gay parents "comparable" to straight parents

[Justin24]

So if they gave a better response would you act the way you all did now or give a different response?

 

[yolland]

I don't see anyone being treated like an outsider because of their views here, Justin. It's really all in how the poster presents themselves. In another recent thread on this subject Irvine and nathan, who disagree completely with one another here, got into a thoroughly respectful debate stretching over several pages, with no personal attacks going on. That's because both of their posts were articulate, well thought through, and well presented. If debate on a topic consists only of rapid-fire, off-the-cuff one liners between people who disagree, it's virtually inevitable that things will get snippy at some point.

 

[BVS]

So if they gave a better response would you act the way you all did now or give a different response?

Let me put it this way.

What if the same response was put in a thread about interacial couples?

 

[Justin24]

Well there is nothing we can do. They have a right to say what they want. Thats all I am going to say.

 

[BVS]

Well there is nothing we can do. They have a right to say what they want.

That's not the point. You made this into a "why do we treat them different" issue.

And that was clearly not what happened. If you can't see that, then I'm sorry.

 

[tommyvill]

what do you think, we should experiment the theory's validity with children?
A child needs to know who to be called his mum and who is to be called his dad.
Are we sure that if he screams in the night "Mum" and both the parents turns her heads?
I'm not against two mature person who decide to live together but when this includes a child...well, I need to know that there's absolutely no problems along with this.
And it has nothing to share with the old conception of homosexuality as a perversion, but it deals with the children's need to grow in a "regular" family in order to avoid further psychological stressings that goes with the adoption...what do you think other children says (i.e. at school when they will know about his parents? I see an enormous risk of emargination)
Who could decide this? Let's face the truth, being parents it's not a right that the law could give you, it's rather a responsability you accept....
I'm sorry about it and I'm sorry that many friends of mine who are gays or lesbians who have a great heart and parent's love toward children can't have child but there's nothing we could do, really...
We can't sacrifice our children for our egoistical willing of having babies, they are not pet...and love someone means to want the best for him, whatever it means, and accepting it...I'm sure you understand...we need more poofs about it...


And behind this there is according to me a wider legal argument, that's usually misunderstood...sorry for it but I'll be boring for a while....;-)
think about it, laws comes after the reality, laws cannot create reality, and I'm sorry but in reality a gay couple cannot give birth to a child...
If it was possible, then a legislation could be possible to legally protect them, but I can't see it happening...
reflect a while, if it was enough a law to create a Nature Right, wouldn't be enough to issue alaw agaist cancer to erase it from the face of earth? The Right to Life is violated with cancer...
but we all know that's not enough...
Same here, there is a discrimination by the nature but hey what we can do?

 

[BVS]

Re: Re: gay parents "comparable" to straight parents

A child needs to know who to be called his mum and who is to be called his dad.

Where is this written?

I knew kids raised by grandparents, kids raised by single parents and they all grew up fine not knowing who to call mom and who to call dad.

 

[tommyvill]

Re: Re: Re: gay parents "comparable" to straight parents

Where is this written?

I knew kids raised by grandparents, kids raised by single parents and they all grew up fine not knowing who to call mom and who to call dad.

Well everybody knows many people here I see huh?
No I was talking about concept not about words, and I was referring to "parents figures": a "dad figure" and a "mum figure" to relate...It can be your grandparents it can be your uncles it can be who you want, but believe me, a child needs it...Open up your eyes...and I'm sure that deeply you can see that too...I'm not talking about tolerance, and I'm sure that you know people who grow well with their grandpas and their single parent but the question is: is it the optimum? did they chooose to grew up that way or were they forced by life happening to go like that? That's the question, IMHO...and they managed to grow up well, I won't doubt it...but if they could choose, what would have they choosen? I'm talking about the Archaetypical figures of the male parent and the female parent, that needs to have a "face" to give the child stability and psichological safety, it's written inside of us, if not demonstrated else...
what about those Archaetypical figures havin two same-sex faces? I would experiment with my children... and as your friend, they've been good enough to overcome this, but we should guarantee everyone, EVERYONE to have the same rights and opportunities...your friends have been strong enough...but is everyone strong enough? We should legally protect the weakest ones, shouldn't we? These are all question that has to be answered before I will pronounce on Homoadoptions...
(please notice I'm only asking, I'm not making any statement now...)
When we give a child to adoption, we should destinate him to an "optimum choose family" or something like that, because we're thinking about his future...we must be sure about whose we're "giving" him...and a single doubt for what I see it's enough...
and about single parents, I'm european, and many E.U. countries have no single parents adoption, and I totally agree with it for the "regular family" need of a child I've talked about above...

And to gays and lesbians who are hunger for parenthood, c'mon don't worry, there are many many ways to give love to children without being their parents...even if I know it's hard!

 

[tommyvill]

Re: Re: Re: Re: gay parents "comparable" to straight parents

what about those Archaetypical figures havin two same-sex faces? I would experiment with my children...

Obviously, I meant: "I WOULDN'T experiment with my children..."

eheheh!!!
we were talking about psychology and the freudian lapsun came up!!
Freud's revenge!

 

[BVS]

Re: Re: Re: Re: gay parents "comparable" to straight parents

Well everybody knows many people here I see huh?
No I was talking about concept not about words, and I was referring to "parents figures": a "dad figure" and a "mum figure" to relate...It can be your grandparents it can be your uncles it can be who you want, but believe me, a child needs it...Open up your eyes...and I'm sure that deeply you can see that too...

Well if it can be in grandparents or uncles then you just answered your own questions.

Just like single parents, same sex parents can offer opposite sex models for their children through these means.

 

[tommyvill]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: gay parents "comparable" to straight parents

lapsun

ups sorry: Lapsus...
I'm tired and I'd better to go to sleep,
it's night in the Old Continent...
byye!!!

 

[BVS]

Tommyvill you can edit your posts with the 'edit' buttom.

 

[tommyvill]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: gay parents "comparable" to straight parents

Well if it can be in grandparents or uncles then you just answered your own questions.

Just like single parents, same sex parents can offer opposite sex models for their children through these means.

They CAN? I need it to be GUARANTEED to accept them to adopt my baby if anything (God forbid!) happens to me!!!
Otherwise
And it must be obvious who is the male and the female, who is the father and the mother, we're talking about a child who has to develop his intelligence, not an einstein who can take the time to think: "hey this guy is a man but he acts like my mum so it's my mum and instead that other guy is my dad..."
For this kind of reasonings I prefer to keep him to mature age, when his personality is forged and he's ready to learn another great, foundamental concept that is the ground itself of our society:
tolerance.
That is a great great thing but needs strong maturity to be fully developed and not turns against itself...
We see in everyday life: tolerance it's not toward every kind of acts...and the controlling of it needs great intelligence...I wouldn't teach my children tolerance first: I would teach him Love first....but I would spend the rest of my parent's life trying to teach him tolerance...

 

[tommyvill]

Tommyvill you can edit your posts with the 'edit' buttom.

ehehehe!!!

Is it that clear that I'm almost a newbye?

thank you bonovoxsupastar!

 

[BVS]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: gay parents "comparable" to straight parents

They CAN? I need it to be GUARANTEED to accept them to adopt my baby if anything (God forbid!) happens to me!!!

Guaranteed?! Oh, please!!!

There are no guarantees. You can't guarantee that a straight couple will love the child the way it needs to be loved, or that they stay together, or that they will be good parents.

 

[VintagePunk]

Apparently some people associate heterosexuality with automatic psychological health and the ability to parent well.

 

[tommyvill]

Guaranteed?! Oh, please!!!

There are no guarantees. You can't guarantee that a straight couple will love the child the way it needs to be loved, or that they stay together, or that they will be good parents.

It's the same old same:
Yes I know it's difficult to choose, but that's the way we should go if we want adoption to be a good one...
And we gotta to come the closest we can to guarantees...
Otherwise it's better not to give the child in adoptions rather than not being sure of the outcomes of it!!
And you're very right!!! If we find sooo hard to guarantee that even heteroadoptions will work out right, why should we bring the whole thing further trying to do things that nature doesn't allow?
And once again, please notice that we're talkin about giving everyone the same chanches, it not automatical that an heterocouple will give the child love and all the rest, but being a "regular" family the child will have less psychological stress in realtion with the other children...
bonovoxsupastar you seem to watch only the parent's point of view, but try to watch it from a child's one...

 

[tommyvill]

Apparently some people associate heterosexuality with automatic psychological health and the ability to parent well.

hehehehe!!
Vintage Punk you made the most classical logical jump of all...
If I've not put it in that way there should be a reason, shouldn't it?
And the reason is that....I didn't wanna tell you this! I know many gays and lesbians (actually one of my best friend is a lesbian) and I'm very faraway from saying that they're not psychologically ok....
I could as well ask you: "hey does Homofamilies automatically guarantee automatic psychological health instead?"...
but I won't do that, I'll try to expalin better my point of view.

The whole question question is to be seen from children point of view what happens? Are adult's right of having baby in whatever condition more important than the children one's of having the best environment that we can give him? We should guarantee the committment of looking for the best for him...
That said, I'm not saying that heterosexuality guarantee psychological health (hey think a bit about me, I'm hetero and I'm totally MAD! ) but rather the opposite. We know that even Heterofamilies can't guarantee "family wellness" so why should we try with things that brings toward the children further psychological and intellectual stress that could keep him from growing the best he can?
When we talk about adoption, we should focus overall on the children point of view, potential adopter give only the disponibility to adopt a child, but it's not up to them to decide whether they'll be parents or not...
And remember that in the first issue we are not gays or lesbians or hetero, we are all human being, some human being likes people of opposite sex and some don't, and the latter are called gays and lesbians but it's just a matter of what you like, not of what you are...this is very very "western way of life", very materialistic: describe people with what they like. But I believe there are no races here, just the human one. We are all the same. Free your mind.

ok sorry for the rant here, cancel the last part wink: ) and get back in the topic!
Bye I go to work!
Tom

 

[BVS]

It's the same old same:
Yes I know it's difficult to choose, but that's the way we should go if we want adoption to be a good one...
And we gotta to come the closest we can to guarantees...
Otherwise it's better not to give the child in adoptions rather than not being sure of the outcomes of it!!

What a crock. Closest we come to guarantees?

Better not to give the child up for adoption? You'd rather them stay in an unwanted home or foster home?

I find your priorities really screwed up.

And you're very right!!! If we find sooo hard to guarantee that even heteroadoptions will work out right, why should we bring the whole thing further trying to do things that nature doesn't allow?

You're confusing procreation and child raising. Just because nature allows one to procreate doesn't mean they can raise a child. Technically speaking many can procreate by age of 13 or 14 doesn't mean I want them raising children. Raising a child takes love, patience, hard work, determination, and strong models for guidance. Sexual orientation does not hinder any of these.

bonovoxsupastar you seem to watch only the parent's point of view, but try to watch it from a child's one...

Think again. Not once have I looked at this from a "parent's point of view". I'm not sure who's posts you are reading. I'm adopted myself and take this issue very seriously from the child's perspective.

 

[BVS]

We know that even Heterofamilies can't guarantee "family wellness" so why should we try with things that brings toward the children further psychological and intellectual stress that could keep him from growing the best he can?

This here...

just negates everything you said below.

And remember that in the first issue we are not gays or lesbians or hetero, we are all human being, some human being likes people of opposite sex and some don't, and the latter are called gays and lesbians but it's just a matter of what you like, not of what you are...this is very very "western way of life", very materialistic: describe people with what they like. But I believe there are no races here, just the human one. We are all the same. Free your mind.


Tom

 

[VintagePunk]

hehehehe!!
Vintage Punk you made the most classical logical jump of all...
If I've not put it in that way there should be a reason, shouldn't it?

No, I've not made a logical jump, I've merely restated what you implied when making your statement about "guarantees."

And the reason is that....I didn't wanna tell you this! I know many gays and lesbians (actually one of my best friend is a lesbian) and I'm very faraway from saying that they're not psychologically ok....

If we're going to get into anecdotal evidence here, I also know gays and lesbians who are just as well adjusted as the most mentally healthy hetero people I know. Conversely, I know of people who were adopted by hetero families whose lives were hellish. In fact, my adult SIL still has scars from when her "loving" hetero adoptive family set her atop a burning stove element, and put cigarettes out on her arms. She didn't exactly have guarantees, did she? However, anecdotal evidence just doesn't cut it, here.

I'd also like to point out here that in a good many cases, any adjustment problems that gays/lesbians have to deal with are a direct result of self-loathing due to the mores and biases imposed upon them by society. It's like a kid being constantly subjected to bullying in the school yard, and then, to add insult to injury, being excluded from play because they're sad, timid, and socially inept.

I could as well ask you: "hey does Homofamilies automatically guarantee automatic psychological health instead?"...
but I won't do that, I'll try to expalin better my point of view.

Of course not. What we should be looking at is overall trends, and by looking at both sets, I think it can be agreed that *some* hetero singles/couples, and *some* homo singles/couples should not adopt, period. When screening for potential adoptive parents, the same strict criteria should be used for both instances, gender and sexuality aside.

The whole question question is to be seen from children point of view what happens? Are adult's right of having baby in whatever condition more important than the children one's of having the best environment that we can give him? We should guarantee the committment of looking for the best for him...

Apply that same argument to the large number of heterosexual people who are so ill-equipped to be parents, it's sad. Should we impose automatic sterilization on them? Where are the children's rights, in this case? Does having the proper plumbing for procreation equate to "the best environment" for the child?

We know that even Heterofamilies can't guarantee "family wellness" so why should we try with things that brings toward the children further psychological and intellectual stress that could keep him from growing the best he can?

Now that's a logical leap, claiming that there will be psychological and intellectual stress on the child of potential homosexual adoptive parents. Study after study from unbiased sources shows this to not be the case. Melon has kindly provided links somewhere in this thread to just a few of them.

I look forward to the day when people will look at science and fact, as opposed to using their own biases and fears to make informed decisions about matters such as this.

And remember that in the first issue we are not gays or lesbians or hetero, we are all human being, some human being likes people of opposite sex and some don't, and the latter are called gays and lesbians but it's just a matter of what you like, not of what you are...this is very very "western way of life", very materialistic: describe people with what they like. But I believe there are no races here, just the human one. We are all the same. Free your mind.

Excuse me for being cynical, but your message of oneness and unity is laughable to me, considering that you're advocating the exclusion of a segment of population from parenting, based upon the biology of who they love and feel sexual attraction for.

 

[diamond]

http://www.pfox.org/images/PFOX-Large_04.jpg


http://www.pfox.org/Testimonials.asp

 

[BVS]

What does that have to do with the issue we're talking about?

 

[adrball]

This thread has been quite active, so I got tempted back in.

I can't believe I took the time time to read this thread.

It's just not natural

I just want to say, why is it that someone who has different belife such as arball get treated as an outsider?

If the person came in and made at least an attempt to make an intelligent argument it would have been different. But they didn't they came in and called the thread a waste and just chalked it up to not being "natural". Why because it didn't fit in their box? You can do better than that.

The purpose of my post was to share where I stand on this issue, not really to elaborate on why. Expressing reasoniing behind what I thought, on the belief that it may lead others to change theirs, was not all on my agenda, so why should I?

I'm normally a person that is open to listening to differing opinions and I am not someone who will be ashamed to change my own standpoint if I believe someone else has made a valid point that I had not previously considered.

But I haven't seen anything here to change my mind, so my view remains unchanged. Even now it seems most people are really of their own firm opinion (if indeed differing to mine).

Let me put it this way.

What if the same response was put in a thread about interacial couples?

I don't believe this is not natural. Animals have always ventured across the planet and IMO it was enevitable that people of differene races would meet.

But it's great to see important issues openly discussed. I chose not to fully partipate because other things were of a higher priority to me.

 

[Irvine511]

http://www.pfox.org/Testimonials.asp

my heart goes out to each and every one of these poor people.

i hope they can find their way out of this abusive world of religiously-based lies and manipulation and into true peace and acceptance of themselves. whatever that might be.

the desperation in these testimonials speaks voumes.

and has nothing to do with gay parenting.

back to the subject.

 

[diamond]

i dunno.
there seems to be a lot of evidence in some of those testimonies..and most gay guys i know were quite randy, never being able to maintain a LTR.

soo...i don't think this bodes well for bringing up children..same as a single parent..either straight or gay.

ta-ta

dbs

 

[BVS]

The purpose of my post was to share where I stand on this issue, not really to elaborate on why. Expressing reasoniing behind what I thought, on the belief that it may lead others to change theirs, was not all on my agenda, so why should I?

But that's the nature of this thread. It's about discussion and debate.

Just like "Democrats suck", "Republicans are evil", or "Christian conservatives are brainwashed" one liners without any reasoning or explanation don't go over so well in here.

I don't believe this is not natural. Animals have always ventured across the planet and IMO it was enevitable that people of differene races would meet.

Well I'm glad, but that's not the point. But as we're using animals to prove what's natural and what's not, there have been plenty of cases of homosexuality found in animals, but not many of adoption. Does that make adoption unnatural?

 

[BVS]

i dunno.
there seems to be a lot of evidence in some of those testimonies..and most gay guys i know were quite randy, never being able to maintain a LTR.

soo...i don't think this bodes well for bringing up children..same as a single parent..either straight or gay.

ta-ta

dbs

I could give you plenty of evidence and testimonies of straight men who have never had a relationship longer than 3 months and they are in their mid 30's and 40's.

But I know you aren't much for looking at true evidence and seeing both sides of the coin.

 

[Irvine511]

i dunno.
there seems to be a lot of evidence in some of those testimonies..and most gay guys i know were quite randy, never being able to maintain a LTR.

soo...i don't think this bodes well for bringing up children..same as a single parent..either straight or gay.

ta-ta

dbs

hmmm ... could it be that the difficulty gay men have in maintaining a LTR (at least in your anecdotal story) possibly be attributed to homophobia and/or lack of gay marriage or at least civil unions? it seems funny that one would use stereotypes to combat gay adoption when you'd simultaneously deny them the very tools one would need to combat such stereotypes.

and what about lesbians?

and what about 50% of straight marriages that end in divorce?

and what about the amount of husbands who cheat on their wives?

etc, etc.

 

[diamond]

i think another reason marriage should not be re defined is that gay guys tend to wander/stray much more than straight fellows.


in my 20s..i used to get hit on gay guys all the time...offered money etc..and they would try and sell me on the idea i was gay etc..it was creepy.

dbs