A Fundamental Christian`s Biggest Dilemma [Pic]

Submitted by: eugenius 5 years ago in

Confusion. Does. Not. Compute.
There are 47 comments:
Female 15
You can be pro-life and pro-gay rights...

Just saying...
0
Reply
Male 661
"When a woman was caught in adultery and brought to Jesus for punishment, Jesus said `Let him who is without sin among you cast the first stone`. A rock came raining down from the sky, crushing the woman. Jesus looked up and said `Awe come on dad! Will you stop that!`"

Fixed. And yes, I`m sorry.
0
Reply
Male 1,243
This sticker was likely made by a person who accepts prejudice, and who thinks that a Christian is someone who judges anothers and doesn`t love others.

Only God can judge who is Christian or not, but we can know them by their love.

God said: Love one another as i have loved you.

When a woman was caught in adultery and brought to Jesus for punishment, Jesus said "Let him who is among you cast the first stone". No one cast any stones at her, because all of us are sinners.
0
Reply
Female 61
Actually I would, so when it grows up I could throw stones at it. Kidding of course.
0
Reply
Male 1
@ShudBWorking You`re making an absurd comparison.
Psychopath decides to kill and maim people; people get hurt
Homosexual decides to insert his penis into the well lubricated anus of another consenting homosexual, literally NO ONE gets hurt.
The idea that you can compare violent, destructive, selfish tendancies, and their social suppression, with the consenting relationships between two people of the same gender is the most insanely stupid thing I`ve ever hurt.
If you don`t like gay sex/love/marriage, don`t do it yourself.....
dratwad
0
Reply
Male 40,401
The next Christian-baiting homosexuality thread that comes along?

I have a plan, a wicked, EVIL plan!

Mwaahahahaha!
0
Reply
Male 86
Re: Camael
Your statement: "did it ever occur to you that maybe encouraging gay people to supress their natural feelings is probably detrimental to their mental health?"
I will reiterate my previous point. Many people have "natural feelings" to kill or steal, yet they are required to suppress those feelings as well. We then do not wonder if the suppression of those tendencies are detrimental to their health because we as a society believe that there tendencies are more detrimental to society, and their mental health on that subject is therefore a non-issue. The same should be said about those who have tendencies to practice homosexuality. This also debases the "homosexuality is found in nature" argument, because they also sling crap, but we do not in a functioning society.
0
Reply
Male 2,214
Didn`t that longhaired hippie say to love each other as we love ourselves?Christ was ok, but christians suck.
0
Reply
Male 5,094
5Cats: When trolling stops being profitable.
0
Reply
Female 48
There`s really no arguing with religous people. They have the ultimate cop out in saying `but this is the random crap I believe in`. But seriously, I know you guys have to go along with what your religion says and all, but did it ever occur to you that maybe encouraging gay people to supress their natural feelings is probably detrimental to their mental health? Not to mention heterosexual relationships are also based on the impulses of being a physical being, like sex, reproduction, etc. It`s no more/less holy.
0
Reply
Male 129
Being a `fundamentalist`, I`ll say that I don`t hate gays, nor want them to die. The lifestyle is a sin-so is bigamy, fornication, adultery, (yes they are different), bestiality and other such sexual sins. Don`t want them to die, want them to be saved. Big difference.
0
Reply
Male 86
I don`t hate gays, gay people, whatever. I just don`t think they should practice the way they feel. I felt like having sex before I got married, I thought it was wrong, got pretty close, but my convictions stopped me, so my wife and I were virgins when we got married. Self-control even in sex is possible. To me it`s the same as lying, steeling, or cheating, pretty much impulses most of us have, but don`t act on them because they are wrong. So, I would vehemently fight for even a gay person`s right to life, the same as I would a person who has strong impulses to steal, and even do now when presented the chance. At the very least, medically speaking, life starts with a human heart beat (as it also ends with one), at 8 weeks, and from that point on, that human should be given a chance to live the life that has been started.
0
Reply
Male 40,401
I think that 150 years ago the female might be 14 but the MALE was older, established in a trade or occupation AND could provide for his family.

Thus a 20-30 y.o. guy would wed a 14-16 girl, but I really doubt many 14 year old BOYS got married. Although they would often be `apprenticed` at that age...
0
Reply
Male 72
I`d still fight for it`s right to live, yeah.
0
Reply
Male 25,417
wow... so many people with opinions. I am not one of them!
0
Reply
Male 2,516
@lordfoobar, I think you`re giving too much credit to teens 150 years ago. Like I said, I`ve seen first hand families formed by teenagers, and they still act like teenagers, only with a family, which is a little scary.
0
Reply
Female 3,562
I`m pro-choice but this is a stupid argument. If you believe abortion is murder, even if you hate gays you probably don`t approve of murdering them.
0
Reply
Male 79
@imnakdjumpme, well said!
0
Reply
Male 598
a real discussion and not just flame! See there is common ground between both sides. I think its fair to assume that NOBODY likes the idea of having an abortion, but we are not at a place in society where you can ban abortion and not have worse repercussions. It is incredibly hard to adopt and we still dont promote contraception and real education well enough. It would be like banning meat around the world; we could do it, but the infrastructure for feeding everyone with plant life isnt set up for that and millions would suffer
0
Reply
Male 79
... and yet they knew better the consequences of their actions than the kids today.

Of course society expects more from people than 150 years ago, I am not objecting this. What I say is that kids back then were more serious about life than today`s. Today, kids know more about life than 150 year old ones, but they are less serious about it. And I say that the parents do not teach them well the lessons of life for them to acquire this seriousness young enough.
0
Reply
Male 2,516
also, to say that 14 year old parents 150 years ago weren`t the pricks kids are today just because they built a house and have a spouse and kids of their own is to give way too much credit to teenagers of the past.

Like I said, I`ve seen it first hand: they have a house and kids, but they`re still rebellious and well, teens.
0
Reply
Male 2,516
@lordfoobar: you can still see 14 year old "men" building their own homes and caring for a family of like 5 kids; heck, I`ve seen it myself first hand... in the jungles of Chiapas, Mexico, where people still live like they did 150 years ago.

Nowadays we expect more educated teens, and that takes time. Educating you in the basic stuff you should know to be a member of a civilized society: 6 years of elementary + 6 years of secondary education. If everything went well, you`re 18 and capable of *starting* to make your own life.

If you want to be professional on something, add one to 8 more, and you are at that point still starting.

It`s not that we have bad parenting in modern days, it`s more that as FoolsPrussia already said, society has come to expect more of you if you want a house. We`ve come to demand that 14 year olds be educated
0
Reply
Male 79
"Pregnancy isn`t a cakewalk and can cause lifelong problems, not to mention that some people aren`t financially able to properly take care of themselves/their fetus for the length of a pregnancy"

yes, I totally agree with you! This is the kind of thing that parents should teach more to their children; the consequences of unprotected sex (and even protected in some cases) before and after is not merely that a baby will "grow", but a life time commitment and should be treated in all seriousness from both parties. If teenagers were more being taken care of by their parents, there would be less unwanted teenage pregnancies, in my opinion. (And i include young adults, as most of them still act like teenagers.)

And you exactly say why so many parents do not want to adopt (but would otherwise). My wife also would like the biological parent out of the child`s life forever, but this is a complicated matter... a lot more than a simple adoption problem.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
lordfoobar, the "plenty of people would love to adopt the kids" argument is bogus, sorry. There are TONS of kids who go unadopted. It`s even harder for them to be adopted if they`re not white, or if they have birth defects, or if they`re older. Not everyone wants their offspring to be raised by someone else without the ability to even see them (and many adoptive parents would prefer if the biological parents don`t ever get to see the child). Not only that, it doesn`t solve the issue of the unwanted PREGNANCY. Pregnancy isn`t a cakewalk and can cause lifelong problems, not to mention that some people aren`t financially able to properly take care of themselves/their fetus for the length of a pregnancy. I`m find with adoption as a /choice/ but it`s not something that should ever be forced for people who don`t want children.
0
Reply
Male 1,832
Ugh. Things that cannot think do not have a sexual orientation. That`s like saying "hey, look at that gay tree over there!"
0
Reply
Male 79
@FoolsPrussia, lifespan or not, a 14 year old boy was more serious about life than most of boys of same age today; they both had and have 14 years of life`s experience. Why would I blame life? There are still 14 year old kids who are mature enough to build their own homes (http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=HXDu2U-CmkI, well he`s 16, but to give him credits, he did start a while earlier). You`d have to be a teacher to know how parents foolishly over protect their children and do not teach them to be responsible for their own actions.
0
Reply
Male 2,672
If you want to start a flame war you need better bait than a lame bumper sticker.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
"Homophobic much CharliMonsta?"

How is what she said homophobic? She`s satirically making the same point that the OP`s post was making.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
"About 150 years ago, it was expected of a 14 year old "man" to build his own house so he could get married. Nowadays, you can`t even ask a 14 year old "man" to even get up to get a job. And who`s fault is this? I say parents play a good roles in this, and it merely slowly got to where we are today."

150 years ago the average lifespan was much lower, as was the quality of life. People also had got married and had children at a much younger age. So you should blame science and advances in medicine too.
0
Reply
Male 79
@jendrian, teenagers weren`t always like that. About 150 years ago, it was expected of a 14 year old "man" to build his own house so he could get married. Nowadays, you can`t even ask a 14 year old "man" to even get up to get a job. And who`s fault is this? I say parents play a good role in this, and it merely slowly got to where we are today. Sadly, it will only worsen still.
0
Reply
Male 40,401
Same crap, different picture.

Yes, the baby still should have rights.
No there`s no such thing as a "gay fetus" period!

When will IAB get tired of trolling it`s own members?
0
Reply
Male 2,516
@lordfoobar: nah, I think teenagers are just irresponsible by nature, overrun by a huge surge in hormones all trying to tell the teenager to hump, challenge authority and leave home to try and become the leader of a group. Just like other primates would do.
0
Reply
Male 79
@LillianDulci, though this is only my personal opinion, many parents can`t bare children and would benefit from those who don`t give a darn about theirs. I personally would adopt and welcome in my family an unwanted child. Unfortunately, the laws where a live are anal about it (takes years and a leg to adopt, among other things), for example.

As for christians, it is surprising how many don`t even know about what their own religion believes in (see http://goo.gl/PO6NZ). I am Mormon, and I can attest that I often see many so called christians who can quote the Scriptures just fine, but fail to grasp the meaning of it. I am not all-knowing, and would probably score an average points in such test as well, but I know when something does or does not fit.

And as responsibility goes, parents play a great part in teaching their children. Having irresponsible teenagers is the result of a lack of teachings from them (mistakes happen, but should not reach such a global scale, in
0
Reply
Male 3,894
We`ve already had this post.

While I believe in gay rights (and am pro-choice), pro-lifers insist on the right to life of a fetus, not the right to get married to members of the same sex. The statement shown here does not follow logic.
0
Reply
Male 1,625
but fundamentalist believe gay is a choice, so the baby would have to CHOOSE to be gay. in short, nothing a little electroshock therapy won`t solve
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Didn`t we already have this post ?
0
Reply
Male 79
@Jowsh, if IAB doesn`t want "pseudo-intellectual thinly veiled conservative christian view", then it should not post this kind of stuff :)
0
Reply
Female 2,674
@lordfoobar - That`s all fine and dandy, except some people pretend to care /so much/ about the fetus, but the SECOND it`s out of the womb, they don`t give a poo about it. It is extremely hypocritical. The same people who want to make abortions illegal are often the ones who don`t want to help out unwed mothers, who are against equal rights for everyone, who complain about people on food stamps, etc.

"responsible enough to conceive a child"

All it takes to conceive is 2 horny (post)pubescent people. It has nothing to do with responsibility and sometimes is actually the result of being irresponsible (i.e. not using birth control, excluding cases where they were trying to conceive). They responsible choice may very well be to abort the fetus if the parent(s) don`t have the means or desire to give birth to and raise a child.
0
Reply
Male 1,237
insert pseudo-intellectual thinly veiled conservative christian view here
0
Reply
Male 79
How funny it is that non christians will believe that this is a dilemme, while it is not. Real christians do not condemn the person, but the actions of a person. No one is born evil and everyone is entitled to be born. Thereafter they have the right to use their own freewill. No one can proclaim themselves christians while taking away the life of someone, less it is dictated by the law. Now, when life begins? I couldn`t say, but what I can say is that anyone responsible enough to conceive a child should be responsible to raise it to the fullness of their ability and assume said responsibility, whatever the choice of the child.
0
Reply
Male 1,122
@clockwork208
There was a time when picture posts were kept to 10 random photos, and the rest were interesting news articles, videos, clips, etc.

Now its mostly picture posts.
0
Reply
Male 1,122
Yes because `Christians` will argue that a fetus has not had the opportunity or faced the pressures of society which sometimes lead to a gay choice.
In other words a Fetus has not had time to use its free will to sin.
0
Reply
Male 835
Politics, social issue, religion, politics, social issue, religion, rinse, repeat, repeat...

Give me funny, interesting, unique or new. Stop feeding the sheeople. It`s getting redundant. Besides, don`t you have a cherryf*cker post you should be directing everyone to?

I swear, IAB was better than this at one point. It really was.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Homophobic much CharliMonsta?
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Repost? )-|
0
Reply
Female 128
I have a bumper sticker that says "I hope the fetus you save turns out to be gay."
0
Reply
Male 1,620
Link: A Fundamental Christian`s Biggest Dilemma [Pic] [Rate Link] - Confusion. Does. Not. Compute.
0
Reply