Should homosexual couples be able to adopt kids? - Page 5 - 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 11-14-2002, 06:16 PM   #61
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha


There are some things I would miss.
maybe the new things, would make them irrelivant.*


we could get you a foster baby named Heather.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 06:23 PM   #62
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Not George Lucas
I wouldn't have everyone be gay. There'd be some heteros, but they'd be the minority.

IMHO, that's where God went wrong.
I just figured it out.

If Jews are "The Chosen People" and they are a persecuted minority.

Then, gays, the persecuted minority, are the "chosen orientation"
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 06:29 PM   #63
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 09:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Not George Lucas
IMHO, that's where God went wrong.
I'm glad God isn't looking for advice.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 06:31 PM   #64
Acrobat
 
Not George Lucas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Bend, IN USA
Posts: 399
Local Time: 05:57 PM
__________________
Not George Lucas is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 06:55 PM   #65
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 10:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Not George Lucas
I wouldn't have everyone be gay. There'd be some heteros, but they'd be the minority.

Well then, there wouldn't be much adjustment for me. The majority of my friends are gay & lesbian. I'm the token hetero gal.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 07:10 PM   #66
New Yorker
 
Achtung_Bebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Beneath the noise, below the din
Posts: 2,859
Local Time: 11:57 AM
now there's a solution to rapid population growth
__________________
Achtung_Bebe is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 09:18 PM   #67
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 09:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by joyfulgirl
I'm the token hetero gal.
But you're damn cute, so maybe I wouldn't miss too much...

__________________
martha is offline  
Old 11-15-2002, 01:21 AM   #68
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 04:57 AM
Just a quick response to melon

Where you quoted me, I'm not sure if I made my point clearly and do want to clarify what I said. Where I stated not ALL homosexual couples will be suitable parents, doesn't mean that I dont agree with them adopting ever, because I do think there is absolutely no legitimate reason why they shouldn't based on their sexuality. I dont think 'ALL' couples regardless of gender and sexuality would make suitable parents, but that is a given. I hope the wrong impression wasn't given from my reply. I dont like any form of discrimination and in cases where couples are refused adoption based on sexuality alone, that in my view, is discriminatory. The decisions should always be based on the couple's expected suitablilty to raise a healthy happy child.

I dont think this was any clearer lol, but I hope no offence was taken.

__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 11-15-2002, 02:14 AM   #69
The Fly
 
pr0digy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 83
Local Time: 03:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Not George Lucas
[ignorant white trash]

Them homo-sexuals is filthy disgusting perverts, all tryin to take over the world! Any homo-sexual couple tryin to adopt a kid is tryin to corrupt his young mind! They's all goin ta hell!

[/ignorant white trash]

In reality homosexuality is not a learned behavior. There has never been any study establishing that as fact. Most studies, however, show that homosexuality is like left-handedness. It's not the norm, but it happens. It's not a bad thing.

Studies also have shown that children raised by homosexual parents tend to be more loved and more well-rounded than adopted by married couples.

Furthermore, heterosexual white males make up the vast majority of child molestors, not homosexuals, as some may have us believe.

It is my belief that it is better for a child to be raised by a gay couple than to be bounced around in a foster home or aborted. If you ask me, I think the world would be a much better place if homosexuality was the norm.
Why am I noticing a trend here?
Why is it that "heterosexual parents" that adopt a child are being portrayed badly?

What I'm saying is that the people that are approving of homosexual parenting are making out like heterosexual parents will be "no good" or wont love them as much as a homosexual parent.

This is absolute bullshit, you could be just as likely to have ratbag homosexual parents than heterosexual ones!

And this leads me back to my point again that a child will receive more love from it's bilogical parents than from a homosexual couple. There is no substitute for the natural mother and fathers love for their naturally born child. Argue all you want, this is my opinion, and I stand by it.

But then before you flame me again, please realise that I am NOT saying that a child that is adopted - regardless of who the parents are - WONT be loved, I'm just saying that there is no substitute for the love of the original parents. However some natural parents are ratbags and do abandon their children, treat them like shit and leave them for adoption by others. But in the case where you have natural parents that love their children opposed to adopted parents that also love them, I believe that the natural parents can offer "something" that the adopted ones cannot. And because of this, this is why I believe that homosexual couples that offer love versus natural parent couples that offer love, the natural parents will be able to raise the child better and offer more love, than the homosexual ones.

Anyway that's my opinion and everyone is different with their opinions, but this vibe I'm getting that all homosexual parents are wonderful loving people in order to make heterosexual ones look bad I don't like at all. But I'm sure many of you didn't intend to give off this vibe in your opinions. And again I state that I do NOT hate homosexuals and I do NOT prejudice them, but I disagree with their lifestyle and the things this lifestyle does and can involve.

If a child is adopted by either heterosexual or homosexual parents, the chances of the parents being ratbags are just as equal for both the sexualities in my opinion.
__________________
pr0digy is offline  
Old 11-15-2002, 07:38 AM   #70
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by pr0digy
[B]

And this leads me back to my point again that a child will receive more love from it's bilogical parents than from a homosexual couple. There is no substitute for the natural mother and fathers love for their naturally born child. Argue all you want, this is my opinion, and I stand by it.
I think you're going to take a lot of heat for this if there's anyone on the forum who was adopted, or anyone who has adopted a child--and I hope you do. Many people--I would venture to say most people, even--who choose to adopt a child do so at great financial and emotional cost. Sometimes people have to go around the world to adopt a child because adoptions are so difficult in the States. Don't tell me, or them, that there is "no substitute" for the love of so-called "natural parents."

Love is love--it need not be accompanied by the "appropriate" biology. It's completely unfair, close-minded, and simply WRONG to state that something is missing from the relationship between a child and his or her adoptive parents, assuming of course that they are good and loving parents. That's ridiculous. You have every right to stand by your opinion, but even as a liberal--hey FYM conservatives, check this out--I believe it is grossly wrong and narrow-minded.

(see, we silly liberals CAN make a a strong condemnation against moral stances we find to be wrong... )
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 11-15-2002, 08:44 AM   #71
The Fly
 
pr0digy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 83
Local Time: 03:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora


I think you're going to take a lot of heat for this if there's anyone on the forum who was adopted, or anyone who has adopted a child--and I hope you do. Many people--I would venture to say most people, even--who choose to adopt a child do so at great financial and emotional cost. Sometimes people have to go around the world to adopt a child because adoptions are so difficult in the States. Don't tell me, or them, that there is "no substitute" for the love of so-called "natural parents."

Love is love--it need not be accompanied by the "appropriate" biology. It's completely unfair, close-minded, and simply WRONG to state that something is missing from the relationship between a child and his or her adoptive parents, assuming of course that they are good and loving parents. That's ridiculous. You have every right to stand by your opinion, but even as a liberal--hey FYM conservatives, check this out--I believe it is grossly wrong and narrow-minded.

(see, we silly liberals CAN make a a strong condemnation against moral stances we find to be wrong... )
yeah point taken, I'm sorry if I offended or pissed anyone off with my opinion, I'll shutup now and keep it to myself

peace.
__________________
pr0digy is offline  
Old 11-15-2002, 09:13 AM   #72
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 09:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by pr0digy

I'm just saying that there is no substitute for the love of the original parents. ... But in the case where you have natural parents that love their children opposed to adopted parents that also love them, I believe that the natural parents can offer "something" that the adopted ones cannot.


DUH!!!!!

What everyone jumped on your ass for was your comments like "disgusting" and "immoral." No duh natural parents are the preference, but most adopted kids don't have that luxury any more. Nice backpedal.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 11-15-2002, 02:59 PM   #73
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,270
Local Time: 11:57 AM
Not to mention, pr0digy, nobody here is saying that only heterosexual parents who have kids will be horrible parents. Sorry if that's how some of us were coming off-that's not what we were getting at.

All we're saying about heterosexual parents is that homophobic people will sit there and say that kids are better off not having parents of the same sex, that same-sex couples cannot raise kids appropriately, and we're saying that's not true-the divorce rate is so high nowadays among heterosexuals, and we've seen some heterosexual parents that we wouldn't trust with our kids for even 5 minutes, let alone the rest of their lives. And we know that there can be homosexual parents that are like that as well-there's bad parents on both sides.

We also know that there are both heterosexual and homosexual parents out there who do an absolutely superb job raising their children. I come from a heterosexual parent household, and I think my parents have done a great job in raising my sister and me. And I have friends whose parents do a fabulous job raising them as well.

All people have been saying is that it doesn't matter what the sexual preference of the parents is, a person's sexual preference is not what determines whether or not they are fit to be a parent for a kid.

And all that is what you were trying to say in your last post, I believe, so we're on equal footing here with that. .

By the way, deep, that thing you said about the Jews being the chosen people and homosexuals being the chosen orientation-that's interesting. . I should write that down somewhere.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
Old 11-15-2002, 04:42 PM   #74
New Yorker
 
Achtung_Bebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Beneath the noise, below the din
Posts: 2,859
Local Time: 11:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
All we're saying about heterosexual parents is that homophobic people will sit there and say that kids are better off not having parents of the same sex, that same-sex couples cannot raise kids appropriately, and we're saying that's not true-
This is beginning to aggrivate me... you say it so casually... "yes, you homophobic people will just sit there and condemn" in so many words.... This is your opposing view, I guess it's easy to amount it to homophobic. But just to clarify (since it seems I must) my best friend for the past 8 years revealed to me a year ago that she is gay, and I still love her all the same... and I would say with confidence that most people who feel that homosexuals should not adopt say this not out of homophobic attitudes but due to other, respectable reasons which I guess some people choose not to hear. I have heard the opposing side to my view, and I respect it and understand what is being said... but it is still my belief that allowing homosexuals to adopt is taking nature into man's own hands and manipulating it in order to suit our needs... I do not think this would be the proper solution to the oversupply of children which has been mentioned. I do think that the solution lies in man himself... This was not always an issue in society. You cannot deny that standards have been lowered, it has been made so easy to disregard a child, primarily due to the legalization of murder, which society prefers to call abortion. Also a factor is the number of teenage pregnancies -- I think the problem arises in these areas of lowered standards. Adoption remains a beautiful thing... couples who perhaps cannot produce children are able to raise a life.... something beautiful is made out of something untimely. Rather than twisting nature in order to suit ourselves, I think it's time the standards are raised. I do not think it is impossible to raise standards so long as enough people who feel the same come together.
__________________
Achtung_Bebe is offline  
Old 11-15-2002, 04:50 PM   #75
Offishul Kitteh Doctor
Forum Moderator
 
bonosloveslave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Taking care of kitties
Posts: 9,655
Local Time: 12:57 PM
Lilly's turn

So when are you gonna fill us in on your perspective Lilly?

*Enquiring minds want to know*
__________________

__________________
bonosloveslave [at] interference.com
bonosloveslave 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 12:57 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