Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Reynard Bleu

The Gay Marriage Question

Recommended Posts

Posted

No surprise to see a lefty missing the real target. You're basically in favour of using children as a tool with which to help eradicate a relatively unimportant stereotype. You want to strategically place children where their existence can reduce adult social stigma. You're forcing the child to be a martyr for a fanciful cause before it can even speak. And yet you call yourself a liberal, no doubt.

No he's not, you're twisting his words somewhat. He's not suggesting using children to reduce the social stigma on homosexuality, simply that one of the consequences of allowing gay couples to adopt might be a change in the social mindset. That's simply an unrelated by-product though, not the reasoning behind letting gay couples adopt.

Posted

No he's not, you're twisting his words somewhat. He's not suggesting using children to reduce the social stigma on homosexuality, simply that one of the consequences of allowing gay couples to adopt might be a change in the social mindset. That's simply an unrelated by-product though, not the reasoning behind letting gay couples adopt.

So what was his reason for letting gay couples adopt?

Posted

So what was his reason for letting gay couples adopt?

Because they could be people who want to care for a child? :unsure:

Posted

So what was his reason for letting gay couples adopt?

The answer is....

Because they could be people who want to care for a child? :unsure:

^ This

The same reason any sane person wants to allow gay couples adopt, so that a child can have a loving home. He's clearly not saying "the only reason gay couples should adopt is to combat homophobia". If one of the outcomes is that it helps ignorant views on homosexuals, then that is just a bonus.

Posted

No surprise to see a lefty missing the real target. You're basically in favour of using children as a tool with which to help eradicate a relatively unimportant stereotype. You want to strategically place children where their existence can reduce adult social stigma. You're forcing the child to be a martyr for a fanciful cause before it can even speak. And yet you call yourself a liberal, no doubt.

I+m+sorry+sir+when+did+rage+faces+become+memes+_285778766f1d306c8d7d0ffae2acacc9.png

Posted

The answer is....

^ This

The same reason any sane person wants to allow gay couples adopt, so that a child can have a loving home. He's clearly not saying "the only reason gay couples should adopt is to combat homophobia". If one of the outcomes is that it helps ignorant views on homosexuals, then that is just a bonus.

So that the gay couple can fulfil their desire to love a child, which is more important than the feelings and the experiences of the child?

Posted

So their wants are more important than giving the child the best possible upbringing?

Being brought up by gay parents and having 'the best possible upbringing' are not mutually exclusive, you know...

If you look at why people adopt in general (straight or gay couples, or even individuals) then it's likely to be either of two options. 1, They want to give a disadvantaged child a better life. Or 2, they are unable/unwilling to have biological children, so they want to adopt so they can still be parents. In either case, being LGBT does not change their motives, only makes the idea of adoption more compelling to them.

Posted

Im against the idea of this being legal, at the end of the day if the world was gay then there wouldn't be a world? so why encourage it.

So you think that everyone will end up being gay because gay people can get married? You do realise hetrosexual people can get married too?, And you also realise that if everyone was gay this doesn't stop babies being born?

Or are you just a moron?

Oops I forgot about your other posts, I know the answer to the last question.

Posted

So you think that everyone will end up being gay because gay people can get married? You do realise hetrosexual people can get married too?, And you also realise that if everyone was gay this doesn't stop babies being born?

Or are you just a moron?

Oops I forgot about your other posts, I know the answer to the last question.

to be honest I always though you was gay, cheers for confirming that it explains a lot.

Posted

Gay marriage - Support. Gay couple is happy, nobody is negatively affected.

Gay adoption - Strongly oppose. Not fair on child.

Out of interest, why don't you think it's fair on the child?

Posted

Im against the idea of this being legal, at the end of the day if the world was gay then there wouldn't be a world? so why encourage it.

I find it genuinely concerning that people still think like this.

Encourage it? You think kids will turn gay because their parents are?

Posted

This doesnt affect me one little bit so dont see an issue.

The main problem I have with the debate is the thought that people are not allowed to feel uncomfortable with it. There are many things in life we dont like but have to accept. Being a homophobe really isnt that bad a thing. It would be much better for people to just admit to that rather than hiding behind religion or the sanctity of marriage.

On Radio 5 today they were debating it and some dude started talking about how marriage is all about procreation so same sex marriages should not be allowed. What a load of bullshit. Just come out and say that homosexuals make you feel uncomfortable. There really isnt that much of a problem.

Posted

Where's the resident homophobe Mack?

People opposed to gay adoption cos it's unfair on the child? Is it unfair because being brought up in a loving, caring same sex couple gives the kids an unfair advantage over abusive, unemployed, unloving, junky, feral parents?

Posted

This doesnt affect me one little bit so dont see an issue.

The main problem I have with the debate is the thought that people are not allowed to feel uncomfortable with it. There are many things in life we dont like but have to accept. Being a homophobe really isnt that bad a thing. It would be much better for people to just admit to that rather than hiding behind religion or the sanctity of marriage.

On Radio 5 today they were debating it and some dude started talking about how marriage is all about procreation so same sex marriages should not be allowed. What a load of bullshit. Just come out and say that homosexuals make you feel uncomfortable. There really isnt that much of a problem.

People should feel uncomfortable about being homophobic, it is a bizarre, pointless thing to be.

I'm not saying you have to feel comfortable watching a gay couple snogging in public, I feel uncomfortable watching anyone gay or straight snogging in public.

But it is ridiculous to think that anyone is less valid or less relevant because of what they do in private.

Plenty of people do plenty of things I don't do or wouldn't feel comfortable doing, but I don't judge them on such things, I judge them on who they are.

At least this whole debate has made a lot of people confront their prejudices and have them challenged.

Posted

This doesnt affect me one little bit so dont see an issue.

The main problem I have with the debate is the thought that people are not allowed to feel uncomfortable with it. There are many things in life we dont like but have to accept. Being a homophobe really isnt that bad a thing. It would be much better for people to just admit to that rather than hiding behind religion or the sanctity of marriage.

On Radio 5 today they were debating it and some dude started talking about how marriage is all about procreation so same sex marriages should not be allowed. What a load of bullshit. Just come out and say that homosexuals make you feel uncomfortable. There really isnt that much of a problem.

Being homophobic is that bad. It means you do not like (and may persecute) gay people because of their sexuality.

It's on a par with racism.

You can choose who have sex with but you can't choose who you fall in love with.

You can say that you don't get it or that it's not for you but to begin to deny people the same options as yourself based on their sexuality is wrong.

Posted

Couldnt give a fcuk if 2 batty boys wanna get married,but the sight of Elton John and his BF adopting kids.to me is not right.

S'pose im just a bigoted old twat.

Also aint the Gment got more important issues to fret about than gay marriages????

Posted

Where's the resident homophobe Mack?

People opposed to gay adoption cos it's unfair on the child? Is it unfair because being brought up in a loving, caring same sex couple gives the kids an unfair advantage over abusive, unemployed, unloving, junky, feral parents?

If that was the choice most people would choose the loving gay couple, but that is not the choice adoption agencies have.

The choice is normally a loving straight couple or a loving gay couple, I would place them with the loving straight couple as they would benefit from a mother and a father instead of 2 mums or 2 dads.

Posted

People should feel uncomfortable about being homophobic, it is a bizarre, pointless thing to be.

I'm not saying you have to feel comfortable watching a gay couple snogging in public, I feel uncomfortable watching anyone gay or straight snogging in public.

But it is ridiculous to think that anyone is less valid or less relevant because of what they do in private.

Plenty of people do plenty of things I don't do or wouldn't feel comfortable doing, but I don't judge them on such things, I judge them on who they are.

At least this whole debate has made a lot of people confront their prejudices and have them challenged.

I didnt say anyone is less relevent or valid? Quite the opposite in fact. If a gay couple want to be married, they should be able to be married. Makes no difference to me. What i'm saying is, your comments on homophobia being a 'bizarre thing to be' are a little unfair. Nobody chooses to be homophobic, its just the way someone feels. But they shouldnt be attacked for that the same way a gay couple should not be attacked for being gay.

We all are what we are.

Guest BlueBrett
Posted

If that was the choice most people would choose the loving gay couple, but that is not the choice adoption agencies have.

The choice is normally a loving straight couple or a loving gay couple, I would place them with the loving straight couple as they would benefit from a mother and a father instead of 2 mums or 2 dads.

Yeah I love how most of those in favour of gay people adopting seem to be assuming that there are warehouses full of unwanted kids all over the country and no conventional families are willing to take them in.

As far as I am aware there is no shortage of couples looking to adopt and the numbers are likely to increase as people (well middle class people anyway) are waiting longer and longer to have kids and then many find they have waited too long to do so safely.

Posted

I didnt say anyone is less relevent or valid? Quite the opposite in fact. If a gay couple want to be married, they should be able to be married. Makes no difference to me. What i'm saying is, your comments on homophobia being a 'bizarre thing to be' are a little unfair. Nobody chooses to be homophobic, its just the way someone feels. But they shouldnt be attacked for that the same way a gay couple should not be attacked for being gay.

We all are what we are.

But these attitudes should be challenged, all phobias can be cured, although homophobia is not a real phobia, it is like racism or sexism, people need to be challenged on these attitudes and made to confront them rather than just resorting to trotting out crap like it's not natural.

Posted

Where's the resident homophobe Mack?

People opposed to gay adoption cos it's unfair on the child? Is it unfair because being brought up in a loving, caring same sex couple gives the kids an unfair advantage over abusive, unemployed, unloving, junky, feral parents?

It's unfair because the child will be stigmatized and this will happen regardless of whether or not you or anyone else think it should. It reminds me of a mother who was in the news not long ago, if I remember correctly she dressed her young male child in female clothing and treated him like a girl, justifying it through gender equality, saying gender shouldn't matter. She may have been right, but forcing it upon a child is wrong. The prority should always be the child and that means avoiding where possible any chance that the child may suffer stigmatism or any other kind of disadvantage.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...