christians in Corinth should avoid. "This is what some of you used to be" implies only that some of the Corinthians were guilty of some of the vices Paul mentioned. Not much more can be made of this.”

As you can see Hamlet when the historical & linguistic context is introduced the verses actually mean something entirely different than what you’re implying. At least BD’s quote actually dealt with homosexuality.

Let’s consider the context of ALL of Paul’s verses about homosexuality shall we? As many verses make clear, Paul considered everyone to be born heterosexual. So where did homosexuals come from according to Paul? Homosexual behaviour was, according to Paul, a punishment by God for not worshipping correctly. LMAO. But we know that’s NOT the cause of homosexuality – biology is. Paul got it wrong! So ALL his writings on homosexuality are based on mistaken ideas concerning sexuality and therefore should be treated the same way. As the nonsense they are. That’s the context of Paul’s writings concerning homosexuality. Like it or not.

I have nothing against uniting people of the same sex.

But it is their misfortune they cannot have children and it should remain their misfortune they should not be allowed to raise children. Remain as it has since humanity began

This is what happens when normal people get addicted to reassuring themselves that the literal will of the almighty Creator is contained in a collection of ancient, poorly translated, politically abused arab folk tales.

If God hates homos, why does He keep producing them, and why hasn't He complained about it in 2000 years?