equality blooms with spring, pt. II - Page 23 - 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 11-22-2009, 08:49 PM   #441
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
So, you're arguing that a child having and being raised by biological parents does not, in any way, strengthen the bonds?
No, in fact there is evidence that adopted children can often feel a bond that biological children don't, there is never a question if they were an accident or burden because they were "chosen", that their parents went out their way financially and emotionally "have" them.

Yes there are medical issues and physical issues such as Deep mentioned, but the "bonds" can go both ways.
__________________

BVS is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 08:53 PM   #442
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
So you see no difference between, for example, being borne to a crack whore in Harlem as opposed to a regular middle class family?

Get real.
That's not at all what I was saying. I think you're confused as to what question AEON asked. AEON proposed a question in which he said all four of these couples are upstanding citizens with secure financial situations, and then asked me to rank them as to what is "optimal." That was the question I thought you were referring to. I don't recall Harlem crack addicts being asked about before this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Are any of those ways "better" than another - or are you suggesting all of the ways are essentially the same?
You said they're all good people with secure homes, why do we need to go any further? Those are by far the most important factors, aren't they?
__________________

phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 08:53 PM   #443
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
So you see no difference between, for example, being borne to a crack whore in Harlem as opposed to a regular middle class family?

Get real.
I'm assuming you missed AEON's setup with "all things being equal". Or did you just choose to ignore again?
BVS is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 08:55 PM   #444
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
A_Wanderer, you are a self-proclaimed scientist - certainly you can follow the discussion to see it is currently revolving around what is optimal and not merely what is acceptable.
I can see that you want to treat same-sex couples as inherently inferior to heterosexual couples, you have explicitly stated this belief is religious, and have been trying to justify it by clutching at any argument you can find.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 08:56 PM   #445
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
That said, that might involve such politically 'unpopular solutions as discouraging divorce, which seemingly is a big no-no, as it's probably 'anti-freedom', or 'anti-human rights', or some such.
You do realize that before divorce laws were re-written in the West that women had basically no means of leaving a marriage with an equal split of property and a variety of other issues?
anitram is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 08:56 PM   #446
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
I'm assuming you missed AEON's setup with "all things being equal". Or did you just choose to ignore again?
My post was in response to a post that stated "There's no such thing [as ideal or optimal upbringings], and the sooner we get past that, the better."
financeguy is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 08:56 PM   #447
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,663
Local Time: 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
But the question was based on the assumption there were no observable problems.

If you have two couples willing to adopt - one is heterosexual and one is homosexual - would it not be more beneficial to place the child in the home that also has the added benefit of a mother role and a father role. Or are you of the opinion that the mother role and father role is not important?
I'm of the opinion that children raised by responsible, loving parents (not the lack of orientation qualifier) who take an active role in their child's development tend to grow up just fine. So if there's a homosexual couple willing to adopt, and all signs indicate that they are responsible adults who will take a loving and active role in their child's development, then no, I do not believe they should be moved to the back of the line until all heterosexual couples are sorted through first. That strikes me as a bit barbaric, frankly.

"Gee, we appreciate your interest in adopting a child, Mr. and Mr. Smith. You seem like a very loving, responsible couple who are eager to start a family. Unfortunately, there's a slight possibility that a better, more straight couple is out there. So if you wouldn't mind waiting a few months/years until we either find that couple or decide to settle for you, that'd be just swell. No hard feelings right?"

Seriously, AEON, do you realize the implications of what you're proposing here?
Diemen is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 08:57 PM   #448
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Or are you of the opinion that the mother role and father role is not important?


i'm told i'd make a great mother.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 08:59 PM   #449
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Perhaps not per se, But there are also studies which show children of gay couples are sometimes disadvantaged by being bullied at school, for example.
And women who wear sexy dresses are just asking to be raped, right? Do you not see the trouble with your above logic?

Quote:
Overall, I personally think that with moves towards reducing population growth, scientifically possible but controversial techniques of generating life by means of such processes as IVF to allow for gay couples that demand kids 'of their own' may become socially unpopular.
But, of course, if heterosexual couples use IVF to demand kids "of their own," that's perfectly fine? I'm sorry, but this entire line of argumentation reeks of heterosexism.
melon is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 08:59 PM   #450
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
You do realize that before divorce laws were re-written in the West that women had basically no means of leaving a marriage with an equal split of property and a variety of other issues?
Certainly. But there are also divorce cases where the husband has exploited the system to renege on his responsibilities.

I am definitely not arguing for getting rid of divorce entirely, I'd be in favour of making it more difficult however.
financeguy is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:02 PM   #451
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by melon View Post
But, of course, if heterosexual couples use IVF to demand kids "of their own," that's perfectly fine?
No, I disagree with that also.
financeguy is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:02 PM   #452
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 10:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
Seriously, AEON, do you realize the implications of what you're proposing here?
That a child possibly might be better off in a home with a mother and father? Is that so radical?
AEON is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:03 PM   #453
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
I can see that you want to treat same-sex couples as inherently inferior to heterosexual couples, you have explicitly stated this belief is religious, and have been trying to justify it by clutching at any argument you can find.
I think you've pretty much summed up the entire thread here.
melon is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:05 PM   #454
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
No, I disagree with that also.
You disagree with IVF? Why?
BVS is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:06 PM   #455
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
I am definitely not arguing for getting rid of divorce entirely, I'd be in favour of making it more difficult however.
How is keeping two people forced into a loveless marriage beneficial? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly sure that when divorce was banned in Ireland, it didn't keep families together; it just made for a lot of separated spouses having extramarital relationships.
melon is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:07 PM   #456
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
That a child possibly might be better off in a home with a mother and father? Is that so radical?


is it too difficult to judge each situation on the merits of the individual parties involved?

or do we need sweeping authoritative rules to follow?
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:07 PM   #457
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
That a child possibly might be better off in a home with a mother and father? Is that so radical?
So, you think single parent homes need to be eliminated as well?
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:08 PM   #458
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
That a child possibly might be better off in a home with a mother and father? Is that so radical?
No more radical than a child might possibly be better off in a home with two mothers.

This argument doesn't work because same-sex parents don't fare any worse than straight couples. It also fails for childless couples, of any orientation.

Crying that somebody should think of the children is a lame tactic designed to take equal rights out of the discussion.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:08 PM   #459
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
I'm of the opinion that children raised by responsible, loving parents (not the lack of orientation qualifier) who take an active role in their child's development tend to grow up just fine. So if there's a homosexual couple willing to adopt, and all signs indicate that they are responsible adults who will take a loving and active role in their child's development, then no, I do not believe they should be moved to the back of the line until all heterosexual couples are sorted through first. That strikes me as a bit barbaric, frankly.
Yes, but I would raise issues of moral hazard here.

In other words, if it's ok for a bank to take massive risks on the markets because they have been given the nod that if their bets go wrong, the taxpayer will ultimately bail them out, then it seems to me that, in a somewhat similar fashion, the system is saying that it's ok for a sexually promiscous heterosexual type to conceive a bunch of kids they don't have the financial resources to care for - because, hey, even if I can't take care of my kids, some nice heterosexual OR homosexual couple that can't conceive on their own can just adopt them.

In both cases, there's a risk that prudence goes out the window.
financeguy is offline  
Old 11-22-2009, 09:09 PM   #460
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,663
Local Time: 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
That a child possibly might be better off in a home with a mother and father? Is that so radical?
What I find radical is that you seem to be perfectly willing to have a responsible and loving couple - one that is eager to adopt and give a child in need a loving, warm and secure life - wait indefinitely while everyone else is sorted through, simply because they're gay.

Given two responsible, secure and loving couples, one heterosexual and one homosexual, do you think it possible that the homosexual couple could be better parents than the heterosexuals?
__________________

Diemen 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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Random Risque U2 Pictures (PT II) FallingStar PLEBA Archive 147 07-28-2003 02:01 PM
MERGED --> When will Cleveland II be? + Rock Hall Celebration (Spring) CMM Interference Gatherings 80 04-14-2003 09:02 PM
Getcher Classical on! Psst...Dieman. Johnny Swallow Lemonade Stand Archive 8 03-07-2003 03:53 PM
the Europe photos pt. II (including interferencers!!!) sulawesigirl4 Lemonade Stand Archive 61 01-05-2003 02:29 PM
When hormones go bad Pt. II: MacPhisto WildHonee PLEBA Archive 9 11-02-2001 06:36 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×