|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Homosexuality & Adoption
Well, didn't really know where to post this. General Discussion seemed better, but it doesn't seem to get much in depth conversation. None of the other forum areas seemed appropriate (maybe the science)...move it if necessary.
Anyway, I'm just curious to hear the different viewpoints on the topic of whether or not homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt as heterosexual couples do.
Personally, I think they should be able to for the reason that, if nothing else, there are an estimated 500,000 children currently in foster care in the US and 100,000 awaiting adoption. I believe those children being in a stable home environment, regardless of parent's sexuality, would be better than them growing up for 17 years (or longer) wondering why nobody wants them. There are other reasons of course, but I don't want to overdo it in the opening post.
If possible, I'd really rather religion stay out of it, as I'm more interested in the viewpoints on the social, mental, and other effects outside of religion. Not saying religion has to stay out of it, I just don't really want the discussion to center around "the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, so anything associated with it is wrong."
Anyway, I'm just curious to hear the different viewpoints on the topic of whether or not homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt as heterosexual couples do.
Personally, I think they should be able to for the reason that, if nothing else, there are an estimated 500,000 children currently in foster care in the US and 100,000 awaiting adoption. I believe those children being in a stable home environment, regardless of parent's sexuality, would be better than them growing up for 17 years (or longer) wondering why nobody wants them. There are other reasons of course, but I don't want to overdo it in the opening post.
If possible, I'd really rather religion stay out of it, as I'm more interested in the viewpoints on the social, mental, and other effects outside of religion. Not saying religion has to stay out of it, I just don't really want the discussion to center around "the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, so anything associated with it is wrong."
Although certainly a controversial topic, I don't really find it difficult to allow homosexual couples (or singles for that matter if they fulfill the rather steep requirements in place today for heterosexuals) the adoption of children. Religious arguments are of no consequence to me personally and any concerns that there would be a tendency of these couples to raise the child with different sexual preferences, my answer would be: So what? So many children are raised by all types of people attempting to indoctrinate their children with their religious or political beliefs or with divergent social competences and no one is complaining. Furthermore, having raised a child myself, I know how difficult it is steer a child in any given direction; my son turned out rather well, but any plans I had for him, any direction I tried to nudge him to, were wishful thinking and I freely admit that it is probably much better this way.
I am not too found of letting homosexual people adopt. Simply because I would rather see two couples, one of each sex, decide to have a child together. I do find that option quite wonderful, because if you want a child you need to be serious about it. - and why not do it yourself.
I am not against letting couples adopt though, I just thing the other option might be a better one for all parts
I am not against letting couples adopt though, I just thing the other option might be a better one for all parts
Besides my views on homosexual marriages, I also don't think they should be able to adopt.
(I'll keep religion out of it)
Well think of it from the child's view. In a foster home they probably have not been exposed to this type of thing (gays "making love" in the rear, lesbians using "toys" etc.). When they move into the home of a homosexual, all these things come as a shock and makes it all the more tempting.
Would you want your 8 year old exposed to these things? Being told from an early age that being gay is OK? To promote homosexuality before the child's even gone through puberty?
What about when this child goes to school? "Okay kids, it's mothers day! We're going to make cards for our mommys."
"I don't have a mommy..I have two daddys."
How will the other kids react? Will they want to be this child's friend? Chances are these younger children have no idea what a "gay" is, maybe just another word they heard on the tele.
But when they hear that this child has "two daddys" or "two mommys", won't they treat the child like a freak?
What if it's a teen? Let's face it, after age 9/10, a child knows most everything they shouldn't. I know I did. In high-school, let's say the child is 14/15 and other children are whispering "hey did you hear, that kid's parents are fags!", well is that really good for the child? They won't make much friends. Obviously they'll also get bullied like hell.
Hear about those kids who walk into school with an AK or an SMG and shoot the place up? Well that's because they can't find people to relate to, they get bullied, they can't connect, get cut off, form a hatred towards everyone, and pretty soon lash out. Some more extremely than others.
When this child is an adult they'll almost surely (of course there can be exceptions) be homosexual his/herself. They'll probably want to adopt like their fathers or mothers did, and the cycle goes on.
(I'll keep religion out of it)
Well think of it from the child's view. In a foster home they probably have not been exposed to this type of thing (gays "making love" in the rear, lesbians using "toys" etc.). When they move into the home of a homosexual, all these things come as a shock and makes it all the more tempting.
Would you want your 8 year old exposed to these things? Being told from an early age that being gay is OK? To promote homosexuality before the child's even gone through puberty?
What about when this child goes to school? "Okay kids, it's mothers day! We're going to make cards for our mommys."
"I don't have a mommy..I have two daddys."
How will the other kids react? Will they want to be this child's friend? Chances are these younger children have no idea what a "gay" is, maybe just another word they heard on the tele.
But when they hear that this child has "two daddys" or "two mommys", won't they treat the child like a freak?
What if it's a teen? Let's face it, after age 9/10, a child knows most everything they shouldn't. I know I did. In high-school, let's say the child is 14/15 and other children are whispering "hey did you hear, that kid's parents are fags!", well is that really good for the child? They won't make much friends. Obviously they'll also get bullied like hell.
Hear about those kids who walk into school with an AK or an SMG and shoot the place up? Well that's because they can't find people to relate to, they get bullied, they can't connect, get cut off, form a hatred towards everyone, and pretty soon lash out. Some more extremely than others.
When this child is an adult they'll almost surely (of course there can be exceptions) be homosexual his/herself. They'll probably want to adopt like their fathers or mothers did, and the cycle goes on.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| Besides my views on homosexual marriages, I also don't think they should be able to adopt.
(I'll keep religion out of it) Well think of it from the child's view. In a foster home they probably have not been exposed to this type of thing (gays "making love" in the rear, lesbians using "toys" etc.). When they move into the home of a homosexual, all these things come as a shock and makes it all the more tempting. |
You seem to assume that only gay couples have sex. If that were true I would certainly line up in the "gay" queue Monday morning. I won't bother to check stats, but I will venture to say that the sale of paraphernalia at the corner sex-store is not dependent on a large gay community.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| Would you want your 8 year old exposed to these things? Being told from an early age that being gay is OK? To promote homosexuality before the child's even gone through puberty? |
Implicitly, you seem to be stating that homosexuality is morally wrong, most probably on religious grounds you intended to leave out. And why you are assuming that sexual education in a gay household begins at an earlier age than in heterosexual relationships is beyond me.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| What about when this child goes to school? "Okay kids, it's mothers day! We're going to make cards for our mommys."
"I don't have a mommy..I have two daddys." How will the other kids react? Will they want to be this child's friend? Chances are these younger children have no idea what a "gay" is, maybe just another word they heard on the tele. But when they hear that this child has "two daddys" or "two mommys", won't they treat the child like a freak? |
In a transitional period this will most probably be true. Children can be mean to anyone who falls out of line, be it body weight, looks, low income of parents not able to finance stylish atire, long hair, .... whatever. If that is a the measure we intend to use in deciding what acceptable behavior in society is, then we are certainly in very bad shape.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| What if it's a teen? Let's face it, after age 9/10, a child knows most everything they shouldn't. I know I did. In high-school, let's say the child is 14/15 and other children are whispering "hey did you hear, that kid's parents are fags!", well is that really good for the child? They won't make much friends. Obviously they'll also get bullied like hell. |
By those standards, the period of enlightenment and the reformation would have swooshed right by us without leaving a mark
Quoting Frank Burns: "Individuality is ok, as long as we all do it together."
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| Hear about those kids who walk into school with an AK or an SMG and shoot the place up? Well that's because they can't find people to relate to, they get bullied, they can't connect, get cut off, form a hatred towards everyone, and pretty soon lash out. Some more extremely than others. |
I would ask for some stats on this one. I am unaware that any meaningful number of random shootings in the US can be attributed to homosexuals. Perhaps we should examine the sexual inclination of postal workers, that could explain a lot.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| When this child is an adult they'll almost surely (of course there can be exceptions) be homosexual his/herself. They'll probably want to adopt like their fathers or mothers did, and the cycle goes on. |
Even if this were true, and I sincerely doubt it knowing how contrary children are (and they are usually quite right in being just that), I would say: so what? If you are arguing that homosexuality is immoral in any case, then why bother with the previous arguments. It's like saying it's not good being a pedophile since you're gonna get the s**t kicked out of you in school.
| MaxStirner wrote: |
| Implicitly, you seem to be stating that homosexuality is morally wrong. |
Well that is my opinion. And my opinion is what was asked for in this thread; if that wasn't what I was stating then I wouldn't be arguing it.
| Quote: |
| most probably on religious grounds you intended to leave out. |
No, this is me. My holy book doesn't talk about high-schoolers bullying each other for having gay parents.
| Quote: |
| And why you are assuming that sexual education in a gay household begins at an earlier age than in heterosexual relationships is beyond me. |
Can you honestly be implying that the whole sexual education process will be completely normal in a gay home?
| Quote: |
| In a transitional period this will most probably be true. Children can be mean to anyone who falls out of line, be it body weight, looks, low income of parents not able to finance stylish atire, long hair, .... whatever. If that is a the measure we intend to use in deciding what acceptable behavior in society is, then we are certainly in very bad shape. |
Thank's for adding to and helping to my argument.
Prostitution is accepted in many parts of the world; does that make it right?
| Quote: |
| By those standards, the period of enlightenment and the reformation would have swooshed right by us without leaving a mark
Quoting Frank Burns: "Individuality is ok, as long as we all do it together." |
But was my point incorrect?
| Quote: |
| I would ask for some stats on this one. I am unaware that any meaningful number of random shootings in the US can be attributed to homosexuals. |
I'm not saying this has specifically happened before. Things like this happen for many reasons; linguistic detachments, color differences (ie. a black student in a majority white school getting made fun of), financial situations, mental conditions, etc...the list could go on til next year.
| Quote: |
| It's like saying it's not good being a pedophile since you're gonna get the s**t kicked out of you in school. |
So you're saying homosexuality and pedophilia are the same thing?
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| Well think of it from the child's view. In a foster home they probably have not been exposed to this type of thing (gays "making love" in the rear, lesbians using "toys" etc.). When they move into the home of a homosexual, all these things come as a shock and makes it all the more tempting. |
How many kids know what their parents do in the bedroom? I can honestly say my parents have never shared any information of that nature, nor do I want them to. Growing up, I went to a private school K-8 grade. I was never personally exposed to black people or really anyone of another race extensively. The school was 100% white. Then I went to a public high school and began experiencing these social interactions. And I wasn't shocked at all =/ Granted it's not exactly the same situation, but it was a social interaction I had never really been exposed to...and the world didn't end when I was exposed to it. As a matter of fact, I know that I would be much more intolerant of other races had I not gone to a school where these social interactions are common.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| Would you want your 8 year old exposed to these things? Being told from an early age that being gay is OK? To promote homosexuality before the child's even gone through puberty? |
Seeing as how I don't think homosexuality is morally wrong, I can't say I would be bothered. I would imagine teaching tolerance at a young age goes a long way. Having never raised a child, I can't say what exactly I would do, but if I do anything positive, I plan on teaching them tolerance, respect, and not to prejudge people over something so small that doesn't hurt others. Obviously, as a parent, you would possibly have to sit down and talk about it (maybe not at age 8, but a little older).
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| What about when this child goes to school? "Okay kids, it's mothers day! We're going to make cards for our mommys."
"I don't have a mommy..I have two daddys." How will the other kids react? Will they want to be this child's friend? Chances are these younger children have no idea what a "gay" is, maybe just another word they heard on the tele. But when they hear that this child has "two daddys" or "two mommys", won't they treat the child like a freak? |
Nearly every kid experiences something of this nature growing up. If we're going to decide who should have children and who shouldn't based on how much kids get poked at at school...well, the entire human population is down the drain. Yeah, kids will react differently; and they've done it to every single person who isn't in the majority be it blacks, Hispanic, obese kids, "nerdy" kids, poor kids, people with odd physical characteristics, etc. If kids never experience this situation, how will we, as a whole, gain tolerance for homosexuals (which I imagine you don't really want, so this doesn't matter to you).
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| What if it's a teen? Let's face it, after age 9/10, a child knows most everything they shouldn't. I know I did. In high-school, let's say the child is 14/15 and other children are whispering "hey did you hear, that kid's parents are fags!", well is that really good for the child? They won't make much friends. Obviously they'll also get bullied like hell. |
And that will very likely happen. As I said, it's happened with people of every nature especially when they're a minority. But how will we ever get past the point where it's not necessary to whisper about and gossip about if kids never have to experience handling the situation? How will it become not so big of a deal if it's never talked about (which, again, I imagine you don't care for this goal).
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| Hear about those kids who walk into school with an AK or an SMG and shoot the place up? Well that's because they can't find people to relate to, they get bullied, they can't connect, get cut off, form a hatred towards everyone, and pretty soon lash out. Some more extremely than others. |
I don't see how this has anything to do with the topic. Pretty sure homosexuality has extremely little relation to school shootings.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| When this child is an adult they'll almost surely (of course there can be exceptions) be homosexual his/herself. They'll probably want to adopt like their fathers or mothers did, and the cycle goes on. |
Not true at all. There is nothing to back that up. You can't make a speculation like that without facts (if you have some, I'd be interested to see). From what I've read, that subject is still 100% up for grabs in the science community. Not only that, but I see no wrong morally with homosexuality, so if they do grow up to be homosexual, big whoop. And what would be wrong with more people wanting to adopt as long as they meet the necessary credentials financially and such? How would it be worse than thousands or millions of kids without anyone wondering where they're going in life?
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| No, this is me. My holy book doesn't talk about high-schoolers bullying each other for having gay parents. |
Well, if it isn't your holy book, then it would certainly be interesting to argue on what you base your rejection of homosexuality as acceptable, moral behavior.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| Can you honestly be implying that the whole sexual education process will be completely normal in a gay home? |
If you attempt to to argue why some behavior should or shouldn't be accepted you'll have to be more explicit that simply stating that it isn't "normal".
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| Thank's for adding to and helping to my argument. |
Not at all. I'm, perhaps futilely, pointing out that a child being teased by fellow students is no measure of what should be considered acceptable behavior in a society.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| Prostitution is accepted in many parts of the world; does that make it right? |
The acceptance (or lack thereof) makes it neither right or wrong. Human rights are not a popularity contest.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| But was my point incorrect? |
Yes, I believe so. What other children whisper to each other in the sixth grade has nothing to do with what is moral or immoral, it's at best gossip and at worst bigotry learned at home.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| I'm not saying this has specifically happened before. Things like this happen for many reasons; linguistic detachments, color differences (ie. a black student in a majority white school getting made fun of), financial situations, mental conditions, etc...the list could go on til next year. |
Well, then the solution should not be to discourage those who happen to differ from the "norm", as you would not suggest racial integration by skin-peeling.
| HalfBloodPrince wrote: |
| So you're saying homosexuality and pedophilia are the same thing? |
You apparently misunderstand me. the fact that someone is being teased in school says NOTHING about the validity of his or her arguments or way of life. Generally, it seemed to me that the exact opposite is often true.
I think that gay couples should have the rights to adopt children. All researches have proved so far that kids brought up by homosexual parents are very similar to those brought up by hetero-parents and parents' sexual orientation doesn't influence the children's one.
While I believe gay marriage is an issue to be decided by the state, I think that gay couples should not be allowed to adopt children. By choosing the homosexual path of sexuality, the individuals are giving up their privelage to reproduce, never mind the child's perspective.
| -Neil- wrote: |
| While I believe gay marriage is an issue to be decided by the state, I think that gay couples should not be allowed to adopt children. By choosing the homosexual path of sexuality, the individuals are giving up their privelage to reproduce, never mind the child's perspective. |
Ermm...I didn't think that adoption involved reproduction. Am I missing something here?
| Bikerman wrote: |
| Ermm...I didn't think that adoption involved reproduction. Am I missing something here? |
Yes, let me word it a little differently. Gay couples cannot reproduce; therefore, their choice to be gay automatically terminates their ability to have children. If they want to have and/or adopt children, then they should be straight. I don't think it is fair to the child who was adopted by homosexual parents, as subjects such as homosexuality can be embarrassing and that child had no choice.
| -Neil- wrote: | ||
Yes, let me word it a little differently. Gay couples cannot reproduce; therefore, their choice to be gay automatically terminates their ability to have children. If they want to have and/or adopt children, then they should be straight. I don't think it is fair to the child who was adopted by homosexual parents, as subjects such as homosexuality can be embarrassing and that child had no choice. |
1) Being gay does not mean you cannot reproduce. Many gay people have children 'naturally'.
2) You seem to be making an argument that only couples who can reproduce 'naturally' should be able to adopt....strange argument since many couples (straight and gay) choose to adopt because they cannot reproduce 'naturally'.
3) Being gay is not a choice that you can simply change. Sexual orientation is far more deep-seated than that.
4) Having disabled parents can be embarrassing. Having older parents can be embarrassing. Having unemployed parents can be embarrassing. Having rich parents can be embarrassing.
5) No child has a choice in it's conception. Children ARE often given some say in adoption.
Last edited by Bikerman on Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:23 am; edited 2 times in total
| -Neil- wrote: |
| While I believe gay marriage is an issue to be decided by the state, I think that gay couples should not be allowed to adopt children. By choosing the homosexual path of sexuality, the individuals are giving up their privelage to reproduce, never mind the child's perspective. |
(1) I do hope that discussions and decisions involving the rights of individuals are NOT left for the state to decide. The role of the state, if any, is to defend and guarantee these rights.
(2) Adoption is not reproduction (as has been pointed out by bikerman)
(3) Desire for a sexual relationship is not primarily (mostly not even secondarily) dictated by the wish to reproduce. One might argue that the fact we find physical enjoyment in a sexual relationship is evolution's design to secure reproduction, but to reduce our motivations to this simple, chemical process is denying much of what makes us human.
(4) I don't see how reproduction can be thought of as a privilege, something that can be earned or forfeited but rather as a fundamental human right.
| Bikerman wrote: |
| 1) Being gay does not mean you cannot reproduce. Many gay people have children 'naturally'. |
I never said that gays cannot reproduce; obviously a man and a man cannot produce a baby via sexual intercourse, and neither can two women. When I said that gays "give up" their privilege to reproduce, this means that the natural flow that results in their homosexuality removes the possibility of having children as a homosexual couple. I am aware that many gays and lesbians have children in other straight relationships.
| Bikerman wrote: |
| 2) You seem to be making an argument that only couples who can reproduce 'naturally' should be able to adopt....strange argument since many couples (straight and gay) choose to adopt because they cannot reproduce 'naturally'. |
Right... the straight couples that cannot reproduce naturally should be allowed to adopt children before gay couples, because gay couples cannot reproduce. This is a sacrifice they must be willing to make when they enter a gay relationship.
| Bikerman wrote: |
| 3) Being gay is not a choice that you can simply change. Sexual orientation is far more deep-seated than that. |
You took my statement in the wrong context. If homosexuality is natural, then the natural result of sexual activity between homosexuals is not to reproduce. I brought reproduction into the picture to illustrate that one aspect that is lacking in homosexual relations.
I know the story of a girl who was raped as a teenager (by a male) and has been a lesbian ever since because she feels the actions of one man represent the desires of all men. She feels more secure with her girlfriend than she would with any man, and I respect her for that.
| Bikerman wrote: |
| 4) Having disabled parents can be embarrassing. Having older parents can be embarrassing. Having unemployed parents can be embarrassing. Having rich parents can be embarrassing. |
True. That was a weak argument of mine, but there exists a condition called homophobia.
| Bikerman wrote: |
| 5) No child has a choice in it's conception. Children ARE often given some say in adoption. |
The first statement is accurate, the second is a little different. Infants don't have a say in the adoption process.
Gay couples adopting children needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis. Some circumstances are alright, but others aren't.
| MaxStirner wrote: |
| (1) I do hope that discussions and decisions involving the rights of individuals are NOT left for the state to decide. The role of the state, if any, is to defend and guarantee these rights. |
Based on your idea on how the state should operate, I should be allowed to smoke pot inside my house because I'm not bothering anyone. Unfortunately, in Michigan, it is illegal to smoke pot. As a result, I can move to California and get a medical cannabis card. Likewise, if gay marriage or adoption of children by gay couples isn't allowed in one state, go to another state that allows it.
| MaxStirner wrote: |
| (2) Adoption is not reproduction (as has been pointed out by bikerman) |
Agreed; however, they are one in the same because both result in the process of the upbringing of children.
| MaxStirner wrote: |
| (3) Desire for a sexual relationship is not primarily (mostly not even secondarily) dictated by the wish to reproduce. One might argue that the fact we find physical enjoyment in a sexual relationship is evolution's design to secure reproduction, but to reduce our motivations to this simple, chemical process is denying much of what makes us human. |
You need a man and a woman to create a baby. This is the point I am trying to make.
| MaxStirner wrote: |
| (4) I don't see how reproduction can be thought of as a privilege, something that can be earned or forfeited but rather as a fundamental human right. |
My aunt is unable to have children. She never has been able and she never will be able to reproduce. Her privilege has been taken away, but hey, it's nature.
| -Neil- wrote: | ||
I never said that gays cannot reproduce; |
| Quote: |
| Gay couples cannot reproduce; therefore, their choice to be gay automatically terminates their ability to have children. |
| Quote: | ||
Right... the straight couples that cannot reproduce naturally should be allowed to adopt children before gay couples, because gay couples cannot reproduce. This is a sacrifice they must be willing to make when they enter a gay relationship. |
| Quote: | ||
You took my statement in the wrong context. If homosexuality is natural, then the natural result of sexual activity between homosexuals is not to reproduce. I brought reproduction into the picture to illustrate that one aspect that is lacking in homosexual relations. |
| Quote: | ||
True. That was a weak argument of mine, but there exists a condition called homophobia. |
| Quote: | ||
The first statement is accurate, the second is a little different. Infants don't have a say in the adoption process. |
http://www.baaf.org.uk/info/stats/england.shtml#ad
| Quote: |
| Gay couples adopting children needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis. Some circumstances are alright, but others aren't. |
Just to clarify:
- A gay couple cannot have sex that results in a pregnancy.
- A gay individual can have sex with a person of the opposite sex resulting in a pregnancy.
I did not mean that gay people are automatically sterile.
The reason why I say a straight couple that is unable to have children (naturally) should be given preference over a gay couple that, as a couple, is naturally unable to reproduce is because the straight couple may have had a dream to have kids only to discover that one of them is unable to reproduce, while gay couples, as couples, cannot reproduce AS A COUPLE. Sperm plus sperm does not equal fertilized egg; zygote plus zygote does not equal fertilized egg.
I don't see how race is relevant in this discussion.
- A gay couple cannot have sex that results in a pregnancy.
- A gay individual can have sex with a person of the opposite sex resulting in a pregnancy.
I did not mean that gay people are automatically sterile.
The reason why I say a straight couple that is unable to have children (naturally) should be given preference over a gay couple that, as a couple, is naturally unable to reproduce is because the straight couple may have had a dream to have kids only to discover that one of them is unable to reproduce, while gay couples, as couples, cannot reproduce AS A COUPLE. Sperm plus sperm does not equal fertilized egg; zygote plus zygote does not equal fertilized egg.
I don't see how race is relevant in this discussion.
| -Neil- wrote: |
| The reason why I say a straight couple that is unable to have children (naturally) should be given preference over a gay couple that, as a couple, is naturally unable to reproduce is because the straight couple may have had a dream to have kids only to discover that one of them is unable to reproduce, while gay couples, as couples, cannot reproduce AS A COUPLE. Sperm plus sperm does not equal fertilized egg; zygote plus zygote does not equal fertilized egg. |
| Quote: |
|
I don't see how race is relevant in this discussion. |
| MaxStirner wrote: | ||
Based on your idea on how the state should operate, I should be allowed to smoke pot inside my house because I'm not bothering anyone. Unfortunately, in Michigan, it is illegal to smoke pot. As a result, I can move to California and get a medical cannabis card. Likewise, if gay marriage or adoption of children by gay couples isn't allowed in one state, go to another state that allows it. |
You misunderstand: The role of the state is to enforce the law. They are not the masters dictating what is right and wrong, they are at best an institution created to defend the rights of individuals.
| MaxStirner wrote: | ||
Agreed; however, they are one in the same because both result in the process of the upbringing of children. |
By that definition you will need also to vet all school teachers, day care employees, baby-sitters, ... or anyone else involved in the raising of children.
| MaxStirner wrote: | ||
You need a man and a woman to create a baby. This is the point I am trying to make. |
I also need a carpenter to build a table and an architect to design my home. The fact that I am not able to do this myself dos not disqualify me from having either.
| MaxStirner wrote: | ||
My aunt is unable to have children. She never has been able and she never will be able to reproduce. Her privilege has been taken away, but hey, it's nature. |
By that standard, you would suggest that my brother bring his adopted son back to the foster home since he (knowingly) married a woman who could not bear a child.
Extending your argument, you will also have to implement laws so authorities can oversee and control in vitro fertilizations, surrogate motherhoods and any other (future) method of fertilization or incubation. I shudder at the thought of the forms I will need to fill out on the flight for my next visit to the US.
I'm adopted and I'm glad I was adopted by strait parents. I don't disrespect gay people and have gay friends (most of whom agree with my reasoning as well) and I think that having a mother and a father gives a child better role models than two mothers or two fathers. I do think that a homosexual couple would be better than say an abusive family so there are exceptions to that too.
Really, if you're in a good family with people that love you it's going to be a good thing so if it works for you go for it.
Really, if you're in a good family with people that love you it's going to be a good thing so if it works for you go for it.
I am traditional so I prefer to die than to have two fathers. I could not live in my country because I would be a victim of hate. And also I hate gays who are going to adopt a child because of its physics. I think if someone has gay parents, he/she is gay too. In Poland it is unbelievable to adopt a child in gay family and i hope it is not going to change.
There were many different surveys and experiments about homo having children and none of the researches didn't say anything about any promoting homo or changing the kid. Being homo is way of life but also DNA, so don't worry
I fail to see what does sexual orientation have to do with the good upbringing of abandoned kids. As long as they manage to actually care about him/her, treat him/her well, and meet all the requirements for such process, I don't care about what makes them horny.
i am 55 years old and never had kids - by choice.
i was orphaned when i was 15, placed under a supervision order of my 18 year old half sister - she couldn't give a toss what happened to me.
i tried to stay on the straight and narrow - not always successful.
the one thing i see here so far is that the kids view or situation doesn't seem to play any part at all.
i have always wondered why in todays so-called "modern" societies we are required to license just about anything - from tv over dogs to guns and cars. to do some quite simple things we have to learn, sit examinations and have to showa license when we're asked by the appropriate authority.
society makes sure we have proven that we know how to do certain things like driving cars, look after elderly as a profession etc.
and still any 2 people of the opposite sex can go and have a kid.
no tests.
no training.
no gudance.
no wonder there are so many misfits roaming the streets or even unwanted kids waiting for adoption.
i understand that the adoption process is quite rigorous - people are examined, checked out and tested before they are allowed to adopt.
as long as a kid is given care and love in a home, with guidance, shelter and food, encouragement and time spent - does it really matter if the parents are black white brown straight gay or whatever?
just give the kid your love and a chance to develop as a responsible person.
cheers
i was orphaned when i was 15, placed under a supervision order of my 18 year old half sister - she couldn't give a toss what happened to me.
i tried to stay on the straight and narrow - not always successful.
the one thing i see here so far is that the kids view or situation doesn't seem to play any part at all.
i have always wondered why in todays so-called "modern" societies we are required to license just about anything - from tv over dogs to guns and cars. to do some quite simple things we have to learn, sit examinations and have to showa license when we're asked by the appropriate authority.
society makes sure we have proven that we know how to do certain things like driving cars, look after elderly as a profession etc.
and still any 2 people of the opposite sex can go and have a kid.
no tests.
no training.
no gudance.
no wonder there are so many misfits roaming the streets or even unwanted kids waiting for adoption.
i understand that the adoption process is quite rigorous - people are examined, checked out and tested before they are allowed to adopt.
as long as a kid is given care and love in a home, with guidance, shelter and food, encouragement and time spent - does it really matter if the parents are black white brown straight gay or whatever?
just give the kid your love and a chance to develop as a responsible person.
cheers
^^ Good post, thanks for sharing
It is my honest belief that people, regardless of sex, race, orientation, what have you, deserve equal rights. Not only are many gay couples incredibly more qualified to raise a child than many straight couples (my opinion of course) but, at least in America, there is a vast abundance of children who need familes. And i cant fathom how backwards minded people are who think that homosexuality is a sin and that they somehow do not have the right to raise a child.
| Kocur14 wrote: |
| I am traditional so I prefer to die than to have two fathers. I could not live in my country because I would be a victim of hate. And also I hate gays who are going to adopt a child because of its physics. I think if someone has gay parents, he/she is gay too. In Poland it is unbelievable to adopt a child in gay family and i hope it is not going to change. |
i understand that in countries with strong traditions views like yours are still prevalent. however, these views are build on lack of awareness, not on facts.
i hope that in this age, with the help of the internet and it's awareness building possibilities, we all will make an effort to educate ourselves more and not just take for granted the old gospels.
otherwise the next step is back to the caves.
no insult intended.
but respect for each living being - equally.
cheers
Well recently in my state there was conference on the topic that Female population is decreasing day by day.Conclusion was that if this is not being stopped then Men will have to strive for women.
So those people went further and had this above topic .So but it is really serious matter as what they proposed with their survey.So they think the above situation will soon going to be appear.
So considering that situation it is ok for the adoption for the Homosexuals finally they have their own life.
So those people went further and had this above topic
.So but it is really serious matter as what they proposed with their survey.So they think the above situation will soon going to be appear.
So considering that situation it is ok for the adoption for the Homosexuals finally they have their own life.
| mtx wrote: |
| There were many different surveys and experiments about homo having children and none of the researches didn't say anything about any promoting homo or changing the kid. Being homo is way of life but also DNA, so don't worry |
You know what I actually agree and disagree with this. Here's why:
1. (source: abc news) Reseachers are, and probably did, find a gene that determines whether your child will be gay or not. Even tho they are researching on heterosexual couples, I would say this kids develop this traits from their parents or the enivorment the parents put them in, whether being gay or not.
2. Being parents, you are able to control what enivorment the child will be in, until they reach a certain age. You know, Puberty. There we find who we are, or try to find. We experiment with different things; whether it be drugs, sexual orientation, sports, mischeve. We either follow or lead, basically.
3. But morally being gay is a way of life, like being straight is a way of life. For real, I say let's stereotyping. Being gay people expect you to be hyper and unprecitable. I know some people who are gay, and all of them are not the same. Same of for straight people, not the same.
I think they should be allowed to adopt. There are too many homosexuals who want children out there, and too many kids who want to be adopted.
I feel that gay couples should be allowed to adopt. As has been said before, there are so many children out there in foster care being shuffled from one temorary home to another. I think it would be far better for the child to have a stable permanent home, no matter what the sexual preferences of the parents.
Far more kids have accidentally walked in on their 'straight' parents during the act and been embarrassed or even traumatized than we know about. That's why there are locks on bedroom doors people.
I am not gay. However, there are a couple members of my family who are. I have had several good friends who are. And I've met a few gay couples who I felt would have made good parents. (I've also met straight couples, with kids, who never should have had them!!!)
Personally, I don't care if a person is straight, gay, bisexual or transsexual. I don't care what their race is, or their religion. If I happen to like that person and he or she becomes my friend, guess what, IT DON'T MATTER.
Chad
Far more kids have accidentally walked in on their 'straight' parents during the act and been embarrassed or even traumatized than we know about. That's why there are locks on bedroom doors people.
I am not gay. However, there are a couple members of my family who are. I have had several good friends who are. And I've met a few gay couples who I felt would have made good parents. (I've also met straight couples, with kids, who never should have had them!!!)
Personally, I don't care if a person is straight, gay, bisexual or transsexual. I don't care what their race is, or their religion. If I happen to like that person and he or she becomes my friend, guess what, IT DON'T MATTER.
Chad
 |