Same Sex Marriage Thread - Part III - Page 33 - 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 07-04-2013, 12:45 PM   #481
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 05:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Irvine511
the quality if the parenting has to do with the individuals involved rather than their sexual orientation.
This statement is a little questionable -- we've discussed in other threads the varying benefits of gender essentialism, and I do believe that gender is important -- but I can also see your point that two loving parents are better than one, regardless of gender. I was visiting a clinic in Africa with some friends a few years ago where babies were crying -- parents had died of AIDS. The nurse said that developmentally, what those babies needed was someone to hold them. The light went on for me in terms of the fact that a baby's desperate need to be held and cared for has no gender-or-orientation-specific need. The need for loving, positive gender models will come later; those babies needed to be held and loved now. And there weren't enough arms. So for me, the more arms the better -- gay or straight.

Quote:
What I do know is that all my LG friends who have children are doing the best they can
My wife and I are friends with a lesbian couple who conceived via IVF and have twins. The couple has their challenges (who doesn't?), but I can attest to the fact that they're doing the best they can to raise their kids and love them the best way they know how.
__________________

__________________
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 12:48 PM   #482
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 10:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
I have two very close couple friends who have children. One is a lesbian couple who used a sperm donor, the other is a gay male couple who adopted a child from an unmarried teenager.

Both couples spent at least 3 years trying to get a child. If it was all about the couple, or if it were an exercise in self esteem, I think they'd have given up long before 3 years. Further, life as a childless adult has enormous advantages -- would someone really give up a reasonably comfortable life of adult freedoms in order to prove some kind of point?

I think as a rule, as Dieman has said, because it is so challenging to create a gay family, those that do are already highly self-selecting and highly motivated and have really thought this through. Gay couples don't get pregnant by accident, or because someone's biological clock is ticking.

All that said, I'm sure some gay parents aren't good parents. We also know a lot of crappy straight parents. My guess that, like the quality of a relationship, the quality if the parenting has to do with the individuals involved rather than their sexual orientation.

However, there are likely unique challenges to children of G/L couples, especially if they live in areas where there aren't many other children like them. While that's society's fault for fostering and encouraging a hostile environment hostile to LGBT people and their families, that's also something such parents know they have to deal with. What I do know is that all my LG friends who have children are doing the best they absolutely can, and probably 75% of those children were adopted. I can't imagine we'd rather have had those kids in foster care, or for those children conceived through donation or IVF to never have existed at all.

Many mothers looking to put a child up for adoption will actively seek out gay couples precisely because they are so motivated.
And lastly, even if it hasn't worked out well for your aunt, don't those children deserve to have the added security of married parents? with.
All of this makes quite a bit of sense on one hand. It's tough to argue against the success you described. But I would be more curious what this generation of children (the ones being currently raised by gay/lesbian parents) will say after they've grown up - since they are, and should be, the focus of this discussion. This issue is not about what is best for homosexuals, it is about what is best for children.
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 01:00 PM   #483
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 12:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post

All of this makes quite a bit of sense on one hand. It's tough to argue against the success you described. But I would be more curious what this generation of children (the ones being currently raised by gay/lesbian parents) will say after they've grown up - since they are, and should be, the focus of this discussion. This issue is not about what is best for homosexuals, it is about what is best for children.

If I had time is respond to your other post, but I don't at the moment.

As for this, it's safe to say that lesbians in particular have been raising children in significant number since the 1980s. Many of these children are grown up and from what studies we have, they are doing just fine.

I can understand that you may have this notion of an ideal in your mind, and maybe we can unpack that later, but would you argue that becomes a strong enough basis upon which to create laws to prevent gays and lesbians from marrying and having children? That you know what's better for them than they do?

Finally, the "best for the children" argument was one that was used against interracial children. The thinking even into the 1980s was that it was unfair to create a half black, half white child, caught between two cultures. How selfish of the parents to foist that on a child!

Seems different today, no?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 01:18 PM   #484
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 10:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
If I had time is respond to your other post, but I don't at the moment.

As for this, it's safe to say that lesbians in particular have been raising children in significant number since the 1980s. Many of these children are grown up and from what studies we have, they are doing just fine.
I won't ask for sources, I'll trust you're accurate here. If this is true - I would find it a bit surprising.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
I can understand that you may have this notion of an ideal in your mind, and maybe we can unpack that later, but would you argue that becomes a strong enough basis upon which to create laws to prevent gays and lesbians from marrying and having children? That you know what's better for them than they do?

Well - I treat this issue as I do all issues. I do my best to align my conscience and my democratic vote with that of the Kingdom of Heaven, as described throughout the New Testament - it sounds hokey I know, but that's where I'm at. The closer something is to that - the better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Finally, the "best for the children" argument was one that was used against interracial children. The thinking even into the 1980s was that it was unfair to create a half black, half white child, caught between two cultures. How selfish of the parents to foist that on a child!

Seems different today, no?
As you do not see how gay/lesbian marriages compares to group marriages - I do not see gay/lesbian adoptions compare to interracial adoptions. I'm sharing my support for a model (male father and female mother) - either role can be filled by a person of any race.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 01:22 PM   #485
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 12:45 PM
i started a separate thread on same-sex adoption.

i also need to go.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 01:29 PM   #486
Self-righteous bullshitter
 
BoMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Soviet Canuckistan — Socialist paradise
Posts: 16,667
Local Time: 01:45 PM
This young man, raised by two moms, had such a horrible childhood, and that has translated into an unproductive, crime-ridden adult life.

Zach Wahls Speaks About Family - YouTube
__________________

BoMac is offline  
Old 07-05-2013, 04:15 AM   #487
Galeonbroad
 
Galeongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,773
Local Time: 06:45 PM
Sorry guys, moving to the other thread....
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraceRyan View Post
And if U2 EVER did Hawkmoon live....and the version from the Lovetown Tour, my uterus would leave my body and fling itself at Bono - for realz.
Don't worry baby, it's gonna be all right. Uncertainty can be a guiding light...
Galeongirl is offline  
Old 07-05-2013, 10:27 AM   #488
War Child
 
Dfit00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 893
Local Time: 01:45 PM
I just noticed that same sex couples can now legally process immigration documents in the US when they marry a foreigner.

Very good advancement in my opinion.
__________________
Dfit00 is offline  
Old 07-06-2013, 04:34 PM   #489
Refugee
 
PennyLanePHINS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NY
Posts: 1,062
Local Time: 12:45 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3542904.html

Costa Rica may have unexpectedly legalized it. Apparently it was written into a bill by a liberal lawmaker, and conservatives signed without paying attention, which is incredibly funny. The president signed the bill, and even though she is more conservative said she wouldn't oppose same-sex unions, so I wonder what will happen now.
__________________
PennyLanePHINS is offline  
Old 07-06-2013, 06:01 PM   #490
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 01:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PennyLanePHINS View Post
Costa Rica Accidentally Approves Same-Sex Unions

Costa Rica may have unexpectedly legalized it. Apparently it was written into a bill by a liberal lawmaker, and conservatives signed without paying attention, which is incredibly funny. The president signed the bill, and even though she is more conservative said she wouldn't oppose same-sex unions, so I wonder what will happen now.
That is funny! Goes to show that politicians do not always know what they are doing.

I could see this being challenged and thrown out if there's enough plausible evidence that the lawmakers were deceived. Now if they just weren't reading the law, that's their problem and they should start looking for new jobs.
__________________
Pearl is offline  
Old 07-07-2013, 05:53 AM   #491
Galeonbroad
 
Galeongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,773
Local Time: 06:45 PM
They signed something without reading it properly?

If that's truly the case, they can't really bitch about it, right? Since they accepted it themselves..
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraceRyan View Post
And if U2 EVER did Hawkmoon live....and the version from the Lovetown Tour, my uterus would leave my body and fling itself at Bono - for realz.
Don't worry baby, it's gonna be all right. Uncertainty can be a guiding light...
Galeongirl is offline  
Old 07-07-2013, 06:39 AM   #492
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,543
Local Time: 06:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearl View Post
That is funny! Goes to show that politicians do not always know what they are doing.

I could see this being challenged and thrown out if there's enough plausible evidence that the lawmakers were deceived. Now if they just weren't reading the law, that's their problem and they should start looking for new jobs.
I don't think they were deceived. They were probably so set in their traditional mindset that they didn't take into account that 'no discrimination' also means no discrimination on sex and sexual orientation. The new law apparently contains the following phrase:
Quote:
“The right to recognition without discrimination contrary to human dignity, social and economic effects of domestic partnerships that constitute publicly, notoriously unique and stable, with legal capacity for marriage for more than three years”
So yes, that can be interpreted as allowing same-sex unions.
Yay for Costa Rica!
__________________
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 07-07-2013, 06:47 AM   #493
Galeonbroad
 
Galeongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,773
Local Time: 06:45 PM
This is my fave radio station's hit of the week. First time I heard it. Pretty impressive that he dares to speak up on it as a rapper.

MACKLEMORE & RYAN LEWIS - SAME LOVE feat. MARY LAMBERT (OFFICIAL VIDEO) - YouTube
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraceRyan View Post
And if U2 EVER did Hawkmoon live....and the version from the Lovetown Tour, my uterus would leave my body and fling itself at Bono - for realz.
Don't worry baby, it's gonna be all right. Uncertainty can be a guiding light...
Galeongirl is offline  
Old 07-07-2013, 07:30 AM   #494
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 55,042
Local Time: 04:45 AM
I hate that song so much that it almost makes me want to be homophobic.

 
Joking of course. Horrible song in my opinion, but if changes any minds...
__________________
cobl04 is offline  
Old 07-07-2013, 10:55 AM   #495
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 01:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Popmartijn View Post
I don't think they were deceived. They were probably so set in their traditional mindset that they didn't take into account that 'no discrimination' also means no discrimination on sex and sexual orientation. The new law apparently contains the following phrase:

They weren't but they make it sound like they were. But they really should've donetheir jobs and read the law over carefully before signing it.

Oh well, so what? Costa Rica has joined the 21st century!
__________________

__________________
Pearl 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 12:45 PM.


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