Sharon Joyce-Burns #fundie

Sharon Joyce-Burns #fundie wnd.com

They all look like they are gay themselves. Not that there is anything actually wrong with that but how can the human race survive without the necessary reproduction cycle? Nature intended for us to be male & female partners in order to reproduce. If people prefer to be be homosexual that is their choice but to purposely not give foster children to heterosexual male/female christian couples is literally against the laws of nature. But of course the REAL PROBLEM IS TAKING THE CHILDREN AWAY FROM THEIR REAL PARENTS TO BEGIN WITH. DESTROY THE FAMILY IS THE GOAL WHY CAN'T THE PRESS REPORT THAT?

31 comments

old comment by ray10k

1: your sexual orientation is genetic, not learned. Most homosexual people were born from, and raised by, heterosexual parents.
2: unless they are seriously in denial (because of the likes of you,) homosexual people will not procreate, meaning their "gayness" won't last beyond a single generation.
3: thanks to the "pro-life" movement, there are more and more children born every day, for whom their mothers cannot afford to provide. As such, any solution that results in more families willing and capable of adoption directly leads to less suffering for the children.
4: you make it sound as if the majority of heterosexual couples want to adopt. By their nature as heterosexual couples, most of them can get children on their own without needing to adopt, and if the couples that do want to adopt are not permitted to do so, then by all likeliness there is a good reason that at no point will include any line to the effect of "teh gayz arr takin our kidz!"

old comment by Dr. Shrinker

Speaking as a former foster and now adoptive parent, I see several...flaws with your, uhm, "reasoning."

First off, I was unaware that the laws of nature favored Christan parents in some way. I do know that there are more children in need of qualified foster placements than there are foster homes. If the state refuses to issue a license to a qualified couple because they are not Christian or heterosexual, aside from the obvious potential for a law suit, you will soon have licensed foster parents having to take in more children than they can handle. That's a pretty heavy burden to put on children and foster parents just to satisfy your petty prejudices.

Now then, on behalf of adoptive parents everywhere, let me assure you that WE ARE VERY MUCH REAL! We help our children with their homework, we clean up their vomit, we read them bedtime stories, we teach them to drive, we help them plan for their futures and help them reach their goals. Our goal is NOT to replace the birth parents in our children's hearts, it is to help our children realize that their hearts are big enough for birth and adoptive parents.

The system is doing its job as well as it can Sharon. If you actually bothered to learn a thing or two you might have realized that. but then, if you were open to learning you wouldn't be posting on WND, would you?

old comment by Swede

Gays CAN reproduce, they're not sterile by default. Straight childless couples CAN'T reproduce, but we're still humans. As there are millions of children in orphanages around the world (some of which are right now held hostages by Russia, to make sure they don't end up in countries where gays have human rights), the problem is not too few kids, but too few good parents.

As a human offspring is incredibly helpless and vulnerable during its first four years or so, Nature intended there to be other people than just the parents around the offspring, to help take care of it, and to take over completely if something happened to one or both of the parents, in order to make sure that the offspring survived into adulthood.

It's not a question of preferment, but being born that way, asshole! Would YOU choose to be something that would make you hated and vilified by evil people like you, possibly even beaten up or murdered by those people, or subjected to "corrective rape". Doesn't it sound just marvelous?

How is Christianity in accordance with nature?

Foster children and orphans should be given to loving, caring parents, regardless of gender. Growing up with two loving fathers must be infinitely better than growing up in an overcrowded orphanage, whatever you think about homosexuality, surely.

If the "real parents" were not able or willing to take care of the child properly, then they are not really real parents. Parents have no inalienable right to their children, but children have the right to have parents who actually take care of all their needs, physically, psychologically and socially.

old comment by pete

Why doesn't the "PRESS REPORT THAT"? Because responsible sources, not FAUX"News" or hate radio, aren't in the habit of lying (Though one could argue that they facilitate liars that's a different subject.). FAUX"News" and hate radio, on the other hand, are rife with freaks who loudly assert that allowing gay people to raise their own children, much less adopt children, does present an existential threat to "the family".

The sane people who constitute the legitimate press realize that adoption is a mechanism whereby children have, hopefully, stable homes with responsible guardians. There is not, contrary to this freak's assertions, a shadowy cabal of wicked government workers who search far and wide for Christians to take their children and give them to gay people. In fact; it's very, very, difficult to take children from their natural parents. Essentially, the parents must be dead, incarcerated, severely mentally ill, or present a serious risk to their child's life before adoption even becomes an issue. Of course; there are also a sadly high number of young mothers who realize that they are unable to care for a child and see adoption as the only logical option. Finally; it would be unconstitutional to require adoptive parents to subscribe to a particular religion.

old comment by sharoonjoyce

I actually do not remember making this comment, i can't even clarify myself because I do not know what I was thinking at the time. It was right around the time that the reality of my loss hit me and I was going through a lot at the time. There is nothing really wrong with homosexual preference people adopting children. It creeps me out a little because I have a hard time trusting that they will raise a child to understand that having one sexual preference over another "norm" doesn't make you who you are. Being a good, decent and moral person who does not intentionally hurt others makes you who you are. The government is turning everyone to prefer sex with their own gender, so it really doesn't matter anymore. We are all doomed anyway with Agenda 21, NWO, Fema Camps, its going to be bad regardless.

old comment by sharoonjoyce

Ok, I don't know what I was thinking at the time I wrote this, I don't even remember writing it to be honest. I can't even clarify because I must have been on another planet. This comment doesn't even make sense to me. Regardless, it is no big deal for homosexuals to adopt as long as they keep their sex life in the bedroom without the children, just like regular parents would do and hopefully they teach them that their sexual preference is up to them to figure out and that they will love them no matter what preference they end up having because that doesn't make you who you are. Being a caring person who does not hurt others intentionally, who gives of themselves without expectations, to be empathetic with those less fortunate, being a good parent and passing along virtues to live by. That is all that matters. Please forgive my stupid comment, it is really ridiculous.

“They all look like they are gay themselves.”
Because that’s something you can detect, visually. That’s why they had people at every recruiting center screening the gay draftees by… Looking.

“ …but how can the human race survive without the necessary reproduction cycle?”
Even gays want and can reproduce, idiot. It’s a little harder and takes more than three shots of tequila (unlike half my high school class), but it won’t be the end of the race even if we ALL become gay.

"Nature intended for us to be male & female partners in order to reproduce.”
Partners?
Partnerships are a social invention. Nature don’t give a fuck. It would be cool if you could only get pregnant after a lifetime committment was sealed, but that’s not how nature works.

"If people prefer to be be homosexual that is their choice”
I don’t remember making a choice to be straight. Pretty sure it’s not volitional.

“but to purposely not give foster children to heterosexual male/female christian couples is literally against the laws of nature.”
Where would one fine these laws of nature? How to identify them? I mean, parents die all the time and nature doesn’t terminate the childhood. Single parents, adoptive parents, foster parents, groups of caregivers. Nature, again, does not enforce your expectations.

"But of course the REAL PROBLEM IS TAKING THE CHILDREN AWAY FROM THEIR REAL PARENTS TO BEGIN WITH.”
Um, many times it’s in the KIDS’ best interest. The ‘real’ parents are addicts, or incompetent, or dead. SOMEONE willing to step forward and give a forever home is a blessing.

"DESTROY THE FAMILY IS THE GOAL WHY CAN'T THE PRESS REPORT THAT?”
Because it’s a lie.

Sharon Joyce-Burns #fundie wnd.com

31 comments

Confused?