IAmMe
Junior Member
Need a kick?
Posts: 143
|
Post by IAmMe on Mar 5, 2002 0:04:26 GMT -5
<<I really actually do dissagree with a single person adopting as well. I think the best enviroment for a child is with a mother and a father.>> In some cases, that is not possible, nor appropriate. I would much rather be raised by a nuturing single parent rather than two unfit parents. Being loved and cared for comes first before holding up the ideal domestic structure, at least for me.
<<It's just because I know if I was adopted into a homosexual family I would have very few if any friends>> Isn't that for the better? If there are people out there who will only befriend you according to your parents' sexual orientation, they're obviously not worth hanging out with.
|
|
|
Post by Ich Liebe Rammstein on Mar 11, 2002 22:05:59 GMT -5
Like you said. We're all people,just different. I think they should have every right to do what other people do. Its not breaking a law,because there shouldnt even be one against it. Some people think its wrong for a child to live with gay parents,but whats the big deal about being gay?? Homosexuals and heterosexuals are like everyone else,some of them might be criminals,but so are alot of people,I mean we're all the same--only different.It shouldnt be such a big deal if they get married and/or adopt a child,its their life and no one should **run it** for them and make them do something because of their sexuality.
~~~~~~Heather,(Edward Furlong,Mike Shinoda,Chester Bennington,KidRock & Joe C. LOVER!!!!!! Linkin Park RULES!!!!!!)
|
|
IAmMe
Junior Member
Need a kick?
Posts: 143
|
Post by IAmMe on Mar 12, 2002 13:21:59 GMT -5
<<Its not breaking a law,because there shouldnt even be one against it.>> Actually, in some countries, it's illegal for homosexuals to marry. So they would be breaking a law.
<<Some people think its wrong for a child to live with gay parents,but whats the big deal about being gay??>> It is for many homophobic people out there.
<<its their life and no one should **run it** for them and make them do something because of their sexuality.>> Exactly what are they making them do?
|
|
|
Post by NaruNarusegawa on Mar 12, 2002 16:10:32 GMT -5
"<<Its not breaking a law,because there shouldnt even be one against it.>> Actually, in some countries, it's illegal for homosexuals to marry. So they would be breaking a law." That's those countries. My #1 concern is the USA.
"<<Some people think its wrong for a child to live with gay parents,but whats the big deal about being gay??>> It is for many homophobic people out there."
Your point? So because there's homophobic people, homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to adopt? What about fat people? There are people in this world who dislike people who are fat, does that mean fat people shouldn't be allowed to adopt? Or people of *insert race here* because there are people against that particular race?
|
|
|
Post by OxNutz on Mar 12, 2002 23:52:40 GMT -5
I'll just put what I posted in another thread.
Marriage isn't a right, it's a tax privelage. Gay couples are not going to raise the strongest possible nation, nor are divorced ones-- and divorced couples who remain divorced do not receive the tax benefits of married couples. As for what cultural form of child rearing works best, I think most studies would indicate that a child with a mother and father who love one another is best. Additional communal influence is also very good, no doubt. But the child of a gay couple is at an automatic disadvantage because they are lacking either a mother or father in the relationship. Two dicks do not a baby make.
I'm for every imaginable gay right. I do not think that "marriage" falls into this category though.
EVERY study will tell you that a child benefits from having a FATHER-- not just two parents, but a FATHER-- particularly male children, but girls too. And you think a kid can grow up just as good without a mother? You're fronting.
I'm saying that a marriage is an economic and social institution designed for child-rearing and procreative unions. Certain things are simply NOT a marriage.
Marriage is not a freedom-- it is an economic privelage. To deny gays freedom would be to say that they cannot live together in relationships. It does not deny anyone freedom to simply state the obvious fact that two men or two women do not constitute a procreative bond. Don't even bring up infertile couples-- to determine whether or not they are infertile or intend to have children is an obvious violation of privacy. Seeing that two dicks do not a baby make is not, it's an obvious fact.
Marriage (that is recognized by the state) allows for the partners to have all types of legal rights to shared properties, estates and power of attorney.
Any questions?
|
|
|
Post by sunny.side.up on Mar 13, 2002 11:41:40 GMT -5
>>I'm for every imaginable gay right. I do not think that "marriage" falls into this category though.<<
Of course marriage does fall into that category. Two straight people who are in love can get married, so why shouldn't two gay people be able to do the same thing? >>EVERY study will tell you that a child benefits from having a FATHER-- not just two parents, but a FATHER-- particularly male children, but girls too.<<
Please tell me where I can find the results of a study like that. And I think it's better for a child to grow up in an environment where the parents - whether they are 2 moms, 2 dads or a dad and a mom - love each other and the child, than growing up with a mother and a father who don't take good care of them.
~*Esther*~
|
|
|
Post by Ich Liebe Rammstein on Mar 14, 2002 20:27:39 GMT -5
Annie:: omg,I didnt know that there were some countries that was illgeal,but oh well,I just didnt know that
|
|
|
Post by NaruNarusegawa on Mar 14, 2002 22:26:31 GMT -5
I'm watching tv, I think it's Nightline or something right now on ABC with Rosie, and they're saying..
there's no statistical difference between children raised in a home with a gay parent.. than children raised in a home with straight parents.
So I think that throws out a lot of preconceived notions that there will be something wrong with them.
And people say the children needs both parents..a male and female.. .what about single parents?
Is a single parent household better than a household with two parents who are the same sex? If it is, why? If not, then how come people aren't debating whether or not single parent adoption should be legal or not?
So what does everybody think about that?
|
|
|
Post by Cassiopeia on Mar 14, 2002 22:54:35 GMT -5
^^^ I think that a household with 2 parents, whether they are gay or straight, is better than a single parent family. I think that a child needs to have an adult family member around when he or she is home. I don't approve of parents putting their children in day care from the time they are 6 months. Of course, two parents who work full time and don't have time for their child are no better than one parent who does the same. I think there are too many bad parents nowadays. I also think that sexual preference has no influence, negative or positive, over a person's parenting skills.
|
|
|
Post by 80s Child on Mar 15, 2002 17:07:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BadFish on Mar 16, 2002 23:54:28 GMT -5
^^Rosie is pretty cool.
Personally, I don't think there are any arguments opposing gays adopting children that aren't based in bigotry.
|
|
|
Post by OxNutz on Mar 17, 2002 19:55:40 GMT -5
Seems heads can't read these days...
"Marriage isn't a right, it's a tax privelage. Gay couples are not going to raise the strongest possible nation, nor are divorced ones-- "
"But the child of a gay couple is at an automatic disadvantage because they are lacking either a mother or father in the relationship."
|
|
|
Post by NaruNarusegawa on Mar 17, 2002 19:59:10 GMT -5
"But the child of a gay couple is at an automatic disadvantage because they are lacking either a mother or father in the relationship."
The same thing can be said about children in a single parent household. How come nobody is debating whether or not a single person should be able to adopt?
|
|
|
Post by OxNutz on Mar 18, 2002 18:58:53 GMT -5
Because that's not the topic of this thread.
|
|
|
Post by NaruNarusegawa on Mar 18, 2002 19:02:32 GMT -5
"Because that's not the topic of this thread."
True, but there's still no controversary about it. It's legal for someone single to adopt, and noone says a thing about it. However, I am gonna make a thread on the issue to see what people think.
|
|