The church was forced by what they laughingly call elected ‘representatives’ on the District Council between choosing their faith and the best interests of children over this loud-mouthed, partisan push for the acceptance of the gay lifestyle. I’m glad they stood up for their faith.

Maybe if the voters of DC wake up and elect decent men and women who aren’t bought off by religion-hating gay activist groups, the church may re-open their services and the kids will have a chance. I think part of this will depend on whether or not the courts do the right thing, repeal the current gay marriage law, and let the voters make this choice for themselves if they want.

And given the fact that there are millions of orphaned children in the world–more than can be accommodated by heterosexual couples adopting, it is absolutely cruel to deny countless children the opportunity to live in a loving home, just because their parents would be two men or women. Or would you rather see these children languish in orphanages and institutions rather than–Heaven forbid–be raised by gay people? Gays could actually serve a great niche by adopting children without any parents, but you and rabidly anti-gay organizations like the Ruth Institute would prefer to keep those children orphaned! It’s scandalous!

Having said that, no one is telling anyone they can’t love who they want or life with whoever they want. But we ARE saying that this is something unique and special about the union of a man and a woman that we bloody well ought to protect and honor with our laws and with what we teach children and with our social services. I’m sorry, that’s just the way it is.

If you can’t see that humans were “designed” to come together as one man and one woman, for the sake of humanity, then I can’t help you friend. Mother Nature is heterosexist. Sucks for you, sorry.

Nerdy,

Not to cheapen anything — we do the best we can and that’s usually less than perfect. But there are only 2 main differences between single-parents and redundant “parents” that I can see. The number two, and the fact that only one group is demanding that they be considered married, when they clearly arent.

You’re making a fallacious “argument from design”–the problem is that unlike shoes or locks or coins, there is no evidence whatsoever that humans were “designed” for anything. And if we were, well, the same Infallible God who made you straight made me gay. So obviously, my homosexuality is as “natural” and “designed” as someone else’s heterosexuality–it just hasn’t been recognized as such by an overwhelmingly heterosexual world, unfortunately.

Gender bias has nothing to do with marriage, except to prove that no, separate just isn’t equal.

i.e; BODY=LIFE-SOUL(i.e;death)
and SOUL=LIFE-BODY(i.e;death)

From the above it is very clear that”it is freely called that ‘life’ only when there exist a body and inner spirit within the bodyi.e;soul”

explanation to” life after death ?”

ANSWER-YES because the element of life i.e: SOUL will exist .This is based on the world fameous principal” EVERY ACTION WILL HAVE AN EQUAL REACTION”.
i.e; when one element perishes,other will remain i.e; when BODY perishes,other element SOUL will remain exist.

And on every marriage related blog I frequent, there’s always someone claiming that we’re a bunch of hypocrites, because we’re not fighting against divorce instead! AS IF! I (and just about everyone traditional marriage advocate i know) has been fighting the culture of divorce for years — not that they’ve noticed, of course. No, whenever anyone on our side brings up mothers and fathers and natural families, it is the SSM advocate who immediately leaps to divorced families, stepfamilies, and single parent families as a justification for this idea of “two mom” or “two dad” families.

Talk about hypocritical. If we outlawed divorced (YES!) advocates for SSM would completely dissapear. This whole “forsaking all others, til death so us part” is simply not part of their plan.

This is what I’ve chosen to do, with the support of my wonderful husband, but there are not a lot of kudos here. It seems like people think it’s a waste of one’s mind and time to devote a couple of decades to raising children. People who know how well I did in school always tell me I need to go to grad school and then I can have a great career, as though raising kids isn’t a worthy expenditure of my talents. So smart and talented women should either not have children, or should dump them in daycare while pursuing “greater things”? Then people wonder what’s wrong with kids.

Thankfully, more and more women my age are starting to realize that our talents can be very well applied to raising our children, and that our children deserve our full attention. Women with degrees are staying home with their kids in greater numbers.

During a period when I was having a hard time accepting my life as a SAHM, I was talking with a friend of mine from high school who is studying to become a doctor (not married yet, no kids). She is a Muslim and she encouraged me so much by saying, “you are the only one who can be your son’s mom and someday you’ll have to stand before God and answer for the type of care you gave him.”

While I went through a period of difficulty accepting the mental atrophy and lack of kudos (why is approval so important to us, anyway?) I never really shook in my resolve to stay home. I worked for three years as a youth minister for a very large parish, and in my work with the 500+ families in my ministry, I saw that nothing beats having a parent at home for helping kids have confidence in themselves, resist peer pressure, and stay out of trouble. You can easily spot in a crowd the kids with a parent at home: they’re the ones who don’t seem to be so victimized by the barbarity that is the high school experience. They’re anchored.

I figure that prioritization is a good skill to have, that’s what helped me do so well in school. So I’m prioritizing by importance and time-sensitivity: i’ll regret nothing more than not being there for my kids, and I’ll have plenty of time for a “career” after menopause.

Thanks, Dr. J! Keep it up!