|
Post by Ich Liebe Rammstein on Aug 2, 2002 22:31:56 GMT -5
<<<< Um, people are born gay too. Being homosexual is not a choice or a lifestyle. It's natural because they are physically attracted to someone of the same sex. It's not as if they woke up one morning and said, "hey, I'll think I'll be gay." It is something that they cannot control. >>>>
I never said that. Gay's do not choose IMO. Maybe if you read more,you'll get the hint of all of what I said.
|
|
|
Post by ColeSlaw12 on Aug 3, 2002 21:33:38 GMT -5
Actually you can be born with red hair. And what is wrong with an interracial couple?? I don't see that as "abnormal".
Yes you can be born with red hair. But its rare. You can also be born homosexual. Some people do see interracial couples as "abnormal" but why should that stop you from dating who you want. Just like homosexuals, others should not regulate who you love.
Maybe if you read more,you'll get the hint of all of what I said.
No need to attack Cassiopeia. I believe she was making the connection between being born with red hair and being born homosexual. Something you missed.
|
|
|
Post by Ich Liebe Rammstein on Aug 3, 2002 21:41:14 GMT -5
oh wow.
|
|
|
Post by julinka on Aug 5, 2002 13:58:52 GMT -5
And what is wrong with an interracial couple?? I don't see that as "abnormal". It is an example of something that, like homosexuality, defies a social norm. blakmagik_woman was arguing that gays shouldn't adopt because they fall outside of social norms, I was just giving another example of people who, by that criteria, shouldn't be able to adopt.
(I'm deliberately sticking with the word "norms" here, since that's a little bit less sticky to define than "normal")
|
|
|
Post by 1.gurl.revolution on Aug 20, 2002 15:07:52 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. sry, but i disagree. my mom raised my sister and i on her own. sometimes having two jobs to support all three of us and we've turned out just fine. my sister has been on the principals scholar, going to a great college, i'm doing great in school, have a job, and my mom is still supporting us no matter what life throws at us. besides, what happens if one parent dies when the child is 6 or 7? should the other one marry right away cause it's "not a good idea" to raise a child alone?
|
|
tay
New Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by tay on Aug 22, 2002 15:09:52 GMT -5
I think gays should be able to get married.
I think gays should be able to adopt and raise kids.
When I was younger, I had a friend, and he was being raised by two lesbians. They were really, really nice people. They were doing everything they could for him, and he was a good kid. Sometimes, he had a little bit of a foul mouth, but then, so does everyone I know. Being raised by gay people doesn't mean you'll turn out gay. If being raised by straight people meant you'd turn out straight, there would be no gay people. I think that gays are qualified to raise children, as qualified as anyone else. As long as they can provide shelter, food, clothing, well-being, and most of all, love, they'll be good parents.
And what's this about a 'father figure' and 'mother figure'? What that is is gender roles. My dad teaches a class at our college about gender roles. Because of him, I haven't been able to 'understand guys better.' My mom... well, she's bipolar. She wasn't when I was little, she was great. Both my parents were. And they're not doing anything that gay parents can't do, and will do if they raise children.
Gay couples (and single gays, if they're adopting, for that matter) should be able to get married and raise a family, and that's all there is to it.
The reason people (or the government) don't want to let gays marry is because as long as they don't have the right to get married, we don't have to take their love seriously. We don't have to recognize their love and union. That's what it's about. Marriage is a piece of paper, but it's a piece of paper that makes your bind legal. If it's not legal, and you can't marry, well, the government doesn't have to see that you're in love with someone of the same gender, and therefore gay.
|
|
|
Post by Cassiopeia on Aug 22, 2002 15:26:07 GMT -5
>>The reason people (or the government) don't want to let gays marry is because as long as they don't have the right to get married, we don't have to take their love seriously. We don't have to recognize their love and union. That's what it's about. Marriage is a piece of paper, but it's a piece of paper that makes your bind legal. If it's not legal, and you can't marry, well, the government doesn't have to see that you're in love with someone of the same gender, and therefore gay. <<
Actually, that is not the reason. Marriage has nothing to do with love by a legal standpoint. The reason some people do not want homosexual couples to marry is because they don't want them to share medical benefits. Personally, I really see no reason why they need to get married. You can live with someone and start a family with them without being legally joined in marriage. But if it became legal for two people of the same sex to marry, I would have no problem with it.
|
|
tay
New Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by tay on Aug 23, 2002 12:32:00 GMT -5
Yes, you can live with someone and start a family with someone without being legally joined. People do. But the thing is they *can't* be joined. It's not *legal* for them to be joined. The government won't recognize them as being joined (in love, sharing medical benefits, whatever you want to see it as) if it's not legal.
|
|
|
Post by Cassiopeia on Aug 23, 2002 14:35:00 GMT -5
^^^ What do you mean, they can't be joined? They can certainly live together. One may not be able to receive medical benefits from the other, but that does not mean they cannot start a family.
|
|
tay
New Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by tay on Aug 23, 2002 15:27:49 GMT -5
They can't be joined by marriage. You know, they can't be joined legally. They can certainly live together and start a family, but as far as being joined by law, they're not allowed to be.
|
|
|
Post by Cassiopeia on Aug 23, 2002 15:47:56 GMT -5
^^^ So? Does it really matter if they are not legally joined? I don't see what the big deal is.
|
|
tay
New Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by tay on Aug 23, 2002 16:37:08 GMT -5
The government is legal. Marriage as a piece of paper (which is how you're talking about it) is a legal thing. If they can't get that piece of paper, they won't be legally joined. If they won't be legally joined, the government won't recognize that they're married, and won't give them the benefits, or anything else.
I just think they should be allowed to get married.
|
|
|
Post by ThaIceLady on Aug 23, 2002 16:41:16 GMT -5
Of course they should be able to marry and adopt. Hell, they're still people with feelings and everyone needs to be loved and love in return. Why would you want to stop others from loving and being with the one they care for?
|
|
|
Post by Cassiopeia on Aug 23, 2002 22:36:36 GMT -5
^^^ No one ever said that gays can't love each other. People are just not allowed to marry someone of the same sex. Again, marriage and love are two completely different things.
|
|
tay
New Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by tay on Aug 24, 2002 2:49:49 GMT -5
Maybe it's the people I know, but I've never known anyone who got married and didn't love the other person, unless they were drunk (yes, I know someone who got married when he was drunk. Oops).
|
|