Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#82 Jun 29, 2013
Dave P wrote:
ASM, please address some of the rest of my posts. For many in the homosexual community, this is about more than a piece of paper or a law. This isn't about tolerance-which many Christians actually do a very good job of, although you wouldn't think so from the media.
OK this has to be the pivotal point of our argument.

I say: gays want legal and social equal rights.

You say: gays want to force everyone to accept homosexual lifestyles.

I just disagree with you about that. But, using your logic, shouldn't homosexuals be allowed equal legal rights while not forcing people to accept homosexual lifestyles?

Suppose I am correct and it IS all about at piece of paper. Would you be in favor of allowing gays to legally marry with the comfort of knowing that it will, in no way, threaten your religious beliefs?
Dave P

Lexington, KY

#83 Jun 29, 2013
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>
Messages like this one are getting to the root of our human condition revealing our need for help-a new heart. David was a man after God's own heart and I am feeling more spiritual kinship with you every day.
This is one of my favorite songs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =hg84C9jX-AoXX
Like that song. Be a good one to use a church- that strange fire lol. I really do like the upbeat worship music that many places use, plus they're oftentimes as spiritual in word as those good old hymns we all sing.

Bottom line you are correct-its our hearts, motives, intents that are the problem. We need that new heart. Without it, well we see the results. ASM looks for answers- how to prevent teen pregnancy, homosexual issues, etc. This IS the answer- a new heart and new Spirit within us.

As for you and I Bobby, I feel the same. At first you and I were at odds every day. Now look at us! What Jesus and grace can do.
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#84 Jun 29, 2013
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Like that song. Be a good one to use a church- that strange fire lol. I really do like the upbeat worship music that many places use, plus they're oftentimes as spiritual in word as those good old hymns we all sing.
Bottom line you are correct-its our hearts, motives, intents that are the problem. We need that new heart. Without it, well we see the results. ASM looks for answers- how to prevent teen pregnancy, homosexual issues, etc. This IS the answer- a new heart and new Spirit within us.
As for you and I Bobby, I feel the same. At first you and I were at odds every day. Now look at us! What Jesus and grace can do.
We used to sing that song in our church regularly. I think it is trademarked/copyrighted where we are now required to pay fees to use it.

He is singing scripture...
Barnsweb

Canton, OH

#85 Jun 29, 2013
Awesome_Steve_Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
OK this has to be the pivotal point of our argument.
I say: gays want legal and social equal rights.
You say: gays want to force everyone to accept homosexual lifestyles.
I just disagree with you about that. But, using your logic, shouldn't homosexuals be allowed equal legal rights while not forcing people to accept homosexual lifestyles?
Suppose I am correct and it IS all about at piece of paper. Would you be in favor of allowing gays to legally marry with the comfort of knowing that it will, in no way, threaten your religious beliefs?
Does freedom to worship according to your own conscience still exist? Isn't that the issue that Christians are concerned that judicial dictators will infringe upon? Is there such a thing? After all, it's one thing for a homosexual to go to a Church that accepts them. Then there are ones that don't. So, as with most other doctrinal differences, the matter should be that those who accept them should welcome them, and those that don't should not be forced to violate what they believe a matter of conscience due to how they view what Scriptures say to their conscience. Does the Supreme court have the right to violate the consciences of a long accepted belief system or social practice? Some are 'progressive' in faith, others 'consevative'. Does the Supreme Court have the right then also dictate political beliefs? To force Republicans to change their views to the left wing Democratic agenda?

Where do you think the lines should be drawn? Or do the lines already exist, and people need to have the freedom to believe as they will, so long as it doesn't harm others pursuit of happiness?

So far we've been told there is strength in diversity. Is this also about to be turned on its ear?

Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#86 Jun 29, 2013
pearl wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, you should go underground, or even maybe the closet, we will let you know when it's okay to come out.
That's revengeful, Pearl. What other way to teach someone a lesson than to give them a dose of their own medicine? According the my theory of balance, it would be an equal and opposite re-action that would bring balance.

But I disagree - I don't want Christians to be oppressed anymore than I want gays to be oppressed. I'd rather that people come to their senses and stop the oppression.

I'd like for the gay's new victories to balance their own past oppression. They can be SO happy now to offset the bitter, sad emotions that oppression brought to them.

Do YOU think the gays want more than a piece of paper? Do you think gays are out to destroy the foundations of Christianity?

Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#87 Jun 29, 2013
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Like that song. Be a good one to use a church- that strange fire lol. I really do like the upbeat worship music that many places use, plus they're oftentimes as spiritual in word as those good old hymns we all sing.
Bottom line you are correct-its our hearts, motives, intents that are the problem. We need that new heart. Without it, well we see the results. ASM looks for answers- how to prevent teen pregnancy, homosexual issues, etc. This IS the answer- a new heart and new Spirit within us.
As for you and I Bobby, I feel the same. At first you and I were at odds every day. Now look at us! What Jesus and grace can do.
I work in a retail store - a grocery store that serves our community from Christians to Criminals - everyone has to eat. My community is largely Christian and our store even sells decorative items with verses and praise to God aimed towards the Christians especially. About every other day, the satellite radio is tuned to the Christian music channel - much to the annoyance of some people and much to the delight of others. They are careful to play modern Christian music rather than traditional hymns or gospel singing - songs similar to the one Bobby posted. Some of our long standing employees are also pastors and/or borderline obsessed with praising and honoring God all day, everyday. There is always an available Bible to reference. We allow local churches to advertise their revivals and Bible school in our store. Some of our customers seek out our employees for Christian counsel and it is absolutely acceptable for our employees to stop the work they are doing and counsel a person, right on the clock. These employees do not go to the SAME churches and it is a past-time to debate and discuss the Bible at work, like you folks do here on Topix. However, they are each passionate about serving the religious needs of the community - the ones they know because they came to our store to buy groceries.

I find it all to be commendable buuuuuuut... it IS sort of inappropriate. In a larger town, this scenario may not be allowed to exist. If we had a Muslim or Buddhist employee, I bet they would complain of intolerance and our Christians would feel oppressed. Perhaps our managers would be pressured to sell decorative items that support Islam ideals or to play music that supports Buddhist ideals - they would find that to be against the will of God, so rather than cater to the needs of ALL religions, they would cater to the needs of none. The Christian influence would have to GO so that our business would be fair and equal to everyone. What a shame.

I disagree with much that my store promotes, but I see the good deeds that are happening; I see the care and compassion that Christianity produces. They also sell decorative items that are secular but not in disagreement with Christian ideals. Every other day we'll hear top 40 music or country music - the needs of non-Christians are catered to as well, within the limits of God's will. Our business promotes NOTHING that is in direct conflict with the Bible - our community has allowed it to be that way for almost 40 years (as long as our store has been open) and so far as I can tell, it will be that way until WalMart puts us out of business.

More relevantly: our business has hired gay and non-Christian employees - religion is not an issue when a person is considered for employment. They don't usually last though - it is because of the intolerance of our community that makes them want to move away and never come back. Our Christian employees are very CAREFULLY tolerant of ALL of our customers and ALL of our employees. If they were not, someone would have stepped in and ended this Christian influence years ago.
Dave P

Lexington, KY

#88 Jun 29, 2013
Southern society will never allow or accept gay marriage? Yes they will. The gays will pursue their goal until they DO. It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL for them not to. Politicians WILL cave because the federal government has already deemed gay marriage as legitimate - not allowing it in your town is discriminatory and gays will come to YOUR state and annoy the crap out of everyone until you change your laws to allow gay marriage. It is the only way to protect the rights of ALL the gays. Since they've come this far, shouldn't they go ahead and finish the job?

*In your scenario, SOCIETY does not accept homosexuality. Politicians and government does, regardless of the will of the people. Which, BTW, is exactly what just happened in California. The will of the people was disregarded for "equal rights", which is actually special rights.

You can make something legal, but that does not make it right nor does it actually force anyone to accept it.
Dave P

Lexington, KY

#89 Jun 29, 2013
Awesome_Steve_Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
OK this has to be the pivotal point of our argument.
I say: gays want legal and social equal rights.
You say: gays want to force everyone to accept homosexual lifestyles.
I just disagree with you about that. But, using your logic, shouldn't homosexuals be allowed equal legal rights while not forcing people to accept homosexual lifestyles?
Suppose I am correct and it IS all about at piece of paper. Would you be in favor of allowing gays to legally marry with the comfort of knowing that it will, in no way, threaten your religious beliefs?
First, I do not believe homosexuality is or should be a "right". It is not a right to steal, kill, lie, commit adultery. We may do those things, but we don't have protection to do so, and can be punished legally for all of them in certain situations. ASM, we speak different languages here, because you accept it as a normal lifestyle, just a preference different from other people. Christianity and faith throughout history sees it as sin, abominable behavior. It leads to destruction of the soul. It is something socially that cannot be accepted.

Marriage has been outlined and defined and practice for thousands of years. We have no authority or "right" to change its' meaning. Many worry about being stigmatized, maligned, made second class citizens, etc. But who is to blame-those who believe and have followed God's standards for thousands of years; or those who in the last 40-50 years have decided that God's standards just isn't meant for them to follow?

No, I am not in favor of allowing gays to marry even if simply they were interested in that paperwork.

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#90 Jun 29, 2013
Awesome_Steve_Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
OK - are you saying that homosexuals didn't exist before 1869? I'd say "English" was a little late designating a word to describe them if what you say is true.
I would suggest that ALL words were created by man - even those found in the Bible. You seem bothered by words less than a few hundred years old - I'm pretty sure folks are steady making up words as we speak. Words are nothing more than descriptions. They describe people, ideas, emotions, philosophies, etc.- they don't CREATE things, they just describe what exists.
I suggest that gay rights has especially struggled because of words and language.
I suggest that gay rights have especially struggled because gay men magnanimously included Lesbians, Bisexuals and Transgendered people in the political equation. The L, B and especially the T should have never been included. Never. Aside from that their blind allegiance to the Democrat Party has failed time and again. A Democrat President signed DOMA. The current Democrat President is on record opposing "gay marriage" not just once but multiple times during election cycles.
Dave P

Lexington, KY

#91 Jun 29, 2013
More relevantly: our business has hired gay and non-Christian employees - religion is not an issue when a person is considered for employment. They don't usually last though - it is because of the intolerance of our community that makes them want to move away and never come back. Our Christian employees are very CAREFULLY tolerant of ALL of our customers and ALL of our employees. If they were not, someone would have stepped in and ended this Christian influence years ago.

ASM- why do you just flatly blame Christians and community intolerance for gay and non-Christian employees leaving quickly and not wanting to return? Could it be perhaps THEIR intolerance of Godly persons? Rejection of the lifestyle and message those people present?

We are not guaranteed the right to not be offended nor have to deal with others we disagree with. Many would rather just be offended and complain against those evil Christians that bother them so much.

Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#92 Jun 29, 2013
Bobby wrote:
<quoted text>
We used to sing that song in our church regularly. I think it is trademarked/copyrighted where we are now required to pay fees to use it.
He is singing scripture...
You know, I was introduced to copyright infringement in church. The internet took it to a whole new level, but back in the day: copyright infringement was performing an artist's music without compensating them, perhaps at a church service.

Hey! Let me sing this great new wonderful song I heard! It talks about Jesus and salvation and it inspired me to praise God!

Well, OK, but its not that easy - we can introduce it into the music budget and vote into agreement that the cost can be offset by using the music in certain services, perhaps multiple times and the benefits can be multiplied by including the choir and instramentalists in the performances, providing them material to use during their on-going practices, unfortunately, less popular or less well-known material, public domain music actually fits our small budget a little better, I'm sorry sweetie, you and your friends can sing it in Sunday School and offer it as a gift to God during prayer - God will love it!

What a shame you have to go through all of that to sing a song in front of your friends and family with the innocent, pure goal of praising God. Society made this a reality - God intended music to serve only one purpose and it was not to turn a profit. You would think religious establishments would rise up against these laws, but instead, they do business within these laws - promoting commerse and supporting society's capitalism. Copyrighted music does not bother Christians at all.

If your song is intended to praise God, why are you selling it to God's followers? It is because Christian entertainment is Big Business with PLENTY of customers. I would imagine that God would disapprove.
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#93 Jun 29, 2013
Awesome_Steve_Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, I was introduced to copyright infringement in church. The internet took it to a whole new level, but back in the day: copyright infringement was performing an artist's music without compensating them, perhaps at a church service.
Hey! Let me sing this great new wonderful song I heard! It talks about Jesus and salvation and it inspired me to praise God!
Well, OK, but its not that easy - we can introduce it into the music budget and vote into agreement that the cost can be offset by using the music in certain services, perhaps multiple times and the benefits can be multiplied by including the choir and instramentalists in the performances, providing them material to use during their on-going practices, unfortunately, less popular or less well-known material, public domain music actually fits our small budget a little better, I'm sorry sweetie, you and your friends can sing it in Sunday School and offer it as a gift to God during prayer - God will love it!
What a shame you have to go through all of that to sing a song in front of your friends and family with the innocent, pure goal of praising God. Society made this a reality - God intended music to serve only one purpose and it was not to turn a profit. You would think religious establishments would rise up against these laws, but instead, they do business within these laws - promoting commerse and supporting society's capitalism. Copyrighted music does not bother Christians at all.
If your song is intended to praise God, why are you selling it to God's followers? It is because Christian entertainment is Big Business with PLENTY of customers. I would imagine that God would disapprove.
I was thinking similar to you, but we also need to consider the artist need to make a living. We have in the past paid for the use of some songs. We have a good music team who write their own songs. Since they are paid staff there is no extra charge for using theirs. This is just the way it is in our society, we don't have to like it but it is the law.

Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#94 Jun 29, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
Does freedom to worship according to your own conscience still exist? Isn't that the issue that Christians are concerned that judicial dictators will infringe upon? Is there such a thing? After all, it's one thing for a homosexual to go to a Church that accepts them. Then there are ones that don't. So, as with most other doctrinal differences, the matter should be that those who accept them should welcome them, and those that don't should not be forced to violate what they believe a matter of conscience due to how they view what Scriptures say to their conscience. Does the Supreme court have the right to violate the consciences of a long accepted belief system or social practice? Some are 'progressive' in faith, others 'consevative'. Does the Supreme Court have the right then also dictate political beliefs? To force Republicans to change their views to the left wing Democratic agenda?
Where do you think the lines should be drawn? Or do the lines already exist, and people need to have the freedom to believe as they will, so long as it doesn't harm others pursuit of happiness?
So far we've been told there is strength in diversity. Is this also about to be turned on its ear?
I expect an increased number of churches who WILLINGLY accept gay married couples within their membership and to work within their church. They already exist, but as gay marriage and homosexual acceptance occurs within the society, churches will form to meet the needs of the community.

That is the way that it has always been and that is the reason there are so many Christian denominations. Don't agree with the church's rules, go start yourself another church with rules that you like. It is the essence of religious freedom! No one is changing your religion.

The Supreme Court bears the responsibility to apply the Constitution to the law. The constitution prevents discrimination and upholds religious freedom. There is no conflict.

The line should be drawn here: when all legal documents can be completed without reference to gender. The end. That's all they want.

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#95 Jun 29, 2013
Awesome_Steve_Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, I was introduced to copyright infringement in church. The internet took it to a whole new level, but back in the day: copyright infringement was performing an artist's music without compensating them, perhaps at a church service.
Hey! Let me sing this great new wonderful song I heard! It talks about Jesus and salvation and it inspired me to praise God!
Well, OK, but its not that easy - we can introduce it into the music budget and vote into agreement that the cost can be offset by using the music in certain services, perhaps multiple times and the benefits can be multiplied by including the choir and instramentalists in the performances, providing them material to use during their on-going practices, unfortunately, less popular or less well-known material, public domain music actually fits our small budget a little better, I'm sorry sweetie, you and your friends can sing it in Sunday School and offer it as a gift to God during prayer - God will love it!
What a shame you have to go through all of that to sing a song in front of your friends and family with the innocent, pure goal of praising God. Society made this a reality - God intended music to serve only one purpose and it was not to turn a profit. You would think religious establishments would rise up against these laws, but instead, they do business within these laws - promoting commerse and supporting society's capitalism. Copyrighted music does not bother Christians at all.
If your song is intended to praise God, why are you selling it to God's followers? It is because Christian entertainment is Big Business with PLENTY of customers. I would imagine that God would disapprove.
So do you work for free or live off the government?
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#96 Jun 29, 2013
Awesome_Steve_Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
I expect an increased number of churches who WILLINGLY accept gay married couples within their membership and to work within their church. They already exist, but as gay marriage and homosexual acceptance occurs within the society, churches will form to meet the needs of the community.
That is the way that it has always been and that is the reason there are so many Christian denominations. Don't agree with the church's rules, go start yourself another church with rules that you like. It is the essence of religious freedom! No one is changing your religion.
The Supreme Court bears the responsibility to apply the Constitution to the law. The constitution prevents discrimination and upholds religious freedom. There is no conflict.
The line should be drawn here: when all legal documents can be completed without reference to gender. The end. That's all they want.
It would not surprise me at all if there are some gays in our church, we do not do a door check on a persons sexual preferences all are welcome. However I do not think we have any gay members unless they have chosen to keep it quiet.

Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#97 Jun 29, 2013
Dave P wrote:
*In your scenario, SOCIETY does not accept homosexuality. Politicians and government does, regardless of the will of the people. Which, BTW, is exactly what just happened in California. The will of the people was disregarded for "equal rights", which is actually special rights.
You can make something legal, but that does not make it right nor does it actually force anyone to accept it.
What I mean when I say: society will HAVE to accept the homosexual lifestyle, I mean, when a gay married couple moves in next door to you - don't form a picket line outside of their house. Just leave them alone. When they visit your church and you introduce them to the Christian ideas about homosexuality and they don't like it, they will leave, like all the other people who disagree with what you teach. Why do you think I don't go to church? Its not because I am gay married.

Our current society did not create the Constitution - but we all still agree to uphold it. But, some of our current laws conflict with the Constitution. Well, it is the Supreme Court's responsibility to correct that as each individual unconstitutional law is presented in their court.

By making gay marriage legal, it will be making social intolerance of gay marriage illegal. SOCIAL intolerance - where the town refuses to sell a house to a gay couple or to give a gay person a certain job or public education that teaches children that people who live a gay lifestyle are to be avoided because they are immoral. Society is not allowed to act that way - what you teach inside your church is private - you ARE allowed to teach children that homosexual lifestyles are immoral since the children are only being taught that with the permission and blessings of their parents.

Society and Christians are two different groups of people even if Christians make up 80% of society. Laws govern society, the Bible governs Christianity.

Explain to me how gay rights are not equal rights, but instead, special rights.

"You can make something legal, but that does not make it right nor does it actually force anyone to accept it."

I know, right? So, when it is legal, do not feel forced to accept it or feel that it is actually right. Just allow others to feel that way if they choose to. That's all they want.

Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#98 Jun 29, 2013
Dave P wrote:
First, I do not believe homosexuality is or should be a "right". It is not a right to steal, kill, lie, commit adultery. We may do those things, but we don't have protection to do so, and can be punished legally for all of them in certain situations. ASM, we speak different languages here, because you accept it as a normal lifestyle, just a preference different from other people. Christianity and faith throughout history sees it as sin, abominable behavior. It leads to destruction of the soul. It is something socially that cannot be accepted.
It was the BIBLE that put homosexual acts in the same category as crimes like murder and robbery - only lying under oath is a crime, btw, lying casually is legal and socially acceptable. Coveting falls in this category as well, also legal but still a sin. You - as a society - are expected to tolerate activities you witness that are NOT criminal activities, such as being gay married. You - as a Christian - are expected to offer the guidance of the Bible to EVERYONE, even if they reject it. You can do both things!

There is an old man who visits our store frequently who explains how homosexuality is an ABOMINATION every time he is reminded of it. I say: I know - those people have probably not been "saved" (that's how we identify real Christians). He is disgusted by their behavior - as I am disgusted to sell "food stamp" groceries to people who are high on drugs. Either way, we are allowed to have our opinion, we are allowed to express our opinion, but other people do not have to adjust their actions to match our opinion. I cannot stop welfare recipients from doing drugs - he cannot stop gay people from living gay lifestyles.

I know my example is flawed since doing drugs is not only a sin (it IS a sin, isn't it?) but also a crime. You may suggest that I should report this drug activity to the police - but my speculation that someone is doing illegal drugs is not enough proof to allow the police to take any action about it. Actually, being high on drugs is not an actual crime, possessing or distributing illegal drugs can be criminally prosecuted. I simply recognize the reality of it when it is in front of my face. Being gay and performing homosexual acts is literally NOT illegal, so a person is just as powerless to change what they witness in both situations.

I know you want gay people to accept Christianity instead of getting gay married - you are concerned for their souls. It is a gay person's RIGHT to accept or reject your religious beliefs just as it is everyone's RIGHT to do so.

I have a gay friend who cannot disregard his Christian beliefs. He has accepted that he will enjoy his life as it is and just spend an eternity in Hell. That doesn't bother me since I don't believe he will ever have to "pay the consequences" of his lifestyle with Hell, since Hell doesn't exist. You would be concerned about this person's decision to sacrifice his soul to the Devil - I say: it's his decision - let him decide. It's his RIGHT.

Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#99 Jun 29, 2013
Dave P wrote:
Marriage has been outlined and defined and practice for thousands of years. We have no authority or "right" to change its' meaning. Many worry about being stigmatized, maligned, made second class citizens, etc. But who is to blame-those who believe and have followed God's standards for thousands of years; or those who in the last 40-50 years have decided that God's standards just isn't meant for them to follow?
No, I am not in favor of allowing gays to marry even if simply they were interested in that paperwork.
Why is this a current issue NOW instead of before now? It is NOW, finally, that this tiny group of people have been able to convince heterosexual people to support their political efforts. Before NOW, gay people have been disregarded as insignificant since they are few in number. It has taken a giant effort to convince heterosexual people to do this - what the gay community has accomplished is straight-up unbelievable!(pun, lol) The odds have NEVER been in their favor. Their time has arrived and it is NOW.

We, the people, have every right to pursue changes in state and federal law - it happens everyday and has been happening since our state and federal laws were established. Christians and any other people are allowed to politically oppose these changes in law - they are doing it right now - but since their efforts are unconstitutional, they will be defeated by the very system of laws they are challenging.

Gay marriage is constitutionally correct. You can't help it. Do you disagree with that statement?

I understand your opposition to gay marriage and I never expect you to vote in support of it - such a vote would make you a liar. The truth is: your vote pales against the constitution and regardless of votes, the constitution is required to be upheld by the law. You are correct that your vote will be disregarded.

Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#100 Jun 29, 2013
MarkEden wrote:
<quoted text>
I suggest that gay rights have especially struggled because gay men magnanimously included Lesbians, Bisexuals and Transgendered people in the political equation. The L, B and especially the T should have never been included. Never. Aside from that their blind allegiance to the Democrat Party has failed time and again. A Democrat President signed DOMA. The current Democrat President is on record opposing "gay marriage" not just once but multiple times during election cycles.
No way! Why wouldn't L, B and T be included? They are victims of sexual discrimination just as gay men are. The DOMA law was overturned based on the specific example of a lesbian couple, gay married in Canada but a resident of NY where gay marriage is recognized. The issue was that NY recognized the marriage but the federal government wanted to charge a large tax to the surviving spouse's inheritance, as if the two people were in no way related. Did you know that an inheritance from an immediate family member is far less taxed than an inheritance from a stranger? It is. Those women were legally family members - and now that their union is federally recognized, the taxes have been reduced - reduced like they will be if you receive an inheritance from your spouse. How fair is that!(answer: totally)

I think that trans-gendered people are the most innocent of those who will be affected by all of this law changing. It is a fact of life that some people are born not specific to either gender. This is as rare as being born albino - but it happens! Parents are encouraged to designate a gender for their child - the child is an infant - they would have no choice but to guess the gender. "Deformities" such as being born with both male and female sex organs are encouraged to be "corrected" surgically - I think this is bad advice! The children are born trans-gendered - they cannot help it - allow them to decide later in life if they want their own "deformity" surgically corrected or if they choose to live with the body that has always been their own. Do not assign them a gender when you don't even know what their gender is! Hormones and human development determine gender - not necessarily sex organs. Do not force gender stereotypes on children. Allow all people to determine their own gender. Do not allow or dis-allow legal documents based on a person's gender. Their gender is their own and not your business.

Why do you think L, B, and T are different from gay?

Since: Jul 12

Oceana, WV

#101 Jun 29, 2013
Here is the trailer to a great movie you can view on Netflix entitled, "Spork". It is the story of a teen who is a hermaphrodite and how she handles the way she is treated by her young peers. The language is quite "modern", so its a little hard for old folks to follow - lucky for me, I have children who were able to translate.

Here is the trailer - warning: it is uncensored.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bassett Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Are You Ready? 53 min HEATH - 72 115
Sola fide? 1 hr Mike_Peterson 38
Catholics (Feb '14) 1 hr Mike_Peterson 1,000
COC and KJV Bible (Jan '13) 5 hr _Randy_ 85
Which church is this 8 hr Bobby 37
What Does Johnny Robertson Say 9 hr Mitchell_Ferguson 2
Who is Eric Picock Tue Bobby 18
•••
•••

Bassett Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Bassett People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Bassett News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Bassett
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••