Guest MattP Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Why is a single parent family any more natural than a gay parent family? Neither have parents of both sex. Is that an excuse though to force in a gay parent family? The former has happened because of an unfortunate turn of circumstance, the latter has happened because of a politically motivated decision by someone. Comparisons are ridiculous.
Monk Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Is that an excuse though to force in a gay parent family? The former has happened because of an unfortunate turn of circumstance, the latter has happened because of a politically motivated decision by someone. Comparisons are ridiculous. Adoption by a single parent is legal in the UK, so the argument that there's a 'lack of the opposite sex' is invalid from an adoption perspective. Not a ridiculous comparison at all.
MooseBreath Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 No I mean homosexuality happens in nature so how can it be unnatural. And I agree it is a no brainer. Who said homosexuality was unnatural? I said two male humans can't have a child, therefore having two male parents is unnatural.
Guest MattP Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Adoption by a single parent is legal in the UK, so the argument that there's a 'lack of the opposite sex' is invalid from an adoption perspective. Not a ridiculous comparison at all. Just because a unjust law has been made legal by a handful of crankly liberal lunatics doesn't make that argument invalid.
leicsmac Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 You know of examples of two male humans procreating? News to me. I think the thread took a turn because gay marriage is a no-brainer. It should be allowed, who cares. Gay adoption is the next talking point, and is far more debatable. I do agree with this though. There's much more room for debate on gay adoption than marriage. Just because a unjust law has been made legal by a handful of crankly liberal lunatics doesn't make that argument invalid. Democracy is a pain in the arse at times eh? (Yes, now I'm the one using ad hominems. Sorry!)
Leeds Fox Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 It denies a potential child either a father or mother? So can divorce, separation and single parenthood. Should they be illegal? Don't know really, but the old statement of 'I just dont think its right' is for me... So don't marry a man, then; no reason why you should stop those for whom "it is right" having the same rights as you... It has turned what was moral wrong into a civil right, Slavery, burning people at the stake and dunking "witches" were once deemed legal and acceptable; the values of society change over time and what's stopping people from marrying their immediate family now? Surely that should be made legal because of equality? Heterosexual marriage didn't lead to men marrying their mothers, sisters and daughters...why would gay marriage lead to blokes wanting to marry their Dads?! Anyway, incest remains illegal! Rediculous statement to make. I'm fairly sure the majority of people with divorced or separated parents still consider themselves to have a mother and father. That's like saying, after moving out of home at 18, you're parentless.
Alf Bentley Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Who said homosexuality was unnatural? I said two male humans can't have a child, therefore having two male parents is unnatural. 2 problems with that: - The word "unnatural" generally has pejorative connotations and implies a negative judgment - The word "parent" is generally assumed to involve more than being a biological progenitor, otherwise words like "step-parent" and "adoptive parent" would be a logical absurdity A child cannot be the offspring of 2 male progenitors, but it can have 2 male parents, through adoption, step-parenting, surrogate mother etc. That is unless you take a very literal definition of "unnatural", in which case male/female adoptive couples and stepmothers/fathers are also unnatural.
Alf Bentley Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Rediculous statement to make. I'm fairly sure the majority of people with divorced or separated parents still consider themselves to have a mother and father. That's like saying, after moving out of home at 18, you're parentless. I don't know precise figures, but some children of divorced/separated parents do see a lot of both parents, some see only a limited amount of one parent - and some lose all contact with one parent. My statement was that "divorce, separation and single parenthood can deny a child a mother or father", not that it will (the latter would have been ridiculous; the former isn't). In part, this is the same point as before - being a mother/father is more than just creating a child. I mean, people who have been adopted will be aware that they have a "birth mother/father", even if they've never met them, but the adoption will have "deprived" them of that parent....though, in many cases, that will be to their benefit as the birth parents presumably felt unable to tackle parenthood, for whatever reason, while the (adoptive) parents will hopefully be better able to do so.
lavrentis Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 I'd imagine getting custody over a child when the child has 2 same sex carers would be even more trouble than it already is.
Charl91 Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 If you're happy to add to a child's potential problems in life in order to satisfy a handful of adults then fine, there's not a great deal more to this particular aspect of the argument against gay adoption than that. Lots more of societies imperfections could be helped along by throwing kids into the mix and letting them take the brunt. Social eugenics. Maybe you're onto something. It's not adding to their problems. It's better for a kid to be adopted by a gay couple then not adopted at all. Why is it just to satisfy a handful of adults? It's kids who will benefit because, y'know, more might actually get adopted, and thats a good thing. I think most people have agreed that straight couples should probably get priority on adopting kids, but if you honestly think that a kid will have more emotional problems being adopted by a gay couple than not being adopted at all, then you're either trolling, severely misguided, or you actually are homophobic. You've still not really clarified on these so-called problems that Kids will experience in schools. To be honest, I think you're talking bollocks there. As I said before, homophobia is already falling, and I'm sure the next generation will care even less. Unless you're arguing that bullying kids about gay parents is not homophobia, simply a misguided attempt to pick on people for being 'different', then in which case it's an even worse argument. I didn't see the people with single-parent familys get bullied, or the only black kid in the school get bullied for being black. Primary school kids are generally a lot more understanding/accepting than most people, and by secondary they should be old enough to know that is is homophobia. Unpopular kids will get bullied, it happens sometimes. They're bullied because they're seen as weak/an easy target, or they're bullied because they're unpopular. What they're bullied about doesn't tend to matter though - that's not the reason for them being bullied, that's just the tools for them to do it with. You can take away these tools, but they'll just find new ones. If it wasn't about having gay parents, it would be about something else - having glasses, being small, etc. On the other side, if you had a popular kid with gay parents, I doubt he'd get bullied about it at all. Kids wont be bullied because they have gay parents, they'll be bullied because they're unpopular and it's an easier angle for misguided and ignorant kids to poke fun at them. So to say "Gay Parents cant adopt because they'll get bullied in school" is a really silly statement. But hey - if you're happy to add to a child's potential problems in life, by refusing him adoption, simply to satisfy the homophobic agenda of a handful of adults, then fine.
Guest MattP Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 I do agree with this though. There's much more room for debate on gay adoption than marriage. Democracy is a pain in the arse at times eh? (Yes, now I'm the one using ad hominems. Sorry!) What is the actual countries position on Gay Adoption? I know gay marriage would be overwhelming pro (correctly as well) but I can't remember reading a stat on adoption?
leicsmac Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 What is the actual countries position on Gay Adoption? I know gay marriage would be overwhelming pro (correctly as well) but I can't remember reading a stat on adoption? Good question. I haven't seen any polls.
Parafox Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 When the list of babies to adopt exceeds couples applying I'll consider two gays having one. Eh? You must have sen and heard completely different reports to the the rest of us. The number of children waiting for adoption far exceeds the number of places avilable. I have two adopted daughters. I think I know from experience what I'm talking about so if anyone would care to ask and challenge my view that adoption of children takes priority over the type of relationship the adoters are in. As long as it's stable, loving and nurturing with full commitment from both partners, only the already damaged children will thrive. For those that are sadly damaged by their early life experiences, then they need to be placed with experienced adopters who are fully aware of the difficulties that may come along. Even in this context, it doesn't matter what the relationship is, as long as it's between loving, tolerant and understanding people
Charl91 Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Eh? You must have sen and heard completely different reports to the the rest of us. The number of children waiting for adoption far exceeds the number of places avilable. I have two adopted daughters. I think I know from experience what I'm talking about so if anyone would care to ask and challenge my view that adoption of children takes priority over the type of relationship the adoters are in. As long as it's stable, loving and nurturing with full commitment from both partners, only the already damaged children will thrive. For those that are sadly damaged by their early life experiences, then they need to be placed with experienced adopters who are fully aware of the difficulties that may come along. Even in this context, it doesn't matter what the relationship is, as long as it's between loving, tolerant and understanding people Exactly. For example http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/children-facing-wait-five-years-2496132 Children in wales wait on average 5 years before being adopted. So for every kid that gets lucky and gets adopted within a year, some poor bugger is waiting 9 years to be adopted. Worse then the bloody NHS!
Harry - LCFC Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Argue over the words used if you want. I won't bother. Typically, you've seen homophobia where you want to see it. Anyone can do that. It doesn't make you special. What I actually meant by "not natural" was exactly that. Two gay dads isn't natural. It doesn't work, biologically speaking. It's not the way we were designed. I suspected it, what you said could easily be construed as homophobic if you'd care to reread what you wrote.
Manwell Pablo Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 I suspected it, what you said could easily be construed as homophobic if you'd care to reread what you wrote. Don't be so Fvcking gay.
Harry - LCFC Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Yeah I remember the days when a few long words were thought of as "gay" by the average pupil.
MooseBreath Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Yeah I remember the days when a few long words were thought of as "gay" by the average pupil. Sounds like you must have gone to some really shit schools.
Harry - LCFC Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 Sounds like you must have gone to some really shit schools. Thanks
ozleicester Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 That's what happens when you don't let her taste sausage. You are without doubt.. the perfect example as to why heterosexuals shouldnt be allowed to mate. You piss weak , fat little gobshite...Make no mistake, if your internet persona was even close to real, someone like me will fvck you up soon.
purpleronnie Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 You are without doubt.. the perfect example as to why heterosexuals shouldnt be allowed to mate. You piss weak , fat little gobshite...Make no mistake, if your internet persona was even close to real, someone like me will fvck you up soon. Hey he isnt little. soz matt.
MooseBreath Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 You are without doubt.. the perfect example as to why heterosexuals shouldnt be allowed to mate. You piss weak , fat little gobshite...Make no mistake, if your internet persona was even close to real, someone like me will fvck you up soon. It's a fair point though. You're her primary male role model. She finds men repulsive. More than likely because veggies are known to be a bit poncy, now she thinks all men are like you so has decided to be a muff-muncher.
Leeds Fox Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 I don't know precise figures, but some children of divorced/separated parents do see a lot of both parents, some see only a limited amount of one parent - and some lose all contact with one parent. My statement was that "divorce, separation and single parenthood can deny a child a mother or father", not that it will (the latter would have been ridiculous; the former isn't). In part, this is the same point as before - being a mother/father is more than just creating a child. I mean, people who have been adopted will be aware that they have a "birth mother/father", even if they've never met them, but the adoption will have "deprived" them of that parent....though, in many cases, that will be to their benefit as the birth parents presumably felt unable to tackle parenthood, for whatever reason, while the (adoptive) parents will hopefully be better able to do so. Yes in part I agree with you, I'm not trying to cause a debate. Although with divorce/seperation, it would then be the parent denying the child of themself, rather than the couple not being together anymore. Also, it's not the adoption that deprives the child of a parent, as they will have already left the child's life (for whatever reason) and adoption is just giving them another chance of a relitively normal childhood. Anyway this is way off topic and I've no real interactions with anyone who's been adopted.
Guest MattP Posted 18 July 2013 Posted 18 July 2013 You are without doubt.. the perfect example as to why heterosexuals shouldnt be allowed to mate. You piss weak , fat little gobshite...Make no mistake, if your internet persona was even close to real, someone like me will fvck you up soon. Hetrosexuals not being allowed to mate, think we can all see the flaw in that.... As for the last line, it was fcuking joke directed at your poncy vegetarianism, though you know where to find me. If I was you I'd call your daughter in though. I can't imagine how much of a pink, limp wristed fanny you must be in real life if your own internet persona is close to real. No wonder your daughter can't stand men if she's never had one in her life.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.