Oh Hamburgers!

Wikipedia I know, but I'm short of time right now. http://en.wikipedia....vior_in_animals If that doesn't satisfy you I am happy to dig deeper another time. Even if such behavior were to take place in animals, WE ARE NOT ANIMALS. WE are created in the image of the One True and Living God and HE says it's abomination. I will take HIS word over YOUR word any day. You said it wasn't found in nature, and I'm saying that's not accurate. You might believe that honosexuality is perverse & that it is sinful, but my point is being homosexual doesn't make you an unfit parent by rule... & KatyAnn I know the thread has gotten briefly side-tracked, but really I think it's in the spirit of the topic (what makes someone fit/unfit to parent).

Wikipedia I know, but I'm short of time right now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals If that doesn't satisfy you I am happy to dig deeper another time.

I understand your viewpoint, I think the part that I disagree with is how a Christian upbringing would be the only cure for things like hatred,murder,theft,envy,unrestrained lust etc. Many of those things are viewed as unlawful in many societies around the world, not all of them Christian. In fact those things are almost universally frowned upon as a general rule. Therefore I think a Christian family may be about as likely as a non Christian family to teach their children about these moral issues. I do agree that those morals are good ones to follow for any family, I think the area that we disagree is in regards to homosexuality specifically. I don't think it's an issue of mutual exclusivity (IE I think you can be both gay AND teach similar values on how to treat people properly). I also agree that parents who do not follow the morals regarding hate, murder, theft, etc etc are not fit to be parents. Again however, parents of all religions teach those same things. Same with homosexual couples. From a religious perspective I can see how homosexuality would be viewed as a sin, but I don't think it's along the same lines as these other social morals that we are discussing. Fox got people riled up about government fears through false (intentional or unintentional) telling of a news story? I'm shocked!

I agree raising a child is one of the most important duties a person can have - I'm currently taking part in it. We however are talking about what makes someone a fit or unfit parent - I understand that you believe that parenting should be bringing people up with Christian values. But does the lack of those values truly make someone an unfit parent/should they not be allowed to care for their child? That's what I've been trying to hone in on, and is the area that I disagree with you about. I have argued that being morbidly obese to the point you can't provide for your child could be seen as making someone unfit. You and BoldBeliever have made the claim that being homosexual makes one unfit because they are not being consistent with God's teachings. My problem with that statement is it makes a lot of people (not just homosexuals) considered unfit parents because of religious viewpoints, something I think is wrong. I do not think the state (or anyone) should take children away from their parents because they are Jewish, or Muslim, or Atheist, or homosexual, or whatever. I agree that tangible issues (abuse, neglect, threat of violence, etc) are all areas that justify deeming someone unfit as a parent... but I do not agree that someone should be unfit simply because they are gay or because they don't believe in a certain God. To me that viewpoint seems inconsistent. Homosexuals have ONE aspect that you consider perverse, but it is enough for you to deem them unfit parents. Don't Jews and Mormons & nonbelievers also have at least ONE aspect in their beliefs that you believe goes against God's desires for us? I don't see what makes one acceptable and one not... for example it seems perfectly reasonable to me that a homosexual couple could raise their child with some sense of morality, just like non believers, or Jews, or Mormons, or anyone else. In the same way, if you think that a problem with homosexuals raising children is they could "pass such perversion down to their children" is that not also true for Jews/Mormons/atheists? If Jewish parents pass their values on to a child is it not likely that those children will have a good chance of being Jewish too? Is that not also a "perversion" in your mind? Being theologically incorrect is not perverse. Homosexuality is against nature and harmful to the mind and the body. You don't grasp the concept of 'perverse' from what I can read. Actually homosexuality, bisexuality, same sex parenting etc is observable in nature among different types of animals. It's not something just humans have done. I also am not quite sure what you mean about homosexuality being harmful to the mind and the body, but I don't think that's necessarily true, or at least any more true than those in a heterosexual relationship. LOL! Thank you, a description is not necessary

How sad.....for you. No need to feel sad for me, I'm perfectly happy to be an American! I'm sure. But you don't feel exceptional or think we're special? I DO think that. Pride in this country has resulted in some great things. And I think that those in other countries should feel special as well. We (as countries) are all blessed in some way. Don't get me wrong - having pride in the country and working like we are special HAS and DOES benefit us greatly. Having something to motivate our work and work towards a mutual goal is a good thing for any country. I DO think we are a special country, but I think it's special because of what we & our ancestors have done for the country, not simply "because we're American". ...does that make sense? Maybe a minor point to make, but that's how I feel anyways.

I agree raising a child is one of the most important duties a person can have - I'm currently taking part in it. We however are talking about what makes someone a fit or unfit parent - I understand that you believe that parenting should be bringing people up with Christian values. But does the lack of those values truly make someone an unfit parent/should they not be allowed to care for their child? That's what I've been trying to hone in on, and is the area that I disagree with you about. I have argued that being morbidly obese to the point you can't provide for your child could be seen as making someone unfit. You and BoldBeliever have made the claim that being homosexual makes one unfit because they are not being consistent with God's teachings. My problem with that statement is it makes a lot of people (not just homosexuals) considered unfit parents because of religious viewpoints, something I think is wrong. I do not think the state (or anyone) should take children away from their parents because they are Jewish, or Muslim, or Atheist, or homosexual, or whatever. I agree that tangible issues (abuse, neglect, threat of violence, etc) are all areas that justify deeming someone unfit as a parent... but I do not agree that someone should be unfit simply because they are gay or because they don't believe in a certain God. To me that viewpoint seems inconsistent. Homosexuals have ONE aspect that you consider perverse, but it is enough for you to deem them unfit parents. Don't Jews and Mormons & nonbelievers also have at least ONE aspect in their beliefs that you believe goes against God's desires for us? I don't see what makes one acceptable and one not... for example it seems perfectly reasonable to me that a homosexual couple could raise their child with some sense of morality, just like non believers, or Jews, or Mormons, or anyone else. In the same way, if you think that a problem with homosexuals raising children is they could "pass such perversion down to their children" is that not also true for Jews/Mormons/atheists? If Jewish parents pass their values on to a child is it not likely that those children will have a good chance of being Jewish too? Is that not also a "perversion" in your mind?

So basically your answer is 'yes' to the question "are Christians the only ones fit to raise children?". You're entitled to your belief.

How sad.....for you. No need to feel sad for me, I'm perfectly happy to be an American!

It's the same as the title of this thread. if I'm not mistaken ( Please correct me if I'm wrong Bold Believer ) Magog is believed by Bold Believer to be either satan or the spirit of anti-christ, which is at work perverting the minds of people, pulling them away from GOD. Homosexuals who are parents, teach there children by there very behavior that it's ok to disregard what GOD says simply because they lust for it, or desire it. That is just plain wrong. You say "don't say it's sinful", well I can't do that. GOD said it is sinful, I will not back off like a coward what GOD said just because someone else might not like it. If you don't like that it is sinful then your arguement is with GOD not me, not Bold Believer. The enemy has blinded people into thinking that things like the op post is ok, perverting things. Trying to Turn that which is good into evil, and that which is evil into good. Only by seeking Christ and his truth, accepting Christ as savior and Lord of our lives, can any of us hope to escape the snares of the enemy. This can also be directed to BoldBeliever since he posted above before I finished responding to you, but I think it's applicable to both of you. Do you have the same stance against Jewish parents? After all, they don't believe Jesus was God, which (according to you) would be disregarding what God says. Do you have the same stance against Mormon parents? After all, they adhere to the Book of Mormon as holy text, which according to many Christians would be perverting God's message. How about atheists? How about agnostics? How about any other parents with non-christian beliefs? Are you willing to take your belief to the logical extreme? Unless you can show a tangible reason outside of "it's sinful" I can only assume you think Christians are the only ones who are fit parents. No hard feelings taken

So because two women or two men might hug, kiss, or hold hands, they shouldn't be allowed to raise children? What damage do you suppose is being done to the children when they see their parents showing that they love one another? Which child has a better family life: the one with gay moms who love eachother, or the one with an abusive father and a drug addicted mother? On the spectrum of "bad parent" I would put "being gay" at the far far bottom. Regarding the obesity thing: I agree it's up to the parents to determine who should assist them in childcare. If they can't/won't do that however, the government SHOULD step in and it IS in their prerogative to 'interfere' if no other efforts are being made. Let me ask you this: if the children WERE getting proper care from an assistant, how did this case even get to court/how would anyone have had a reason to think the children were in danger? If no one is there to take care of the children it become's the government's job to stand for the underrepresented (the kids).

I feel that American exceptional-ism is a belief held exclusively by Americans Do I think America is an exceptional country? Absolutely. Do I believe in American exceptionalism? Nope.

Give me a reason homosexual couples shouldn't be allowed to raise children in the US. Show me why they specifically are unfit. I've explained why someone morbidly obese may not be fit: they can't play with their child, they can't protect them from harm (how are they going to whisk their child out of the street if they can't get out of bed?), etc. And "it's sinful" isn't a good answer because that could be applied to far more couples than homosexual ones. BECAUSE THEY PRACTICE PERVERSION. END OF DISCUSSION. What specifically. Have sex? I should hope they don't do that in front of their children. If they did it would be just as wrong if a heterosexual couple had sex in front of their children. Anyways, I already said "it's sinful" isn't a good answer, which is basically what you gave me. Try again please. OK. I have held my peace long enough. If you are so spiritually blind that you can't figure out that homosexuality is perversion and that it shouldn't be practiced AT ALL, much less around where children are, then you need to leave my thread. Please don't bother to post to this thread anymore, I've had enough of you. I'm not talking about the issue of homosexuality being right or wrong, I'm simply asking what homosexuality has to do with being a fit or unfit parent. You have yet to provide me an answer (not that I blame you - I can't either). I'm not trying to fight, I'm just asking you to explain your statement that homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to raise children. But if that bothers you we can go back to the issue of obesity and children. Do you agree with me that there may be a point where someone's weight would prevent them from adequately caring for their child? Or do you disagree, and if so why?

Give me a reason homosexual couples shouldn't be allowed to raise children in the US. Show me why they specifically are unfit. I've explained why someone morbidly obese may not be fit: they can't play with their child, they can't protect them from harm (how are they going to whisk their child out of the street if they can't get out of bed?), etc. And "it's sinful" isn't a good answer because that could be applied to far more couples than homosexual ones. BECAUSE THEY PRACTICE PERVERSION. END OF DISCUSSION. What specifically. Have sex? I should hope they don't do that in front of their children. If they did it would be just as wrong if a heterosexual couple had sex in front of their children. Anyways, I already said "it's sinful" isn't a good answer, which is basically what you gave me. Try again please.

Give me a reason homosexual couples shouldn't be allowed to raise children in the US. Show me why they specifically are unfit. I've explained why someone morbidly obese may not be fit: they can't play with their child, they can't protect them from harm (how are they going to whisk their child out of the street if they can't get out of bed?), etc. And "it's sinful" isn't a good answer because that could be applied to far more couples than homosexual ones.

But being a flaming sexual deviant pervert isn't? Heather can have 2 Moms but not a fat daddy? Is anyone other than myself seeing the absolute ABSURDITY of this? If we don't draw a line in the sand, this government will walk all over us, even worse than it already it is doing. I see no absurdity. If the parents are being perverted/deviant in front of their children then there's an issue, but that applies to hetero and homosexual couples equally.

I don't know all the details about the case, but the truth is in the details. Obviously if the issue was "being overweight = being unfit to parent" then it's an absurd overreach. HOWEVER If you are so heavy that you can't care for your children (can't walk/ can't play with them / can't keep them safe if they get into a dangerous situation) then yes it IS an issue where someone could be deemed unfit. If I was so overweight that I was bedridden, how could I be expected to care for a child? Again I don't know if that's what is going on in this case, but it seems very likely that those are the issues we are dealing with. I will say however that if what was mentioned is true above (that the father started at 500+ pounds and has lost 150 pounds since) it seems heartbreaking to me if this man is trying to turn himself around in order to keep his kids... that shows dedication and it would be terrible to have someone try so hard to retain his children that he is making such a large life change. ..but I still stand by my statement that being morbidly obese to the point where you lose the ability to be mobile does seem like it could be a legitimate reason that someone would be deemed unfit.

Funny I seem to be required by the government to put taxes towards social security & medicare for seniors, services I very likely will never get good returns on when I myself reach retirement age. Where is the outrage about that?

No I mean who's on the other side of the war... liberals in general? Teenage pranksters? Angry people incapable of dealing with opinions they are opposed to? I don't think this is a war initiated by "liberals" against "conservatives", I think it's a war initiated by stupid people against people with strong opposing opinions.

It's not a 'joke'. It's war. Against whom? A couple immature teenagers? Anyone reasonable (from either side of the issue) wouldn't pull something like this, nor (I hope) would advocate a prank 911 call to disrupt someone who they don't agree with.

Well having true freedom of speech is also to allow those who don't support freedom of speech...the freedom to speak.

Pretty awful 'joke'.

My apologies, I see it was your friend who made that claim.

Swearing is probably not acceptable for Christians, but I wouldn't necessarily discount someone from being a Christian just because they swear... as in the OP. Still it is probably best to watch your language in general.

As long as the speech doesn't put lives in danger (which sometimes can be a bit of a gray area) I'm up for all of it. If you take some you gotta take it all.

If this gets tied into a way for them to apply for legal citizenship I'll be more in favor of it. I think it is a good idea, but I'd really like to see these children/families become legal citizens and pay taxes etc.