Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

2 Lesbians kill adopted children and suicide

Apr 3, 2018 3:49AM PDT
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/04/03/authorities-investigate-california-cliff-plunge-as-felony.html

"The Hart family's two moms, and three of the six adopted children were found dead. The three others have yet to be found and are presumed dead.

Last month, concerned neighbors of the Harts had called protective services over concerns that the children may have been going hungry.

Authorities discovered the wreckage of the Washington state family’s vehicle last week on the rocks along the coast near Mendocino, California – just days after the child welfare authorities in their home state began investigating whether the children were being abused or neglected.

New details released Monday suggest that Jennifer Hart, the woman behind the wheel of an SUV that drove off the side of the Pacific Coast Highway, intentionally pointed the vehicle toward the ocean before hitting the accelerator.

The preliminary investigation revealed that the 2003 GMC Yukon continued to accelerate until the vehicle tumbled over the cliff – sending Hart, her wife and their 6 adopted children to their deaths, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

Authorities now believe the apparent suicide plunge may have a more sinister backstory, as investigators search for a possible motive."


I've always been against homosexual couples adopting children.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Nothing strange about laws concerning sexual urges
Apr 4, 2018 2:36PM PDT

We have loads of them, covering things like rape, statutory rape, age of minors, age of marriage allowed, requirements to inform a partner if one has an STD, prostitution, paedophilia, restrictions between close family members for genetic reasons, so I see no problems in restoring the laws concerning proscriptions against homosexuality, sodomy, and such like.

- Collapse -
I notice
Apr 4, 2018 3:05PM PDT

you ignored my premise of an "upside down world". Is it that hard to imagine? - to put yourself in another's shoes?

Rick

- Collapse -
ever seen boxes with arrow on them?
Apr 4, 2018 5:02PM PDT

typically says "this side up"? That's the way morality is too. One side up, all others are the wrong side.

- Collapse -
ever seen
Apr 4, 2018 5:17PM PDT

"Why be normal" bumper stickers? Sometimes, they too are applied inverted.
Just a thought.

Whose morality? The "majority"? That's exactly what I'm getting at - life is not one-size-fits-all, no matter what anyone may want.

Rick

- Collapse -
I would agree with 'life currently does not'.
Apr 5, 2018 3:10PM PDT

Psalm 145:16 promises just that in future; complete satisfsction.

- Collapse -
Do those laws need "restoring"?
Apr 4, 2018 7:19PM PDT

Aren't they still on the ... I mean, in the Book?
Men choose to borrow and enforce them sometimes, usually very poorly. Or, men choose to un-borrow them, with predictable results.
The only government capable of doing them right is the first one on the earth. It will be back.

- Collapse -
Hey! I get told our manifesto is rubbish, here,
Apr 4, 2018 7:14PM PDT

all the time! Pay attention!
Many reasons for going without sex. The one most often overlooked is the only one in the Bible: Being without a marriage mate.
Some of us choose to stay single to keep their lives simpler in serving Jehovah. They choose rule 1.
Others can't find a mate who is a Witness. See rule 1.
Some have a past that prevents them from remarrying scripturally. See rule 1.
Others are in a position like the one discussed here. Wouldn't be satisfied in a straight marriage. They wait for the fulfillment of Gen 1:28. In the meantime, see ... what was it? ... Oh, yeah, rule 1.
You need to read and consider Gen 1:28 and Ps 37:29. No other system of government or society can deliver on that, and retroactively! Lots more informative than Meet the Press.

- Collapse -
that will need some explaining
Apr 5, 2018 7:38AM PDT
"Some have a past that prevents them from remarrying scripturally."

Since even the law of Moses allowed both in a divorce to get married again, even required a writing of release from marriage so a woman would be free to marry again also, just like the man, who then may have had more than one wife. Hardness of heart was not acceptable then, nor by Christ. There was a legal requirement for both to be released from a marriage so they could marry another in any divorce. Deut chapter 24. What Christ said didn't change that at all, in fact he endorsed it, since he'd been asked about the very same law. Also christians could be married to someone not a christian, same as those who were already married to such a person and then converted to Christ. Paul even said if the unbeliever was content to dwell with them, to stay with them. Paul furthermore urged married for those who felt the need so they'd not be tempted to engage in a sexual union outside of marriage. Teaching otherwise is a doctrine of The Devil. He's the one who wants division, just like he's the one who wants gender corruption in the world too. Lack of marriage allowed, serves the Devil, not God. The Devil's been working at that one since the Garden of Eden, where he tried to break up Adam and Eve.
- Collapse -
(NT) Explanation: OT Law fulfilled; paid off.
Apr 5, 2018 3:12PM PDT
- Collapse -
but NT law is different.
Apr 5, 2018 3:14PM PDT

jw.org has all the scriptural teaching. You won't go there, of course.

- Collapse -
Misguided
Apr 4, 2018 2:29PM PDT
"Just because it upsets a subset of civilization?"

THEY are the subset, and it's also not civilized.

As I've said before, what they do behind closed doors and not push it onto the TV, the street, the News Media, the Legal system, then most will not bother them. However when they want to make it public, push laws concerning protecting it, trying to force acceptance by those who reject the perversion and reject it being taught as acceptable, then EVERYONE who is in the public has the right to tell them to stop it, and if they won't, then to make laws to force it, since they have shown they want to use force themselves. IN other words THEY make it OUR business then too!
- Collapse -
And
Apr 4, 2018 2:40PM PDT

It used to be a "perversion" to marry outside one's ethnicity. Most people feel differently nowadays. A lot of very brave people fought for that - to change the laws, etc. Same thing is happening sexually - last polls I read about such show USA acceptance of same-sex marriages around 60% - and globally it's similar and in many countries higher. A pretty large "subset", methinks.

Rick

- Collapse -
One obvious difference.
Apr 4, 2018 5:00PM PDT

"Interracial" in that case meant male and female. Jehovah doesn't care; quite the opposite. [They got married.] Science is on his side: The offspring's mixed genes are human and human.
Same sex: How do they reproduce? Science and Jehovah on the same side there, too. Can't be done.

- Collapse -
and what did Ezra say?
Apr 4, 2018 5:04PM PDT

When the Jews returned from Babylon?

Oh, and what did Jehovah say about who his people could marry when they went into Canaan, and who was forbidden to them, racially?

- Collapse -
I thought I had replied to this.
Apr 4, 2018 7:38PM PDT

The problem was not racial. You should "understand that God is not partial, but in every nation the man who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him".
Those wives picked up in Babylon were not lovers of Jehovah, and were pulling their husbands away from him. Notice that provisions had to be made for the put-away wives.
Two people are noteworthy in the Bible, Rahab and Ruth. Both were non-Jews, from neighboring lands. Rahab was a prostitute. Ruth was one of a pair of sisters-in-law who were cast on Israel's "shore" by cruel fate, not choice. Both women spoke up for their hope in the God of the Israelites at first opportunity. Both women are listed in Matthew's genealogy of the Messiah; only Tamar and Mary are so honored with them. [Ruth was Rahab's daughter-in-law and her grandson was David, the proto-Messiah.]
The name Jehovah means 'he causes to become'. How he does that is not our business. We plan; he purposes.

- Collapse -
Rahab the harlot got married
Apr 5, 2018 7:39AM PDT

to a believer in God as I recall. No forbidding there.

- Collapse -
I said that both spoke up for Jehovah,
Apr 5, 2018 3:17PM PDT

but you didn't read what they said. You accepted what I said, without checking???

- Collapse -
(NT) jehovah is not a democrat
Apr 4, 2018 5:02PM PDT
- Collapse -
And he has a smart phone.
Apr 4, 2018 5:04PM PDT

Not a democrat. 60% is always outvoted by the one who controls the lightning. Happy

- Collapse -
LoL
Apr 4, 2018 5:24PM PDT

And here I thought Electromagnetism was one of the four forces.

Well said, though.

As I mentioned elsewhere I already know I'm going to hell - most likely, if it exists - so a shock or two won't make much difference...

Rick

- Collapse -
Why would you buy into such a phony, and illegal,
Apr 4, 2018 7:40PM PDT

idea like Hell?

- Collapse -
Illegal?
Apr 7, 2018 4:35PM PDT

I thought ideas existed in people's heads and are only illegal (in some cases) if acted upon. I know that some religions have no conception of hell.

I myself am usually joking when I say I'm going there - I have no proof it exists, of course, or does not. So it just means I know I have done things that *could* select me for a trip there, metaphorically speaking. I don't believe in absolution, really - good works are fine, but don't erase really evil works.

If my ideas/thoughts were treated as the "true me" I'd be in prison for a lonnng time. Who would really want to read someone else's mind? Not me.

Rick

- Collapse -
In the "civilized" West, it's illegal.
Apr 7, 2018 6:51PM PDT

Romans 6:23, a saying so well known it's proverbial: "The wages that sin pays is death."
Hellfire doctrine: After you die, you get brought back to life, somehow, in Hell, where you are tortured forever for your sins.
The first is godly, by definition.
The second is unconstitutional in the US, and against statute in countries like Britain that have no written constitution. USC, Amendment V, Rights in criminal cases: "... nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb..."
The Bible says God made us in his image. Since he has no physical body, it means having a measure of his main qualities of wisdom, justice, power and love. Hellfire guys have made their god in _their_ image.
What, do you think, wa$ the purpo$e of thi$ invented teaching?

- Collapse -
(NT) Ok,
Apr 7, 2018 7:37PM PDT
- Collapse -
Truth, not JW error
Apr 8, 2018 1:51PM PDT

Matthew 10:
28 - Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. (Jesus speaking)

Revelation 20:
12 - And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne. And there were open books, and one of them was the book of life. And the dead were judged according to their deeds, as recorded in the books. The sea gave up its dead, and Death and Hades gave up their dead, and each one was judged according to his deeds. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death—the lake of fire.…

Revelation 1:17 (Jesus speaking)
I am the First and the Last, the Living One. I was dead, and behold, now I am alive forever and ever! And I hold the keys of Death and of Hades.

Romans 14:9
For this reason Christ died and returned to life, so that He might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. (Hmm, Lord of "the dead"? figure out that one, but a JW can't)

Matthew 16:27
For the Son of Man will come in His Father's glory with His angels, and then He will repay each one according to what he has done.

John 5:
27And He has given Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man. Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming when all who are in their graves will hear His voice and come out—those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.…

so many other verses refute the JW error given above.

- Collapse -
and yet, we don't go into battle,
Apr 8, 2018 4:21PM PDT

with "christians", or work in rendition sites, with "christians", or work in munitions factories, with "christians".
Go figure.
When the Son of Man arrives, will he really find Christianity being practiced? What do you think?

- Collapse -
rhetorical question
Apr 9, 2018 2:08PM PDT

One first posited by Jesus himself.

- Collapse -
I know very well where I got the question.
Apr 9, 2018 4:36PM PDT

Calling it "rhetorical" lts us pose it on the passive third person. We have no doubt about his answer for himself, but what about us?
"When he comes, will he find _me_ practicing the faith?" That's the non-rhetorical version, which is certainly what he intended. There are not three answers, only two. "I serve you part time and my secular government part time. I love you both for your fine qualities" is not one of those two.
Not to mention, he will already have our answer from our behavior.

- Collapse -
(NT) "lets us pose it"
Apr 9, 2018 4:37PM PDT
- Collapse -
Re: choice
Apr 5, 2018 7:29AM PDT

OK, let's make it a little bit more personal (not meant to offend you). Consider the following situation.

Long ago (well, rather long ago) you met your current wife and her brother. Nice people. So after a time you started choosing who of the two to f***. An important decision, especially if you intend to marry her of him, surely. So you thought and weighed and finally, after due consideration, you made your choice and you made you choice and married her. No doubt a good choice.

Or isn't that the story, and were you just born (biologically and psychologically) as straight, not gay. In that case, it wasn't a choice at all, just a natural instinct. Like birdt fly to the south each fall, while they could just as well choose to fly north.

In that case (unlikely, I agree), why do you think it's instinct for you, and a choice for gays? What's so different between gays and you that you have a instinct for the sex you prefer and they don't and are making a choice?