I Freed My Mind....HAVE YOU - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-04-2003, 01:32 PM   #31
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Zooropa
II'm also concerned over the party's gay rights platform. While I don't believe that gay couples should be allowed to adopt children, I see nothing wrong with acknowledging a union between them, with all the rights and priviledges that a traditional married couple recieves.
Gay couples can adopt in 46 states and gay individuals can in 3. Only Florida bans it altogether, banning both homosexuals and bisexuals theoretically. All 50 allow gays to be foster parents.

(Note: I am unsure about this above statistic, particularly involving couples; all I know is that Florida is the only one that bans it altogether.)

In studies, children raised by homosexuals are perfectly normal and well-adjusted. The only problems noted was the flack these children can get from bigoted heterosexuals who seem to have a problem with it. And fears about "turning the children gay" is fearmongering rhetoric. It isn't happening.

I think all state "weddings" should be called "civil unions," whether it is gay or straight, and let religion perform "marriage" ceremonies. The fact of the matter is that gays already *can* get married, depending on the religion. It is the state recognition that is all one is after; religion is and always will be free to restrict who they will marry and which marriages they will recognize. The Catholic Church does it all the time; all you Protestants are fornicators living in sin.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 01:43 PM   #32
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond

i think that by glorifying God is how man finds true joy and everlasting hapiness.

Diamond
Agreed!
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 01:51 PM   #33
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 05:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon

all you Protestants are fornicators living in sin.

Melon
That makes it sound so much more exciting than it is (much of the time).
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 02:01 PM   #34
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 08:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Gay couples can adopt in 46 states and gay individuals can in 3. Only Florida bans it altogether, banning both homosexuals and bisexuals theoretically. All 50 allow gays to be foster parents.

(Note: I am unsure about this above statistic, particularly involving couples; all I know is that Florida is the only one that bans it altogether.)

In studies, children raised by homosexuals are perfectly normal and well-adjusted. The only problems noted was the flack these children can get from bigoted heterosexuals who seem to have a problem with it. And fears about "turning the children gay" is fearmongering rhetoric. It isn't happening.

I think all state "weddings" should be called "civil unions," whether it is gay or straight, and let religion perform "marriage" ceremonies. The fact of the matter is that gays already *can* get married, depending on the religion. It is the state recognition that is all one is after; religion is and always will be free to restrict who they will marry and which marriages they will recognize. The Catholic Church does it all the time; all you Protestants are fornicators living in sin.

Melon
Wether or not religion is ok with gay marraige is, imo, irrelevant. I'm an atheist so.... civil recognition is the one that counts, although I'm unsure, I believe vermont is the only state that recogizes gay marraiges as legit. This needs to be brought to the national level, and legislation needs to be put through on the federal level that will recognize gay marraige.
Adoption, I've seen studies that suggest the exact opposite of what you said. Either way, i feel that the biggest problem facing america today is family values. All studies have shown that a child with both a mother and a father has a far better chance of being well-adjusted that a child who lives in a single parent home. Are there exceptions? Sure, but as a general rule, a child has a much better chance of success if they are raised by a mother and father. I just don't feel that a gay (same-sex) couple can give a child what he/she needs. Just my opinion, although like i said earlier, sociologists are somewhat divided on the issue. It's not a question of "turning the child gay". That doesn't happen, you right on that. You are either born gay, or not. (OK- note to all, I'm am not homophobic, a bigot, or whatever other name you can think of. the following statement may seem malicious,but it is not ment to be that way, just a statement of what I percieve to be fact and research that I have looked at on the subject....) Homosexuality is not natural in nature. Some scientists will go as far as to say that it is a genetic defect. Is that true? I dunno, although it seems to make sense. However, with that being said, it does not mean that homosexuals are any less human then a straight person. They certainly deserve to be treated equaly accross the board. However, IMO, it is not appropriate to raise a child in a gay household.
Believe me, I've though long and hard about the subject, but I haven't seen anything that has led me to accept gay adoption. Hopefully, that will change.

note* I have several gay friends who are well aware of my beliefs. It should be stated that they don't think I should be able to adopt either!
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 02:04 PM   #35
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:37 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond

i think that by glorifying God is how man finds true joy and everlasting hapiness.

Diamond

Agreed.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 02:14 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Zooropa
Homosexuality is not natural in nature. Some scientists will go as far as to say that it is a genetic defect. Is that true? I dunno, although it seems to make sense.
Well, you're wrong right there. In fact, just recently, Darwin's theory of sexual selection was proven wrong, due to lesbian monkeys in Japan. The Bush I Administration funded a study on gay rams, after the agriculture industry was having problems of rams not only not copulating with females, but only amongst themselves. In fact, not only is it highly prevalent in the animal kingdom, but it has been present in all of recorded history. In fact, it has led much of anthropology to believe that man is inherently "bisexual," and that exclusive heterosexuality is a cultural construct. I think many of us would disagree with that, but I find it interesting, considering it, in effect, establishes bisexuality as the baseline of "normal."

Secondly, assuming it was a "genetic defect," I wouldn't start legislating on that. The average human is born with eight, most in "junk DNA." Not only is "genetic defect" a loaded term with a Nazi-era "eugenics" connotation, but it flat out assumes that there is a "normal" baseline--when there isn't.

Of course, in an "ideal world," there would be two parents (a mother and a father), but as it stands, we have lots of children up for adoption with *no* parents. I think a loving household of two gay parents is much better than a single household or none at all, yes?

Anyhow, you're free to disagree. I always enjoy an intelligent conversation on any subject.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 02:33 PM   #37
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 08:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Well, you're wrong right there. In fact, just recently, Darwin's theory of sexual selection was proven wrong, due to lesbian monkeys in Japan. The Bush I Administration funded a study on gay rams, after the agriculture industry was having problems of rams not only not copulating with females, but only amongst themselves. In fact, not only is it highly prevalent in the animal kingdom, but it has been present in all of recorded history. In fact, it has led much of anthropology to believe that man is inherently "bisexual," and that exclusive heterosexuality is a cultural construct. I think many of us would disagree with that, but I find it interesting, considering it, in effect, establishes bisexuality as the baseline of "normal."

Secondly, assuming it was a "genetic defect," I wouldn't start legislating on that. The average human is born with eight, most in "junk DNA." Not only is "genetic defect" a loaded term with a Nazi-era "eugenics" connotation, but it flat out assumes that there is a "normal" baseline--when there isn't.

Of course, in an "ideal world," there would be two parents (a mother and a father), but as it stands, we have lots of children up for adoption with *no* parents. I think a loving household of two gay parents is much better than a single household or none at all, yes?

Anyhow, you're free to disagree. I always enjoy an intelligent conversation on any subject.

Melon
Opening up my eyes melon. Just found the study about rams you alluded to. I was unaware. Still, for now, I'll stick w/ my beliefs until I've seen more exaustive studies, particular refering to humans. As you know, no matter what the study, there are often influential factors that were not involved in the study. More research needs to be done.

I agree w/ your "Ideal world" arguement. I alluded to this in another thread though, I'm not for the band-aid approach to solve problems. I want to get in on the ground level to fix the problems. We need to educate youths on sex, and you know what, teach them how to use contraceptives. I rather have a 15 year old having sex w/ a condom then not. W/ that said, parents need to be involved in their childrens lives ALL THE TIME. THEY NEED TO BUG THE HECK OUT OF THEIR KIDS. They also need to treat their kuds w/ respect while doing so. None of this because "I said so". They need to teach the children about the dangers and consequences of sex at an early age, and do everything they can to protect their children from these dangers because children inevitably rebel and engage in risky behaviors.

There are countless other issues which I could debate/agree w you on for hours that follow the above logic, But I'll spare you the boredom.

Now, I'm off to find more info on the "natural homosexuality/bisexuality" arguement............
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 02:59 PM   #38
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 08:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Zooropa
I think it's important to here the other side of the arguement, if only to confirm your own convictions. Ideological arguements are not winnable, perse, and it's also important to remember that to exclude the other side, or to dismiss the otherside is very dangerous.

I think in the end, it really comes down to neither side being absolutly right or wrong. The purpose of debate should be to explain yourside, and in the end hope that the otherside has taken your views into account, and questioned their own beliefs, to see if they still hold true.


Being here also reawakened a increased interest in all things political that had been somewhat dormant (the daily stuff w/children, spouses, work). Or I got involved in discussions here because of an increase of attention.
It has also created a renewed research interest.
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 03:31 PM   #39
War Child
 
Vorsprung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 976
Local Time: 02:37 PM
I don't seem to understand the importance of the question whether homosexuality is natural or not. There actually are gay scientists who say that gay behaviour is not natural or otherwise somehing strictly human, since about all animals with homosexual behavior only display this behavior when there's some kind of lack of partners of the other sex.

But what does it matter? Bungeejumping/rollercoasters for example also brings pleasure to many people and it that's also not natural....
What's this obsession with natural=good????? Why??? Sure it's a great marketing instrument. ("Made out of natural ingredients only so no synthetical shit"). What a bullshit! Opium is natural and so are many of the world's most deadly venoms, not to forget: bullshit
__________________
Vorsprung is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 03:39 PM   #40
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 08:37 AM
natural implies "goodness" so long as something that is "unatural" doesn't prove to be more beneficial. Or something like that.
The question of homosexuality being natural isn't an arguement over good or bad perse, but specificaly in regards to adoption, a homosexual couple has not proven to be an equal or better situation to raise a child then in a straight marraige.
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 03:47 PM   #41
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:37 AM
Actually, one of the studies said that children raised by gay children were actually "better adjusted" than children in straight families. Less guilt and less archetypical gender assignments thrown at the children.

Considering that over half of all marriages end in divorce, I would say that the heterosexual institution is an utter failure on its own, wouldn't you?

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 03:54 PM   #42
Acrobat
 
Zooropa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, New York, USA
Posts: 421
Local Time: 08:37 AM
Marriage as an institution fails as a result of two things (IMO), one is the marriage is entered into for the wrong reasons, i.e. comfort, convience, youthfull bliss. Second, I feel is a product of this generation, the self gratification generation. Couples are not interested in working through problems they may have, this takes time and effort. They feel it is easier just to quit the relationship all together.
__________________
Zooropa is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 04:46 PM   #43
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Zooropa
Marriage as an institution fails as a result of two things (IMO), one is the marriage is entered into for the wrong reasons, i.e. comfort, convience, youthfull bliss. Second, I feel is a product of this generation, the self gratification generation. Couples are not interested in working through problems they may have, this takes time and effort. They feel it is easier just to quit the relationship all together.
I think that is something that both ends of the sexuality spectrum will agree upon.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 04:59 PM   #44
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
Considering that over half of all marriages end in divorce
I recently came across an article than questioned this statistic. It is one that has been thrown around in the press so often that everyone just assumes its true. The article found studies which suggested a divorce rate of anywhere from 10% to 28%.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 03-04-2003, 05:09 PM   #45
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:37 AM
what is the saying about stats, figures
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com