Pages

Thursday, December 25, 2008

Merry Christmas


nativity2


Angels rejoiced in his birth. Shepherds came. Wise men followed a new star.


For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. --Isaiah 9:6


holy family


The baby Jesus was raised on earth by married parents--Mary his mother and Joseph his adopted father.


All children born on Earth deserve this same blessed situation.


A married mom and dad who love them.


Merry Christmas.

33 comments:

  1. A very Merry Christmas to you, too, Kingfisher! You are greatly appreciated.

    God Bless,
    Pearl

    ReplyDelete
  2. MERRY CHRISTMAS! MERRY CHRISTMAS!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Merry Christmas Kingfisher.

    Mary and Joseph set a great example for us all.

    ReplyDelete
  4. but acording to your comments in another column, adopted families are "not ideal"- jesus was adopted by joseph. ergo...

    but yes, happy christmas. a time when tolerance and goodwill can be celebrated by one and all, and jesus's love for mankind, regardless of "sins" can be remembered.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Feeling nostalgia for the emotional twisting of facts to fiction? Nice Try J.Slac Anonymous, but Merry Christmas to you anyway!

    ReplyDelete
  6. actually i'm not jesusislac. i just don't really fancy having a name. he had good points though, despite any emotionality.

    i think the holy family can, indeed set an example to us all. despite their not being a traditional family- joseph took on an expectant mother and eventually her child, at a time when adoption was uncommon- they succeeded in raising one of the most prominent figures in history. christmas is a time not only to remember the birth of the saviour, but to embrace the idea that non-traditional families can be successful too.

    ReplyDelete
  7. What do you mean by "tradition family?" non traditional family?

    ReplyDelete
  8. anon,

    you are right. mary and joseph had an exceptional situation. however, they got married and provided the baby Jesus with married parents. while Jesus was not biologically related to Joseph, Joseph was able to take care of Jesus' needs as a father.

    However, their un-traditional situation did not purposefully strip Jesus of a parent. it stepped in and helped. They are a wonderful family to celebrate because they were able to provide a child with a mom and a dad. but we don't want to create un-traditional circumstances on purpose.

    it's interesting that even though Jesus' literal father was God, the creator of the universe, it was still important that Jesus have an "adopted" father on earth...and even siblings.

    la familia sagrada

    ReplyDelete
  9. Jesurgislac,

    You cannot hide yourself. Yours is a uniquely unreasonable voice that glares through any attempt at anonymity. In addition, the citing of information largely from Great Britain points to the fact that you are you. (Not to mention the Kingfisher stat log gives you away). This attempt to disguise yourself suggests that you are suddenly less than eager to own your own opinions....

    No matter. Anonymous commenting has been disabled in order to foster more cohesive discussions without the bother of having to respond to "anon 1" and "anon 2," not knowing which is which.

    Your comments are welcome, Jesurgislac. But don't be afraid to own your voice. Though your past assertions have been questionable in nature at best, anonymous comments will do even less for your opinions. Through the adoption of a saucy slang expression popular among youth today, we here at Kingfisher suggest that you "own up."

    ReplyDelete
  10. that's amusing that you think there's only one person who has similar opinions- ie opinions which aren't yours.

    anyway, point is, i am not jesusislac. i have been commenting for a bit, always as anon because... well, i couldn't think of a good name to be honest. it doesn't really matter who you think i am though.

    to be honest, i don't think my comments have been unreasonable. it just happens to be something i feel strongly about. and you must feel the same way (if with different opinions) to write in this column so regularly. if anyone is unreasonable or rude, i think it might be you- you have presumed to know who i am, mocked the way i have put across my opinions and generally put me down in a way which has not referred to the information i have given.

    still. i am glad to have this chance to speak freely.

    ReplyDelete
  11. also, coincidentally, if joseph was able to provide jesus with a male role model, despite not being his biological father, why can lesbian parents not provide external male role models for their children?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Joseph was married to Jesus' mother and lived in the same house.

    ReplyDelete
  13. he wasn't just a "male role model" joseph was jesus' adopted father on earth.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Mary and Joseph would have demonstrated how to treat members of the same sex and members of the opposite sex. Having two women treat each other as though they were husband and wife eg sleeping in the same bed, passionate kissing etc is not a good role model. Homosexual acts are disordered.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Free,"

    Thank you for creating a Google account and picking a name. It will help keep the structure of our discussions confusion-free.

    "that's amusing that you think there's only one person who has similar opinions- ie opinions which aren't yours."

    It is statements like this one that betray your true identity, Free. Your uniqueness is not in your opinions but in your expression of them. There is not only one person who shares your opinions; of this we are fully aware. However, it is true that there is only one person who riddles this blog with irrational "conclusion" assumptions and statements such as the one above ("ie opinions which aren't yours.").

    Perhaps we are wrong and there are more unreasonable dissenting visitors of this blog. In which case, we have our work cut out for us. Be that as it may, we still appreciate your willingness to choose an identity other than anonymous for the sake of discussion cohesion.

    Do not assume that our intent has been to put down or mock. If you will recall for a moment, we have not once made any attack on you as an individual. We are merely calling readers' attention to the overwhelmingly emotionally-driven arguments you have a tendency to present as fact and majority opinion.

    Now, in answer to your question, Joseph was not just a provisional male role model; he was Jesus' father. Jesus was raised by a father and a mother, not two mothers and a sometime male role model. Are you conceding that a father figure is imperative? And, are you suggesting polyamory is the key to attempting to imitate this father-mother ideal?

    ReplyDelete
  16. I don't think a father figure is a necessity. I do think male/ female role models are important- but these can come in many shapes and sizes.

    For me, there were my grandfathers- constant, stable figures in my life, who my mothers considered before having me. I also have my godfather, who has also been a stable figure in my life, and a number of male friends of my parents, who my mum has ensured had as much contact with me as possible. I know it's not the same thing as a dad- but I don't think that makes it any worse.

    Another point is, I know many children of gay mothers, and lesbian parents do not attempt to imitate any sort of male female dynamic. As with married couples, tow parents tend to take on different roles within the home, but these (again as with married couples) are not gender-specific.

    I am not going to bother replying to your blatant incendiary remarks regarding me, and J., and "our" styles of writing. You can think what you like- and I shall continue writing, in a way which I do not consider to be highly emotional.

    It's hard to pick out majority opinion- in my particular area, my views are relatively typical of general opinion. England in general, I think, is quite like Massechusetts in that liberal opinion is more common than in quite a lot of America.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Free,"

    "I know many children of gay mothers, and lesbian parents do not attempt to imitate any sort of male female dynamic."

    Could you please clarify this sentence? Please? Because when I read this, I see every fear of the creation of a genderless society realized. If children of Lesbian parents are not imitating male/female dynamics, then they are perpetuating homosexuality? Right? Honestly, I would like to understand this.

    Kingfisher,

    I do not in any way view your remarks as "incendiary." They were extremely level-headed. (Not that you need my approval or anything...I realize that sounded a bit lofty). :0)

    ReplyDelete
  18. Free, I think you are right when you say that role models are important. Some of those models come from biological parents others extended family and others from friends of the family. The most influential role models I expect would be the ones who spend the most time with the child. If that role model has heaps of "issues" then the child might have issues too.

    According to the research, people who practice homosexual acts are more likely to have "issues". This is why same sex couples should not be able to raise children.

    ReplyDelete
  19. There are important things that children learn from parents because of their gender. Things that have nothing to do with who takes out the trash or who cooks dinner.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I know it's not the same thing as a dad- but I don't think that makes it any worse.

    No kid should ever be intentionally stripped of their dad because of their mother's sexual orientation. Every kids should know what it's like to have a dad who adores them.

    This is why I care so much about marriage. It's one way of encouraging the very best possible situation for children.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "I know many children of gay mothers, and lesbian parents do not attempt to imitate any sort of male female dynamic."

    Yes, that's what i said. Two women don't pretend to be something they aren't- ie a married couple. Why should they? That would confuse a child far more. Instead, they say that thy are the child's female rolemodels, and that yes, their family is different- that doesn't make it and better or worse than any other family. It simply means that the child will have two loving female parents, and will receive male guidance from outside the home.

    What would you say a child receive's from a father which he does not receive from a mother, other than a male role model? Both will love the child. Both will play with the child. Many mothers play, say, sports with a child- a typically male role, but in today's society an utterly acceptable part of being a mother. If the child gets male role models outside the home, then what is it missing?

    I predict that you will, again, say "a father who adores them" (in a rather emotional fashion, I might add). But a child in a home with two mothers is still being adored by multiple adults. They still have many men presenting them with masculine images to imagine themselves with/ being.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "I know many children of gay mothers, and lesbian parents do not attempt to imitate any sort of male female dynamic."

    Does this mean that the mothers treat each other like biological sisters or like lesbian lovers? Or do you mean something else?

    ReplyDelete
  23. What children learn from the fathers is much more than sports and much more important than just being adored. Although I do like pointing out that every child should have mother and a father who adore them...because they should. The actual adoration from a male and female is different.

    For example, girls who have good relationships with their fathers are less likely to be sexually promiscuous.

    There's lots of other stuff. I don't have links right now. But I think I'll do a post on it. Role models are not enough. Children need a dad and a mom in their lives, in their house. Every moment is a learning moment.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Presumably, they treat eachother as who they are: committed female partners, and mothers raising a child together.

    Having a father is no garuntee of having a good relationship with him, I might point out.

    It's hard to tell what's best for a child. Largely it is down not to the family make up, but the people themselves. "Need" is a strong word to use for the prescence of both biological parents; plenty of children do not have both sexes of parents and emerge from childhood miraculously intact and happy. So no, "need" i think not.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Free, that is not what studies show. All studies show that children do best with a mom and a dad, married and living together with their children.

    Because some children turn out happy and intact does not prove that all children turn out this way. Also, who knows what kind of sadness and confusion was overcome getting to that place.

    Tragedy happens. But I'm confused when people think their love and devotion (to another party) is good enough justification to decide to strip their child of either a dad or a mom.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "I know many children of gay mothers, and lesbian parents do not attempt to imitate any sort of male female dynamic."

    The problem arises when same sex couples don't imitate anyone they just be themselves. They promote a homosexual lifestyle onto children. Same sex attraction is a disorder and it's consequent set of behaviours as well. These behaviours are not good role models.
    Alcoholism is also a disorder. Having a disordered attraction to drink too much alcohol generates tension within. If an alcoholic weakens and submits to their desires, goes and gets drunk they are being a bad role model to their children.
    Unfortunately this happens in real life alcoholics do have children, but would an adoption agency adopt a child to alcoholics? I doubt it because they recognise it as a disorder.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Alcoholics are prevented from adopting children not because it's a disorder, but because it prevents the parent from taking due care of the child, The child might not be safe.

    The child of a homosexual couple is as safe as in a heterosexual couple. Both may produce a child who is not happy or intact, but the child is at least being given the chance to have a family, rather than languishing in a children's home with no parental figures whatsoever.

    ReplyDelete
  28. The Bible shouldn't make any difference in the debate about homosexual marriage.

    1) Marriage existed LONG before Christianity, and long before the bible for that matter. It has existed in every single religion in every single society in every place on earth that is inhabited by humans. Why then do some people believe that Christianity should have a monopoly on marriage?

    2) Separation of Church and State, anyone?

    ReplyDelete
  29. The child of a homosexual couple is as safe as in a heterosexual couple. Both may produce a child who is not happy or intact, but the child is at least being given the chance to have a family, rather than languishing in a children's home with no parental figures whatsoever.

    This is the important issue, not only safe but psychologically and emotionally sound. More research needs to be done in this area. have you read the book "Out From Under"?

    ReplyDelete
  30. "Why then do some people believe that Christianity should have a monopoly on marriage?"

    I don't know M, I've never met anyone who has thought that Christianity has a monopoly over marriage.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I think "M" makes an important point. Marriage is not just a religious or private affair, it is a public affair--so the public has a right to regulate it/decide what it means to them.

    ReplyDelete

This forum is open to anyone with a desire to express him/herself with respect, civility, and understanding. Please remember, therefore, that comments are not always reflective of the opinion of this website and its community. We reserve the right to delete any commentary or content, including, but not limited to, material that is obscene, profane, irrelevant, or otherwise inappropriate as per our discretion.