akflightmedic Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 This place is still about EMS isnt it? Good Question, however I do believe this topic is under the NON EMS Discussion...
tiedyedbeth Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 I don't have a problem with homosexuals. I have a good friend from high school who I'm still in touch with who is a lesbian. She knows I'm Christian, and she knows where I stand in that regard. But we agree it's between her and God, not she and I. We leave it there, and continue our friendship as always. What I don't care for is the tendency within that community for some to be "in your face" about it. I believe what goes on in the bedroom belongs in the bedroom, and to that degree I don't care to see PDA from anyone. A person's sexual orientation certainly won't affect the care I give someone when answering a call.
ffemtdrew14 Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 I am a Christian, and I believe that homosexuality is a sin. I put homosexuality in the same category as heterosexual sex outside the marriage bed, be it adultery or fornication. God ordained sexual union between one man and one woman, through the bonds of marriage. The Bible mentions homosexuality throughout the old and new testaments and places it in the same category as adultery. I agree that homosexuality has been around since the fall, so has every other sin man can commit. I treat a gay person like i treat everyone else, I do not have to condone or agree with the sin, but I will love the sinner. As I have no reason to dislike or even hate someone because of their sin, for a sinner saved by grace am I. As previously stated, marriage is ordained by the church and the government should not be telling churches whom they can marry. Nor should the church be told by the government as in what the church can teach or having to condone things that conflict with the doctrines and the Bible. I think that the same rules that apply to a man and a woman whom are unmarried should apply to homosexual couples, it the realm of legall and medical decisions. In my opinion, the person chooses this, the same as one chooses to cheat on his/her spouse, have premarital sexual relations, steal , murder, ect. God created us with a free will, the freedom to choose, and we will choose to either do what, or follow God's laws. In short, I see no need for any special classification any more different than anyone else. Homosexuals are still male and female, young and old, and deserve the same respect as every other human life. The issue of tolerance should be a two way street, there should be a tolerance to the level you not have to agree with me, yet should be willing to return the respect that your views are receiving.
alpha23958 Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 In regards to the gay gene Oh, I just love those.. I think I saw those gene's at Abercrombie, but my question is.. Do they come in red? Oh my gosh, it's just dripping with..... sarcasm.
CodeBlueEMT Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Blah, blah, blah, blah.."Homosexuals, why do people still care?" Blah, blah, blah..."Do you have a problem with homosexuals?" Who cares? It really doesn't matter to me what your religious views, sexual orientation, or political affiliations are. What DOES matter is the type of person you are. PERIOD. I can be intolerate of whatever I choose. Don't like it, tough. Religious zealots and Bible thumpers. Guess what? Somebody is wrong. Ooops, I should have stayed with the "fill in the blank" religion. Why is it churches don't pay taxes? They get all that political influence for free. I have to pay taxes. Maybe I'll start the CodeBlueEMT Church for LaZBoy Recliner Apostles and Wayward Women. Only 15% gets you salvation. I'll take 10%. It must be so hard to come out of the closet. Where's my sympathy? Pass me a Kleenex. You poor thing. So misunderstood. Basically, I don't give a crap what the other people do with their own lives. Have at it. Funny how the "misunderstood" want others to condone and validate their needs. It's your skin, live in it. Shayne
DwayneEMTP Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Blah, blah, blah, blah.."Homosexuals, why do people still care?" Blah, blah, blah..."Do you have a problem with homosexuals?" Who cares? It really doesn't matter to me what your religious views, sexual orientation, or political affiliations are. What DOES matter is the type of person you are. PERIOD. I can be intolerate of whatever I choose. Don't like it, tough. Religious zealots and Bible thumpers. Guess what? Somebody is wrong. Ooops, I should have stayed with the "fill in the blank" religion. Why is it churches don't pay taxes? They get all that political influence for free. I have to pay taxes. Maybe I'll start the CodeBlueEMT Church for LaZBoy Recliner Apostles and Wayward Women. Only 15% gets you salvation. I'll take 10%. It must be so hard to come out of the closet. Where's my sympathy? Pass me a Kleenex. You poor thing. So misunderstood. Basically, I don't give a crap what the other people do with their own lives. Have at it. Funny how the "misunderstood" want others to condone and validate their needs. It's your skin, live in it. Shayne Were we supposed to find some semblance of coherence or rationality in that ridiculous rant? Where? (In the future, please turn off Jerry Springer while posting...thanks.) Dwayne
Just Plain Ruff Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Code blue, the same question can be asked - why do the Political action committees and soft money campains not get taxed?
pyroknight Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Isn't it counter-intuitive to state that homosexuality is genetic? I mean, if it were, wouldn't they "breed" themselves out of existence? I hope they do find the "gene" that creates homosexuals. Instead of "curing" homosexuals, I think we should innoculate the idiots. If we could determine IQ early enough, we could "make" them homosexual and eliminate those genes from the gene pool! Unfortunately, one side effect of this course of action would be a reduction in the number of EMS responses. The idiots DO provide job security for EMS. What a conundrum!
pyroknight Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 I think the biggest "problem" that people have with homosexuality in the US is the current push to have same-sex unions recognized as being equal in status to a traditional marriage. Many of those who vehemently oppose "gay marriage" do so because of their belief in the family unit. If you want to discuss statistics, look at the statistics on children who come from broken homes. Their is no debate that children raised in a loving, two-parent family fare better than those raised in single-parent homes. Everyone knows someone who was raised in a single-parent home who turned out great or someone from a two-parent family who is messed up, but when you look at the averages, two parents are best. Two homosexual parents would likely be just as positive (I have never heard of a study, so I am guessing), but homosexual parents cannot make a decision to HAVE children, they must rely on someone approving them to adopt. US society has typically placed a certain value on families. If you look at many of the social problems in our country today, most of them can be traced directly or indirectly to the undermining of families. Benefits to spouses were originally designed so that wives could stay home and raise the children. (More studies for you. Consider how much better children who stay home with mom fare than those shuttled off to day care when they are a month old) Maybe spouse/partner benefits should be modified for married couples, too. Perhaps health care benefits should be changed to be more like a welfare benefit that you have to qualify for. One partner (of any gender) would be eligible to be covered under the other partners health insurance when pregnant and for a set period (one year or until school age?) after birth or adoption. This would allow one member of ANY "family" to stay home with each new family member. After the kids start school, it's time for "mom" to go back to work and earn her own health insurance. I should run for office. No. Wait. I don't want the press digging around in my closet. 8)
vs-eh? Posted April 3, 2007 Author Posted April 3, 2007 1. The "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy is absolutely ridiculous, and is honestly a shame on the US military (or any other country that follows similar tenants). The most recent issues regarding this that I remember seeing is the fact the several Arabic translators were dismissed. Apparently this is a highly specialized and rare position that the dismissals caused a huge hindrance. Could you imagine if a similar policy applied to heterosexual couples who were of a different "race" or "ethnic group"? That you could not bring your spouse or family to a military function or discuss them because your are "white" and they are "black" or "asian" or vice-versa? 2. Someone mentioned that the union between a man and a woman is sanctioned (under "God" or "the church") because of the ability to procreate. Since two people of the same sex cannot physically conceive a child, it is a sin. If two heterosexual married people were known to be sterile, or simply could not conceive (for whatever reason), would they also be thought of as sinners? Would their intercourse for only the visceral pleasures it offers and the known inability to procreate be akin to homosexual sex? 3. People who are homosexuals (under God) are sinners and their sin punishable under God. Someone went on about the Qur'ān, and someone mentioned that in the Old and New Testaments that homosexuality is akin to adultery. Adultery falls under one of the glorious "Ten Commandments", the only words that God itself felt were important enough to physically write in stone. The punishment (of course) is death. Also, make sure you don't covet a person's ox or ass, because death will soon follow. God doesn't mess around regarding livestock... 4. The last interesting point made, was that if you believe in God (and all that title entails), is that God either created homosexuals or that he "made a mistake". If God created homosexuals, he in turn wants them to be scorn against and even put to death (under his physical words). If God simply "made a mistake", well then that opens a whole other can of worms, regarding the paradox of omnipotence, etc... How does an all powerful God (all knowing, all seeing, always there) simply "make a mistake"? Doesn't sound like any God that I want twiddling his fingers around me. Don't even bother with the "free will" arguement...
Recommended Posts