{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/17/2015 9:26:08 PM
31
I'm Mormon, and I don't think that the lifestyle is a good choice for your eternal progression. One of the responsibilities of mankind given to is by god is to get together as man and woman and have children. If you live the gay lifestyle than you will never be able to have your own biological children.
That said I don't think anyone has the right to restrict your civil liberties. God has made us all responsible for our own actions and it's wrong of other to try and force you to do something. I believe that God still loves you and knows what you are feeling and understands what you have gone through in your life.
If any religious guy is mean to you then he is not following Christ's teachings. If Jesus were here he would try and teach the gay community, not destroy them, and he would love you since you are a child of god and a brother.
English
-
Anyways, we don't need any more children at this point.
-
Lol we always need more children. The earth is fully capable of supporting much more people than are alive today. It's a matter of using resources wisely to avoid wasting good food.
-
But we aren't, that's the thing.
-
But we could, if our leaders were responsible. The Mormon church for a long time exercised a principle called the law of consecration. Under this law there was no currency, only the trading of goods and services. Right now the world has enough resources for the entire world to live well and without any poverty, if it was spread evenly and justly. If we allowed a perfect person like Christ to decide where everything goes, then there would be no more hunger and poverty. This would also require humanity to be humble enough to sacrifice their decadence, which is why we don't live under this law now, since we aren't ready for it.
-
And if we aren't ready for the policy necessary to support further population growth, we aren't ready for further population growth. Therefore we don't need more children.
-
Well we constantly need to have more children for various reasons. If we just stopped having children that would be a problem. There is merit in being wise with how many children you have. Mormons for example are freely allowed to take advantage of birth control and family planning. They are still encouraged to have children but are told to pray about it to make sure they are making the right decision with how many children they have.
-
The point is that gay people not having children isn't a problem, and shouldn't be used as an excuse to discriminate against them.
-
My intention isn't to discriminate against them because they can't have children. My point is that they are missing out. Having children is a great blessing that teaches you a lot about becoming more like Christ and God. You become a teacher, role model, and provider for your children and that triggers a lot of personal character growth, and Mormons believe that your family ties continue into the afterlife. Thats why the Mormon church encourages everyone to have children, since it becomes a learning experience. Part of that experience of course includes learning to act as man and wife in tandem, and that's something that gay people are missing out on as well.
-
Edited by Demagogue: 2/18/2015 12:29:20 AMI'm not confident you've understood anything I've said. Gay people CAN have children, and the traditional husband/wife roles AREN'T tied to biological sex!
-
Gay people can't have their own biological children within their partnership. Yes the mother and father roles are tied into their sex. Sorry.
-
Edited by Demagogue: 2/18/2015 1:01:40 AMSo? No they aren't. If you want to restrict people rights because of who they are, you better bring proof.
-
I'm not restricting anyone's rights. I'm just expressing my opinions that are based around my faith. You are getting offended and I don't intend for you to be.
-
Edited by Demagogue: 2/18/2015 1:15:46 AMIf you don't allow someone to get married or raise children outside of a traditional union you are restricting their rights. Is that not what you support?
-
I believe that it's not right but I don't think people shouldn't be allowed to live how they choose. That's why it's great to live in America. I can have a different opinion than you and it's ok. If people really want to be gay then they will be gay. I may not agree with it but that's alright. I take advantage of this myself. I am allowed to be religious even though people tell me I'm a moron for doing so. If the op wants to get married to another man and adopt a child then he has every right to. Am I not allowed to express my opinion or encourage him to try something different?
-
You're totally allowed, just as I am allowed to tell you why I think your position is wrong.
-
Great! Glad we can agree!
-
Actually if you are gay, you can still technically have a biological child.
-
What do you mean? Like if he had sex with a woman one time for the sole purpose of having a baby?
-
Sorry for late reply: In vitro fertilization and surrogates. Basically you do not need to have sexual intercourse with someone in order to have children. Just need egg/sperm donor and you are set
-
I believe that both males and females offer different gifts to their children. There are certain things that come easier to males than they do to females, an vice versa. I believe that if two males raise a child the child might be missing out on a female influence. That's why we were created this way, male and female.
-
Yeah, the child might be missing out on the influence of a biological mother's presence in the household, but ultimately, children just need unconditional love, support, and discipline from their parents -- whether or not it comes from a straight or gay couple. Biologically speaking, humans have evolved for sexual intercourse to be the means of fertilizing an egg with sperm. However, I believe everyone has a right to bear/raise children regardless of sexual orientation. We have the means and the technology to do this, and no one should be told they shouldn't be allowed to have children. However, you do bring up a valid point about the benefits of a heterosexual couple raising their own children. Like I said though, all children need is a little bit of love and some guidance on the side.
-
You don't need to have sex to make babies.
-
I commented on this in another reply if you want to reference that.
-
Edited by Demagogue: 2/17/2015 10:17:20 PMI don't care what you believe unless you can prove the children are actually harmed, "Gender roles are culture based, and while most cultures distinguish only two genders, some recognize more. Androgyny, for example, has been proposed as a third gender. Other societies have been claimed to see more than five genders, and some non-Western societies have three genders – man, woman and third gender." Also, that's sexist AF.
-
I can't prove it which is why I prefaced everything with "we believe." What's sexist about what I said? We value men and women equally and they have an equal part in the family decisions and structure. Let me ask you this: does a person's thoughts and opinions have any weight in determining what gender you are born as? If a man decides later in life to be a woman, does that mean he is no longer genetically a male? In our church we place great value on becoming comfortable with the gender you were born with. There are some people who are born hermaphrodites, and for those people I believe for the most part they are given the freedom to decide what gender they want to be in life. However to be born a hermaphrodite is extremely rare.
