My goodness you people are delusional.
-
50
-
interesting take wrote:
My goodness you people are delusional.
I know. The fact that a state openly discriminates against religion, and uses LGBT children to hide it is beyond delusional.
516 -
I wonder why letsrun keeps putting politics on there site that has nothing to do with running. Could it be that the people who run this site all have the same political views and trying to pass it on to everyone else. Very strange! I don't see Runner's World or Track and Field News or even the old Running Times magazine doing this except when it came to possible boycotts of Olympics. Everyone anyway knows what side of the political spectrum the people who run this site are!
74 -
I don't see the letsrun people quoting Christopher Hitchens!
01 -
trackfangirl wrote:
I wonder why letsrun keeps putting politics on there site that has nothing to do with running. Could it be that the people who run this site all have the same political views and trying to pass it on to everyone else. Very strange! I don't see Runner's World or Track and Field News or even the old Running Times magazine doing this except when it came to possible boycotts of Olympics. Everyone anyway knows what side of the political spectrum the people who run this site are!
I bet it drives 50% of the traffic?
30 -
Justice for ALL. FINALLY
01 -
This! Runners World has much much more class and never stoops this low. Sad.
32 -
Hadesophobe wrote:
Headlines don\'t match facts wrote:
That's not accurate. The whole purpose of the LGBT movement is to be gay. The whole purpose of the Christian movement is to get into heaven in the afterlife, thereby avoiding Satan and the lake of fire and all that stuff. So they are at cross-purposes.
I'm interested to know more about the fires of Hell and the endless torture for sinners. Why is God so freaking cruel that he would send people there?
Because, you have a choice?
24 -
Headlines don\'t match facts wrote:
If you read the Exhibits attached to the underlying Complaint, you can see Mike and Kitty Burke got denied for (1) Mike has PTSD (he's whacked), (2) they flat out stated that they would not support a gay kid's right to be gay, and would subject him or her to whatever exorcisms the Catholic church utilizes these days and (3) they said they do not recognize same-sex marriage which, unfortunately for them, the state of Massachusetts that they want to foster in, does by law.
So they need to learn to lie better on their application and in interviews, or they should move to Alabama or Utah and do the foster care ($$) gig there.
Exactly!
10 -
LOLLOL wrote:
just send him over to the local parish orphanage... what could go wrong with Father Dirt in charge?
In the last two decades, there hasn't been a whole lot of sexual abuse of children by priests. Whereas if you can send him to a hospital offering gender-affirming health care to have his genitals cut off and to be poisoned with opposite sex hormones and suppressors of his natural hormones.
312 -
HaveItBothWays wrote:
maryland resident wrote:
Only Maryland is worse. It's run by far left authoritarian Democrats who hate normal people
So Maryland/ Baltimore is a lawless cesspool, yet at the same time is ruled with an iron fist by authoritarian democrats?
Christian beliefs center on love and forgiveness, yet it is ok to hate in the name of the religion for sexual orientation, race, or even political stance.
Do you not realize that Catholicism distinguishes between sin and sinner? This goes back at least to St. Augustine (354-430 AD) to whom is attributed a famous saying (paraphrased): Love the sinner but hate the sin. Catholicism views same-sex acts as sinful because they cannot satisfy any of the ends of sex (the unitive or the procreative). But Catholicism views gays and lesbians as disordered (because of the same-sex attraction which cannot satisfy either of the ends of sex; they are not viewed as sinful for their homosexuality (but rather disordered)). But committing same-sex acts is sinful according to Catholicism.
40 -
trackfangirl wrote:
I wonder why letsrun keeps putting politics on there site that has nothing to do with running. Could it be that the people who run this site all have the same political views and trying to pass it on to everyone else. Very strange! I don't see Runner's World or Track and Field News or even the old Running Times magazine doing this except when it came to possible boycotts of Olympics. Everyone anyway knows what side of the political spectrum the people who run this site are!
You are overlooking the "T" in "LGBT." That "T" has been the cynosure of a great many discussions lately regarding sports (e.g., William ("Lia" [sic]) Thomas), including running (e.g., Craig "Cece" [sic] Telfer).
37 -
blah blah blah blah blah wrote:
Good. Protecting children from bigots is good for the child, the community, and the country.
The irony is rich!
03 -
Hadesophobe wrote:
Headlines don\'t match facts wrote:
That's not accurate. The whole purpose of the LGBT movement is to be gay. The whole purpose of the Christian movement is to get into heaven in the afterlife, thereby avoiding Satan and the lake of fire and all that stuff. So they are at cross-purposes.
I'm interested to know more about the fires of Hell and the endless torture for sinners. Why is God so freaking cruel that he would send people there?
God isn't cruel. People's own actions put them where they will end up. The state they evolve to determines the type of after-life they will have. God can and will forgive sins and we can change for the better. It is all up to us.
03 -
this is the motivation wrote:
The entire purpose of the lgbt movement from the beginning ( the reason why it was invented) was to be an anti christian movement.
That is the essence. It's to punish, disassemble, and divide Christianity.
The target of the movement was never for securing anybody's rights. The target of the movement was to attack and marginalize Christians from the get go.
"Pro LGBT" is a code for anti- Christian.
I get that persecution is the schtick. But, you way overestimate how much thought Non- Christians give to Christianity.
60 -
how it is not? wrote:
Precious Roy wrote:
People who do foster care get paid and are effectively working for the government. This is more akin to the lawsuits by county clerks who refused to certify same sex marriages. You cannot use your religion to get around job requirements when you chose to work for/with the government. If you are going to be a foster care provider and take tax payer dollars, you are going to have to provide an environment for the child that conforms to the government's requirements. The government does not want to have foster parents being in conflict with LGBTQ kids and try to convince them that they are committing a sin against God or whatever religious BS they would want to throw at them. Kids in foster care are extremely vulnerable and LGBTQ kids are also often the victims of bullying, discrimination, etc. Put those two together and you have a very precarious situation for a child. The last thing in the world that child needs is a bible thumper foster parent telling them that baby Jesus cries because the kid isn't attracted to the opposite sex or is a girl who feels more like a boy.
This is BS. You are still advocating a system that is not neutral. You want to punish the Christian for being pro-traditional family values, but not punish the couple who is pro lgbt which is the opposite.
Yea kids are vulnerable. YOu want them groomed. If you cared about kids you would want them with Christian parents who will steer them away from sickening perversion like sodomy.
Stop trolling, Jesus Christ
20 -
I think children should not be indoctrinated in 2000 year old myths and legends. This is not a good use of their time.
81 -
deweydecimal wrote:
Newname wrote:
So what? That's their religious belief.
It doesn't matter what religion they are following, or whether or not they are religious. The only thing that matters is whether or not they are actively hostile to LGBT people when they could have a foster child who is potentially LGBT. Since the couple was clearly hostile towards LGBT people (in this case because of their religious beliefs) they did not meet the state's criteria for being foster parents. Being a foster parent is a job paid for by the state. If you were applying for a job as an elementary school teacher, but you had a long track record of being actively hostile towards children with disabilities, you would likely also be denied that position.
You have the right to believe that gay people are sinners that are going to burn in hell. You have the right to attend a church that believes homosexuals are going to burn in hell. You also have the right to have your own biological children, use a sperm donor, or a surrogate, or pursue a private adoption. However, the state's role is to protect children, including children who might be LGBT, who are under their care. Why would you want a couple who is steadfast in their belief that LGBT people are going to hell, to parent a child who is potentially gay when it has been well established that having unsupportive parents, or growing up in a household that teaches that LGBT people are sinners, is extremely detrimental to their well-being?
They believe homosexuality is a sin. It is their religion. They don't attack Gays. They are not hostile.
05 -
Newname wrote:
deweydecimal wrote:
It doesn't matter what religion they are following, or whether or not they are religious. The only thing that matters is whether or not they are actively hostile to LGBT people when they could have a foster child who is potentially LGBT. Since the couple was clearly hostile towards LGBT people (in this case because of their religious beliefs) they did not meet the state's criteria for being foster parents. Being a foster parent is a job paid for by the state. If you were applying for a job as an elementary school teacher, but you had a long track record of being actively hostile towards children with disabilities, you would likely also be denied that position.
You have the right to believe that gay people are sinners that are going to burn in hell. You have the right to attend a church that believes homosexuals are going to burn in hell. You also have the right to have your own biological children, use a sperm donor, or a surrogate, or pursue a private adoption. However, the state's role is to protect children, including children who might be LGBT, who are under their care. Why would you want a couple who is steadfast in their belief that LGBT people are going to hell, to parent a child who is potentially gay when it has been well established that having unsupportive parents, or growing up in a household that teaches that LGBT people are sinners, is extremely detrimental to their well-being?
They believe homosexuality is a sin. It is their religion. They don't attack Gays. They are not hostile.
The powers that be smeared and vilified Islam for decades.
The last 5-6 years they have pivoted and are now going after Christians.
07 -
this is the motivation wrote:
The entire purpose of the lgbt movement from the beginning ( the reason why it was invented) was to be an anti christian movement.
That is the essence. It's to punish, disassemble, and divide Christianity.
The target of the movement was never for securing anybody's rights. The target of the movement was to attack and marginalize Christians from the get go.
"Pro LGBT" is a code for anti- Christian.
you sir are an idiot
20
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.