What about single mothers and fathers? Should we take their kids away because they aren't guaranteeing the child's right to a mother and father? That is ridiculous reasoning.adam1503 wrote:
I think the only way to start a family is with a man and a woman: whether they adopt ar procreate is up to them. But starting a family with two men or two women is wrong. And when you start to talk about children, the desires of the parents become less important; it is what the child needs that matters. And a child has the right to having a mother and a father. So when homosexual people say they want to have a child, I say that its not fair on the child to raise them in that way because they deserve a mother and father.T.Pike wrote:
So you thin a gay couple would be a better potential adoptee than a hetero couple?
Come on, I'm all for people being themselves & stuff but don't you think a mommy & daad would be better than a mommy & mommy or daddy & daddy?
They should accept tha being gay means not being able to have children.
You do realize I was kidding, right?HurricaИe wrote:
Advocating contraceptives and incentives to not have so many children works.
-konfusion
>.>konfusion wrote:
You do realize I was kidding, right?HurricaИe wrote:
Advocating contraceptives and incentives to not have so many children works.
-konfusion
<.<
I realized you were being facetious, but at the same time I felt some resentment in that line.
Eh... good question, but I've seen some really shitty hetero parents and known some good gay ones. People are people. I think a father and a mother figure are necessary for the healthiest childhoods, but then again, I don't think it's the government's right to prevent a gay couple from having a child through adoption.T.Pike wrote:
So you thin a gay couple would be a better potential adoptee than a hetero couple?
Come on, I'm all for people being themselves & stuff but don't you think a mommy & daad would be better than a mommy & mommy or daddy & daddy?
Adoption should be a process open to both types of couples.
I said that it was the best way to start a family. Its too bad if the marriage then falls apart, and if it does then the children should still be allowed to see both parents, unless one or both of them is abusive in some way.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
What about single mothers and fathers? Should we take their kids away because they aren't guaranteeing the child's right to a mother and father? That is ridiculous reasoning.
Let them get Married. Let them Adopt.
What kind of Bullshit is it where people are denied the to adopt a child because of their Sexual Orientation? If they want a Child, let them adopt one, it's not like they can just go and have one themselves, and it's not like they can change their Sexual Orientation.
What kind of Bullshit is it where people are denied the to adopt a child because of their Sexual Orientation? If they want a Child, let them adopt one, it's not like they can just go and have one themselves, and it's not like they can change their Sexual Orientation.
Whats to say that having a Mom and a Dad is any better thn having a Mom and a Mom or a Dad and a Dad?T.Pike wrote:
So you thin a gay couple would be a better potential adoptee than a hetero couple?
Come on, I'm all for people being themselves & stuff but don't you think a mommy & daad would be better than a mommy & mommy or daddy & daddy?
Battlelog: DaReJa
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
How do you then explain to the child why it has two mummies or two daddies? How would that child feel when all their friends have both a mummy and a daddy?DaReJa wrote:
Let them get Married. Let them Adopt.
What kind of Bullshit is it where people are denied the to adopt a child because of their Sexual Orientation? If they want a Child, let them adopt one, it's not like they can just go and have one themselves, and it's not like they can change their Sexual Orientation.
I think the idea of a homosexual couple raising a child is highly questionable. They may make excellent parents, but I still think there can be no equivalent to a man and woman starting a family.
I know where you're coming from adam, but I think that's something the family has to deal with. The government really shouldn't get involved in these private affairs.
Granted, I would agree that a gay couple would face challenges unknown to straight ones in raising a child, and the child would unfortunately receive quite a bit of ridicule.
Granted, I would agree that a gay couple would face challenges unknown to straight ones in raising a child, and the child would unfortunately receive quite a bit of ridicule.
I don't mind it, as long as they aren't making out in front of me.
But it will eventually ruin the way the world works.
Two gay men will adopt a son, who will grow up to fall in love with another man. This will repeat and nothing is going to work out properly.
But it will eventually ruin the way the world works.
Two gay men will adopt a son, who will grow up to fall in love with another man. This will repeat and nothing is going to work out properly.
Which is precisely why every straight family only has straight kids... wait a minute...Ryan wrote:
I don't mind it, as long as they aren't making out in front of me.
But it will eventually ruin the way the world works.
Two gay men will adopt a son, who will grow up to fall in love with another man. This will repeat and nothing is going to work out properly.
-konfusion
You just explain it to the child. How would the child feel? I don't know, You don't know, but I highly doubt it will make a difference in anything. What is it supposed to make them feel?adam1503 wrote:
How do you then explain to the child why it has two mummies or two daddies? How would that child feel when all their friends have both a mummy and a daddy?DaReJa wrote:
Let them get Married. Let them Adopt.
What kind of Bullshit is it where people are denied the to adopt a child because of their Sexual Orientation? If they want a Child, let them adopt one, it's not like they can just go and have one themselves, and it's not like they can change their Sexual Orientation.
I think the idea of a homosexual couple raising a child is highly questionable. They may make excellent parents, but I still think there can be no equivalent to a man and woman starting a family.
Having Homosexual parents will not make the child Homosexual.Ryan wrote:
I don't mind it, as long as they aren't making out in front of me.
But it will eventually ruin the way the world works.
Two gay men will adopt a son, who will grow up to fall in love with another man. This will repeat and nothing is going to work out properly.
Battlelog: DaReJa
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
According to your post, their sextual orientation should have nothing to do with whether or not they should be allowed to adopt children.DaReJa wrote:
Let them get Married. Let them Adopt.
What kind of Bullshit is it where people are denied the to adopt a child because of their Sexual Orientation? If they want a Child, let them adopt one, it's not like they can just go and have one themselves, and it's not like they can change their Sexual Orientation.
Therefore, paligamists, necrophiliacs and zoophiliacs should all be allowed to adopt children. I don't consider that a healthy way to grow up....
What do you think will happen to the child?Deadmonkiefart wrote:
According to your post, their sextual orientation should have nothing to do with whether or not they should be allowed to adopt children.DaReJa wrote:
Let them get Married. Let them Adopt.
What kind of Bullshit is it where people are denied the to adopt a child because of their Sexual Orientation? If they want a Child, let them adopt one, it's not like they can just go and have one themselves, and it's not like they can change their Sexual Orientation.
Therefore, paligamists, necrophiliacs and zoophiliacs should all be allowed to adopt children. I don't consider that a healthy way to grow up....
Battlelog: DaReJa
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
1) tl;drIRONCHEF wrote:
I am Christian
2) the quoted section is the reason.
3) jihad
4) ????
5) profit
I think that the feelings of the child are highly significant. They would almost certainly feel confused: they would grow up not understanding why they had 2 mothers/fathers... imagine the parents trying to answer the question of where babies come from. Wouldnt the child want to know how two women/men had a baby when they were just told it takes a man and a woman? Then how do you explain that to the child?DaReJa wrote:
You just explain it to the child. How would the child feel? I don't know, You don't know, but I highly doubt it will make a difference in anything. What is it supposed to make them feel?
When they are old enough to understand where they came from, theres always the issue of the identity of their bioligical parents. Im fairly sure the child would have some curiosity as to who they were really descended from.
You see, all sorts of complicated and confusing issues are in store for a child raised by a homosexual couple. Families are based around a man and a woman: they always have been and always will be. It should not be any other way.
EDIT:
what???_Spawn_ wrote:
1) tl;drIRONCHEF wrote:
I am Christian
2) the quoted section is the reason.
3) jihad
4) ????
5) profit
Last edited by adam1503 (2008-01-16 20:43:01)
I think the child will, more or less, end up the same way, although I would preferr not to think about it.DaReJa wrote:
What do you think will happen to the child?Deadmonkiefart wrote:
According to your post, their sextual orientation should have nothing to do with whether or not they should be allowed to adopt children.DaReJa wrote:
Let them get Married. Let them Adopt.
What kind of Bullshit is it where people are denied the to adopt a child because of their Sexual Orientation? If they want a Child, let them adopt one, it's not like they can just go and have one themselves, and it's not like they can change their Sexual Orientation.
Therefore, paligamists, necrophiliacs and zoophiliacs should all be allowed to adopt children. I don't consider that a healthy way to grow up....
Yes the feeling of the child are significant, Yes they would be confused. But, how do you know they wouldn't understand? (I don't know if they would, but also don't know if they wouldn't.) I'm sure there wouldn't be any problem explaining where babies come from, or where they came from.adam1503 wrote:
I think that the feelings of the child are highly significant. They would almost certainly feel confused: they would grow up not understanding why they had 2 mothers/fathers... imagine the parents trying to answer the question of where babies come from. Wouldnt the child want to know how two women/men had a baby when they were just told it takes a man and a woman? Then how do you explain that to the child?
Wouldn't all adopted children be curious about where they came from?adam1503 wrote:
When they are old enough to understand where they came from, theres always the issue of the identity of their bioligical parents. Im fairly sure the child would have some curiosity as to who they were really descended from.
And always will be?? What??adam1503 wrote:
You see, all sorts of complicated and confusing issues are in store for a child raised by a homosexual couple. Families are based around a man and a woman: they always have been and always will be. It should not be any other way.
Think about it. Why, How?Deadmonkiefart wrote:
I think the child will, more or less, end up the same way, although I would preferr not to think about it.DaReJa wrote:
What do you think will happen to the child?Deadmonkiefart wrote:
According to your post, their sextual orientation should have nothing to do with whether or not they should be allowed to adopt children.
Therefore, paligamists, necrophiliacs and zoophiliacs should all be allowed to adopt children. I don't consider that a healthy way to grow up....
========
EDIT - Hi Spawn.
Last edited by DaReJa (2008-01-16 20:55:28)
Battlelog: DaReJa
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
Children mimic their parents. It is a natural thing to do. Whether it is mostly subconscious or not, I don't know, but you cannot deny that a child is greatly influenced by the way they are raised.DaReJa wrote:
Yes the feeling of the child are significant, Yes they would be confused. But, how do you know they wouldn't understand? (I don't know if they would, but also don't know if they wouldn't.) I'm sure there wouldn't be any problem explaining where babies come from, or where they came from.adam1503 wrote:
I think that the feelings of the child are highly significant. They would almost certainly feel confused: they would grow up not understanding why they had 2 mothers/fathers... imagine the parents trying to answer the question of where babies come from. Wouldnt the child want to know how two women/men had a baby when they were just told it takes a man and a woman? Then how do you explain that to the child?Wouldn't all adopted children be curious about where they came from?adam1503 wrote:
When they are old enough to understand where they came from, theres always the issue of the identity of their bioligical parents. Im fairly sure the child would have some curiosity as to who they were really descended from.And always will be?? What??adam1503 wrote:
You see, all sorts of complicated and confusing issues are in store for a child raised by a homosexual couple. Families are based around a man and a woman: they always have been and always will be. It should not be any other way.Think about it. Why, How?Deadmonkiefart wrote:
I think the child will, more or less, end up the same way, although I would preferr not to think about it.DaReJa wrote:
What do you think will happen to the child?
========
EDIT - Hi Spawn.
What are they going to Mimic?Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Children mimic their parents. It is a natural thing to do. Whether it is mostly subconscious or not, I don't know, but you cannot deny that a child is greatly influenced by the way they are raised.
Battlelog: DaReJa
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
Personally i don´t have any problems with homosexuals let them have partnership, equal rights to married couples. However you can´t force the church for instance to marry them they are a independant organisation and free to do what they want.DaReJa wrote:
Let them get Married. Let them Adopt.
What kind of Bullshit is it where people are denied the to adopt a child because of their Sexual Orientation? If they want a Child, let them adopt one, it's not like they can just go and have one themselves, and it's not like they can change their Sexual Orientation.
About adoption allot of development countries does have rules forbidding foreign homosexuals to adopt their children and that is something we should respect every culture does not look so keen on this.
Tromboner999 wrote:
Best thread EVER!
I'm against marriage as a whole. Therefore, I am also against GAY marriage.
well, as far as the terminology is concerned, marriage is a religious institution that was invented by the church to cement their view of a religiously sanctioned union between a man and a woman, and to force their view of a favourable lifestyle onto their followers.
It is a religious ceremony, that should have no significance whatsoever in todays secular society, at least not as far as the dealings between the citizens and their respective government are concerned. The problem with that is that most western nations are based on christian beliefs, just as most middle east nations are based on islamic beliefs.
This speaks of course volumes of the power the various religions ( and their institutionalized forms, the churches ) have had over us in the past, and in some cases still do.
true, in theory most liberal western nations do have a separation of church and state today, but we all know that this is handled very differently from region to region. Some are more religious than others, and in some areas, there is so much social pressure that people are practically forced to marry if they want to live together. I can't even imagine what homosexuals must go through in these areas.
I think that the separation of church and state should be enforced as much as possible. Thus, marriage as a religious institution should not be legally reckognized by the state, with no special privileges for married couples. What marriage is, how it is defined and who should be allowed to marry who on the first place should be a matter between the church and its followers only.
The legally reckognized, secular version of a marriage should be a civil union, with the same privileges, rights, and duties bestowed upon all couples who chose to have one equally, regardless of their sexual orientation, or their faith. To me, that would include adoption.
te me, there is no indication that a homosexual couple would be any less qualified to raise a child than a heterosexual couple. To be honest, when I look at the hordes of straight trailer park trash that are allowed to breed these days, the idea of a gay or lesbian couple adopting a child sounds not so bad.
Raising a child successfully is not about your sexual orientation. It's about what kind of person you are, and wether you'd be a good parent.
The only reason why some people believe that the "right" way to raise a child is in a traditional heterosexual marriage is because that's what we have been culturallly conditioned to believe through religious dogma. It is nothing that we cannot overcome through our free will, if we want to.
The point is, people should have the right to make that choice for themselves, and not have church and state interfere.
Of course, later in life, when they grow up, they might want to know who their biological parents are, and how the situation came about, but that discussion would be no different than that which would occur if a heterosexual couple had adopted a child.
and in any case, I dare say that those who care for the child are its "real" parents, not those who happen to share their genetic structure.
Biological parenthood means nothing. I know a lot of biological parents who couldn't give a rat's ass about their children, who abuse them, neglect them, or even kill them.
It is a religious ceremony, that should have no significance whatsoever in todays secular society, at least not as far as the dealings between the citizens and their respective government are concerned. The problem with that is that most western nations are based on christian beliefs, just as most middle east nations are based on islamic beliefs.
This speaks of course volumes of the power the various religions ( and their institutionalized forms, the churches ) have had over us in the past, and in some cases still do.
true, in theory most liberal western nations do have a separation of church and state today, but we all know that this is handled very differently from region to region. Some are more religious than others, and in some areas, there is so much social pressure that people are practically forced to marry if they want to live together. I can't even imagine what homosexuals must go through in these areas.
I think that the separation of church and state should be enforced as much as possible. Thus, marriage as a religious institution should not be legally reckognized by the state, with no special privileges for married couples. What marriage is, how it is defined and who should be allowed to marry who on the first place should be a matter between the church and its followers only.
The legally reckognized, secular version of a marriage should be a civil union, with the same privileges, rights, and duties bestowed upon all couples who chose to have one equally, regardless of their sexual orientation, or their faith. To me, that would include adoption.
te me, there is no indication that a homosexual couple would be any less qualified to raise a child than a heterosexual couple. To be honest, when I look at the hordes of straight trailer park trash that are allowed to breed these days, the idea of a gay or lesbian couple adopting a child sounds not so bad.
Raising a child successfully is not about your sexual orientation. It's about what kind of person you are, and wether you'd be a good parent.
The only reason why some people believe that the "right" way to raise a child is in a traditional heterosexual marriage is because that's what we have been culturallly conditioned to believe through religious dogma. It is nothing that we cannot overcome through our free will, if we want to.
The point is, people should have the right to make that choice for themselves, and not have church and state interfere.
to be honest, why would a gay or lesbian couple explain procreation differently than a heterosexual couple ? Small children don't care about wether those who care for them are one man and one woman living in a marriage, or two men living in a civil union.adam1503 wrote:
.. They would almost certainly feel confused: they would grow up not understanding why they had 2 mothers/fathers... imagine the parents trying to answer the question of where babies come from. Wouldnt the child want to know how two women/men had a baby when they were just told it takes a man and a woman? Then how do you explain that to the child?
Of course, later in life, when they grow up, they might want to know who their biological parents are, and how the situation came about, but that discussion would be no different than that which would occur if a heterosexual couple had adopted a child.
and in any case, I dare say that those who care for the child are its "real" parents, not those who happen to share their genetic structure.
Biological parenthood means nothing. I know a lot of biological parents who couldn't give a rat's ass about their children, who abuse them, neglect them, or even kill them.
As a parent that paragraph stuck out to me. Only because my interpretations of what I deem as appropriate for a child have changed since having one of my own. There is no question that when a man or woman becomes a parent they have paternal instincts that kick in. Now, a woman carries the child so is it a biological chemestry? As a father I can tell you that my wife is much more nurturing than I, however, am more protective at least in a physical manner. So my question to you is this: Are a parent's ability to care for a child hindered by circumstanes? Would a foster or step parent nurture a child less, or even more, than a birthing parent? for the record I have not researched any links or studies, I am merely throwing it out there so any of you can entertain the the question. I am interested to hear explanations from parents and non parents alike.B.Schuss wrote:
To me, there is no indication that a homosexual couple would be any less qualified to raise a child than a heterosexual couple. To be honest, when I look at the hordes of straight trailer park trash that are allowed to breed these days, the idea of a gay or lesbian couple adopting a child sounds not so bad.
Raising a child successfully is not about your sexual orientation. It's about what kind of person you are, and wether you'd be a good parent.
Malloy must go
Thank you B.Schuss, You said it better thn I could.
Battlelog: DaReJa
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
MyBFi/BF3i Admin
AKA DanielRJ
GameSurge IRC Network, Support Agent and Staff
Phuzion IRC Network, Support Director and Operator
As already said, there is no logical reason what so ever to prohibit gay marriage.
A gay couple is very much capable of rising a kid as well. If a single mother/father can do it, why couldn't two women/men do it together?
It's amazing that it still is illegal in most of the western world.
A gay couple is very much capable of rising a kid as well. If a single mother/father can do it, why couldn't two women/men do it together?
It's amazing that it still is illegal in most of the western world.