[quote author=minagir link=topic=8535.msg108075#msg108075 date=1259712679] [quote author=abanoub2000 link=topic=8535.msg108074#msg108074 date=1259710723] [quote author=sodr2 link=topic=8535.msg108073#msg108073 date=1259710251] [quote author=abanoub2000 link=topic=8535.msg108069#msg108069 date=1259703025] [quote author=minagir link=topic=8535.msg108050#msg108050 date=1259637591] [quote author=Mozes link=topic=8535.msg108048#msg108048 date=1259634052] [quote author=abanoub2000 link=topic=8535.msg108046#msg108046 date=1259628534] well some of guys were kinda harsh... ouch
butt..... i have researched the subjects, from a biblical point of view and i found allot of things that dont support gay rights... but i can't find much on abortion... a little help?
The gospel reading in the third watch (Agpeya) where a sinful woman weeps at the feet of Jesus indicates that she committed the crime of abortion. I am told, the keyword is 'her weeping' which is a sign of a woman who aborted .This fact is still true today. A doctor told us women who go to abortion clinics are characterized by their weeping a lot at first. If someone else has a better explanation?
killing a life is not enough for you?!!!
First, thanks for the quotes and your explanations guys, but i still dont see a fetus as a human life! Even if it is kinda developed it hasn't breathed, but if the baby takes in it's first breath then it is a life (that is my point of view)
what if you were that fetus huh?? what if your mom wanted an abortion and was going to have one, but your dad stopped or convinced her from getting one? would you thank your dad for saving your life, or tell him it didnt matter since i was still in the womb and i couldnt breath yet
if i were a fetus and i was aborted i would have thanked god that my would be parents were smart enough to know they couldnt support me!
[quote author=Godislove260 link=topic=8535.msg108057#msg108057 date=1259658310] I don't know where God commands us to oppose giving gays rights!!! Before you jump up with all the bibilical verses saying how being gay is against God's will, listen first please, I'm not justifying the fact of being gay, I, as a christian, know and moreover I understand why it is against God's will... BUT them being sinners doensn't mean they should not have equal human rights!! God makes the sun shine on both the sinners and the righteous. What you are saying implies that this specific kind of sinners should be treated like animals, I still am not sure that you fully understand the implications of what you are saying... If we deny gays human rights on the basis that being gay is agaisnt God's will, then we should also deny anyone who is not Christian (by word AND deed) their human rights!!! My opinion is: human rights are for humans, regardless of what they believe... I'll give you a small example: let's say a certain country exists where the leaders run the country according to their religion, and they view a certain kind of people as terrible sinners according to the teachings of that particular religion, so they discriminate against them and don't allow them to live as humans, but take away all their rights... instead of saying: religion is for God but the country is for all! If you think that would be right for christianity to do, then it would be right also for any other relgion to do, otherwise you would be a hypocrite, and I think that also is against God's will... Peace
Abouna Peter has explained the negative social aspects of supporting Gay rights.
If your concern is with the imposition of religion on people of other faiths, then do you know of any other religion that approves of the practice of Homosexuality?
If you also care much about human rights, I would like to know how you would react if an child of yours would turn out to be gay? What would you do :throw your unwavering support behind him so as not to violate his/her human rights or seek advise how to help him get rid of his/her habit? Would you be content all your life about the child??? If not,why not? I look forward for an honest and direct reply.
Does having intercourse between sibilings fall under the definition of human rights? Like gays,they too can argue that they have the right to.Don't you think so? I am interested to know where the advocates of human rights draw the line,if there is any??
mozez if MY child turned gay i'd beat him with el gasma el 2adeema, but i am talking about giving gay people rights as in them being treated equally in today society, i see them being laughed at, or harassed on a daily basis, i dont think any christian person can be against that!
Abanoub you just made a serious contradiction...so you believe that gay's should be treated equally and NOT be laughed at and NOT be harassed...yet you would beat your own child if he was gay?
This is a very interesting topic that I have discussed with many priests and servants, and for the Gay Marriage part I think Fr. Peter said it best that they should be given human rights but rights of marriage are only for real marriages, between and a man and a women. If you are considering the relationship between two men a marriage than you are defying the Bible and even the laws of nature.
Now for abortion, I am wishy washy myself but my argument with people who are against it is this. The embryo is in no way affected because it has not developed enough, nor seen the world for it to be called murder. Also, if by bringing someone into the world the parents ruin their lives than why bring them. That child will grow up messed up and most likely end up on the streets and be faced with the same dilemma of abortion. Abortion I think is good to a certain extent. Like if one of the parents is willing to take care of the baby then in that case the abortion should not go on, or if the parents are able to find a good family than again the child should not be aborted. However, if both parents are financially and emotionally unable to take care of the a child and both want to abort so as not to destroy their lives than in that case I see no problem with abortion. You are not killing a human being yet, its like killing a bug (might be a bad example, but gets the point across) if that bug is going to sting you and get you sick, don't tell me that's a sin! :D
ok u guys need to go to a pathology museum and see the bodies of fetuses preserved in bottles and look how human they are even from very early in the womb. (even if u think that's gross, i think it's more gross to kill them). also no-one mentioned adoption. lots and lots of people want kids and can't have them. some people have kids and don't want them. so you can give your child for adoption. my mum was adopted coz my grandmum wanted to kill her but abortion wasn't legal. she drank some poison but it didn't work. this is why i am here today.
1. I make a big distinction between Church marriage and Civil marriage, I do not see any sanctity in civil marriage, it is what it is in my opinion, just a contract between two people... (in which case I don't see any reason why homosexuals should not be allowed to have such a contract with eachother) 2. Even if certain religions consider homosexuality to be right, that does not change a thing in this discussion 3. I believe the main goal of law is to ensure the protection of everyone's rights, to protect society from itself and to put several procedures at hand with which those who break the law are punished, one of the functions for those punishments is: to scare people off from breaking the law. Now to what Father Peter said, I understand his concern for society, but I think freedom of expression is something so fundamental that to put boundaries on it is a very dangerous thing. For example, the freedom of atheists to say the most terrible things about christianity, I as a christian am most definitly bothered by what is being said, but I cannot support a law that would deny them the right to mock my religion.. Because I too have a right to evangelize, to tell people about God and to prove those atheists wrong, and if I want one I have to take the other also... Now my point is this: I have a very grim look on today's society, I see all that is holy and good being lost in a world that loves and encourages sin in all its forms. But I do not think that banning certain things in a legal way is the solution as much as making use of our own rights might be. I mean, if we outlaw gay marriage, if we even outlaw being gay altogether (in some countries you can get executed for being gay) I don't t think that will solve the problem, becaue when people are forced to respect the law or are afraid of the consequences of breaking it and they obey just because of that, while their intentions are different then you'll have a hypocrite society. But if we play our role correctly as children of God and be lights, I think that will have more effect.
4. To Mozes, my child cannot just 'turn out to be gay', as Father Peter said: there are temptations which we all face, and there are actions which we ourselves choose. If my child felt that he was sexually/emotionally attracted to the same sex I would be most saddened by that, not only because of my religious opinions, but also because I would know how hard it is for him to have to deal with such emotions, and I would seek help for them as I would consider it a temptation that has to be fought off, but in the case where my grown up child would freely choose his life of homosexuality with his partner, all I can do is pray for them, but I wouldn't want them to live in society that will judge them by their sexual orientation and not by the rest of their personality, I definitly wouldn't want them to live in a society where they would be exectued for it, or would not be able to find work (all existing examples of discrimination) etc. And if they did live is such a society and they pretended to be heterosexual while in fact they do all they want in secret, then I don't think that would be any better... It would just lead to hypocrisy.
5. Look, I feel very strongly about this because I just value rights a lot, I understand their importance and I also understand that the law has an important function, but it can't solve all societies problems. I am a christian who can (as long as I don't harm anyone) live my life just as I would like and the appreciation of that freedom leads me to not be able to deny anyone else from living their lives as they choose (as long as no one is harmed of course). I am free to sin, some things the law punishes for because they constitute harm to someone else, why do I choose not to steal? Is it out of fear for the law? Is it because I love God so much that I don't want to break His commandments? If I did it out of love for God, then I would do it regardless, but if I did it out of fear for an earthly punishment, does that make me a good christian? This discussion is not about tolerating sin, it's about not mixing state matters (including law) with religious matters.
"If a non-Christian person wishes to engage in homosexual behaviour in private I have few problems with that. If they wish to change society so that it accepts and encourages such behaviour as normal then I must resist. This has nothing to do at all with locking up homosexuals, or taking away their property, or throwing them out of their jobs. And it is a straw man to suggest that it does."
But homosexuality is now taught in schools. In Canada, sex education begins very early on, and the kids are taught that you "do not know you are gay unless you've tried".
They tell kids to experiment with sex and be safe about it (i.e. to use contraception).
So, society is now accepting a sin as the norm. Gays are now allowed to adopt children also. The state considers such a unit as a "family unit".
Does it disgust me? Very much. But can we do anything about it? Nothing. As you correctly pointed out: we could go to prison for even saying Homosexuality is wrong and a "sin" - and discriminating against it due to our religious convictions. I think, one day, it will be a punishable crime to Christian in the west. They will equate us with Nazis, and evildoers. We will be considered as those who are "intolerant" to diversity and sexual freedoms.
It will be compulsory, as far as I know, to give the SAME sex education lesson in schools in the UK very soon. And the worst part is this: You have no right to remove your kids from attending.
Right now, as a parent, you can opt to have your kids abstain from sex education at school. But later this year, or early next year, this will change. A sex education "specialist" will come to your school, and tell your 13 to 16 year olds that "unless they've tried homosexuality, they won't know that they're gay".
They will advise them to experiment sexually.
I wonder how kids must look at each other at the end of such classes??
What must be on their minds?
Anyway, homosexuality has passed the point of it being a sin. It is now an accepted part of western life - and their status has more rights than non gays.
#1. When I said I wanted to see some clarity in the thread I was perhaps not clear enough myself. The issue of the rights of homosexuals in the West (which is what we are discussing) has NOTHING at all to do with killing people who practice homosexuality, locking them up, or throwing them out of their jobs. Therefore it is not reasonable to combine these human rights with the social rights which is what the discussion and controversy in the West is all about. It is not right to say 'homosexuals have a right to not be locked up - therefore they also have a right to everything else they demand'. This does not follow at all.
#2. Since we are talking about social rights we are talking about what sort of society we want to be a part of. In our Western democracies we all have a responsibility to participate in shaping our society. It is not enough to say 'Christians should be tolerant so we should not seek to shape society'. It seems to me that this is a sinful approach itself since the saying is true, 'all that is needed for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing'.
#3. The freedom of speech is an important component of Western society, but it is not absolute. It is not absolute within the school environment, or within the domain of children's programming, nor when it is practiced in a way that is designed to cause public nuisance. Yet this is what is being demanded by many homosexual activists. They are indoctrinating our children in school and on TV, and they are intimidating the wider community by large and often explicitly sexual public parades. The freedom of expression is a US peculiarity which goes beyond a freedom of speech. I have no problems with a homosexual activist producing a book about homosexuality, but that does not mean he should be able to stand in the High Street and shout it out.
#4. The freedom of speech is being subverted and manipulated by the homosexual lobby so that only they are able to access this right. As has been said, it is increasingly the case that it is against the law to criticise homosexual behaviour. This shows that the aim of the homosexual lobby is not the freedom for private practice but the domination of the public space.
#5. The freedom to discriminate is also a necessary component of Western culture, but this is also being subverted by homosexuals to the diminishment of the freedoms of others. If I run a hotel and do not wish to open my facilities to homosexuals I could end up in prison and my business shut down. Yet there is no harm done by a business choosing its customers. This is surely also a 'right' yet it is now denied the vast majority of people in the West.
#6. Homosexual practice is a sin, as is adultery and promiscuity. None are worse than the other. It seems to me that when homosexuality, promiscuity and adultery are promoted in schools then there is something very wrong if the Church remains silent. This has nothing to do with Church and State but everything to do with Church and Society. We are a part of society and if we do nothing then we will be judged. Do we have nothing to say about the sexualisation of society and of our young people? Why not? Every child who is tempted into sexual sin is our responsibility if we have done nothing about the increasing decadence of our Western Societies. It is not enough to say 'we can do nothing'. Of course we can, and we are not alone in our concerns, and in a democratic society our concerns should be heard and should influence society.
#7. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman with the intention of bringing up a family for and within society. It is therefore properly protected by society, even when the State attacks it - as is the case in the UK where it deliberately works out better financially to not be married. Other relationships are not marriage. Those children brought up in a marriage are statistically better off in all measures. Other relationships may well be allowed by the State for various purposes, but again the homosexual lobby wishes to gain all the benefits of marriage with none of the responsibilities for building society. At the same time as they seek to gain benefits those unmarried people who are not married do not see any legal relationships being allowed to them, nor those close relatives who have lived together for many years. It is therefore nothing to do with fairness, but it a measure of the power of the homosexual lobby which is linked in very closely to Government and to the Media. If it was a matter of fairness then all relationships could be registered.
#8. We cannot and should not say 'it is none of my business'. What happens when sex with animals becomes popular - I am sorry to even raise the possibility. Should we then say that the promotion of that is part of people's human rights? I do not believe we are saying that private practice should be criminalised but that the public space should not be dominated by a small minority group whose behaviour is generally considered deviant.
#9. Homosexual practice is dangerous. It kills people and damages their bodies. It is not natural. It spreads diseases. It is not Christian to allow such practice to be encouraged and to allow the public space to be used to promote such practices. Here in the UK the State has banned people's freedom to smoke in public, and wants to ban the open sale of cigarettes. It has also banned hunting with hounds. It has banned fast food being advertised during children's programmes. It is entirely possible for all manner of things to be banned in the public domain without taking away people's right to smoke in private and eat themselves sick at McDonalds. YET, the same State allows and even demands that homosexual practices be taught and encouraged in our schools! We have a responsibility to help shape our society, but if we are silent then many will fall into sin, and will harm themselves and others.
#10. None of this means that homosexuals should be locked up. But it does mean that in our shared public space there is no reason why one small but powerful group should be allowed to dominate. On the soaps on UK TV there are no positive presentation of Christians. But on every soap there are homosexuals who are kissing and embracing each other while our children are watching. Even worse - in the British system of things I am paying for the BBC to make programmes - therefore it seems to me that I have a right to influence what is shown in these programmes. I am only one voice, but there are many Christians, many Muslims and Hindus, and many non-religious people, who are offended that on every prime time show there MUST be a presentation of homosexual acts. I pay for these programmes therefore it is my right and my duty to speak out.
#11. The Church cannot avoid being a part of society, in the UK, in the US, in Canada and throughout the West. But if we do not speak out then we are complicit in society becoming more degenerate and in our children becoming caught in sinful lifestyles. It is not enough just to turn the TV off. We have a responsibility to all those around us who do not turn the TV off and who are drawn into accepting sin as normal. The Director of Strategy in No 10 Downing Street is a practicing homosexual. He has constant access to the Prime Minister of the UK. The Deputy Prime Minister and Business Secretary, Lord Mandelson, is a practicing homosexuality. There are other ministers who are practicing homosexuals. This would not matter if their homosexuality were a private matter, but in the UK of 2009 it is not a private matter but has become a matter of every TV programme, and every school curriculum. Yet most British people do not consider homosexual practice as normal - but in the usual British way they wish to be tolerant of the private practice of others. There are very powerful people who are pushing for the normalisation of homosexual practice - if the Church does nothing then they will succeed and it will be the 'traditional family' which suffers - as it already does in the UK. We will be to blame if we have been silent out of a false sense of tolerance.
What happens in someone's bedroom is not my business - but what is taught to my children and shown on the TV programmes I am paying for does matter and is my business. If I cannot criticise homosexual practice without being arrested then that is also my business - and recently Christian pastors have been arrested for 'hate crimes' because they criticised homosexual practice.
Perhaps there is a time of serious persecution coming upon the Church soon in the West? We must choose whether we will stand up for the Christian principles we believe are the basis for all truly human societies - or we will compromise pur faith, be complicit in encouraging sin and deserve to be overwhelmed by the forces of Islam.
Non-Christian couples who wish to marry in a civil society are entering a union which is universally understood and supported.
Marriage in all societies has always been between a man and a woman.
Would you support the marriage of a man and a dog? Why not if that is what the man wants?
But marriage is not defined by individuals, it is defined by God, and by society. We enter into a relationship which is already and always a 'given' in human history, we do not demand that society bends itself to our own wishes.
I do not reject the idea that any people should be able to enter into a legally contractual relationship which provides certain rights and protections. But if two spinster sisters enter into such an arrangement it is not a marriage. Neither is it a marriage if it involves two men. A marriage is between a man and a woman and is for the sake of building up the family of society.
Marriage is both civil and sacramental. It is always civil but is not always sacramental. But marriage is always and everywhere between a man and a woman. You are seeking to redefine the word to suit your argument but there is no reason why anyone should accept your redefinition. A man who engages in homosexual practices is free to marry a woman and this would be a true use of the word marriage - of course he would have to choose to modify his sexual behaviour. But a man who engages in homosexual practices can never marry another man, whether according to civil or sacramental sense of the word. And if the word is redefined it does not change the true meaning of the word.
'In the beginning God created them male and female...'
Homosexual practice is therefore theologically disordered and should never be accepted by Christians as an acceptable form of behavior, just as promiscuity is theologically disordered and should never be accepted by Christians as an acceptable form of behaviour, just as adultery is theologically disordered and should never be accepted by Christians as an acceptable form of behaviour.
Perhaps it should also be said that though we are free to believe as we choose, in the sense that the Church does not operate a system of mind scans, and it is good to be both humble and questioning, nevertheless in regard to abortion, all Orthodox Churches and the Roman Catholic Church and most Christians around the world consider and have always considered that abortion is a sin, and is the taking of a human life.
It does not seem to me that to accept abortion is consistent with the Orthodox Faith.
Of course we all struggle with coming to understand the teachings of the Church in one context or another, but there is no difference of opinion among Orthodox, nor has there been, Orthodoxy does not accept abortion and generally considers it murder, certainly the taking of a human life.
[quote author=I Believe link=topic=8535.msg108080#msg108080 date=1259724185] Abanoub you just made a serious contradiction...so you believe that gay's should be treated equally and NOT be laughed at and NOT be harassed...yet you would beat your own child if he was gay?
MY child would be raised as a christian, i would teach him that it is wrong to practice it (which is where the gasma comes in) but i also want him to know that these are HUMAN BEINGS that we treat as second citizens all because of what? falling into temptation?
[quote author=Godislove260 link=topic=8535.msg108089#msg108089 date=1259746365] 2. Even if certain religions consider homosexuality to be right, that does not change a thing in this discussion
Please name me a major religion that considers Homosexuality a right. I am curious to know,if you have any name in mind.
believe the main goal of law is to ensure the protection of everyone's rights, to protect society from itself and to put several procedures at hand with which those who break the law are punished, one of the functions for those punishments is: to scare people off from breaking the law. Now to what Father Peter said, I understand his concern for society, but I think freedom of expression is something so fundamental that to put boundaries on it is a very dangerous thing. For example, the freedom of atheists to say the most terrible things about christianity, I as a christian am most definitly bothered by what is being said, but I cannot support a law that would deny them the right to mock my religion.. Because I too have a right to evangelize, to tell people about God and to prove those atheists wrong, and if I want one I have to take the other also... Now my point is this: I have a very grim look on today's society, I see all that is holy and good being lost in a world that loves and encourages sin in all its forms. But I do not think that banning certain things in a legal way is the solution as much as making use of our own rights might be
All indications are that you seem to feel very strong about the protection of equal rights. It is my turn to ask you if you do know the right definition or if you really do understand the reason why the "Equal Rights law" clause, article or whatever is inserted in a constitiution of a nation.Suffice to say,those wise people who had coined the term never had the issue of gays or the right to anything that is unnatural in their minds.
According to the legal dictionary, Equal Rights is the right of every person by absolute and personal right, without subject of another, to receive in kind the same amount, size, number or value of what is given to others in a comparable place, so that there may be an impartial and tranquil state of mind where all can meet and be capable of completing a task or resolving a situation.
This means equal rights are the foundation of a society. Rights such as:
*Equal pay for equal work. *Freedom from stereotyping and bigotry. *Equal stature in society. *Equal Opportunities for work. *Equal access to knowledge. *Equal expectations of performance standards. *Equal access to health: doctors, emergency room status, etc. *Equal expectation of safety on the street and in the workplace. *Equal expectations of non-discrimation and harrassment in the workplace. *Equal opportunity for medical leave upon a birth of a child. *Equal opportunity to leave upon the birth or adoption of a child in order to prepare for a family adjustment. *Equal time off for arranging care of a spouse, child, or parent with a critical or degenerative health condition. *Equal opportunity to be considered for alternate or associate jobs when unable to perform current position due to health or other immediate problem.
*Equal access to all property and moneys, excluding when having chosen prenuptial agreements, after marriage and until frozen by a legal authority for the purpose of divorce.
*Equal opportunity to resolve grievances with employers before resorting to legal assistance by a guarantee that there will be an objective counsel within the workplace to make problems heard and handled.
*Equal opportunity for additional work, overtime pay, work privileges and fringe benefits. *Equal right to have a daycare on the premises of any white collar and any other feasible career where the parent may be able to spend a lunch or break time with their child.
*Equal opportunity for unmarried parents in the workplace. etc etc etc etc etc...
When I think of equal rights, I think along these examples. I am not convinced of your reasons that you gave us in the event your childern turn gay. You would be running from one monastery to the next in search of help and cure for them. You would spend the rest of your days thinking and wailing about that. You can not expect society to be tolerant of your child,if you are not in the first place. Tolerance and understanding starts at home.You would be extremely happy even pray for society to be harsh on them, if you saw an opportunity that such treatment may cause a change in their behaviour. It is tough and entirely another matter when it happens to you, isnt it? All that talk of equal rights would evaporta einto thin air. Let us be honest. If Gays are executed in some countries,then it is their law and one must abide by it.we should also know that religions such as Christianty,Islam,judaism hindiuism are also the identities of societies ,way of life and not just private spritual matters or faith. if there are non-religious people who oppose the rights of gay,then they do it, cos their identity and conscience dictates them to do so.
First, thanks for the quotes and your explanations guys, but i still dont see a fetus as a human life! Even if it is kinda developed it hasn't breathed, but if the baby takes in it's first breath then it is a life (that is my point of view)
abanoub thinks that a fetus has no life.He seems to think, it does not breathe ,therefore it has no life. Of course, that is his 'point of view' as he says.He has not even bothered to check his information before he forms his point of view.In other words, ababnoub thinks that a fetus in the womb is a dead fetus that apparantly grows and develops in size until birth. That is why he probably thinks, it is not a great deal to abort a piece of dead flesh that has no life in it.
abanoub wants to get rid of this guy and wonders if he were a good christian.
Mozes Supports letting poor children sleep on the street in the freezing cold with no idea who their parents are! Yay for torturing children!
Abortion is a good way to end that problem! but NOOO lets let that kid sleep outside, in the winter because I dont want to 'kill' something that i am not even sure is alive yet!
you are entitled to hold your opinion but it is not an Orthodox, nor even a Christian one.
This child can be helped and saved. Killing him before he is is born is not a means of helping him.
If you are concerned for him then serve him, you have talents and the means of raising support for him. But what you are suggesting, or even stating, is that it is better to kill him rather than serve him.
That would be like the Parable of the Good Samaritan having an ending where others had passed by and then the Samaritan saw the man with so many injuries and said 'Well the best thing is to put him out of his misery, and killed him'.
There are even few among those whoi support abortion who would dare to say that an unborn child (not a fetus) is not human until it draws its first breath. And if you ask any mother she will not say, 'This is just a collection of cells I am carrying'. Indeed we know that the unborn child increasingly responds to external stimuli in an intelligent and conscious manner. It is also that case that the brain of an unborn child does not switch on during birth, but is already fully conscious. So setting the point at which a person becomes human at birth is illogical and not scientific at all.
I would urge you to reflect on the various scriptures which speak of the unborn child, and prayerfully consider your opinion in the light of the teaching of all of the ancient Churches, which have uniformally considered abortion to be murder. Likewise all of the ancient cultures I am aware of considered that causing a miscarriage through violence against a pregnant woman was equivalent to having murdered her child.
The poor will always be with us, and there are issues around population control, but abortion is not the answer - you yourself could provide for this child if you wished. In the UK there were 196,000 abortions carried out in 2008. We do not have children sleeping in the streets. We do have a culture of promiscuous sexual activity, and a low sense of the worth of the unborn child among some sections of the community. These are not accidental pregnancies, nor generally ones to people who could not care for another child. They are generally abortions of convenience, generally by people who have been lazy about contraception, or and who even view abortion as a form of contraception.
It is not. It is the taking of a human life. This is the teaching of the Church, and has always been.
So you are worried about those kids who are starving and poor look at what our Lord Jesus Christ says...
Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature? So why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble. Matthew 6:25-34
ok so abortion was out topic in my ap biology class today, and i cant honestly say that a fetus isnt a life after the scientific proof.... soo i guess you guys are right and i was wrong.... thanks for the advicce and sorry for being so stubborn
if you weren't stubborn you wouldn't have learned all this stuff that you did. It's good to ask questions (the more stubborn the better) if you're aim is to learn... but if your aim is to just attack and prove that you are right... not good
how else can one learn without stubborn questions?
My opinion is that allowing gays to have a civil marriage is the right thing to do, as in my opinion, civil marriage is no more than a contract. I understand some people might see more in it, but legally it is just a binding contract between two people who love eachother who take upon themselves duties toward eachother.. if marriage is defined like this (and it is in many places) then there are no objective reasons why it shouldn't be allowed for two people of the same sex... (at least none that I can imagine)
Dear Mozes, thank you for answering the question you had asked me before yourself, I just wish you would have done that earlier so that I wouldn't have bothered giving you an answer myself. If I had a company then I would seek the best, most qualified employees to work there, who they sleep with, what religion they adhere to, where they're from, all of that doesn't matter as long as they do their job well, if however someone should refuse a perfectly qualified person for the fact that that person is gay, then I would consider that wrong and a loss to the employer who could have had a good person in their work force.
I do feel that most people on this site disagree with me, and that is perfectly fine, it is their right as it is mine to express their opinions. It is sad though that some poeple make use of that right in a manner that I consider disrespectful...
Hi every body, I will jump into this very hot topic: Some of us get upset and personal when we get into discussions like this; but here is my opinion + The Church is against sin no matter what it is called, Stealing, murder, homosexuality, fornication, lust, adultry......just to name a few. + The rule of thumb is HATE the sin but LOVE the sinner (emphasis on the 'er' at the end of the word). + I am not preaching here, since I too fall into judging sinners once I know the sin. For example, I find it difficult (which is wrong) to love some one after you tell me he is a thief, stealing from his work, or he is a drug dealer selling drugs to young people, But this is my human weakness, so please do not write and preach to me, + So it is important not to seek to know other people sins, remember the story of St Makari the great when he sat down on a big vessel inside one of the monk's cells while the other monks were searching the cell. He knew there was a woman there, and after the brothers left he said to the monk "Judge yr self before they judge u" On his way out a voice from heaven came to him saying "Blessed are u Makari, for u became like yr master covering up for others sins". + Sin is sin and we pray for our and other's salvation and repentance. Hate sin but you love the sinner, for Jesus died for us when we were sinners Romans 5:8 "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us". he did not die for the righteous, He died for me a sinner. God bless u all
Generally we must all work with non-Christians, but we have to consider if the situation we are working in is causing us to compromise on the principles of our Faith - this is not the same as thinking ourselves better than others. There is a difference also between working with people, or being at college with people, and spending free time with them. It is in this latter situation that we are more likely to compromise.
It is necessary to say that homosexual practices are a sin, and those who practice them are sinners. But adultery is a sin, and those who practice adultery are sinners. And we also are aware that we are liable to fall into sexual sin and when we do and persist in it then we are sinners. But that being so, we have to decide if it is harming us to work for or with someone who is a sinner, I mean living in the constant practice of a sin. If we become used to a sin because someone we are close to practices it then this is not always helful for us.
We should not set ourselves up as better than someone we know who is practicing homosexual sin, or heterosexual sin, but if we start saying to ourselves - it doesn't matter - then we are thinking wrong. It does matter very much, and we should be very much moved to prayer for the person trapped in such a sinful way of life - no less than we should always pray with a sense of our own sinfulness. But the one who continually practices homosexual acts, and the one who continually practices adultery and promiscuity is in grave danger, and we must pray for them, rather than change our way of thinking to a non-Christian one. They are not excused their behaviour because they are not Christians, even while we should not judge them. We should intercede for them that they might be rescued from their sinful way of life, as we pray for ourselves.
Comments
"Life of a baby starts at conception. Any abortion is considered a murder."
http://www.suscopts.org/q&a/index.php?qid=993&catid=414
[quote author=abanoub2000 link=topic=8535.msg108074#msg108074 date=1259710723]
[quote author=sodr2 link=topic=8535.msg108073#msg108073 date=1259710251]
[quote author=abanoub2000 link=topic=8535.msg108069#msg108069 date=1259703025]
[quote author=minagir link=topic=8535.msg108050#msg108050 date=1259637591]
[quote author=Mozes link=topic=8535.msg108048#msg108048 date=1259634052]
[quote author=abanoub2000 link=topic=8535.msg108046#msg108046 date=1259628534]
well some of guys were kinda harsh... ouch
butt..... i have researched the subjects, from a biblical point of view and i found allot of things that dont support gay rights... but i can't find much on abortion... a little help?
The gospel reading in the third watch (Agpeya) where a sinful woman weeps at the feet of Jesus indicates that she committed the crime of abortion. I am told, the keyword is 'her weeping' which is a sign of a woman who aborted .This fact is still true today. A doctor told us women who go to abortion clinics are characterized by their weeping a lot at first.
If someone else has a better explanation?
killing a life is not enough for you?!!!
First, thanks for the quotes and your explanations guys, but i still dont see a fetus as a human life! Even if it is kinda developed it hasn't breathed, but if the baby takes in it's first breath then it is a life (that is my point of view)
what if you were that fetus huh?? what if your mom wanted an abortion and was going to have one, but your dad stopped or convinced her from getting one? would you thank your dad for saving your life, or tell him it didnt matter since i was still in the womb and i couldnt breath yet
if i were a fetus and i was aborted i would have thanked god that my would be parents were smart enough to know they couldnt support me!
do not mix marriage with reasons for abortion.
whos talking about marriage?
I don't know where God commands us to oppose giving gays rights!!! Before you jump up with all the bibilical verses saying how being gay is against God's will, listen first please, I'm not justifying the fact of being gay, I, as a christian, know and moreover I understand why it is against God's will... BUT them being sinners doensn't mean they should not have equal human rights!! God makes the sun shine on both the sinners and the righteous. What you are saying implies that this specific kind of sinners should be treated like animals, I still am not sure that you fully understand the implications of what you are saying... If we deny gays human rights on the basis that being gay is agaisnt God's will, then we should also deny anyone who is not Christian (by word AND deed) their human rights!!! My opinion is: human rights are for humans, regardless of what they believe... I'll give you a small example: let's say a certain country exists where the leaders run the country according to their religion, and they view a certain kind of people as terrible sinners according to the teachings of that particular religion, so they discriminate against them and don't allow them to live as humans, but take away all their rights... instead of saying: religion is for God but the country is for all!
If you think that would be right for christianity to do, then it would be right also for any other relgion to do, otherwise you would be a hypocrite, and I think that also is against God's will... Peace
Abouna Peter has explained the negative social aspects of supporting Gay rights.
If your concern is with the imposition of religion on people of other faiths, then do you know of any other religion that approves of the practice of Homosexuality?
If you also care much about human rights, I would like to know how you would react if an child of yours would turn out to be gay? What would you do :throw your unwavering support behind him so as not to violate his/her human rights or seek advise how to help him get rid of his/her habit? Would you be content all your life about the child??? If not,why not? I look forward for an honest and direct reply.
Does having intercourse between sibilings fall under the definition of human rights? Like gays,they too can argue that they have the right to.Don't you think so? I am interested to know where the advocates of human rights draw the line,if there is any??
Now for abortion, I am wishy washy myself but my argument with people who are against it is this. The embryo is in no way affected because it has not developed enough, nor seen the world for it to be called murder. Also, if by bringing someone into the world the parents ruin their lives than why bring them. That child will grow up messed up and most likely end up on the streets and be faced with the same dilemma of abortion. Abortion I think is good to a certain extent. Like if one of the parents is willing to take care of the baby then in that case the abortion should not go on, or if the parents are able to find a good family than again the child should not be aborted. However, if both parents are financially and emotionally unable to take care of the a child and both want to abort so as not to destroy their lives than in that case I see no problem with abortion. You are not killing a human being yet, its like killing a bug (might be a bad example, but gets the point across) if that bug is going to sting you and get you sick, don't tell me that's a sin! :D
(even if u think that's gross, i think it's more gross to kill them).
also no-one mentioned adoption.
lots and lots of people want kids and can't have them. some people have kids and don't want them. so you can give your child for adoption.
my mum was adopted coz my grandmum wanted to kill her but abortion wasn't legal. she drank some poison but it didn't work. this is why i am here today.
2. Even if certain religions consider homosexuality to be right, that does not change a thing in this discussion
3. I believe the main goal of law is to ensure the protection of everyone's rights, to protect society from itself and to put several procedures at hand with which those who break the law are punished, one of the functions for those punishments is: to scare people off from breaking the law. Now to what Father Peter said, I understand his concern for society, but I think freedom of expression is something so fundamental that to put boundaries on it is a very dangerous thing. For example, the freedom of atheists to say the most terrible things about christianity, I as a christian am most definitly bothered by what is being said, but I cannot support a law that would deny them the right to mock my religion.. Because I too have a right to evangelize, to tell people about God and to prove those atheists wrong, and if I want one I have to take the other also... Now my point is this: I have a very grim look on today's society, I see all that is holy and good being lost in a world that loves and encourages sin in all its forms. But I do not think that banning certain things in a legal way is the solution as much as making use of our own rights might be. I mean, if we outlaw gay marriage, if we even outlaw being gay altogether (in some countries you can get executed for being gay) I don't t think that will solve the problem, becaue when people are forced to respect the law or are afraid of the consequences of breaking it and they obey just because of that, while their intentions are different then you'll have a hypocrite society. But if we play our role correctly as children of God and be lights, I think that will have more effect.
5. Look, I feel very strongly about this because I just value rights a lot, I understand their importance and I also understand that the law has an important function, but it can't solve all societies problems. I am a christian who can (as long as I don't harm anyone) live my life just as I would like and the appreciation of that freedom leads me to not be able to deny anyone else from living their lives as they choose (as long as no one is harmed of course). I am free to sin, some things the law punishes for because they constitute harm to someone else, why do I choose not to steal? Is it out of fear for the law? Is it because I love God so much that I don't want to break His commandments?
If I did it out of love for God, then I would do it regardless, but if I did it out of fear for an earthly punishment, does that make me a good christian?
This discussion is not about tolerating sin, it's about not mixing state matters (including law) with religious matters.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
They tell kids to experiment with sex and be safe about it (i.e. to use contraception).
So, society is now accepting a sin as the norm. Gays are now allowed to adopt children also. The state considers such a unit as a "family unit".
Does it disgust me? Very much. But can we do anything about it?
Nothing. As you correctly pointed out: we could go to prison for even saying Homosexuality is wrong and a "sin" - and discriminating against it due to our religious convictions. I think, one day, it will be a punishable crime to Christian in the west. They will equate us with Nazis, and evildoers. We will be considered as those who are "intolerant" to diversity and sexual freedoms.
It will be compulsory, as far as I know, to give the SAME sex education lesson in schools in the UK very soon. And the worst part is this: You have no right to remove your kids from attending.
Right now, as a parent, you can opt to have your kids abstain from sex education at school. But later this year, or early next year, this will change. A sex education "specialist" will come to your school, and tell your 13 to 16 year olds that "unless they've tried homosexuality, they won't know that they're gay".
They will advise them to experiment sexually.
I wonder how kids must look at each other at the end of such classes??
What must be on their minds?
Anyway, homosexuality has passed the point of it being a sin. It is now an accepted part of western life - and their status has more rights than non gays.
#1. When I said I wanted to see some clarity in the thread I was perhaps not clear enough myself. The issue of the rights of homosexuals in the West (which is what we are discussing) has NOTHING at all to do with killing people who practice homosexuality, locking them up, or throwing them out of their jobs. Therefore it is not reasonable to combine these human rights with the social rights which is what the discussion and controversy in the West is all about. It is not right to say 'homosexuals have a right to not be locked up - therefore they also have a right to everything else they demand'. This does not follow at all.
#2. Since we are talking about social rights we are talking about what sort of society we want to be a part of. In our Western democracies we all have a responsibility to participate in shaping our society. It is not enough to say 'Christians should be tolerant so we should not seek to shape society'. It seems to me that this is a sinful approach itself since the saying is true, 'all that is needed for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing'.
#3. The freedom of speech is an important component of Western society, but it is not absolute. It is not absolute within the school environment, or within the domain of children's programming, nor when it is practiced in a way that is designed to cause public nuisance. Yet this is what is being demanded by many homosexual activists. They are indoctrinating our children in school and on TV, and they are intimidating the wider community by large and often explicitly sexual public parades. The freedom of expression is a US peculiarity which goes beyond a freedom of speech. I have no problems with a homosexual activist producing a book about homosexuality, but that does not mean he should be able to stand in the High Street and shout it out.
#4. The freedom of speech is being subverted and manipulated by the homosexual lobby so that only they are able to access this right. As has been said, it is increasingly the case that it is against the law to criticise homosexual behaviour. This shows that the aim of the homosexual lobby is not the freedom for private practice but the domination of the public space.
#5. The freedom to discriminate is also a necessary component of Western culture, but this is also being subverted by homosexuals to the diminishment of the freedoms of others. If I run a hotel and do not wish to open my facilities to homosexuals I could end up in prison and my business shut down. Yet there is no harm done by a business choosing its customers. This is surely also a 'right' yet it is now denied the vast majority of people in the West.
#6. Homosexual practice is a sin, as is adultery and promiscuity. None are worse than the other. It seems to me that when homosexuality, promiscuity and adultery are promoted in schools then there is something very wrong if the Church remains silent. This has nothing to do with Church and State but everything to do with Church and Society. We are a part of society and if we do nothing then we will be judged. Do we have nothing to say about the sexualisation of society and of our young people? Why not? Every child who is tempted into sexual sin is our responsibility if we have done nothing about the increasing decadence of our Western Societies. It is not enough to say 'we can do nothing'. Of course we can, and we are not alone in our concerns, and in a democratic society our concerns should be heard and should influence society.
#7. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman with the intention of bringing up a family for and within society. It is therefore properly protected by society, even when the State attacks it - as is the case in the UK where it deliberately works out better financially to not be married. Other relationships are not marriage. Those children brought up in a marriage are statistically better off in all measures. Other relationships may well be allowed by the State for various purposes, but again the homosexual lobby wishes to gain all the benefits of marriage with none of the responsibilities for building society. At the same time as they seek to gain benefits those unmarried people who are not married do not see any legal relationships being allowed to them, nor those close relatives who have lived together for many years. It is therefore nothing to do with fairness, but it a measure of the power of the homosexual lobby which is linked in very closely to Government and to the Media. If it was a matter of fairness then all relationships could be registered.
#8. We cannot and should not say 'it is none of my business'. What happens when sex with animals becomes popular - I am sorry to even raise the possibility. Should we then say that the promotion of that is part of people's human rights? I do not believe we are saying that private practice should be criminalised but that the public space should not be dominated by a small minority group whose behaviour is generally considered deviant.
#9. Homosexual practice is dangerous. It kills people and damages their bodies. It is not natural. It spreads diseases. It is not Christian to allow such practice to be encouraged and to allow the public space to be used to promote such practices. Here in the UK the State has banned people's freedom to smoke in public, and wants to ban the open sale of cigarettes. It has also banned hunting with hounds. It has banned fast food being advertised during children's programmes. It is entirely possible for all manner of things to be banned in the public domain without taking away people's right to smoke in private and eat themselves sick at McDonalds. YET, the same State allows and even demands that homosexual practices be taught and encouraged in our schools! We have a responsibility to help shape our society, but if we are silent then many will fall into sin, and will harm themselves and others.
#10. None of this means that homosexuals should be locked up. But it does mean that in our shared public space there is no reason why one small but powerful group should be allowed to dominate. On the soaps on UK TV there are no positive presentation of Christians. But on every soap there are homosexuals who are kissing and embracing each other while our children are watching. Even worse - in the British system of things I am paying for the BBC to make programmes - therefore it seems to me that I have a right to influence what is shown in these programmes. I am only one voice, but there are many Christians, many Muslims and Hindus, and many non-religious people, who are offended that on every prime time show there MUST be a presentation of homosexual acts. I pay for these programmes therefore it is my right and my duty to speak out.
#11. The Church cannot avoid being a part of society, in the UK, in the US, in Canada and throughout the West. But if we do not speak out then we are complicit in society becoming more degenerate and in our children becoming caught in sinful lifestyles. It is not enough just to turn the TV off. We have a responsibility to all those around us who do not turn the TV off and who are drawn into accepting sin as normal. The Director of Strategy in No 10 Downing Street is a practicing homosexual. He has constant access to the Prime Minister of the UK. The Deputy Prime Minister and Business Secretary, Lord Mandelson, is a practicing homosexuality. There are other ministers who are practicing homosexuals. This would not matter if their homosexuality were a private matter, but in the UK of 2009 it is not a private matter but has become a matter of every TV programme, and every school curriculum. Yet most British people do not consider homosexual practice as normal - but in the usual British way they wish to be tolerant of the private practice of others. There are very powerful people who are pushing for the normalisation of homosexual practice - if the Church does nothing then they will succeed and it will be the 'traditional family' which suffers - as it already does in the UK. We will be to blame if we have been silent out of a false sense of tolerance.
What happens in someone's bedroom is not my business - but what is taught to my children and shown on the TV programmes I am paying for does matter and is my business. If I cannot criticise homosexual practice without being arrested then that is also my business - and recently Christian pastors have been arrested for 'hate crimes' because they criticised homosexual practice.
Perhaps there is a time of serious persecution coming upon the Church soon in the West? We must choose whether we will stand up for the Christian principles we believe are the basis for all truly human societies - or we will compromise pur faith, be complicit in encouraging sin and deserve to be overwhelmed by the forces of Islam.
Father Peter
Non-Christian couples who wish to marry in a civil society are entering a union which is universally understood and supported.
Marriage in all societies has always been between a man and a woman.
Would you support the marriage of a man and a dog? Why not if that is what the man wants?
But marriage is not defined by individuals, it is defined by God, and by society. We enter into a relationship which is already and always a 'given' in human history, we do not demand that society bends itself to our own wishes.
I do not reject the idea that any people should be able to enter into a legally contractual relationship which provides certain rights and protections. But if two spinster sisters enter into such an arrangement it is not a marriage. Neither is it a marriage if it involves two men. A marriage is between a man and a woman and is for the sake of building up the family of society.
Marriage is both civil and sacramental. It is always civil but is not always sacramental. But marriage is always and everywhere between a man and a woman. You are seeking to redefine the word to suit your argument but there is no reason why anyone should accept your redefinition. A man who engages in homosexual practices is free to marry a woman and this would be a true use of the word marriage - of course he would have to choose to modify his sexual behaviour. But a man who engages in homosexual practices can never marry another man, whether according to civil or sacramental sense of the word. And if the word is redefined it does not change the true meaning of the word.
'In the beginning God created them male and female...'
Homosexual practice is therefore theologically disordered and should never be accepted by Christians as an acceptable form of behavior, just as promiscuity is theologically disordered and should never be accepted by Christians as an acceptable form of behaviour, just as adultery is theologically disordered and should never be accepted by Christians as an acceptable form of behaviour.
Father Peter
It does not seem to me that to accept abortion is consistent with the Orthodox Faith.
Of course we all struggle with coming to understand the teachings of the Church in one context or another, but there is no difference of opinion among Orthodox, nor has there been, Orthodoxy does not accept abortion and generally considers it murder, certainly the taking of a human life.
Father Peter
Abanoub you just made a serious contradiction...so you believe that gay's should be treated equally and NOT be laughed at and NOT be harassed...yet you would beat your own child if he was gay?
MY child would be raised as a christian, i would teach him that it is wrong to practice it (which is where the gasma comes in) but i also want him to know that these are HUMAN BEINGS that we treat as second citizens all because of what? falling into temptation?
2. Even if certain religions consider homosexuality to be right, that does not change a thing in this discussion
Please name me a major religion that considers Homosexuality a right. I am curious to know,if you have any name in mind. All indications are that you seem to feel very strong about the protection of equal rights. It is my turn to ask you if you do know the right definition or if you really do understand the reason why the "Equal Rights law" clause, article or whatever is inserted in a constitiution of a nation.Suffice to say,those wise people who had coined the term never had the issue of gays or the right to anything that is unnatural in their minds.
According to the legal dictionary, Equal Rights is the right of every person by absolute and personal right, without subject of another, to receive in kind the same amount, size, number or value of what is given to others in a comparable place, so that there may be an impartial and tranquil state of mind where all can meet and be capable of completing a task or resolving a situation.
This means equal rights are the foundation of a society. Rights such as:
*Equal pay for equal work.
*Freedom from stereotyping and bigotry.
*Equal stature in society.
*Equal Opportunities for work.
*Equal access to knowledge.
*Equal expectations of performance standards.
*Equal access to health: doctors, emergency room status, etc.
*Equal expectation of safety on the street and in the workplace.
*Equal expectations of non-discrimation and harrassment in the workplace.
*Equal opportunity for medical leave upon a birth of a child.
*Equal opportunity to leave upon the birth or adoption of a child in order to prepare for a family adjustment.
*Equal time off for arranging care of a spouse, child, or parent with a critical or degenerative health condition.
*Equal opportunity to be considered for alternate or associate jobs when unable to perform current position due to health or other immediate problem.
*Equal access to all property and moneys, excluding when having chosen prenuptial agreements, after marriage and until frozen by a legal authority for the purpose of divorce.
*Equal opportunity to resolve grievances with employers before resorting to legal assistance by a guarantee that there will be an objective counsel within the workplace to make problems heard and handled.
*Equal opportunity for additional work, overtime pay, work privileges and fringe benefits.
*Equal right to have a daycare on the premises of any white collar and any other feasible career where the parent may be able to spend a lunch or break time with their child.
*Equal opportunity for unmarried parents in the workplace.
etc etc etc etc etc...
When I think of equal rights, I think along these examples.
I am not convinced of your reasons that you gave us in the event your childern turn gay. You would be running from one monastery to the next in search of help and cure for them. You would spend the rest of your days thinking and wailing about that. You can not expect society to be tolerant of your child,if you are not in the first place. Tolerance and understanding starts at home.You would be extremely happy even pray for society to be harsh on them, if you saw an opportunity that such treatment may cause a change in their behaviour. It is tough and entirely another matter when it happens to you, isnt it? All that talk of equal rights would evaporta einto thin air. Let us be honest.
If Gays are executed in some countries,then it is their law and one must abide by it.we should also know that religions such as Christianty,Islam,judaism hindiuism are also the identities of societies ,way of life and not just private spritual matters or faith. if there are non-religious people who oppose the rights of gay,then they do it, cos their identity and conscience dictates them to do so.
First, thanks for the quotes and your explanations guys, but i still dont see a fetus as a human life! Even if it is kinda developed it hasn't breathed, but if the baby takes in it's first breath then it is a life (that is my point of view)
abanoub thinks that a fetus has no life.He seems to think, it does not breathe ,therefore it has no life. Of course, that is his 'point of view' as he says.He has not even bothered to check his information before he forms his point of view.In other words, ababnoub thinks that a fetus in the womb is a dead fetus that apparantly grows and develops in size until birth. That is why he probably thinks, it is not a great deal to abort a piece of dead flesh that has no life in it.
abanoub wants to get rid of this guy and wonders if he were a good christian.
Lord have mercy!
Mozes Supports letting poor children sleep on the street in the freezing cold with no idea who their parents are! Yay for torturing children!
Abortion is a good way to end that problem! but NOOO lets let that kid sleep outside, in the winter because I dont want to 'kill' something that i am not even sure is alive yet!
you are entitled to hold your opinion but it is not an Orthodox, nor even a Christian one.
This child can be helped and saved. Killing him before he is is born is not a means of helping him.
If you are concerned for him then serve him, you have talents and the means of raising support for him. But what you are suggesting, or even stating, is that it is better to kill him rather than serve him.
That would be like the Parable of the Good Samaritan having an ending where others had passed by and then the Samaritan saw the man with so many injuries and said 'Well the best thing is to put him out of his misery, and killed him'.
There are even few among those whoi support abortion who would dare to say that an unborn child (not a fetus) is not human until it draws its first breath. And if you ask any mother she will not say, 'This is just a collection of cells I am carrying'. Indeed we know that the unborn child increasingly responds to external stimuli in an intelligent and conscious manner. It is also that case that the brain of an unborn child does not switch on during birth, but is already fully conscious. So setting the point at which a person becomes human at birth is illogical and not scientific at all.
I would urge you to reflect on the various scriptures which speak of the unborn child, and prayerfully consider your opinion in the light of the teaching of all of the ancient Churches, which have uniformally considered abortion to be murder. Likewise all of the ancient cultures I am aware of considered that causing a miscarriage through violence against a pregnant woman was equivalent to having murdered her child.
The poor will always be with us, and there are issues around population control, but abortion is not the answer - you yourself could provide for this child if you wished. In the UK there were 196,000 abortions carried out in 2008. We do not have children sleeping in the streets. We do have a culture of promiscuous sexual activity, and a low sense of the worth of the unborn child among some sections of the community. These are not accidental pregnancies, nor generally ones to people who could not care for another child. They are generally abortions of convenience, generally by people who have been lazy about contraception, or and who even view abortion as a form of contraception.
It is not. It is the taking of a human life. This is the teaching of the Church, and has always been.
Father Peter
Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature? So why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.
Matthew 6:25-34
Abanoub
how else can one learn without stubborn questions?
A good student asks lots of questions?
Dear Mozes, thank you for answering the question you had asked me before yourself, I just wish you would have done that earlier so that I wouldn't have bothered giving you an answer myself.
If I had a company then I would seek the best, most qualified employees to work there, who they sleep with, what religion they adhere to, where they're from, all of that doesn't matter as long as they do their job well, if however someone should refuse a perfectly qualified person for the fact that that person is gay, then I would consider that wrong and a loss to the employer who could have had a good person in their work force.
I do feel that most people on this site disagree with me, and that is perfectly fine, it is their right as it is mine to express their opinions. It is sad though that some poeple make use of that right in a manner that I consider disrespectful...
“Evil company corrupts good habits.” (1 Corinthians 15:33)
i think... correct me if I am wrong
I will jump into this very hot topic:
Some of us get upset and personal when we get into discussions like this; but here is my opinion
+ The Church is against sin no matter what it is called, Stealing, murder, homosexuality, fornication, lust, adultry......just to name a few.
+ The rule of thumb is HATE the sin but LOVE the sinner (emphasis on the 'er' at the end of the word).
+ I am not preaching here, since I too fall into judging sinners once I know the sin. For example, I find it difficult (which is wrong) to love some one after you tell me he is a thief, stealing from his work, or he is a drug dealer selling drugs to young people, But this is my human weakness, so please do not write and preach to me,
+ So it is important not to seek to know other people sins, remember the story of St Makari the great when he sat down on a big vessel inside one of the monk's cells while the other monks were searching the cell. He knew there was a woman there, and after the brothers left he said to the monk "Judge yr self before they judge u" On his way out a voice from heaven came to him saying "Blessed are u Makari, for u became like yr master covering up for others sins".
+ Sin is sin and we pray for our and other's salvation and repentance.
Hate sin but you love the sinner, for Jesus died for us when we were sinners Romans 5:8 "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us". he did not die for the righteous, He died for me a sinner.
God bless u all
is there a difference between a sinner and an evil person?
we can love the person but we don't have to keep company with him... correct?
It is necessary to say that homosexual practices are a sin, and those who practice them are sinners. But adultery is a sin, and those who practice adultery are sinners. And we also are aware that we are liable to fall into sexual sin and when we do and persist in it then we are sinners. But that being so, we have to decide if it is harming us to work for or with someone who is a sinner, I mean living in the constant practice of a sin. If we become used to a sin because someone we are close to practices it then this is not always helful for us.
We should not set ourselves up as better than someone we know who is practicing homosexual sin, or heterosexual sin, but if we start saying to ourselves - it doesn't matter - then we are thinking wrong. It does matter very much, and we should be very much moved to prayer for the person trapped in such a sinful way of life - no less than we should always pray with a sense of our own sinfulness. But the one who continually practices homosexual acts, and the one who continually practices adultery and promiscuity is in grave danger, and we must pray for them, rather than change our way of thinking to a non-Christian one. They are not excused their behaviour because they are not Christians, even while we should not judge them. We should intercede for them that they might be rescued from their sinful way of life, as we pray for ourselves.
Father Peter