"You don't know me dude, you can assume things but you can't know. After my experiences in religion, there's no damn way I will ever raise my child in that environment, not if I have anything to say about it. I will raise my child to THINK about they believe in, to ask questions, to make their own decisions. Of course I'll try to teach them decent morals, but I will encourage them to be responsible for themselves as all parents should do. I'm not gonna try and strong arm them like a lot of others might.

And if they decided to be religious later I may not agree with it but I'd accept them just the same, I wouldn't cast them out or judge them. I just would want them to know why they believe something, and what they do from that would be up to them.

I firmly believe parents sometimes need to control less, and listen more, empower more. You'd have better kids and better relationships then."

You have bias, Kleisto...You will probably teach your children Christianity from a wounded man's viewpoint.

That is not fair for the children!

and it's fair to teach them full belief in strictly? I don't think so.

And you don't know how I would raise my kids so don't assume. The main thing I would teach them with ANY belief, Christianity or otherwise would be to question before they believe it, even my own. Now if they came to me and asked what I thought I would tell them, but I would not preach to them. I'd let them make up their own mind. It is after all their life, not mine.

Too many parents try to make their kids into what THEY want them to be not caring what the child needs or wants. That's where you lose them a lot I think. Don't force em into your box and you'll have better relationships as they get older and more respect. You ask for rebellion otherwise.

On the kids, I really do think if you give them enough space to make their own life, you will have an easier time than if you fight them for it all the time. Maybe it's naive to some, but that's what I think. Respect the child and they'll respect you IMO.

As for the other part you are wrong I DO have an open mind, and if religion could make sense to me I would believe it again, but it can't so I do not.

Just because I don't accept what everyone tells me to doesn't mean I don't have an open mind om stubborn. It actually it means I have more of a mind and am less stubborn than some others are because I actually question what I'm told instead of accept more blindly even if it means going away from that belief. But no my mind is open, religion just doesn't jive with me anymore, and I can't see myself going back again having opened my eyes to the issues with it.

You claimed that they should be taught unbiased information but you are incapable...by your own admittance.

You are too wounded by your personal experiences.

No I'm not, because I will compel them to question, not just accept, even from me. I'll tell them what I think but they won't have to believe me. That's more than can be said for religious. They don't teach to question, just obedience. That's a lot more bias showing than what you claim I would do.

I take it that you were not allowed to ask questions in Bible School?

I don't know of any Christian Schools who don't allow children to ask questions.

That would have been a deterrant for me,
had I been that child.

I would have told my parents and we would have gone where questions were welcomed.

If hostility was the driving force behind the questions...that barrier would have to be disassembled.

'That's not the issue, it's how they USE that belief to influence public policy and try and shame other people who don't think or act like they do that is the problem. They never stop to think that maybe it's how they act that brings all the backlash, they just think people hate them for what they believe and it's just not true.'



both sides can logically lay this claim against the other

few people are 'persecuted' today, and as a group homosxuals arent oppressed

but individuals face obstacles and hatred from other individuals, sure

and peoples behaviors are either upheld , supported, or discouraged

thats life,,,

Homosexuals aren't oppressed? So the fact that people are trying to stop them from getting the SAME benefits and rights as straight couples have doesn't count? Get out of here with that, don't be an apologist. Christians oppress them a lot more than they claim they are being. Same goes for a group like sex workers. These are just people that want to live their lives how they like that's all it is. To deny them that is to oppress...no one is really oppressing Christians from believing what they want at all by comparison.

As for the rest, maybe it may be life, but I say it's time we all grow the hell up and stop making others business ours.

bologna, people arent trying to prevent them from having rights, civil union has always been on the board, which would do just that

but LGBT want total ACCEPTANCE of their SEXUAL lifestyle , so it is important to have that sexual lifestyle legally sanctioned in the same way heterosexual activity is,,,,

and I agree, we should grow the hell up,, everybody wont nor do they have to embrace or agree with everything we want to do,,,,whether it be sex worker or homosexual behavior

that is not the same as being 'oppressed'

does make good Copy in the Press,though!

must be entering a Black Hole,getting Spaghettified!

Firstly in the case of the sex workers (and by extension their clients) , it is the same as being oppressed because they are forced entirely underground having to fear having their lives ruined on a daily basis, because of certain peoples' morality being offended making what they do consensually with other adults illegal. That's number one. Number two, why should gays have to settle for civil union if they wanna be married like everyone else? Why is that any of our business? There is no good reason for it, ones personal morality is not a legitimate excuse to deny them it.

We don't have to agree on everything, but just cause you disagree with a behavior or act does not give you the right to take away someones' ability to do it if they so choose. No one should be able to do that. That's not what a free society is based upon.

no, having sexual behavior sanctioned by government is not a RIGHT,,,thats the point,,,,if the point is rights than civil union IS married like everyone else with no REQUIREMENT of a sexual relationship nor any RESTRICTION on one,,,why would that be an issue?

because too many of the LGBT want to ram their sexual behavior down the throat of others, by forcing government (And by extension taxpayers) to suppor their BEHAVIOR,,,

noone has now or will take away an adults right to have sex,, so thats not an issue

having the 'right' to behave in a certain sexual way, isnt the same as having the 'right' to be married,, the latter doesnt limit the former,,,


to make sexual work a legitimate career, would mean applying taxes and tax policy,,,,as stated above, there is ALREADY nothing that prevents people from whatever sexual behavior they choose

but to make sex a mere taxable 'service' has no point,,,,
and escorting is still legal,, so the option to be paid for ones company is still not oppressed,,,

But if someone wants to pay for sex or get paid for it they can't, and it's not right. Hell some of the workers who do it DO pay taxes anyhow, so why not just make it legal? Who does consensual sex harm here? Please tell me?

Besides that, if you film it and sell it it's legal as it is, so why exactly should that change because it's private? Where is the logic in that?

Finally, making it a "service" DOES have a point because for those that choose to wanna do it (or those who are paying for it) then they can do it legally without having to worry about being arrested, having a criminal record, or being hurt or abused by the underground system (one of the big problems by having it illegal), why exactly is it ok to force them to do this under the table just because it goes against someone's moral code? If they want to be paid for it they ought to have every right to do it, same as someone who wants to pay for it the same. It is not anyone's business but their own. So there is a very good reason for making it legal, several in fact.

we can already LEGALLY HAVE SEX WITH ANYONE WE WANT

period

there are ways to be paid if thats what we want to,,,its a non issue as far as Im concerned




though, yes, it is a double standard that the bees knees begins and ends with whether two people are 'adults' and 'consenting'

yet we dont allow those consenting adults to OUTRIGHT (although there are indirect ways to be paid) exchange money

or that we dont allow consenting family memebers to have sex (unless its closeted)

or that we dont allow a consentual sex slave trade, although it would make for diffiulty proving whether the conditions were actually 'consentual' or whether the workers 'consent' under some type of dures,,,,


I know for a fact, plenty of ways people can and do get paid for sex, Im sure they dont care if the government sanctions it or not,,,actually, they probably prefer government 'stay out of it' so they can keep more of their literally hard earned money

and I dont personally think sexual choices should have to be sanctioned by any government action,,,

Actually a lot of people care about it a lot more than you think.....because as it is they put themselves very much at risk both in terms of the threat of being arrested and such as I've mentioned, and also having a greater chance of being abused by seedy people who are able to get away with as much as they do strictly based on how we have stigmatized and criminalized what they are doing for a living or what someone is choosing to buy and partake of. If we did not do that, that would not as easily happen, and you obviously would have a LOT less people charged with consensual crimes and having their lives destroyed over something they chose to do privately with another person or group of people.

Given all that, when it's a choice between continuing to foster that type of a culture, and hurting so many men and women in the process vs. simply legalizing the whole thing and lifting the veil on this industry once and for all.....which one is really doing more harm here?

I know you don't personally believe in government sanctioning sexual choices (and I'm as much against government involvement things as anyone, probably more than most even), but in this particular instance the benefits of doing so far outweigh any perceived negative effect.

what you see as benefits, I see as a pandoras box,,where people who are desperate will begin feeling desperate actions are acceptable

and the proof of people doing these things under duress will become much more difficult of a burden

Im fine with having sexual freedom that we already have,,,without government involvement via taxation or 'respect' , which usually is accompanied with responsibilities,,,

I agree. Government should stay out of the sex business.

All unions should be civil unions. There should be no such thing as marriage, only civil unions.

Then you it's clear you support a system that harms more than it does good, because the way the system is now for them does so. Pandora's box belief or not that does not justify treating them as criminals, ruining their lives, and leaving them open to abusers without any way of legal recourse even when they aren't arrested, it just doesn't. Stop caring more about your own moral code than the people that code effects.

At the very least this should be decriminalized.....there's no good reason not to. Even if government isn't gonna support it, they should not be putting people in jail and otherwise wrecking havoc in their lives for it.

government should encourage males and females to commit in their sexual relationship in support of family stability for the children that come of the male female sexual relationship

other relationships, I dont see any government reason for interest in,,,,,