Same Sex...Marriage

[213]

You'd be wrong, since I have no reason to distaste harmless people. I distaste criminals. Gays tend to be friendly and it's nice that they have the opportunity to marry if they so wish, actually it's not of my business to be against that.

The mindset of an adoption is different. The kid starts integrated in a adoption home where he hopefully is provided for, taken care for, loved. Giving a kid for an adoption must be a well thought out process.

Of course some of the pitfalls apply to straight parents, if they are unable to provide for the kid or are unstable or have abusive behaviour. Then they should not be allowed to adopt.

I'll say it again: the well being of a kid is the most important factor in adoption, not the parents wishes. If there is no problem with gay adoption (so my views and of some psycologists, institutions and political parties are wrong), gay couples must PROVE that it is so, not just saying so plenty of times with the hope that it is true, starting lobbying campaigns or have hysterical gay rights advocates.

You're acting as if being a gay couple IS child abuse. It's simply not, and you grossly underestimate how adaptive and understanding kids can be when given honesty, consistency and understanding.

 

[Luv_Studd]

Anything that has been said negatively against gays regarding marriage or raising children, can equally be said about hetero couples or parents.

I have a son who is gay, in his early 20's, and I think of him being married some day. And, if possible, raising kids as well. I have seen him around kids and there is nothing perverse about it.

 

[Hermskii]

I have a son who is gay, in his early 20's, and I think of him being married some day. And, if possible, raising kids as well.

And there it is...

 

[cryptophreak]

Benefica, It's not my goal to defend gay people. Those of you who have been around a decade or more might remember my argument with Phoenix on the derogatory use of the word "gay". I'm not a particular defender of homosexuals, or any group for that matter. This is a scientific problem. You appear to be saying that same-sex couples are less fit to raise children, and I've yet to glimpse a remotely plausible basis for that. I'd do the same thing if you posted about the moon being made of cheese.

Let's examine your latest reasoning:

1) Gay couples have an hard time to prevent their kids from being influenced by their choice of sexual life. Ok, this is debatable.

Debatable indeed. Further, this applies at least equally to opposite-sex parents. So even if it's true, how is it relevant in a discussion about the parental fitness of same-sex couples? Why does a totally mundane phenomenon transform into a problem in their case? Could it be that you're making a value judgment on sexuality? I think so. Next!

2) Children of gay couples are more prone to be mocked and harassed. Only a fool would argue this point.

Gifted children are targeted for ridicule. Should we purposely breed dumber kids? Unreasoned conformity isn't a valid reason for anything, and it might be the worst possible goal. Further, this point roughly simplifies to "We shouldn't do different things because they are different," which is a tautology that would only be seen as meaningful by a bigot.

3) Allowing a couple of males to adopt a child, leads that the child is raised without a mother. Tell me that this is irrelevant...

I suppose you're implying that growing up without a maternal figure is harmful to children. Let's examine that assumption, shall we? We just heard from the American Academy of Pediatrics on that subject:

There is extensive research documenting that there is no causal relationship between parents’ sexual orientation and children’s emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral development. (11 citations given) Many studies attest to the normal development of children of same-gender couples when the child is wanted, the parents have a commitment to shared parenting, and the parents have strong social and economic supports. Indeed, current research has concluded that “In all, it is now well-established that the adjustment of children and adolescents is best accounted for by variations in the quality of the relationships with their parents, the quality of the relationship between the parents or significant adults in the children’s and adolescents’ lives, and the availability of economic and socio-economic resources.”

And lastly:

If you prefer to say I'm prejudiced because I think that one has to have more caution with children, children are more vulnerable and more worthy of be defended than adults, so be it.

Stop hiding behind children. You are not heroically defending anyone. If you had presented a single credible argument for restricting homosexuals more than anyone else, I'd have reason to think that you were motivated by concern for children and not prejudice. Instead I have received an increasingly suspect pile of innuendo which asserts nothing meaningful while implying that homosexuals are self-evidently harmful to children.

 

[Jacks:Revenge]

I am 100% against same sex marriage, don't even get me started on gay couples raising kids.

It's so against nature, how the fuck did it ever come so far?!

To make matters worse, I believe my country was actually the first in the world to allow for fags to get married, and to have children.

if I was to learn of your untimely death, I would celebrate.

If there is no problem with gay adoption (so my views and of some psycologists, institutions and political parties are wrong), gay couples must PROVE that it is so

there is no problem with gay adoption.
your view is wrong. any psychologist who thinks there is a problem with gay adoption is wrong, is ignoring the research, and has an ulterior agenda. any adoption institution or political party (Republican...) who thinks there is a problem with gay adoption is wrong.

it's really that simple.
you're just wrong. the current scientific research does not support you. agenda-driven psychologists do not make you any less wrong. a political party (Republican...) on your side does not make you any less wrong.

get it?

if anyone opposes _anything_ regarding gays, that person is automatically intolerant.

you're missing the point.

you're not "automatically intolerant" because our opinions are different.
you're automatically intolerant because reality is not on your side.

the reality is that there's nothing wrong with a healthy, happy, gay couple adopting and raising children.

3) Allowing a couple of males to adopt a child, leads that the child is raised without a mother. Tell me that this is irrelevant...

it's fucking irrelevant.

why don't you talk to a child who was raised by a gay couple?
stop pulling assumptions out of your asshole and talk to the children that you claim to know so much about.

[m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ[/m]

you're prejudiced.
you're bigoted.
your reasons for opposing same sex marriage and adoption are grossly misinformed. congratulations.

 

[Hermskii]

I'm a practicing Catholic who is basically Republican but starting to lean Libertarian. You can guess my stance on all of this can't you?

Atheist can't and don't believe in sin if they don't believe in God. Is that right? If so then it might stand to reason that they aren't offended or opposed to the saying "HATE the sin, LOVE the sinner. Is that right? I was just wondering.

Oh and look! I put one of those smilies at the end of that! It's like I have the immunity relic on or something isn't that right? THAT'S AWESOME!

 

[Benfica]

Debatable indeed. Further, this applies at least equally to opposite-sex parents. So even if it's true, how is it relevant in a discussion about the parental fitness of same-sex couples? Why does a totally mundane phenomenon transform into a problem in their case? Could it be that you're making a value judgment on sexuality? I think so.

How does this apply to opposite sex? The fact that a kid is raised with a gay couple will induce pressure upon the kid to adapt to a gay lifestyle or more willing to try same sex relations. I don't see why the vast majority of kids which naturally have heterosexual tendencies should have to deal with this. Do you want a society where kids are raised to be homosexual or there's pressure to be so?

Gifted children are targeted for ridicule. Should we purposely breed dumber kids? Unreasoned conformity isn't a valid reason for anything, and it might be the worst possible goal. Further, this point roughly simplifies to "We shouldn't do different things because they are different," which is a tautology that would only be seen as meaningful by a bigot.

So, you say that since there are other wrongs, this wrong doesn't matter. Since kids are mocked by other reasons, creating a situation where it will SURELY happen is fine? Two wrongs make it right? Is this the best you can say?

I suppose you're implying that growing up without a maternal figure is harmful to children. Let's examine that assumption, shall we?

No, you are wrong.

The most important issue is the welfare of the child. Social science research has repeatedly demonstrated the vital importance of both a father and a mother for the healthy development of children and the serious risks that they face if they are raised without a mother or a father. Mothers and fathers bring unique gifts that are essential to the health of a child.

Among the many distinctive talents that mothers bring to the parenting enterprise, three stand out: their capacity to breastfeed, their ability to understand infants and children, and their ability to offer nurture and comfort.

Social science studies confirm this. Numerous reports indicate that infants and toddlers prefer mothers to fathers when they are hungry, afraid or sick. Mothers tend to be more soothing. Mothers are more responsive to the distinctive cries of infants; they are better able than fathers, for instance, to distinguish between a cry of hunger and a cry of pain. They are also better than fathers at detecting the emotions of their children by looking at their faces, postures, and gestures.

Children who were deprived of maternal care during extended periods in their early lives “lacked feeling, had superficial relationships, and exhibited hostile or antisocial tendencies” as they developed into adulthood.(6) Clinical experience suggests that deliberately depriving a child of its mother, motherlessness, causes severe damage because mothers are crucial in establishing a child’s ability to trust and to feel safe in relationships. All cultures recognize the essential role of the mother.

Stop hiding behind children. You are not heroically defending anyone.

How come is or would be heroic to defend children? That's basic and common sense. Then who said I have an heroic stance or how is it heroic in this thread to defend kids? Seriously, what are you talking about?

If you had presented a single credible argument for restricting homosexuals more than anyone else, I'd have reason to think that you were motivated by concern for children and not prejudice.

Yet you were unable to dismiss them, just side-stepped them, as seen above.

 

[Leo(T.C.K.)]

How does this apply to opposite sex? The fact that a kid is raised with a gay couple will induce pressure upon the kid to adapt to a gay lifestyle or more willing to try same sex relations. I don't see why the vast majority of kids which naturally have heterosexual tendencies should have to deal with this. Do you want a society where kids are raised to be homosexual or there's pressure to be so?

I'm sorry? In that sentence you mentioned word "naturally". That implies you believe that strict heterosexuality is natural, therefore you have biased view. There's more out there than meets the eye.
Also, why should gay children be pressured or raised to be heterosexual even though they aren't? Then don't say it doesn't apply to "opposite sex" whatever you meant with that even though that's incorrect. Based on what you say you would pressure your children to be or more like behave heterosexual. Yet a parent with common sense shouldn't do that. Neither should the homosexual parent or parent in homosexual relationship.

And also you use words like "fact" where it's not a fact but just your opinion because you don't know any better, you are looking at it from miles away distance. And Hermskii is even worse it seems. So being Catholic and all the prejudices make him forget to be a bit more open. What is the sin in this case? Just because your indocrinated mind believes everything you are told in a church. It's not harming anyone, therefore it should not be considered a sin in the strict sense and such other "sins" could be forgotten or interpreted differently, just looking at it from a bit of open mind. Religion wasn't meant to be as restrictive as it became. Lots of what you believe to be the ultimate and only truth was rewritten during historical periods. That means lots of what you believe is in the end made up, but you cannot see the gist of it. You don't see what was the original message they intended to give, you have a curtain in front of you basically. The tolerance and accepting differences is what it should be about
Do I need to remind that the bible was abused as a source of control over people especially in middle ages? Acording to many historical sources the bible used to be very different, many parts were thrown out or rewritten to suit the government of the time. But I think you don't want to hear about that. You will just plug your ears and go like: "I can't hear you, no I can't, you didn't say anything, my knowledge is absolutely correct, I am always right and my religion, everything they say is set in stone"

 

[TWD]

The idea that gay couples would try to influence their children into being gay is simply ridiculous. It goes against their entire belief system. If you cannot choose to be gay then it doesn't matter what you do. A parent can only be supportive in helping the child determine what their preference is for themselves. If there was any influence, it would be subconscious. But iirc the research shows this doesn't happen.

There's seriously no reason to spend 3 pages refuting the same point.

I don't believe the research is complete on this subject though. I don't think it will hold them back developmentally, but it will certainly influence attitudes and beliefs. I just don't believe a kid ends up being the same person regardless of the type of home they are raised in. Our culture has already changed significantly since homosexuality became a flashpoint issue. There's no way to know what the final impact will be. That's what marriage defenders are really afraid of. That the value system will change to something that no longer reflects their own views. That's where we differ. I believe that those values have been critical to my own success, and the success of this country. Others think they were never necessary.

 

[[GU]elmur_fud]

I'm a practicing Catholic who is basically Republican but starting to lean Libertarian. You can guess my stance on all of this can't you?

Atheist can't and don't believe in sin if they don't believe in God. Is that right? If so then it might stand to reason that they aren't offended or opposed to the saying "HATE the sin, LOVE the sinner. Is that right? I was just wondering.

Oh and look! I put one of those smilies at the end of that! It's like I have the immunity relic on or something isn't that right? THAT'S AWESOME!

The entire premise of the bible is an exercise of free will. God says we have free will. Satan says nope. If anything Christians should be all for gay marriage being legal because otherwise they are endorsing the removal of free will. Instead though I am always hearing advocated that the government enact laws that uphold that individuals views on good and evil.

--------------------------------------------------

Lets put a face on this, because every discussion is better with visual aids: Neil Patrick Harris, his partner, and their kids.

 

[Jacks:Revenge]

Do you want a society where kids are raised to be homosexual or there's pressure to be so?

no one is "raised to be homosexual."
that's a non sequitur.

homosexuality is not a choice you ignorant fool.
you cannot influence someone to suck a dick even if you wanted to.

short of holding a person at gunpoint and threatening their life, you can't make a straight person gay. you're either born straight or you're born gay. you don't just decide to be gay or not as you grow up. if you're a gay person, then you've always known that you were gay from as early as you could remember. if you're not a gay person then you never will be.

having 2 dads or 2 moms doesn't make someone gay.
being gay makes you gay. period.

when it comes to this particular issue, your ignorance and bigotry is GLARING.
just remember this conversation in 20 years. remember where you were standing: the wrong side of history. I almost feel sorry for you... almost. your complete lack of perspective and the intolerant attitude you will likely pass to your own children, perpetuating the cycle of ignorant bigotry. it's pretty sad. hopefully you get your mind right (or die) before you have the opportunity to procreate.

 

[cryptophreak]

How does this apply to opposite sex? The fact that a kid is raised with a gay couple will induce pressure upon the kid to adapt to a gay lifestyle or more willing to try same sex relations. I don't see why the vast majority of kids which naturally have heterosexual tendencies should have to deal with this. Do you want a society where kids are raised to be homosexual or there's pressure to be so?

Here's how it applies: Do you want a society where kids are raised to be heterosexual? When I flip your argument the other way like that it's blatantly ridiculous. If the example of homosexual parents legitimises homosexuality in the eyes of the child, surely the same problem exists for children of straight parents: Being raised by heterosexual parents makes it seem okay to be straight. Somehow I doubt you're alarmed by that fact, therefore I say that you're unfairly prejudiced against homosexuals. This has little to do with children; you think there is something inherently evil or wrong about being gay, or else this would be a non-issue.

So, you say that since there are other wrongs, this wrong doesn't matter. Since kids are mocked by other reasons, creating a situation where it will SURELY happen is fine? Two wrongs make it right? Is this the best you can say?

No, let me phrase this another way and hopefully you'll get it. The fact that children bully each other is regrettable. We should not respond to the fact by letting ignorant, mean-spirited children decide who is allowed to be a parent. This is approaching the problem the wrong way -- if children are behaving badly, it's the responsibility of parents to adjust them, not allow the children to demand that their classmates get different parents.

 

[Razorjack]

You're either trolling or ignorant, and if that's the case, definitely intolerant. Why the fuck does it matter what someone else does?

You're right, I don't give a flying fuck. Just saying that if fags are allowed to openly express their, in my opinion disgusting way of living, then I am allowed to be openly homophobic. Freedom of speech, bro.

now. Because in the end it would be probably considered for someone like Razorjack an attack from my side. Maybe he's aware of all those things, but he's yet another extreme example. But maybe he lives in one of those heavily religious more secluded areas, there are few like that in .nl as far as i know, some formerly islands. Or maybe not, who cares anyway.

I live in the second biggest city, downtown area. Lots of fags walking around here all day long. And I am not religious.

 

[Benfica]

Here's how it applies: Do you want a society where kids are raised to be heterosexual? When I flip your argument the other way like that it's blatantly ridiculous. If the example of homosexual parents legitimises homosexuality in the eyes of the child, surely the same problem exists for children of straight parents: Being raised by heterosexual parents makes it seem okay to be straight. Somehow I doubt you're alarmed by that fact, therefore I say that you're unfairly prejudiced against homosexuals. This has little to do with children; you think there is something inherently evil or wrong about being gay, or else this would be a non-issue.

Indeed I want kids to be raised as heterosexuals. If you want this to be said point blank, here it is! If you don't see why is preferable to be straight than to be gay, you can even ask GAYS.

No, let me phrase this another way and hopefully you'll get it. The fact that children bully each other is regrettable. We should not respond to the fact by letting ignorant, mean-spirited children decide who is allowed to be a parent. This is approaching the problem the wrong way -- if children are behaving badly, it's the responsibility of parents to adjust them, not allow the children to demand that their classmates get different parents.

You are rephrasing but still side-stepping the point. The fact of the matter is that kids WILL be harassed and mocked. It is the responsability of the parents, but welcome to the Real World!
If I have children psychologists telling me that this is not important when selecting parents for adoption, I can be convinced. On this forum where posts are completely opinion based??

Look, perhaps one has to live with the fact that are cultural differences. For example, this is not from some random homophobes, this is the government of Russia
http://rt.com/politics/lavrov-homosexual-propaganda-united-nations-law-466/

The Foreign Minister said Russia’s draft law banning homosexual propaganda protects the rights of the majority from a group that wants to promote its own value system.

"We don't want reverse discrimination to occur: when one group of citizens has the right to aggressively forward their values, which differ from those of the majority of the population, and moreover imposing them on children," Lavrov said.

Russia’s draft bill, which has already passed the lower chamber of the Russian parliament, is specifically designed to prevent any kind of discrimination, Lavrov said, noting that “we have no commitment to permit propaganda, which is very aggressive as a rule.”

Homosexuals can go about their business freely and unpunished, and it fits within the framework of the obligations of all countries to forbid discrimination because of any given attribute, he added.

 

[Al]

I love the argument: "What's next?! Next they're gonna wanna marry animals and inanimate objects!"

Marriage takes consent by 2 people of legal age.

Jesus doesn't hate gays (or anyone). Neither should you.

 

[Hermskii]

The idea that gay couples would try to influence their children into being gay is simply ridiculous. It goes against their entire belief system. If you cannot choose to be gay then it doesn't matter what you do. A parent can only be supportive in helping the child determine what their preference is for themselves. If there was any influence, it would be subconscious. But iirc the research shows this doesn't happen.

Really? I disagree. Like it or not, most of you have been influenced by your parents. Whether it be positive or negative, you were influenced by one or both of them and I'll go way further and say you were majorly influenced.

Possible example:
What religion are your parents TWD? Same as yours?
Many others here hate religion because it was forced on them in their youth. Guess what? That means you were influenced.

My parents, family and friends I had growing up totally shaped me into being the person I am. Thank God for that too I say. Amen.

I'm just saying to you TWD that I think you and anyone else here who claim that parents don't try to influence the children they raise are insane. It isn't just about religion, or being gay or handling money or how best to cook chicken. Like it or not you have been influenced and most likely by a parent first and then friends and teachers and coworkers. I just influenced you to respond! Deny it!

 

[Leo(T.C.K.)]

But the point is, you cannot really influence sexuality, you might be influenced by other means but you still have free will or should have. My grandmother for example went to church about every day or weekend and I lived with her and grandfather together for most of my childhood also. I was in church few times, but I didn't feel like going there anymore and nobody forced me to take those views when I had my own opinion on something. Most kids would just take for granted and truth what they are told, but not me. But nobody really forced me to some opinion either, but here we're talking about religion. Religion is a fucking choice in the end, what you believe in and all. But this is entirely different matter and it's like banging head at a brick wall when trying to talk to you three, razorjack possibly being the worst. Then again his homophobia is probably based on the fact that all he sees are the stereotypical girlish faggots in such big city. It seems in .nl in general gays are really acting like the stere
otype, because they feel they need to belong to that. In czech I've never really met a stereotypical gay person, I can tell you that. No weird clothing and manners, just being "common looking". You probably never seen anyone who doesn't fall out of the urban gay stereotypes. Either way, discriminating gays in .nl is I believe criminal offence on itself. Make that something of your own.
But whatever, the entire thing basically comes down tDOCTOR OCTOGANAPUS BLAAARGHHHH
Edit: that's how arguing with you guys about this feels like because it goes nowhere.

 

[hal]

What is wrong with you people? You can't discuss a topic that's been beaten to death without resorting to personal attacks?

 

[Sir_Brizz]

¿sʞɔɐʇʇɐ ןɐuosɹǝd oʇ ƃuıʇɹosǝɹ ʇnoɥʇıʍ ɥʇɐǝp oʇ uǝʇɐǝq uǝǝq s,ʇɐɥʇ ɔıdoʇ ɐ ssnɔsıp ʇ,uɐɔ noʎ ¿ǝןdoǝd noʎ ɥʇıʍ ƃuoɹʍ sı ʇɐɥʍ