Lunch Break: Elton John & David Furnish discuss baby secrets
To give us a break from the daily grind…
Elton John and David Furnish surprised the world last Christmas with the birth of their son Zachary via a surrogate. The couple threw open the doors to their home and their lives for a Barbara Walters special airing on ABC’s 20/20 last Friday evening.
Walters asked which one is the biological father? Why in the world did they choose Lady Gaga as the baby’s godmother? And why did they take their shirts off in the delivery room?
During the interview, John, 64, revealed that the birth came earlier than expected and that the pair learned the surrogate was in labor while he and Furnish, 48, were out lunching and shopping. John also says he was the one to cut the umbilical cord, after which he and Furnish both “took our shirts off” and put the baby next to their chests.
Explains Furnish: “They call it skin-to-skin bonding because it’s such a traumatic thing for a baby to come into the world.”
John finally said they do not know who the biological father is but that it does not matter to either he or Furnish. Zachary will be told the truth and he can request a DNA test.
After watching the broadcast, I must say I have never seen either of these men so happy and content in their lives. They are also open to considering another child to add to their family.
Email LauraLoo with your Lunch Break suggestions.
[HT: People Magazine, ABC 20/20; photo via ABC]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Robes?
Get dressed! Barbara is coming over!
Haha, Carla, I thought the same thing! :D
I guess it was a breakfast interview?
Maybe everything they owned was at the drycleaners that morning. Ugh! What a phoney and theatrical way to try and convince the media that you’re having an “intimate family moment.”
It’s too bad that many celebrities like John, with all his resources and money, don’t do enough to help children who are conceived naturally. But, it’s his money and he can spend it as he wishes.
If I had that kind of money, I’d be running the most bustling CPC ever. Then, ordinary people could adopt babies and wouldn’t have to jealously watch the wealthy as they rent wombs and treat families like commodities.
That is one adorable baby. Squee!
I will refrain from making some comment on the folly of choosing Lady Gaga as a godmother and focus instead on the positive: Elton John looks absolutely giddy. And, of course, that is one adorable baby.
So so happy to see a pro-life blog supporting a gay couple <3
I agree, Amber. It is very nice. :D
I think Elton and his partner tried to adopt before, didn’t they? But it fell through. With the tightening restrictions on adoptions both here and abroad, I can see how it would make couples who really want a baby to turn to surrogacy – which I dislike for the same reasons you mentioned, ninek – the “children as a commodity” view.
Can we please stop glorifying and celebrating this as though it’s a good thing? This is a perversion of fatherhood and parenting and family, and this baby deserves a mother. In vitro, surrogacy, embryos made and stored and discarded — these are not the tenets of pro-life at all.
Jen –
I have to agree with you. Thank you for being brave enough to stand up and speak (write) the truth.
Maureen
I agree, Jen.
A celebratory post about Elton John’s kid one day, a Ray Boltz post the day before. . .maybe this site isn’t a hostile environment for gay people after all.
That is a very sweet picture. Other than the robe thing, which I think is kind of silly. They look very happy and proud.
This is nothing to celebrate – it is child abuse, pure a simple, and not a pro-life view at all. Firstly, two men can never be parents to a child. Such a notion completely insults and diminishes the importance and incredibly powerful role of a mother, which this child was willfully denied. That is a violation of his rights. Second, homosexual relationship are among the most unstable, violent, abusive, and perverse known to the world, especially involving males. It is disgusting to see this type of perverse abuse held up as some sort of good. These men need to be treated and this child deserves a mother and a father. Shame on you and this blog for promoting such an anti-life story. Wake up. Pro Life = Pro Marriage. And marriage is only between a man and a woman (always has been and always will be). If you are not pro-marriage you are NOT pro-life.
“Second, homosexual relationship are among the most unstable, violent, abusive, and perverse known to the world, especially involving males”
Source, please?
HI Bruce.
Please see Jen’s comment.
Go here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/article/topic/homosexuality/ and page through the 28 pages. Go here: http://narth.com/ and go through their site and learn some of the truth, rather than the intensely-skewed “data” provided by homosexual groups and their sympathizers, such as the APA. Homosexuality is a disorder, and a destructive one at that. It is no place for a child. These people need help, and lots of it.
Oh, here is another fascinating look at the homosexual culture which is, allegedly, no “different or worse” than a real father and mother raising children: http://americansfortruth.com/news/hunky-jesus-contest-in-san-francisco-mocks-christianity-on-easter-sunday-but-don%E2%80%99t-look-for-hunky-muhammad-contest-anytime-soon.html
HAHAHA. Okay, so you used NARTH as your source. That effectively negates your point of view on this issue. NARTH’s analysis of research is routinely dismissed by the scholars and scientists who conducted the research. They’re a joke.
Bruce,
The ultimate goal of being pro-life ought to be achieving equal rights for children and then pushing to go a step beyond that: equal rights for all human beings. Let’s not get into massive, pointless fights over whether or not this involves the GLBAT community, too. If you don’t accept gay men as valid parents, then I can get very annoyed but know that there is nothing that I can do to change your mind. I must accept this (though I will always, always stand with GLBAT men and women and work for their equality which means that I will also always speak up in times like this).
What I can’t accept or comprehend is being unhappy for them or not wishing them well- all parents (gay, straight, partnered, or single) could use the love, congratulations, and support (well, Elton John won’t read this, but you know what I mean).
I for one am happy for them. And I’m happy to see that even many people who are personally opposed to the GLBAT community are also wishing them well. It is a step in a good direction.
Well, Elsa, if you accept the APA as your source, they (and you) can easily be dismissed since they are considering removing pedophilia from their list of mental illnesses. Two can play at this “agenda-source” game. Only mine involves actual truth. Yours are a joke. Homosexuality is a disorder and is clearly (research has proven) destructive to both adults but ESPECIALLY children. Homosexuals make up the vast majority of pedophiles and there is a clear link between child abuse and homosexuality. No one who truly cares for children would accept placing them with high-risk offenders such as homosexuals. Not to mention how insulting and untruthful it is to suggest that two men can do what a mother can do or two women can do what a father can do. To suggest that millions of years of male+female=child was somehow unnecessary is the very height of stupidity. Homosexuality needs to be exposed as the rampant disorder it is, and these people need compassionate help to rise above or deal properly with their disorder. To suggest otherwise is to be unloving and anti-life.
More “natural and normal” homosexuality to be “celebrated” “http://americansfortruth.com/news/more-public-sex-in-san-francisco-folsom-street-fair-2010.html Do you want your children raised by these people? Do you really think this is normal and natural, and no different than your mother and father? If so, you need help too.
Here is more from the “we’re no different than you” movement: http://americansfortruth.com/news/michael-savage-is-right-san-francisco-is-the-least-tolerant-and-meanest-city-in-the-country.html
And some more: http://americansfortruth.com/news/video-log-cabin-republicans-help-corrupt-children-at-chicago-gay-pride-parade.html Why don’t we celebrate and congratulate this behavior here too? Heck, lets just let homosexuals raise all of our children!
And some more kids being indoctrinated into the “normalcy” of homosexuality: http://americansfortruth.com/news/labarbera-asks-biased-chicago-tribune-reporter-should-children-attend-gay-pride-parades.html
“the rate of homosexual attraction is 6-20 times higher among pedophiles” – Ray Blanchard, et al. “Fraternal Birth Order and Sexual Orientation in Pedophiles.” Archives of Sexual Behavior, Volume 29, Number 5 (2000), pages 463 to 478.
Homosexuals giving advice to children on how to “fist” each other: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/fistgate/handouts/index.html
Homosexual idea of “fun” for kids: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/youth_pride/tranny_prom/adults/MrLeatheCardr/index.html
More “homosexual” normalcy on display for all to see: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08b/pride_week/dyke_march/index.html
Do you want this for your children? Is this normal? Is this prolife? Nope, Nope, and Nope.
Dude, we get it. You think homosexuals are sicko perverts. I, on the other hand, KNOW gay people, and know that they are not sick, perverted, disgusting, or any of the of the things you’re describing. They’re PEOPLE.
Yup, disgustingly perverted just like I was too. I am a person…a person that got help and learned the truth. Homosexual activists, and those who enable them like you, ignore our illness and let us wallow in our own destruction. That is not loving, Elsa, that is hatred. Give us the truth about our disorder, if you really love.
Wow. Carla, read Bruce’s posts and you’ll see why all of us, pro life and pro choice, have to take stand against this kind of crap. I’d rather have my kids raised to Elton John than this Bruce fellow.
<i>No one who truly cares for children would accept placing them with high-risk offenders such as homosexuals.</i>
The child wasn’t placed there, it’s the biological offspring of one of them. There are many people who after a heterosexual marriage discover that they are gay. Should they lose custody of their biological children?
Also, how is a gay person a high-risk offender? Even if most pedophiles are gay, that’s still a very small part of gay people. How high must the risk be in order to be stripped of your biological children?
I actually agree with you about the biological mother being important. Hence, I wish she would stay in the baby’s life.
Truth: You can’t be Pro-Life and Anti-Marriage (which is pro-homosexual). If you are, you are a hypocrite.
Once you separate children from sex, it leads to death. Abortion is the most obvious, but contraception and homosexuality ultimately lead that way as well. Once we have given up the truth that sex is for procreation as well as the bodily unity of husband and wife, we have NO GROUNDS to oppose abortion, because we have forfeited the purpose of sex. If sex results in a life, how can you say it should be preserved when other forms of sex do not yield a life? How can you say that only one form of sex must result in the caring and raising of children, when other forms do not carry that requirement? The truth is, you can’t, because you’ve already forfeited that right. Sex, to the homosexual activist, is only for pleasure, not children or marriage or anything else. To those who support that, you cannot (for purposes of equality) say that heterosexuals cannot do the same. Why should they be burdened with a child for seeking the same pleasure as homosexuals? Why can’t they either contracept or abort the child should contraception fail? The truth is, you have NO GROUNDS to say they don’t if you support homosexual sex. You’ve lost the battle. You either are 100% PRO LIFE and say that sex is ONLY for a man and a woman in the confines of marriage, or you LOSE all rights to arguing against abortion. To be pro-life is to promote and recognize that sex has a procreative aspect, and all other forms which do not are not life-giving, but rather anti-life. Its that simple. If you’re big on the whole “homo” thing, you are cowardly and hypocritical.
In truth, we must love homosexuals like we love alcoholics and schizophrenics. They are persons worthy of love and compassion, but we should not allow them to wallow in their diseases. To let an alcoholic continue to drink himself to death, or allow a schizophrenic to go without medication is unloving and reckless. The same holds true for homosexuals, who lifestyle choices (if encouraged) lead only to mental illness, abuse, and ultimately death.
No- it is not hypocritical to be both pro-GLBAT rights and pro-life. Lots of people are. I know that I couldn’t care less what two adults consent to do. Being pro-life means hating those things that degrade people or dehumanize- hate abortion, hate rape, hate violence, hate hatred.
Nothing is more dehumanizing than distorting marriage, sex, and the role of mother and father. Nothing. To separate children from sex is to embrace death and embrace abortion. Separating children from sex led to contraception, let to abortion, and led to the libertine culture that embraces homosexuality, pornography, abuse, and pedophilia. It is all related and it all has the same source. It is incredibly hypocritical to embrace distorted sexuality while at the same time claiming to care about people and children. You can’t do both, it is impossible. If you “couldn’t care less about what two adults consent to do” then you cannot care if they consent to abort their child as well. You said it yourself. It is all on the same line. You hate things that degrade people. Did you see the links above? They show what degraded people look like – slaves to their distorted passions. That is anti-life. The fact that you cannot see that means you have been duped. It is time to realize that you cannot reconcile Pro Life and pro-homosexual. It is a logical impossibility.
Wow. If anything these hysterical posts have cemented my view that I can be Pro-Life and not be the sort of person who is so full of hatred for homosexuals and homosexuality.
Hal,
I read.
I do love the homosexuals in my life. I can agree to disagree about homosexuality but will take a stand for the lives of babies that will die and their mothers wounded by abortion.
I like to pick my battles.
Vannah,
That baby deserves a mom.
Wake up. Pro Life = Pro Marriage.
Weird. I thought Pro Life = respecting each human life from the moment of conception.
Bruce, if you’re “ex-gay” and you think being gay is the same as molesting children, does that mean you yourself are a child molestor?
On the topic of in vitro and embryos, I looked it up and and it’s unclear to me whether Zachary was conceived through IVF or articifical insemination. If he was conceived through IVF, it’s not a given that they made other embryos and the other embryos were destroyed. My parents couldn’t find a doctor who would let them just do a couple of embryos, but that was in the mid-eighties and since then I’ve heard of doctors who do let couples do that and implant all the created embryos.
ninek: You can read about all of Elton John’s charity activity, some of which is related to children, here:
http://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/62-elton-john
Why are kids who are “conceived naturally” more worthy of charitable activity than other kids? If it turned out that some of the kids who get his charitable contributions were conceived through IVF or AI, would that make his work with them mean less?
P.S. To Bruce: Listen to Carla. Seriously. I may disagree with her on this, but I’m not going to get into a big huge debate over it when there are more productive things to be done.
Is it hostile to gay people to say that children deserve a mother and a father? Have we come so far as that in our thin-skinned, offend-me-not culture?
Zachary is adorable. He will have tons of attention by lots of people. He will have lots of adventures and everything money can buy.
But Zachary is denied a relationship most of us really treasure. He won’t be able to love or even know his mother growing up. If he is allowed to know her as an adult, it will be too late to have a childhood with her. Are we celebrating that?
Zachary won’t get a chance at knowing or loving his mother, not because a tragedy took her, but because the two men who contracted his conception decided that Zachary doesn’t need or deserve a relationship with his mother.
Two men can’t give motherhood, no matter how loving or wealthy they are. They cannot replace a mother. Stating that is not hostile, it’s a common sense observation. I think having a mother and being a mother matters greatly to people, and this story makes me quite sad.
This is so naturally stomach churning. Poor baby deliberately has no Mama, how selfish.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/04/zach-wahls-talks-about-ho_n_818700.html
*Sigh.* Do you think the articulate, confident Zach Wahls needed a daddy growing up? Seems pretty well-adjusted to me.
Mary Ann, well said! A heterosexual couple could do the same thing, and I would still feel the same: it’s treating a family as a commodity. There are too many healthy babies that are aborted by their physically healthy parents. That’s a terrible tragedy. I would rather see abortion become history and babies who’s parents didn’t have the means to raise them get chance at a life with a new family.
Many people in the entertainment industry and in our daily lives are pro-choice and they don’t seem to realize you can’t run a species by surrogates and artificial inseminations. It’s the fast track to extinction. Now, I realize that today the world seems pretty well populated, but that can change and it is changing.
But I like what Mary Ann said, because I would not be the person I am if I hadn’t known my mother. A mother is irreplacable. A mother isn’t a pair of shoes or a coat that can be discarded. Will there be a woman, central to his life? We don’t know. But ‘mommy’ is so special of a word, how can we just toss it away and say, oh, babies don’t need mommies and if you think they do, you’re hateful.
When I was young and very open minded, I thought that gay couples could live as extended families. But that’s not what happened. Instead, I’ve watched my gay friends age in isolation. My gay male friends from the old days hardly have any female friends, and the lesbians I know don’t have gay men over for regular dinners much less co-habitate with them. I’m not sure all that sexual-preference based isolation is such a great thing. It’s better for a child than being killed in an abortion, for sure. But life without a mommy? I’m glad I didn’t miss it. My mom is my hero.
Women have decided that their bodies are roving incubators, for a hefty fee. It’s women who have done this to themselves. Gays have decided that mothers are entirely unneccesary for the children they grew in a rented uterus. Lesbians do much the same.
Here we see ethics and morality stood on their heads. Choice is supposed to be guided by a consideration of human dignity, which when done means that there are certain choices that are always and everywhere illicit.
No more.
Choice has become the highest social good in itself, and damn the humans who may suffer as a result. It’s been that way for 53 million babies and counting with abortion. So it’s only consistent that the same thinking has taken hold in surrogacy and gay/lesbian adoptions.
Motherhood/Fatherhood as optional accessories in the life of a manufactured child who was grown in a rented uterus.
Lovely.
Who is Zach Wahls’ biological father?
Was his mother married to his father and then divorced?
Did his mother conceive him with the help of donated sperm?
Okay, Zach Wahls was conceived by sperm donation.
This is not an insignificant point because sperm donors are screened for health, intelligence, attractiveness, etc. So, a woman can shop for a donor who possesses qualities that she could not get in a mate because a desirable mate would also have some requirements. A sperm donor, just wants the money. So, yeah, it is a designer baby thing.
I appreciate Bruce’s passion and boldness. He has experienced first hand the consequences, the spiritual death that accompanies this type of sin.
We can all have our different opinions, but in the end, the only Person who’s opinion really matters is God’s.
He’s pretty clear. Homosexuality is a transgression of His Law, it’s sin.
The Good News is that Jesus forgives, restores and redeems, as Bruce can attest to.
Whatever temptation we are faced with, we all need to choose Life.
Hippie,
Regardless of the sperm donor’s traits, the sperm cell contains only half of the chromosomes of the donor. Because of dominance and recessiveness in those ratios, it depends on the same roll of the dice in the egg to get the desired traits in the offspring. Then there is the issue of much intelligence, etc, being the exult of upbringing and chance life events, having nothing to do with genetics at all.
What happens when the child turns out to be something other than what the parents thought they were purchasing?
So sad.
The discussion here seems to be focusing entirely on sex to the exclusion of gender. A “mother” is not exclusively female and a “father” is not exclusively male. These words have biological definitions–the person whose body produces and incubates the egg and the person whose body provides the sperm–but they also refer to social roles. To refuse to accept this fact would be to refuse to accept adoptive parents as legitimate mothers and fathers, simply because the offspring they are raising is not their own, biologically. There’s no fair reason to believe that Zachary will be denied the nurture of a mother; it’s just that the roles a mother who is typically female fulfills that are the source of this nurture will instead be shared between two loving parents who happen to both be male.
Well, yet another woman has weighed in with a renunciation of her fundamental identity. That’s why it’s called the Culture of Death. “Choice” suffocates everything.
Please show me a mother who is not female and a father who is not male.
That is utter lunacy, Joan. Mothers are female and fathers are male. No one is denying the motherhood of adoptive mothers, but it is beyond absurd to say that mothers don’t have to be women. This breaking-down of genders is going to such a insane and dangerous extreme. Male and female do matter! They are different, by design, for very good reasons, and they are not interchangeable.
This child may have two fathers who have dominant feminine traits, but he does not have a mother. How confusing and sad for him. No mother to model for him what womanhood means and how important it is, and no one to show him what it really means to be a man either.
Carla – legally? Because that’s not too difficult – some people who have sex change operations have previously mothered/fathered children.
Having spent my whole life encountering people who acted like I must have had a horribly deprived childhood because I’m an only child, my personal jury is out on whether two fathers or two mothers are any better or worse than a mother and a father. (As in, the whole “the baby’s deprived!” thing doesn’t carry much weight with me because I’m also supposedly “deprived”.) I suspect so many individual factors are involved that it would be difficult to come to a clear conclusion. Either way, I think it’s important for kids to have positive male and female longterm role models in their lives, whether those people are parents, relatives, or family friends.
Jen: how is “really being a man” dependent on being sexually attracted to women?
No not sex change. A woman who becomes a man and gets pregnant and carries that baby to term is still a woman. That whole “pregnant man” thing. Remember that? Good times.
Wondering what Joan will come up with.
Personally, I was far more distressed over the picture of Charlie Sheen and his porn star live ins posing with his children. Apparently these are the children’s mothers when their biological mother is not around.
Gay parents are as old as the human race. Judy Garland and LIza Minelli were the children of gay fathers. I would be far more concerned about children who are raised by heterosexual meth addicts than I would a gay couple.
Let’s keep in mind that over the centuries children have been sold into prostitution, slavery, tossed into asylums, forced to survive on the street, endured famines, pestilence, and warfare. Are gay parents really that big of an issue?
This little boy is adorable, as are all babies. And, Mr. John and Mr. Furnish are happy with him – they would be crazy not to be! But, and this is a big but, babies are naturally (and obviously) made by the union of a man and a woman (or more simply, by the union of a cell that comes from a man and a cell that comes from a woman). By design, this little boy HAS a mom and a dad (a man and a woman who were part of his creation), which implies that he should CONTINUE to have a mom and a dad in his life parenting him. So, where is his mom? If she were to die, of course she couldn’t mother him. If she were imprisoned, of course she couldn’t mother him. If she were unable to mother him, then she could hand over her mothering responsibilities to another person who could mother him (a woman – women are different than men!) So, where is his mom? I don’t think it’s right for a man or a woman to take part in the creation of a child with the intent, right from the outset, that they will not both parent the child. Neither men nor women should be handing over their cells – eggs or sperm, to be used in the creation of a child (their child) that they have no intention of parenting. So, while Zachary is beautiful (God brings good even when we do wrong), it wasn’t right for his mom and his dad to agree to participate in his creation when one of them had the deliberate intention not to parent him.
Hi Valerie,
I respect your point but how does anyone forsee the future? Parents have never planned to leave their children orphaned. They haven’t forseen famine, warfare, and epidemic. Life is what happens when we make other plans, and no matter how noble our intentions to give a child two parents, it doesn’t always work out that way.
What about parents who opt to place a child for adoption? Are they any less “guilty” of producing a child they now cannot raise? What about single parents who adopt children who otherwise would be shuttled from foster home to foster home?
I think the most heartrending article I ever read was of two gay men who took in abandoned infants and toddlers with AIDS. These men endured the heartbreak of nuturing these children and giving them a loving home, only to watch them weaken and die. But these children at the very least had the opportunity to live their brief lives in a loving and nuturing home, not to die alone in a hospital. One of the men was holding a severely emaciated AIDS child, produced by two heterosexuals BTW, who had been abandoned in the hospital. Surrounding him were pictures of the children that had died. What absolutely incredible people. Does anyone think these children cared about the gender or the sexual orientation of the men who loved and cared for them?
“That is utter lunacy, Joan. Mothers are female and fathers are male. No one is denying the motherhood of adoptive mothers, but it is beyond absurd to say that mothers don’t have to be women.”
If you’re drawing the line strictly at the biological relationship between parent and child, then what makes an adoptive female parent any more of a mother than an adoptive male parent who fulfills all the same obligations that a female mother would typically have to her child?
Maybe the better question is why the fixation on normative gender roles in the first place? Shouldn’t we just be happy that this child is going to have responsible, loving parents who will do everything in their power to give him a good upbringing? What more could you ask for? I’d like you to show me a child raised by two men or two women who feels that he or she was deprived of something critical by not having a “traditional” family with opposite-sex parents.
I remember the movie “Kramer vs Kramer”. The “mother” Meryl Streep walks out on her son and husband then after “finding herself” returns to demand the return of her son. When it looks like he will lose custody of his son the “father” Dustin Hoffman asks “why is a woman by virtue of her sex a better parent?”
Any answers anyone?
I think that a man and a woman have a responsibility to the children they help create. I don’t think that giving away sperm/eggs for the creation of a child, i.e., intentionally becoming a biological parent to a child you have no intention of parenting, is being responsible to that child. Regarding unexpected circumstances, people have a responsibility to do the best they can to deal with the circumstances. If a child is conceived unexpectedly and the parents think that the most responsible thing they can do for the child is place him/her for adoption, then that is being responsible. Through adoption, the man and the woman can delegate their respective responsibilities to another man and woman. Or, if parents say they want to parent, but they are, in reality, being totally irresponsible with their born children, then society will place the children in a situation where people will care for them in a responsible manner – the parents are forced to delegate their responsibilities. How the unexpected/difficult circumstances are handled actually reflect the principle that the biological parents have a primary/initial responsibility to parent the child – it’s just a matter of applying that general principle to the specific facts of a given situation. I think helping to create a child you have no intention of parenting from the outset is a different category.
So sad for this baby. He deserves a mother and a father. Instead he has two very selfish people who are all about themselves.
Mary, gay parents ARE that big an issue.
Adults have the duty to do what is right. Children are innocent and powerless. There is a huge body of research that demonstrates children of gay parents are at risk for behavioral issues as well as a high incidence of homosexuality.
Research also shows that children do best with a mother AND a father.
This is all about legitimizing a lifestyle choice and nothing more.
Jen, great post! Mary Ann, great post! Bruce… keep speaking out. I have many gay friends. I don’t “hate” gay people. My one lesbian friend just got engaged… to a MAN! What is all that about? She was in a long term relationship with a woman (6 years it was) and then poof! She is hetero again.
But whatever. My gay friends live promiscuous lives. I know not all gay people do but a large majority do. It is NOT a healthy lifestyle and it is not loving to pretend their lifestyle has no risks.
That being said, I think you can be pro-life and pro-gay but in essence you are working against yourself. Strong HEALTHY families (Dad, Mom and kids. Not two dads, two moms, or one dad and 3 moms etc..) are the framework needed to support new life. We see married women having abortions when the marriage is weak and flawed and the family unit failing. We see women having abortions when sex is treated as something you can do with anybody anytime regardless of marital status or gender etc… We see abortion when the family is not held up. Its true. I don’t have a “source” for that, just experiences I’ve seen with my own friends and family.
Jill, I’m wondering what your intended message is? With all due respect to Bruce, it’s not necessary to cite NARTH as authority; we have the Word of God. The pro-life argument originates in the same Bible as the teaching: “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” and “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Did Jehovah change His mind? (“I the LORD do not change…”)
Sonja, I set up this post, not Jill. Lunch Breaks cover a variety of topics up for debate and discussion. I do not support homosexuality because God’s viewpoint is made perfectly clear, but that does not mean we won’t approach subjects of a sensitive nature. LL
Joan,
“I’d like you to show me a child raised by two men or two women who feels that he or she was deprived of something critical by not having a “traditional” family with opposite-sex parents.”
This is the entire apostolate of Dawn Stefanowictz.
http://www.dawnstefanowicz.org/
Sydney, your friend is probably bisexual. I know you know some people identify as bisexual because I’ve been talking about being bisexual on this site for a few years now. If she’s your friend, why don’t you have conversations with her about what’s going on in her life and not just spread your assumptions?
What’s your source for a “large majority” of gay people being promiscuous? Promiscuity isn’t a healthy lifestyle no matter who people are sleeping with.
Mary,
The answer to Dustin Hoffman’s question is that a woman is NOT a better parent by virtue of her sex. The issues raised in that movie touched upon the great damage done by divorce. Part of that damage is done in having to choose one parent over the other for custody.
Neither is the better solution. A child needs both in their functional state. However, when we deviate from God’s design we find ourselves making finer and finer distinctions between the lesser of two evils, forgetting all the while that we are still ending up with evil.
Marauder, I just told you what my “source” is. I can’t back that up with some website that will satisfy you. I just know from my gay friends and what THEY have told me about the gay lifestyle. My one gay friend said that all gay men are “ho’s” and will “sleep with anything that moves.” His words. He thought it was really funny.
She is not bisexual. At least she says she is not. “Spreading assumptions”? Oh, like spreading rumors? You reprimand me like I posted her name on here and her address and her personal information. Give me a break. i am allowed to speak from the experiences of my own life whether you agree with them or not. Okay, your turn.
Dawn Stefanowictz was evidently raised in a devastatingly broken and abusive home. That her father was gay, however, is incidental to the abuse. That he was a drug user, exposed his child to his sexual encounters, and allowed her to be molested are the problems — that he was gay is orthogonal to the abuse. Consider the not-infrequent scenario of a single mother with a predatory boyfriend: the boyfriend has access to the mother’s daughter and often abuses the child or even pimps her out to other abusers. But we do not claim that this means all or most single mothers are unfit to raise children.
Dawn Stefanowictz was raised by a man who was gay, white, Canadian, and abusive. His abuse made him an unfit parent; his sexual orientation was as incidental as his race and nationality.
Wendy,
I don’t make any claims about whether or not those who engage in homosexual actions are abusive in general. Certainly I would hope that they are not, but my belief about the morality of sexual actions between two people of the same sex is independent of statistics. I only pointed out Dawn simply to answer Joan’s question.
Hi angel 9:37PM
Gay parents are as old as the human race. Why are they suddenly a big deal? Angel, even heterosexuals produce children for their own selfish reasons. Throughout history the only purpose of marriage and reproduction was to keep a political or royal family going, or to produce sons to care for aging parents. Girls were great to sell as slaves when the family was in need of money or just didn’t need an extra mouth to feed, or to care for the younger children and the household. People produced many children to make certain any would survive. My greatgrandmother lost 5 children but considered herself fortunate as 4 survived to adulthood. People, and yes that includes heterosexuals, have children to fill emotional needs and wants.
Let’s get over this naive notion as to how children are brought into the world to be loved and cherished. Ideally yes, in reality no. BTW, would you prefer to see a child with a loving gay couple or Charlie Sheen and his porno queens?
Bobby:
Fair enough :)
;)
Hi Gerard,
I think the point of the movie was to illustrate a double standard very prevalent at the time. A double standard that favored the mother, period. Had Mr.Kramer walked out and abandoned his wife and child, would he have had a prayer of getting custody of the boy back from his Mrs. Kramer? Not a chance. However Mrs. Kramer was awarded custody of her son after abandoning him and his father because, well, she had found herself and she was after all his mother. This was what prompted Mr. Kramer to ask the question concerning the fitness of a parent based solely on his/her gender.
Hi Marauder and Sydney M,
Personally I view human sexuality as a continuum. It has no strict borders. That may explain your friend Sydney. I watched the movie about the performer “Little Richard” who was, well, flamboyant, from his earliest childhood, much to the anguish of his father. Also “Chaz” Bono has said that from earliest childhood he wanted to emulate her father and did not like being “forced” to be a girl. I am convinced people are born “wired” a certain way, for lack of a better word.
I can certainly point to the examples of wanton promiscuity among hetereosexuals as well. It isn’t gay people producing the large numbers of out of wedlock births in this country.
Homosexuals have some of the highest rates of suicide, and no, it does not have anything to do with “bullying” or “religious bigotry” either. These stats come from nations which recognize homosexuals friendships as “marriages” for decades and have highly “tolerant” views about the disorder. Suicide rates, abuse, and depression are still overwhelmingly high among homosexuals. It is a DISORDER which, in and of itself, carries with it a higher risk of abuse, depression, and suicide. It is unloving to allow them to continue in such a state and to give them license to destroy themselves. It is anti-life and anti-Christian.
Hi Wendy 8:21am
The situation you describe could fit any number of heterosexual homes as well, I have known a few. You are absolutely correct that sexual orientation is incidental. I was raised in a heterosexual home with a drunken abusive father as well, who was also a womanizer. My brother and sister knew this though I was too young at the time.
Claims of abuse by homosexual “parents” are common, not due to such abuse being coincidental to homosexuality, but rather such abuse being intrinsic to homosexual relationships.
The rates of drug abuse, domestic violence, and child abuse are disproportionately high among homosexual partners than heterosexual partners. By far. In reality, it is not even close.
There are only two sexes: male and female. There are no other “options”, just unfortunate persons who need help and treatment. There is only one “sexuality” which is heterosexuality. There are no other “options” or a “continuum”, just persons who need help and treatment.
Bruce,
Do we know specifically why these gay people killed themselves? Why do American teens, many from privileged homes and heterosexual parents, kill themselves? Working in the ER I saw people try time and again until they finally succeeded.
My cousin recently killed himself, a straight man with a wife and teenage children.
I think suicide is very complex and there are no easy answers as to what can go on in the human brain to drive people to such desperation.
Hi Bruce,
In your opinion. Look around and see just how neatly people fit into a mold. I have two straight daughters but from toddlerhood on I saw distinct differences in the degree of their ”femininity”.
Does anyone think the transgender person enjoys living with the torment they do? Did “Little Richard” enjoy tormenting his father and subjecting himself to ridicule and abuse? I consider LR an immensely talented man and great performer who is i no way sick, but who was born what he was through no choice of his own.
Homosexual men have suicide rates 200 times that of heterosexual men. Sorry, this is a slam-dunk case. It is a destructive disorder that no one should encourage or ignore. These persons are crying for help, and people like you just keep shoving them back down into their disease. That is hatred.
Bruce,
Do you have sources for your abuse claims? Also, how accurately can abuse be measured when it is not always accurately reported?
Bruce 9:10am
Again I ask, do you know the specific reason why there is a higher suicide rate among gays?
Are you just assuming it is because they are gay??
There are thousands of ex-“homosexuals” living perfectly normal lives as normal people. There are also thousands who live chaste and celibate lives as well. How do they do it? They got help. Just like me. It is possible. The only ones who say it isn’t are those who either are ignorant of the facts or have some sort of a strange fascination with keeping persons with this disorder wallowing in their disorder. There is nothing “normal” about homosexuality. In the words of a homosexual writer in the UK, it is a “sewer” lifestyle. I should know, as I agree.
The suicide rate among homosexuals is disproportionately higher due to the higher rates of mental illness associated with the disorder. These include primarily depression, and this occurs even in highly “tolerant” cultures with do not consider homosexuality to be abnormal, encourage its recognition, and even give those disordered people all of the same rights as those truly married. Homosexuality is most definitely behind the higher rates of suicide, and the facts and research clearly indicate this.
Quoting a recent study, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) is warning of the increased risk of suicide that is linked with young people who identify themselves as homosexuals before achieving full maturity – a process encouraged by many homosexual high school clubs.
The Washington Post recently ran a sympathetic article about a 15-year-old boy named Saro who described his homosexual feelings and how Gay Straight Alliance student clubs help such gay teens to deal with discrimination and bullying in high school and middle school.
“What the article failed to describe,” said PFOX Executive Director Regina Griggs, “is the danger of young sexually confused teens self-identifying as gays at an early age. Research has shown that the risk of suicide decreases by 20% each year that a person delays homosexual or bisexual self-labeling. Early self-identification is dangerous to kids.
“Schools should not be encouraging teens to self-identify as gays, bisexuals or transgendered persons before they have matured. Sexual attractions are fluid and do not take on permanence until early adulthood. Rather than affirming teenagers as ‘gay’ through self-labeling, educators should affirm them as people worthy of respect and encourage teens to wait until adulthood before making choices about their sexuality. If teens are encouraged to believe that they are permanently ‘gay’ before they have had a chance to reach adulthood, their life choices are severely restricted and can result in depression.”
Griggs also notes that schools with Gay Straight Alliance clubs are notorious for suppressing ex-gay organizations or individuals supporting tolerance for the ex-gay community. “GSA clubs and their teacher sponsors make schools unsafe for anyone who has rejected the ‘gay’ label in their lives or who believes in ex-gay equal rights. Our efforts to reach all students are typically met with hostility and violence. Time after time, we have faced hostile gay students and teachers ripping up our ex-gay materials or demanding that we be banned from distributing our materials on campuses.”
The National Education Association’s Ex-Gay Educators Caucus recommends diversity and inclusion of the ex-gay viewpoint in public schools, but this is seldom the case, according to Griggs. “What we find is that Gay Straight Alliance leaders and their school officials routinely suppress the ex-gay viewpoint and bully into silence anyone who dares to speak up for ex-gay equality and tolerance. If schools truly cared about diversity, they would include the diversity of the ex-gay community. Former homosexuals and their supporters should have the same kind of access to public schools that GSA clubs currently enjoy.”
Griggs concludes: “Articles such as the one in the Post fail to tell both sides of the bullying debate and endanger the lives of sexually confused and troubled youth who should be discouraged from self-labeling as gay, bisexual or transgendered.”
A new study in the United Kingdom has revealed that homosexuals are about 50% more likely to suffer from depression and engage in substance abuse than the rest of the population, reports Health24.com.
After analyzing 25 earlier studies on sexual orientation and mental health, researchers, in a study published in the medical journal BMC Psychiatry, also found that the risk of suicide jumped over 200% if an individual had engaged in a homosexual lifestyle.
These findings strongly support the results of similar studies conducted in the United States, which have unveiled the severe physical and psychological health risks associated with homosexual behavior. Drs. Paul and Kirk Cameron of the Family Research Institute revealed in 2007 that research shows that the lifespan of a homosexual is on average 24 years shorter than that of a heterosexual. As a health threat, even smoking pales in comparison, as studies show smoking can shorten one’s life by only 1 to 7 years on average.
While the Health 24 article suggested that homosexuals may be pushed to substance abuse and suicide because of anti-homosexual cultural and family pressures, empirical tests have shown that there is no difference in homosexual health risk depending on the level of tolerance in a particular environment. Homosexuals in the United States and Denmark – the latter of which is acknowledged to be highly tolerant of homosexuality – both die on average in their early 50’s, or in their 40’s if AIDS is the cause of death. The average age for all residents in either country ranges from the mid-to-upper-70s.
Dr. Rick Fitzgibbons, a psychiatrist and member of the Catholic Medical Association, says there is evidence that homosexuality is itself a manifestation of a psychological disorder accompanied by a host of mental health problems, including “major depression, suicidal ideation and attempts, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, conduct disorder, low self-esteem in males and sexual promiscuity with an inability to maintain committed relationships.”
Fitzgibbons said the American Psychological Association, which is known for its support of homosexual “marriage,” ignored the evidence he presented that homosexuality presents significant danger to psychological health.
Survey results from a study of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, & Transgender Youth undertaken by the Vancouver based McCreary Centre Society has found disturbing trends among the sexually disordered youth. The report, titled “Being Out” is based on surveys of youth between the ages of 13 and 19 in BC. The key findings of the study were that: – A quarter of the youth surveyed had attempted suicide in the past year. – Most non-heterosexual youth are reluctant to disclose their sexual orientation to teachers, doctors and social service providers. – Lesbian and gay youth are more likely than heterosexual youth to engage in self- destructive behaviours such as substance abuse and risky sexual activities. – Almost 50% of gay and lesbian youth have very low self-esteem. – Over half have been physically and/or sexually abused. – None of the youth in the survey group gave high ratings to the quality of their family relationships. The findings of this study mirror exactly a similar survey conducted last May in Massachusetts which also found that the youth who called themselves homosexual or bisexual were more than three times more likely to have attempted suicide in the past year. The Vancouver study, like its Massachusetts predecessor calls for “action to discourage discrimination against homosexuality, support for services to address the specific physical and emotional health needs of gay and lesbian youth, and training programs for professionals working with young people.” They ignore another more obvious possible interpretation of the study: that homosexuality is itself a disorder, and that it is the root cause of the problems of drug use, promiscuity and suicidal tendencies so prevalent among homosexual youth.
A study led by Susan Cochran and her team of researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles, published in the open access journal BMC Psychiatry, reports that homosexuals seek treatment for mental health issues or substance abuse at a rate over two times higher than heterosexuals.
The study of 2074 people interviewed in the California Health Interview Survey found that 48.5% of homosexual and bisexual individuals reported receiving psychiatric or drug abuse treatment in the past year as compared to 22.5% of heterosexuals.
When the research results were broken down by gender, the report states that lesbians and bisexual women received the most medical treatment and heterosexual men received the least.
“It is well known that health services utilization is greater among women generally,” Cochran commented. “Here we have shown that minority sexual orientation is also an important consideration. Lesbians and bisexual women appear to be approximately twice as likely as heterosexual women to report having received recent treatment for mental health or substance use disorders.”
Cochran concludes that, “The pervasive and historically rooted societal pathologizing of homosexuality may contribute to this propensity for treatment by construing homosexuality and issues associated with it as mental health problems.”
However, critics of the accepted secular interpretation that mental illness in homosexuals is due to discrimination have pointed out that in countries where homosexuality has been “normalized”, the numbers of homosexuals seeking medical intervention for a wide range of mental and medical conditions including major depression, suicidal ideation and attempts, anxiety disorders, and substance abuse, are virtually the same as reported in the California study.
Homosexuals in the United States and Denmark – the latter country is acknowledged to be highly tolerant of homosexuality – both die on average in their early 50’s, or in their 40’s if AIDS is the cause of death, according to a study by Drs. Paul and Kirk Cameron of the Family Research Institute.
An analysis last year of 25 earlier studies on sexual orientation and mental health in the UK revealed that homosexuals are about 50% more likely to suffer from depression and engage in substance abuse than the rest of the population and also found that the risk of suicide jumped over 200% if an individual had engaged in a homosexual lifestyle.
A documentary film produced by British homosexual journalist Simon Fanshawe late last year stated that the “gay” lifestyle is a “sewer” of casual degrading sex, drug abuse and misery. In the film Fanshawe castigated what he views as a prevalent gay subculture that is focused on vanity, puerile superficiality, and transient pleasure, at the expense of lasting values and meaningful relationships.
The film includes statistics that show the deadly consequences of the homosexual lifestyle. For instance, one in nine gay men in London is HIV infected and new cases of HIV have doubled in the city in five years. Incidences of syphilis have increased in the same time period 616 per cent. “Unsafe” sex, Fanshawe said, is not the only way in which gay men are self destructive. “If there’s a new drug, gay men will find it and take it,” he stated.
New research has again shown the grave danger of homosexual sex acts to the human body. The grave health risks associated with such dangerous sexual behaviours is one of the prime reasons why society as a whole should oppose homosexual acts, doctors have told LifeSiteNews.com under condition of anonymity.
A study which appears in the February issue of the International Journal of STD & AIDS, has found that “HIV-positive men who have sex with men are up to 90 times more likely than the general population to develop anal cancer.”
The study was based on data from 244 patients at the University of California – Los Angeles (UCLA) CARE clinic who had anal cytology screenings (similar to a pap smear) between February 2002 and December 2004. The UCLA authors of the study are: Ross D. Cranston, Steven.D. Hart , Jeffrey A. Gornbein, Sharon L. Hirschowitz, Galen Cortina, and Ardis.A. Moe.
A Canadian doctor who spoke to LifeSiteNews.com (anonymously for fear of reprisal) about the dangers our homosexual sex acts in 2005 stated: “Anal intercourse causes abrasions of the relatively fragile rectal wall, especially in the receptive partner. The penetration of E.coli, always present in the stool, and other bacteria, viruses and parasites penetrate through such lesions into the deeper body tissues. This leads to the suppression of the immune system of such individuals even if there is no exposure to HIV. The immune suppression increases the risk to develop certain cancers, opportunistic infections, to which otherwise one would be resistant, and other health problems including the risk of premature death.”
Information on the health risks of gay sex is available from the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association (GLMA). A survey by members of the GLMA released in August 2002 listed the main health problems affecting homosexual men. According to Christopher E. Harris, MD, GLMA President and Vincent M.B. Silenzio, MD, MPH, there are increased health risks for homosexual men.
The most common health problems in homosexual men are:
1. Increased incidence of infectious diseases
– HIV/AIDS*
– syphilis
– gonorrhea
– chlamydia
– pubic lice
– hepatitis A
– hepatitis B
– hepatitis C
– anal papilloma
2. Increased incidence of cancer especially
– colon/rectal
– prostate
– testicular
3. Increased incidence of eating disorders
– bulimia
– anorexia nervosa
– obesity
4. Increased incidences of other psychological problems
– anxiety
– depression
– suicide
5. Increased incidence of addiction problems especially
– tobacco
– alcohol
– street drugs
– amyl nitrates (poppers)
Sydney, I don’t have a problem with you posting about your life experiences. I do have a problem with your acting as though your life experiences, and the life experiences of your friends, speak for millions of people you don’t know and have never met. I don’t think that’s any better than the pro-choicers that come on this site and claim that all the pro-lifers they know are abusive and hate women, so therefore they refuse to believe that pro-lifers can not be abusive and not hate women. Anecdotal evidence can’t be used to prove something universal. It can only be used to disprove something universal. I’ve never claimed that all GLBT people have healthy relationships or aren’t promiscuous.
Bruce: When people hate you and you’re constantly presented with a view of the world in which there’s no place for you to find happiness in love, that tends to make you depressed. Depressed people sometimes commit suicide. You might as well claim that kids who committed suicide because they were being bullied obviously had some type of intrinsic disorder.
Bruce,
Interesting that the Traditional Values Coalition, of all people, debunked the 30% gay teen suicide rate as an urban myth.
Also, a search of google will show any number of conflicting studies. Studies BTW Bruce never give a final answer. There will always be another researcher and study to dispute what one study has found.
As all of the information I posted above shows, bullying has nothing to do with the extremely high suicide rates of homosexuals. To underscore this, the rates are the same in countries which are far more tolerant of homosexuality than the United States. To further underscore this, the presence of lobbies and clubs promoting disorder as natural and the presence of anti-bullying measures have failed to stem the tide of suicides. That is because these measures are not addressing the actual source of depression and suicide: homosexuality, which is a destructive disorder. That is not bullying. It is the truth. The real hatred is to deny these people the truth and to deny them true love and compassion by telling them the truth and helping them to live in accordance with the Natural Law. I love homosexuals enough to tell them the truth and help them with their disorder. You don’t. There is the difference.
To love a homosexual is to tell him or her the truth of their disorder and to befriend them and help them live either a chaste lifestyle or seek successful therapies to rise out of their disorder. It has worked time and time again and only those who hate homosexuals fight against it.
Hi Marauder,
I remember when the Native American youth suicide rate was said to be disproportionately higher than the general population. Did this suggest that being Native American makes one more inclined to kill oneself or were there other social and psychological factors?
Only if lobbies, clubs, laws, and other groups have made sure to eliminate all other possibilities, as is the case with homosexuality. Also, since homosexuality is not the same as race, your analogy is an utter fail.
Again studies vary and we read them and draw our own conclusions. But I think you have to be careful not to view life as so simplistic that there is a single cause to explain a certain phenomena. The Traditional Values Coalition pointed out how statistics were distorted concerning gay teen suicide. Other studies will show factors other than homosexuality. We recently read of a gay college student who jumped off a bridge after his tryst with another man was recorded and put on the internet. Did he kill himself because he was gay?
The blood of homosexual suicide victims rests squarely on homosexual lobbies and activists who support their disordered and destructive lifestyles. They allow them to continue to wallow in their disease, telling them it is okay while they continue to suffer. It is the very height of hypocrisy and hatred. Research is utterly clear on this: Homosexuality carries with it extraordinarily high rates of mental illness, drug/alcohol abuse, domestic violence, child abuse, fatal disease, and suicide. In fact, the research is so overwhelming, it seems silly to even have to say it.
Truth is truth, it is not relative. There are no other “conclusions” to draw on this. There is only one: Homosexuality is a disorder that carries with it deadly consequences. The truth is that if we really love these people, and we do, we need to care for them in truth. We need to help them break their habits, seek qualified and capable therapy (such as Courage), and regain a relationship with God and authentic friends.
I’ll say it again. If you love your spouse, brother, sister, parent, or friend, would you lie to them, knowing that only the truth will save them bodily and spiritually? Would you deliberately keep the truth from someone you love knowing that only the truth will save their life? If your answer is no, then why do you do that with our homosexual brothers and sisters and friends? Why do you insist on lying to them, telling them that it is okay for them to continue on the path to destruction? How is that loving? It is not.
I have to admit it is somewhat of a shock to see this kind of behavior promoted through Jill’s blog, who I know supports the biblical condemnation of such behavior.
Bruce has done an excellent job of pointing out the problems with the homosexual lifestyle. Let me add that my personal opinion is that the homosexual lifestyle is a type of genocide against men in that many times the behavior results in death.
We need to encourage those who are trapped in the behavior to come out of it and get into counseling, not glorify it by beaming over their adoptions, which Pope Benedict has said is a type of violence against children.
You cannot be pro-gay and pro-life. The two are diametrically opposed to each other.
Bruce 10:24am
The young gay man I told you about jumped off the bridge because a couple of heterosexuals got a sick thrill from recording him with another man. I understand they are now facing some much deserved criminal charges.
Andrew,
I don’t think its a matter of being “pro-gay”, whatever that is. If I argue the unborn gay child has as much right to life as the unborn straight child, is that not being PL and PG?
Are the gay couple I mentioned who care for AIDS children not PL? Giving love and care to children no one else wants isn’t PL?
Let’s put it this way Andrew, I don’t think being heterosexual confers any great respect for life on anyone.
One acedotal story does nothing to change decades of research and truth. But, since you pointed it out, let me add that all parties involved were suffering from disorder. This was a tragedy, but had nothing to do with the fact that homosexuality overwhelmingly results in death for those who engage in such a lifestyle. It has nothing to do with the fact that this young man should not have been engaging in such sexual activity to begin with. If you fight the disorder properly, this type of situation never arises. You’re still not getting it.
Only heterosexuals can be life-giving by virtue of their nature. Second, there isn’t any evidence that anyone is “born” homosexual. But even if that were the case, it still proves nothing, since people are born with physical and mental disorders each and everyday. Yet, when someone has a psychological or physical illness genetically or through no fault of their own, we do not say, “That’s okay, you’re fine” as they take their own life or the lives of others. We get them help. Why? Because if we don’t, we are responsible for not taking care of them when they have a deadly disorder. The same is true of homosexuals. It is we, and only we, who love them enough to take care of them. People like you are no different than bartenders encouraging alcoholics to drink, or crowds gathered under a suicidal jumper encouraging him to jump.
Mary, you cannot be pro-life and pro-gay because there is a root cause of both that is the same, and that is risky, promiscuous sexual behavior.
The homosexual community thrives on promiscuity and needs it in order to survive. The pretty picture of domesticity that is presented in the elton john picture above is extremely misleading, to say the least.
Abortion advocates know that continued risky sexual behavior ends in the need for abortion, hence the reason why they continue to push contraception. It’s a sick cycle that pro-lifers should be working to end rather than beaming over.
Exactly. The root cause of abortion is ultimately the denial of the meaning and identity of sex and sexuality. It is for the bodily unity of man and woman directed toward the procreation of offspring. Once one tampers with that definition, sex becomes whatever one wants it to be, and as is the case with modern society, that definition changes hourly. The result is disease, abuse, and death – three horsemen that stalk contracepted sex, homosexual sex, and the abortion industry. They all come from the same source: A denial that sex is for married couples geared toward procreation.
Bruce,
As to who is “getting it” is a matter of perspective. Review the studies both supporting and opposing your viewpoint Bruce. Yes I see yours, but I find it interesting that the TVC debunks the gay teen suicide claim, with studies to back it up, and accuses gays of distorting this number to their advantage! Studies and statistics can be used both ways to further an agenda.
Its my opinion that children are born gay, transgender, and heterosexual. No one has proven otherwise and the human brain, which we for the most part have absolutely no comprehension of, will probably never give us an answer on this. I also see the torment gay people go through when what there are conflicts with religion, family, and society. Who in their right mind would choose this? Did the performer Little Richard choose to endure torment, ridicule, abuse, and his father’s contempt? Personally I think he had no choice, this was who he was born to be. Let’s not forget the Rev. Ted Haggard. I am convinced the man was and remains bisexual, and could no longer constrain it. I am pleased to read of his comeback, despite the disgrace, reviling, and ridicule he has and continues to endure, mostly by people who call themselves Christian. He is also far more tolerant of gay people, maybe because he better understands what they endure.
Andrew 10:59
I’m afraid I don’t understand the point of your first statement. Why do gay people need promiscuity to survive?
Children are produced as the result of promiscuity, prostituion, rape, to force a marriage, etc. Sorry, but that’s the way of the world. The physically and mentally damaged child of drug addled heterosexuals is cared for by a loving gay couple. Who is PL here? The abandoned AIDS infected children of heterosexuals are cared for by a loving gay couple. Who is PL here? It isn’t gay people who produce the children that end up in foster care or on the welfare rolls. All too often they help care for them.
Your opinions do not constitute research nor truth. I have provided countless examples of research which blow your anecdotes out of the water. You choose not to accept them. I cannot make you drink…only lead you to water. If you want to continue to embrace lies and your own erroneous opinion, while turning away from simple truth and reality, I cannot prevent you from doing so. But know this: Such a stance as yours is leading to the daily, if not hourly, death of homosexuals.
BTW, point of fact: The Catholic Church is one of the only places where the truth about homosexuality is proclaimed…and they care for more AIDS victims than anyone else. You see, people can be truthful and loving at the same time. This is a lesson that is lost on homosexual activists and their enablers. :)
Andrew,
Surely you can concede that a gay person can be anti-abortion (pro-life); no?
Bruce, 11:21am
Again, a matter of perspective. I am not denying the research, I am telling you there is research that offers various perectives and findings, including that of the TVC. Any of us can point to a study and say “see, this proves I’m right”. No, a study proves nothing and you can expect any number of researchers to dispute or find fault with the study, as google searches will show.
Again, its in the perspective, I won’t change your mind, you won’t change mine.
About the RCC, they are to be commended for care of AIDS patients. However it should be pointed out not all AIDS patients are gay.
Mary, I truly hope you are not that naive. Please take an honest look at the make-up of the homosexual community today. It is extremely brutal, it is violent and risky behavior is the favored thing.
I witnessed this when I was a police officer and patrolled the inner city.
And Janet, I would say that if a gay man wants to be pro-life, then he should be honest and acknowledge the root cause and stop his own behavior first. It might help if he would stop referring to himself as a “gay man.”
The Catholic Church has a great ministry called “Courage” that deals specifically with these men who are trapped in the lifestyle and want to get out. It is very successful and has helped many men. I know some men who are in Courage and they are very stout defenders of human life, because they understand the root problem so well, in a way that straight people do not.
In other words, their recovery and exit from the homosexual lifestyle gave them the insights needed to more fully live a life that is in conformity with the truth. That’s what we need to work towards.
A chaste and continent homosexual, who is not engaging in homosexual activity, can not only be pro-life, he or she is living a perfectly Christian life. Homosexuals who engage in homosexual activity cannot be pro-life, since they are actively participating in deadly activities which lead to destruction of body, mind, and soul.
One word: TWISTED!
OK two words: PERVERTED and TWISTED!!
Similarly, an alcoholic or drug addict who is engaging in alcohol or drug abuse cannot be pro-life either, since such activity does not promote life nor health. It is destructive. One cannot proclaim a pro-life stance when engaging in pro-death activity…such a person is a hypocrite. LeRoy Carhart cannot be pro-life because he engages in pro-death activity. Neither can a practicing alcoholic, drug addict, or homosexual. I would add to that, a contracepting person as well.
Andrew,
You didn’t address my question, why do gays need promiscuity to survive? Also, I thank you for your service as a police officer.
My brother was also a police officer and said the same thing about certain minorities.
This proves what?
Ouch, Mary. I hope you’re not calling me a racist. It seems that’s where you are headed.
If you can’t make your points honestly and without personally attacking other posters, then perhaps you should leave this discussion.
Homosexual activity, it has been shown time and time again, does not require monogamy. Sexual activity between married persons requires moral norms such as monogamy and exclusivity because such acts are naturally ordered toward the procreation of children. Homosexual sex does not have that nature, so there is no need to limit it to just one person. In fact, and research has shown this time and time again, homosexual relationships are “enhanced” by adding partners. This is because in reality, such relationships are no different than friendships. Friendships are enhanced by adding more friends. Marriages are not enhanced by adding more spouses. Why? Because they are fundamentally different. The latter involves the comprehensive bodily and spiritual unity of a male and a female for life ordered toward the procreation of children. The former is merely a spiritual and psychological unity, which though noble, lacks the bodily dimension that is geared toward producing children. Therefore, homosexuals are under no obligation by nature to limit themselves to one partner. And reality has shown that to be the norm…multiple partners. Homosexuality may not require promiscuity, but it also seems to not thrive without it. Truth is truth. :)
Thanks, Bruce!
Andrew,
LOL. I came no where close to calling you a racist. I simply stated a fact. BTW, throughout history the same things were also said of the Irish, Italian, and Chinese immigrants and communities.
I in no way attacked you, on the contrary I thanked you for your service.
None of it is mine or belongs to me. I just report what is true. :)
Race and homosexuality are not analogous. It would be closer to the truth to equate alcoholism, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder with homosexuality, since these are all disorders. Race is not a disorder.
Right. Racial issues are not a part of what we are talking about. It is disgusting that it was brought in to combat a legitimate point.
Bruce 11:59am
LOL. Please Bruce, why do you think prostitution is the world’s oldest profession? Because married heterosexual men are constrained by monogamy and moral norms? Ask these ladies, and men, who most of their customers are. Yup, married heterosexual men. Are you aware that during the Victorian Era, of all times, child prostitution was rampant? Guess who liked these prepubescent young virgins? Bingo.
Even the great biblical kings had their concubines, I mean wives. Throughout history heterosexual kings had their wives and mistresses. It was expected, after all marriage was just a political arrangement. Look most recently at Prince Charles. He had an obligation to marry Diana, it was accepted that he could keep the woman he truly loved on the side.
Whatever Marauder.. do you know all gay people too? Because you’re bi you are a know it all about sex with whomever suits your fancy at the moment? I never said I speak for all gay people. Okay? Stop putting words in my mouth. IN MY OPINION BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE WITH GAY FRIENDS WHO HAVE TOLD ME SUCH THINGS I believe that gay people tend to be highly promiscuous. Is that better for you?
Mary, sure there are hetero people shacking up and fornicating with whoever they want whenever they want. That doesn’t mean homosexuality is okay. That just proves the point that maybe people ought to get back to the plan God has for sex and stop abusing it, using it as recreation and downright treating it disrespectfully. When people don’t use sex the way it’s Engineer planned for it to be used… well, you get all the medical and social problems we see in our society. Seems pretty obvious to me but then some people seem to enjoy being a dunce.
Andrew,
I’m saying these can be brought up as examples, which they can. Yet you call me racist when I say other racial and ethnic groups have been accused of what you accuse gay people of.
We cannot fairly make judgments on people in this manner, correct?
Mary, honestly, is your point “Well hetero people do it too!” ???? DOESN’T MAKE IT RIGHT. ALL people need to get back to the basics and treat sex with the care and respect that God intended.
Hi Sydney M,
What I am saying is that blanket statements cannot be made about ANY people as to their virtues or failings. Heterosexuals have no monopoly on virtue, gay people have no monopoly on vice. Yes sexual responsibility is great, too bad the human race has yet to figure that out.
Mary, you proved my point for me by bringing up prostitution and why it is evil. Because when heterosexuals are not monogomous, people and children are hurt. Why? Because moral norms apply to such activity because of the nature of the activity (unitive and procreative). Homosexual acts do have the same standards because they are not the same kind of acts. Monogamy does not apply, and as research has shown, is largely non-existant. This is by design, because the “more the merrier” is “good” in homosexual friendships. This has been shown time and time again. So thank you for proving the point. :)
If God didn’t care who we had sex with He would not have made two genders. He would not have made penises and vaginas. Guess what… penises and vaginas were designed for each other. They fit rather nicely… very very nicely. Penises and rectums do not. Vaginas with other vaginas do not. They aren’t made for each other! Now why didn’t God just make us like worms.. able to be male or female given the situation. Why can’t we procreate with another human being no matter the gender? Guess what… GENDER MATTERS. God has a design. It might not be PC to say so but I don’t care. God has a design and just like lawyers say you can’t file a lawsuit if you don’t use a product as it was designed to be used and it hurts you… well, you can’t use your body and sex outside of its natural design and not expect problems. you choose to do that… you reap the consequences. God is not mocked.
Oh and Andrew,
Unless you can directly quote me saying something racist, kindly refrain from suggesting I am saying something racist.
The trouble is, Mary doesn’t recognize that homosexual acts are disordered by nature. Moral norms cannot apply to disordered acts. You’re attempting to put a square peg into a round hole…or to use an analogy more akin to this discussion…you’re attempting to put a male reproductive organ into a male digestive tract. It constitutes neither reproduction nor digestion. It is naturally disordered.
Bruce 12:20PM
What it proves Bruce is that heterosexual men have never been constrained by moral norms or marital monogamy. Whatever one thinks of prostitution it would have closed down as a profession thousands of years ago had hetersexual men truly been constrained by moral norms and marital monogamy.
Actually, Mary, it does not prove that. What it proves is that when heterosexual men do not abide by such moral norms, bad things happen. That is because of the nature of the act. In contrast, homosexual men experience more pleasure by not abiding by such moral norms, and their “relationships” are “enhanced” (their words, btw) by having multiple partners. Promiscuity and sleeping around are natural to homosexual lifestyles. The problem with that, of course, is that it also helps spread disease and abuse. So, to summarize once again, promiscuity among heterosexuals is bad because of the nature of the act. But promiscuity is not natural to heterosexuals and can be avoided. Promiscuity among homosexuals is natural to the lifestyle and cannot be avoided, but also bad because it enhances the destruction of the lifestyle. This isn’t that hard. :)
Bruce 12:22PM
One could argue that any number of sex acts engaged in by both gay and straight people are disordered by nature. My point is gay people have no monopoly on them. I will not elaborate on the heterosexual acts that will not result in reproduction and one could argue were not intended but I will leave that to your imagination.
What about gay and heterosexual people who do not engage in sex, maybe because of illness or age, but still have loving relationships?
Bruce,
I won’t keep repeating myself as you are going over the same material again and again that has already been addressed. If you want to think gay people are naturally promiscuous while straight people are just being naughty, fine. Far be it from me to suggest that any straight man would visit the local cathouse because he actually enjoys doing so.
Actually, no. There is only one form of sex that is natural: the unitive marital act between a man and a woman ordered toward procreation. That is the definition of sex. There are a variety of “sexual activities” that, if ordered properly, will lead to sex (as defined above). They are only natural and ordered if they do so. If they do not, they are disordered. Since homosexual sexual activity can never lead to the marital act, such activity is always disordered by its very nature. Contracepted sex that does not lead to the authentic and life-giving marital act is also disordered. It is merely masturbation. As for those who do not engage in sex (as defined above) they are merely in friendships. Friendships are fine, but there is no need to recognize them at the state level or to give them any special attention. Homosexuals do not have “relationships” other than friendships. That is all they are since they are incapable of forming the kind of union a man and a woman can form. There is nothing wrong with a friendship unless they engage in destructive behavior, such as sexual activity not ordered toward procreation. Hence, homosexual friendships that include such activity are destructive and disordered. The very desire for such disorder is a disorder in and of itself, but can be successfully fought against and conquered. It is only when people like you suggest that homosexuals engage in such disordered behavior does destruction occur. You are a party to destructive behavior when you encourage it.
That is right, Mary. homosexual activity and promiscuity go hand in hand. It is “natural” to the unnatural disorder of homosexuality. Thank you for finally getting it and catching up with the research on the matter. :)
LOL Bruce! You are nailing it. Keep up the good work here…
Bruce 12:41PM
LOL Whatever Bruce, whatever.
The darkness of the human heart. How sick!
Mary, I take that to mean you have admitted defeat. That is the first step toward getting right on this matter.
Bruce,
You wish. That’s my polite way of saying I think your previous post makes no sense.
To Jill Stanik,
I’m pretty disappointed at your acceptance of homosexual parenthood. I viewed your website as respectable site for pro-life information. Homosexuality is a mortal sin just like abortion. To exonerate one, and condemn the other is relativism. Let us embrace the culture of life fully, the way that God has attended.
Donna
Can’t some of you just be happy for the couple? At least the child has a loving home. Why does it matter if the kid is being raised by two men? So long as he’s not abused and is provided for, that’s all that really matters.
Hi Donna,
This blog post was done by LauraLoo. Please cut and paste where Jill has stated she is accepting of homosexual parenthood.
This website IS a respectable prolife site.
This is where we discuss ideas, and disagree and come to a better understanding. :)
PS.
Her name is Jill Stanek.
I have to be happy because some guy tells me to?
I think this situation is incredibly sad. I am as entitled to my opinion as you are entitled to yours.
There’s nothing sad about a child having two loving parents. Again I ask why does the gender of the kid’s parents matter?
Wow, someguy, you must have missed all of the 100+ arguments about why this is not a good thing. Way to read. To your point, why does it matter if a kid is being raised by a television studio? Or a group of apes? Or other children? Or by an internet forum?
Hi Some Guy,
As I have pointed out gay parents are as old as the human race and children have been raised in far more horrific circumstances than with two gay parents.
As Carla, for whom I have great respect points out, on this blog we discuss ideas, and disagree and come to a better understanding.
We aren’t a mutual admiration society or the Stepford Wives. Thank heaven, wouldn’t that be boring!?
I read about the first twenty or so comments until I grew tired of reading the same non-arguments over and over and over again. The fact of the matter is that you, and a few others, have done nothing other than assume that someone who is gay can’t raise a child based on no fact other than (s)he is gay. It’s a ridiculous assumption. Sexual orientation doesn’t determine whether or not you’ll be a good parent. Will some children who grow up in same-sex households be abused, mistreated and grow up maladjusted? Yes. But the same is true for households in which there’s a mother and a father. Isolated incidents do not speak of the whole, nor are they indicative of it.
Murder is as old as the human race, which is a poor argument that it is then perfectly okay to do so. Try harder, Mary. This attempt of yours failed miserably.
It makes me sad. Statement based on how I feel about the subject.
It makes you happy. Statement based on how some guy feels about the subject.
Why ask why?
Hi Mary!!
I respect you as well and MAN do I tire of moderating these kinds of threads. :)
Bruce 3:05PM
Ditto my 1:05PM post
Someguy, no assumptions were made. Instead, research was presented which clearly shows the homosexual lifestyle to be incredibly disordered and destructive and certainly no place for a child. In addition, arguments were successfully made that men and women are indeed different, and that mothers and fathers each brings something indispensable to a child’s life which cannot be replaced by two men nor two women attempting to do the same thing. Truth is truth.
Hi Carla,
No kidding. As I recall you have been stuck with some real lulus. You never failed to handle them very well.
This “what’s true for you is not true for me” is why abortion will never cease until this false belief is done away with once and for all. Relativism is at the heart of why abortion still exists. Because you can sit there and say, “Well, so-and-so thinks that homosexuality is okay, but I don’t, but whatever…why ask why..” is exactly why you will never beat abortion. You either recognize that objective reality and truth exists or you admit that you do not have a rational argument as to why abortion should be prohibited. If all reality is merely subjective and relative, then you have no ability to tell another what he or she can or should do, because that would imply an objective reality or truth exists. Until you can say that something is “objectively wrong and is always wrong” you will never win this battle. Abortion is objectively wrong and is always wrong. Do you know why? For the same reason why homosexual activity is objectively wrong and is always wrong. They are all wrong because they contradict objective truth and reality. There can be no debate on this. You either get it or you don’t. Pray that you do.
Mary, you can call me what you like, but I have yet to be “moderated” so I would have to assume that nothing I have said or done is out of line here. Can the same be said of yourself?
Bruce,
I haven’t called you a thing. In fact I like you as you sound like a man of conviction. Plus you share a name with one of my favorite nephews.
“Can the same be said of yourself”? Absolutely. Like I said poor Carla gets stuck with enough threads that are lulus and I wouldn’t want to make her job any more difficult.
Yes, you are making all hosts of assumptions. For example, I’ve noticed how you don’t mention that suicide rates for gays aren’t evenly distributed throughout the U.S., and that suicide rates for gays are higher in the South and Midwest than they are in the Northeast and West. There’s a reason for that, and it’s due to reasons you dismiss. People don’t just commit suicide because they’re gay, but rather because they don’t feel that they can handle the ever condescending views of society directed towards them for being gay sans any kind of support system to deal with the condescension. I’d be willing to bet that most gay people are well-adjusted, normal everyday citizens, and that you wouldn’t know they were gay unless they told you were gay.
And for what it’s worth, studies have been remarkably consistent in pointing out that children raised by gays are just as well off as they’re counterparts, and show no ill-effects of being raised in a same-sex household.
Oh, and homosexuality stopped being considered a mental disorder about forty years ago, so I think you would be wise to stop classifying it as such.
Hi Bruce,
Honestly?
Some of your posts have been right on the edge.
I appreciate your experience as someone that found their way out of the homosexual lifestyle.
Someguy, all of your points have already been addressed, especially those about suicide. Secondly, as for it being “categorized” as a disorder, it clearly is according to unbiased and truthful sources. The APA does not qualify.
I am really quite disappointed with both the post and the comments. Appalled, in fact.
LL, you wrote: “I have never seen either of these men so happy and content in their lives.”
Is that the standard by which we measure what is right and wrong before God? Adultery makes a lot of people “happy”; some people are happy when they’re gossiping or looking at pornography. Some people are a lot happier when they’re not inconvenienced with an unwanted baby.
What about this little child? What sort of beliefs and values do you suppose two homosexual men are going to impart? Will he be led toward Jesus Christ or away from Him?
You have done much harm here.
I will beg to differ from Bruce in one regard: Homosexuality is not a mental disorder or illness. It is a spiritual disorder. It is sexual sin, immorality, unrighteousness, ungodliness — or as Paul aptly calls it in Romans 1, “a dishonorable passion.”
The remedy for which is Jesus Christ who preaches repentance and transformation.
“…And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”
“Oh, and homosexuality stopped being considered a mental disorder about forty years ago, so I think you would be wise to stop classifying it as such.”
It was a political move to remove ‘homosexuality’ as a diagnosis/disorder. It doesn’t make it ‘normal.’ I’ve used this example a lot in the past and it usually falls on deaf ears: A gal I knew in college was actively lesbian, and still is. She was raped at a very young age by a man. Does anyone think she was born a lesbian? I don’t. In her case, homosexuality is a symptom of a deeper disorder, and she is using it as a coping technique to try and minimize the effects of the trauma. Every girlfriend she’s had, so far as I know, has had to endure her extremely unstable personality until they couldn’t take it any more. She’s not healthy. Now, lesbians would argue with me that she is and it’s me who is a judgemental hater. I know the truth.
We should treat people with compassion, but we shouldn’t lie to ourselves just to be politically correct. It isn’t helping my old classmate and it isn’t helping anyone else.
I do not hate homosexuals, God loves them and so do I. I want to see their lives and souls saved from this destructive life but the fact is that the homosexual lifestyle is unhealthy, risky, and embraces a promiscuous life-style, not my opinion or even Bruce’s opinion. Read why the FDA will NOT accept blood donors who are MSM even if (1) they are in a “mongamous” relationship, even if (2) they practice so-called “safe sex” and even if (3) they have EVER had sex with another man. I will give you the link to the FDA website article if you are really interested. The CDC documents on their website increased rates STDs including syphilis (which is curable and we used to think would be extinct by now until homosexuality became promoted and encouraged so now HIV-AIDs and syphilis numbers have started to rise again). I want to see homosexuals healed and whole not destroyed but we must tell them the truth first. The numbers of heterosexuals that are promiscuous and have multiple sexual partners pale in comparison to the homosexual numbers (this does not excuse promiscuous heterosexual behavior) but if you read the FDAs article it details that the risk is no where near as great as for heterosexuals (it is hundreds to thousands of times riskier for homosexuals depending on which category of blood donors they detail).
Mary, your friends who gave homes to HIV positive children are truly to be lauded. I was looking into this issue recently, though, and now the prognosis for HIV+ children is quite good with the new drug regimens–they can live out normal lifespans. I assume then that you no longer know these men, or they are no longer caring for children.
It is a biological impossibility for a man to be a mother or a woman to be a father, but it is quite possible that gay individuals may make good parents. However, I don’t think it should be promoted as the best possible situation, and I do think that having a mother and a father is far better than any other parental combination. But if the option is not having a permanent family, it may be better to have “two dads” or “two moms.” And if we heterosexual married Christians were providing homes for all the children who needed them, there wouldn’t be a reason to recruit homosexual couples as adoptive parents (though they might still try to adopt, and people might advocate it, for political or social engineering reasons).
In a world where so many have turned so far from God, I think we need to acknowledge the good that even very fallen people can do. It doesn’t do anything against the bad. In the end, though, none of the good we do–which is, after all, only what we were supposed to be doing the whole time–will stand against the wrong we have done. Each of us will answer to God for our sins. Some will say that they drove out demons and healed the sick. God will not be impressed if He did not know them. But some will say, “I followed Your Son. I tried to be like Him. I walked with Him.” God will say, “Well done, my good and faithful servant. Nothing I have will be withheld from you.” It’s about walking with Jesus. In the end it will not be my chastity or unchastity, my kindness or intolerance, my obedience or disobedience that matters. All that will matter is that I confessed, was forgiven, took up my cross and followed Him to death.