Dad, mom ...I'm ...um, I'm gay

[KCKID]

The title/subtitle says it all. This scenario must have occurred many, many times. We've all heard, read or seen instances of this and the types of responses that parents of their gay children have given. While we only seem to have a handful of vocal anti-gay Christians on this forum, I'm genuinely curious as to how they would react if their son or daughter came to them and told them that they're gay. Others, feel free to offer your input.

The question again: How would you (a Christian) respond to your son or your daughter coming out to you that they are gay? Without revealing any more than you need to, has this actually happened to any of you ...either as a gay son/daughter or as a parent?

[KCKID]

I'm too young to (responsibly) be a parent, but my brother is gay and also from meeting others, i've learned that they are just like everyone else. There's nothing really different about the "gay lifestyle" except risk of depression. The worst thing you could possibly do as a parent is to reject the kid or tell them they made the wrong choice and so on. There's no fixing it and there's nothing wrong that needs to be fixed.

I'd have a hard time caring if my kid(s) were gay. I'd probably just hug them, say they can come to me about anything. I don't know if the sex act is a sin or not, but i wouldn't want my kid to suffer or be alone his whole life either, if celibacy is even possible. This middle ground can cause a lot of conflict. I would advise my child to make a decision that feels right and to not waiver.

There are times in life any of us can enjoy being single. There are times we may want a relationship. If he decides on a relationship and ends up having gay sex, i would not want my kid to be tormented over this. I would steer him to resources that are supportive of whatever path he takes in life.

Very wise response, master blaster. And hey ...you actually addressed the OP! You also bumped up the thread so I'll once again ask 99percentatheism or anyone else to discuss the contents of Romans 1:26-27 with me. THIS is the NT text that is probably the most widely used with which to condemn homosexuality. Do you - whoever - believe that it does condemn homosexuality per se? Then, by all means, please step up to the plate and defend your stance by discussing the contents of this scripture.

[KCKID]

I'm too young to (responsibly) be a parent, but my brother is gay and also from meeting others, i've learned that they are just like everyone else. There's nothing really different about the "gay lifestyle" except risk of depression. The worst thing you could possibly do as a parent is to reject the kid or tell them they made the wrong choice and so on. There's no fixing it and there's nothing wrong that needs to be fixed.

I'd have a hard time caring if my kid(s) were gay. I'd probably just hug them, say they can come to me about anything. I don't know if the sex act is a sin or not, but i wouldn't want my kid to suffer or be alone his whole life either, if celibacy is even possible. This middle ground can cause a lot of conflict. I would advise my child to make a decision that feels right and to not waiver.

There are times in life any of us can enjoy being single. There are times we may want a relationship. If he decides on a relationship and ends up having gay sex, i would not want my kid to be tormented over this. I would steer him to resources that are supportive of whatever path he takes in life.

Very wise response, master blaster. And hey ...you actually addressed the OP! You also bumped up the thread so I'll once again ask 99percentatheism or anyone else to discuss the contents of Romans 1:26-27 with me. THIS is the NT text that is probably the most widely used with which to condemn homosexuality. Do you - whoever - believe that it does condemn homosexuality per se? Then, by all means, please step up to the plate and defend your stance by discussing the contents of this scripture. You could be right.

[bluethread]

Very wise response, master blaster. . .

Could it be that you find the response wise, because it fits your world view? Let's look at it this way. What if your son came to you and said that he was going on a diet of raw bloody pig's guts? Would it be wise to say that you will love and support your son in this decision? After all, we can't really choose what we find to be appetizing, right?

[Clownboat]

Very wise response, master blaster. . .

Could it be that you find the response wise, because it fits your world view? Let's look at it this way. What if your son came to you and said that he was going on a diet of raw bloody pig's guts? Would it be wise to say that you will love and support your son in this decision? After all, we can't really choose what we find to be appetizing, right?

You just compared a group of people to being on a diet of raw bloody pig guts. How can you even call yourself a Christian? That's right, you can say any amount of evil as long as you can interpret justification for it into your holy book. This is what you appear to be doing, and the fact you try to use the Bible to justify it makes it no less disgusting IMO.

Just imagine the moderation reports a post would get by Christians if someone made a claim that making the decision to become a Christian would be like making the decision to go on a diet of raw bloody pig guts. Yet, here you are, making the same type of claim about homosexuals.

The worst part of all this for me is the fact that you feel justified making such a horrible and disgusting statement about your fellow humans.

[bluethread]

Very wise response, master blaster. . .

Could it be that you find the response wise, because it fits your world view? Let's look at it this way. What if your son came to you and said that he was going on a diet of raw bloody pig's guts? Would it be wise to say that you will love and support your son in this decision? After all, we can't really choose what we find to be appetizing, right?

You just compared a group of people to being on a diet of raw bloody pig guts. How can you even call yourself a Christian? That's right, you can say any amount of evil as long as you can interpret justification for it into your holy book. This is what you appear to be doing, and the fact you try to use the Bible to justify it makes it no less disgusting IMO.

Just imagine the moderation reports a post would get by Christians if someone made a claim that making the decision to become a Christian would be like making the decision to go on a diet of raw bloody pig guts. Yet, here you are, making the same type of claim about homosexuals.

The worst part of all this for me is the fact that you feel justified making such a horrible and disgusting statement about your fellow humans.

No, I did not compare people to the diet. I compared the activity to the diet. That said, what do you have against people who eat raw bloody pig guts? Why are you saying that is horrible and disgusting? Aren't they allowed to do what they want with their own bodies? By the way, I don't call myself a Christian and I do believe that some Christians do eat bloody pigs guts. They just don't eat them raw.

[Clownboat]

Very wise response, master blaster. . .

Could it be that you find the response wise, because it fits your world view? Let's look at it this way. What if your son came to you and said that he was going on a diet of raw bloody pig's guts? Would it be wise to say that you will love and support your son in this decision? After all, we can't really choose what we find to be appetizing, right?

You just compared a group of people to being on a diet of raw bloody pig guts. How can you even call yourself a Christian? That's right, you can say any amount of evil as long as you can interpret justification for it into your holy book. This is what you appear to be doing, and the fact you try to use the Bible to justify it makes it no less disgusting IMO.

Just imagine the moderation reports a post would get by Christians if someone made a claim that making the decision to become a Christian would be like making the decision to go on a diet of raw bloody pig guts. Yet, here you are, making the same type of claim about homosexuals.

The worst part of all this for me is the fact that you feel justified making such a horrible and disgusting statement about your fellow humans.

No, I did not compare people to the diet.

This thread is about homosexuality. Here are your exact words for all of us to see.

What if your son came to you and said that he was going on a diet of raw bloody pig's guts?

And you now want to claim that you are not comparing people to a diet of bloody pig guts?
If not comparing the decision to be gay with eating raw bloody pig guts, then I don't see a reason for you to ask such a question. Thus I draw the comparison.

I compared the activity to the diet.

Yes, the activities that homosexuals do. Thus you singled out homosexuals and likened them to choosing to eat raw bloody pig guts.

That said, what do you have against people who eat raw bloody pig guts?

I know of no one that eats raw bloody pig guts and thus having nothing against a person that does so.

Why are you saying that is horrible and disgusting?

Let's be clear. Your statement comparing the choice to eat raw bloody pig guts with homosexuals choosing to act on the very thing that makes them homosexuals (same sex attraction) was horrible and disgusting.

Aren't they allowed to do what they want with their own bodies?

That depends. Do they have religious people making them feel guilty about it, or condemning them to hell over it? Sure, they are allowed, but the guilt and condemnation is not necessary.

By the way, I don't call myself a Christian and I do believe that some Christians do eat bloody pigs guts. They just don't eat them raw.

Your statement being horrible and disgusting has nothing to do with you being a Christian or not. So, if you are not a Christian, I retract my statement asking how you can call yourself a Christian.

Do you call yourself a Christian?

[bluethread]

No, I did not compare people to the diet.

This thread is about homosexuality. Here are your exact words for all of us to see.

What if your son came to you and said that he was going on a diet of raw bloody pig's guts?

And you now want to claim that you are not comparing people to a diet of bloody pig guts?
If not comparing the decision to be gay with eating raw bloody pig guts, then I don't see a reason for you to ask such a question. Thus I draw the comparison.

It appears that we have a grammar problem here. The thread is about what one would do if one's child told them that they were homosexual. That is an identity based on a desire or activity. I do not think that those things define the entire character of the individual. That is similar to referring to someone as an porkeater. The term is accurate, but not all inclusive. So, at the outset, there is no character reference involved, unless one sees the eating of raw bloody pig guts as a character flaw. If that is the case, who is making the character judgment?

I compared the activity to the diet.

Yes, the activities that homosexuals do. Thus you singled out homosexuals and likened them to choosing to eat raw bloody pig guts.

As I said, why do you find that offensive? What do you have against those who eat raw bloody pig guts?

That said, what do you have against people who eat raw bloody pig guts?

I know of no one that eats raw bloody pig guts and thus having nothing against a person that does so.

Then, me thinks thou doest protest too much.

Why are you saying that is horrible and disgusting?

Let's be clear. Your statement comparing the choice to eat raw bloody pig guts with homosexuals choosing to act on the very thing that makes them homosexuals (same sex attraction) was horrible and disgusting.

Why? If you see nothing wrong with homosexual behavior or the eating of raw bloody pig guts, what is horrible and disgusting? If I compared homosexual behavior to the drinking of 100 year old chardonnay, would you find that horrible and disgusting?

Aren't they allowed to do what they want with their own bodies?

That depends. Do they have religious people making them feel guilty about it, or condemning them to hell over it? Sure, they are allowed, but the guilt and condemnation is not necessary.

You are the one who appears to be reacting adversely to the eating of raw bloody pig guts. So, if your son said to you that he is attracted to a diet of raw bloody pig guts, you would say that you loved him supported him in that decision and that is all?

By the way, I don't call myself a Christian and I do believe that some Christians do eat bloody pigs guts. They just don't eat them raw.

Your statement being horrible and disgusting has nothing to do with you being a Christian or not. So, if you are not a Christian, I retract my statement asking how you can call yourself a Christian.

Do you call yourself a Christian?

If your statement has nothing to do with being a Christian, then why did you say that? If I did call myself a Christian, would you still retract the statement? It appears that someone is not being honest about there feelings regarding the eating of raw bloody pig guts. Do I detect a phobia here?

[Danmark]

It appears that we have a grammar problem here. The thread is about what one would do if one's child told them that they were homosexual. That is an identity based on a desire or activity. I do not think that those things define the entire character of the individual. That is similar to referring to someone as an porkeater. The term is accurate, but not all inclusive. So, at the outset, there is no character reference involved, unless one sees the eating of raw bloody pig guts as a character flaw. If that is the case, who is making the character judgment?

I'm not sure of the intent of this post. [part of the problem involves one of my peeves, the parsing of posts into multiple paragraphs which quickly gets unwieldy with subsequent quotes]

I do not see homosexuality as necessarily a character issue at all. If someone has a gender preference issue similar to mine [heterosexual; tho' I suppose I could be a Lesbian trapped in a man's body] than the only 'character issues' are those that both straights and gays share.

[bluethread]

It appears that we have a grammar problem here. The thread is about what one would do if one's child told them that they were homosexual. That is an identity based on a desire or activity. I do not think that those things define the entire character of the individual. That is similar to referring to someone as an porkeater. The term is accurate, but not all inclusive. So, at the outset, there is no character reference involved, unless one sees the eating of raw bloody pig guts as a character flaw. If that is the case, who is making the character judgment?

I'm not sure of the intent of this post. [part of the problem involves one of my peeves, the parsing of posts into multiple paragraphs which quickly gets unwieldy with subsequent quotes]

I do not see homosexuality as necessarily a character issue at all. If someone has a gender preference issue similar to mine [heterosexual; tho' I suppose I could be a Lesbian trapped in a man's body] than the only 'character issues' are those that both straights and gays share.

Sorry that clownboat decided to divide up my post and begin this style of conversation. However, once it begins, what is one to do. That said, clownboat appears to want to imply that I am somehow impugning the character of homosexuals, because I am comparing homosexual sex to the eating of raw bloody pig guts. Admittedly, that is a matter of preference and not character. However, that is my point. How a parent should react to a particular behavior from their children really depends on the relationship between the parent and the child, as well as their shared background. Saying that parents should say that they love their child and will support them no matter what is really dependent on what "no matter what" ends up being. What is wrong with, because I love you, I have some real concerns about what you are doing? How about, because I love you, I can not condone that behavior?

[Joab]

It appears that we have a grammar problem here. The thread is about what one would do if one's child told them that they were homosexual. That is an identity based on a desire or activity. I do not think that those things define the entire character of the individual. That is similar to referring to someone as an porkeater. The term is accurate, but not all inclusive. So, at the outset, there is no character reference involved, unless one sees the eating of raw bloody pig guts as a character flaw. If that is the case, who is making the character judgment?

I'm not sure of the intent of this post. [part of the problem involves one of my peeves, the parsing of posts into multiple paragraphs which quickly gets unwieldy with subsequent quotes]

I do not see homosexuality as necessarily a character issue at all. If someone has a gender preference issue similar to mine [heterosexual; tho' I suppose I could be a Lesbian trapped in a man's body] than the only 'character issues' are those that both straights and gays share.

Sorry that clownboat decided to divide up my post and begin this style of conversation. However, once it begins, what is one to do. That said, clownboat appears to want to imply that I am somehow impugning the character of homosexuals, because I am comparing homosexual sex to the eating of raw bloody pig guts. Admittedly, that is a matter of preference and not character. However, that is my point. How a parent should react to a particular behavior from their children really depends on the relationship between the parent and the child, as well as their shared background. Saying that parents should say that they love their child and will support them no matter what is really dependent on what "no matter what" ends up being. What is wrong with, because I love you, I have some real concerns about what you are doing? How about, because I love you, I can not condone that behavior?

Because I love you I cannot condone the way my god made you?