Gay Marraige For or Against

[truthseeker]

Well its a point that has been raised and shouted down, but I feel that society isn't ready for daddy/daddy families and it will have an impact on the child for sure.

I am a member of society. You dont speak for me when you say that 'society' isnt ready - only for yourself.

Posters have said that children get bullied for loads of things and if they were mixed race or mixed religion they could be bullied too, so does that make it ok? Sure the black kid will be bullied and the muslim kid will be bullied so the kid with the 2 dads will fit right in.

But you cant stop a child from being bullied even if he has the perfect home set up, is of the same race/religion as other children in the school. Fear of bullying is just not a good enough reason.

TBH I don't have any great moral objection to it, yes it does make me uncomfortable and yes I do accept that good parents are hard to find and 2 dads might be great, it just doesn't seem like the right fit.

What about it makes it not the right fit? Families come in many different constellations, single mothers/single fathers/widows/relations raising children etc....

I don't think gay couples were ever meant to be parents for obvious reasons.

In many heterosexual couples one or other are sterile or cannot reproduce for any number of reasons.

The nature element to my argument doesn't get much (any) backing here, but most things in nature have a purpose and we have evolved to our current state and that for me spells out the best case scenario is man/woman +child.

We may have evolved to our current state, but it is society and not nature that puts the restrictions on gay couples adopting. If we only did what nature intended we would not have contraception, adoption for sterile couples, fertility treatment and any number of other medical or scientific advances.

 

[MrMan]

You've used this particular example a couple of times now - would you for instance feel any better about mammy/mammy families?

it just writes easier for me, I don't think it reads well if I put Daddy/Daddy, Mammy/Mammy each time i make a point.

 

[MrMan]

I am a member of society. You dont speak for me when you say that 'society' isnt ready - only for yourself.

That is why I expressed it as a personal opinion (the 'I feel' bit).

But you cant stop a child from being bullied even if he has the perfect home set up, is of the same race/religion as other children in the school. Fear of bullying is just not a good enough reason.

I take that fully into consideration, but you may also have problems with parents of other children and their reaction and possible restriction of interaction with that family. I don't accept that just because you or I would not create any problems for a gay couple and child it would not be the case for everyone. I don't think it is a simple live and let live situation, it should be examined in detail.

In many heterosexual couples one or other are sterile or cannot reproduce for any number of reasons.

Which is widely known and understood i presume as is the fact that gay couples can never concieve a child together even if both are fertile and this to me does have some impact on my viewpoint.

We may have evolved to our current state, but it is society and not nature that puts the restrictions on gay couples adopting. If we only did what nature intended we would not have contraception, adoption for sterile couples, fertility treatment and any number of other medical or scientific advances.

Nature has allowed us to develop to invent and further our medical advances, if we can 'evolve the state where mean can give birth then I'll change my mind.

 

[truthseeker]

I take that fully into consideration, but you may also have problems with parents of other children and their reaction and possible restriction of interaction with that family. I don't accept that just because you or I would not create any problems for a gay couple and child it would not be the case for everyone. I don't think it is a simple live and let live situation, it should be examined in detail.

Again, parents restrict interaction with other families for a number of reasons, race, religion, narrow mindedness etc.... So I dont see how the gay parents family unit would suffer any worse than any other non mainstream family that people may feel are 'different' and therefore 'wrong types'.

Which is widely known and understood i presume as is the fact that gay couples can never concieve a child together even if both are fertile and this to me does have some impact on my viewpoint.

But non fertile heterosexual couples are in the same boat as homosexual couples.

Nature has allowed us to develop to invent and further our medical advances, if we can 'evolve the state where mean can give birth then I'll change my mind.

Well women can give birth so does that make mammy/mammy more acceptable?

I dont see a strong case against at all, any of the points raised seem to be negated by other aspects of society (like infertile couples being able to adopt).

I think the strongest point raised is that perhaps there will be prejudice against the child from other families restricting interaction. But I think that this is also an issue that affects immigrant families, families of a particular religion, families of a particular race etc...

Lets pretend for a minute that the adoptive parents live out in the boondocks and plan to homeschool the child and the only social interactions with other kids are with family - thereby removing the issue of bullying or restrictive social interactions) - in that situation would it be a problem for a child to be raised by gay parents?

 

[S.L.F]

Again, parents restrict interaction with other families for a number of reasons, race, religion, narrow mindedness etc.... So I dont see how the gay parents family unit would suffer any worse than any other non mainstream family that people may feel are 'different' and therefore 'wrong types'.

To my mind every child needs both a father figure and a mother figure in their lives

But non fertile heterosexual couples are in the same boat as homosexual couples.

Not quite they are just unlucky not to be able to reproduce whereas a homosexual couple could reproduce if they got to gether with a member of the opposite sex.

Lets pretend for a minute that the adoptive parents live out in the boondocks and plan to homeschool the child and the only social interactions with other kids are with family - thereby removing the issue of bullying or restrictive social interactions) - in that situation would it be a problem for a child to be raised by gay parents?

Then to me they would be bad parents whatever their sexual orientation.

 

[Complainer]

I'm wondering if there is a lot of fear of the unknown coming through here. Can those who would be opposed to gay parents parenting mention if they know any mature, settled gay couples among their circle of family and friends?

 

[Pique318]

or even mature, settled, straight couples with no problems ?

This thread is now at the 1% point...when people start focusing on the 1% of things that 'could' possibly make things worse for a kid in a gay marriage. Sheesh.

 

[MrMan]

Again, parents restrict interaction with other families for a number of reasons, race, religion, narrow mindedness etc.... So I dont see how the gay parents family unit would suffer any worse than any other non mainstream family that people may feel are 'different' and therefore 'wrong types'.

So the argument here is they won't be alone in their suffering? Those other scenarios would also have children born into that life rather than chosen.

But non fertile heterosexual couples are in the same boat as homosexual couples.

Yes they are but that is down to chance i.e if I get with a fertile woman and am infertile myself then we cannot conceive, if she hooked up with my fertile friend instead she could have kids. There is a 0% chance for a gay couple even if they change partner if they are of the same sex the same outcome will apply.

Well women can give birth so does that make mammy/mammy more acceptable?

they can with the help of the opposite sex.

 

[MrMan]

I'm wondering if there is a lot of fear of the unknown coming through here. Can those who would be opposed to gay parents parenting mention if they know any mature, settled gay couples among their circle of family and friends?

Yes I have one family member that I know is gay, and would know one other gay couple. Most of the gay guys I know do not have long term partners. I wouldn't consider any of them my close friends though.

 

[MrMan]

or even mature, settled, straight couples with no problems ?

This thread is now at the 1% point...when people start focusing on the 1% of things that 'could' possibly make things worse for a kid in a gay marriage. Sheesh.

Maybe we shouldn't look at all of the possibilities and probabilities, I sure hope an adoption agency would before they find a home for a child.

 

[Pique318]

Maybe we shouldn't look at all of the possibilities and probabilities, I sure hope an adoption agency would before they find a home for a child.

If they did, then no-one would be adopted....unless you know some 'perfect' couples out there would be infallible as parents ?

 

[truthseeker]

To my mind every child needs both a father figure and a mother figure in their lives

So all single mothers are bad parents?
I agree its a nice ideal, but not practical in many cases - regardless of the sexuality of the parents.

Not quite they are just unlucky not to be able to reproduce whereas a homosexual couple could reproduce if they got to gether with a member of the opposite sex.

This line of reasoning is absurd. Of course 1 member of an infertile couple could reproduce with someone else, as could 1 member of a homosexual couple - but the comparison being drawn is between that of an infertile couple and that of a homosexual couple.

Then to me they would be bad parents whatever their sexual orientation.

Why? In many remote areas of the world children are home schooled and dont have the kind of social interactions that city children have - I dont see why this constitutes bad parenting?

 

[truthseeker]

So the argument here is they won't be alone in their suffering? Those other scenarios would also have children born into that life rather than chosen.

No, the argument here is that there are a myriad of reasons why children may or may not be bullied - and even children with 'perfect' families may be bullied for having red hair or freckles or any other real or imagined reason - it is unfair to prevent a homesexual couple adopting based on the possibility that the child may be bullied for having gay parents. The child may not be bullied.

Yes they are but that is down to chance i.e if I get with a fertile woman and am infertile myself then we cannot conceive, if she hooked up with my fertile friend instead she could have kids. There is a 0% chance for a gay couple even if they change partner if they are of the same sex the same outcome will apply.

But you negate the original premise with that argument - the point is that for a given heterosexual couple who are infertile then they are in the same boat as a gay couple - if you start breaking up the couples to find new partners then the original comparison is no longer there.
What about surrogacy or donated sperm - either of which would allow 1 half or the gay couple (or the infertile couple) to conceive.

they can with the help of the opposite sex.

As can daddy/daddy - and as can one half of the infertile heterosexual couple.

Just to answer Complainers question (although I am not opposed to gay parenting), I know 1 long term lesbian couple both of whom were in heterosexual marriages in the past and have children (now grown) from them.
I know 3 long term male gay couples, 2 of which wish to marry so there is no doubt of the commitment they have to each other.

 

[Chocks away]

So all single mothers are bad parents?

I'm sure that if SLF wanted to make that point he would have. He didn't, so why tilt it?

Why? In many remote areas of the world children are home schooled and dont have the kind of social interactions that city children have - I dont see why this constitutes bad parenting?

Hey, we're talking the world we know about, not Outer Mongolia/Pradesh.

 

[S.L.F]

I'm wondering if there is a lot of fear of the unknown coming through here. Can those who would be opposed to gay parents parenting mention if they know any mature, settled gay couples among their circle of family and friends?

Hi Complainer, I'm not a homophobe I have gay friends and don't have a problem in telling them or anybody else my views on this subject.

or even mature, settled, straight couples with no problems ?

This thread is now at the 1% point...when people start focusing on the 1% of things that 'could' possibly make things worse for a kid in a gay marriage. Sheesh.

Perhaps you would like to point us towards the post where someone said anything like that.

So all single mothers are bad parents?
I agree its a nice ideal, but not practical in many cases - regardless of the sexuality of the parents.?

Thanks you've made my night you have contradicted yourself.

The sexuality of the parents is set in stone 1 man + 1 woman.

*edit* To further my point I never said single mothers are bad parents, that's just a plain silly argument

What I do think is that a child needs the influence of a good man and a good woman, bit like a cup of tea normally has milk they go together very well.

Bacon and cabbage, Abbot and Costello, Little and Large.

This line of reasoning is absurd. Of course 1 member of an infertile couple could reproduce with someone else, as could 1 member of a homosexual couple - but the comparison being drawn is between that of an infertile couple and that of a homosexual couple.?

Yes but as MrMan said for a gay partner to have a child it would mean having sex with a member of the opposite sex.

Why? In many remote areas of the world children are home schooled and dont have the kind of social interactions that city children have - I dont see why this constitutes bad parenting?

Chocks stole my thunder here

I'm sure that if SLF wanted to make that point he would have. He didn't, so why tilt it?

Can't wait to steal your thinder one day

Hey, we're talking the world we know about, not Outer Mongolia/Pradesh.

Plus the fact that in those kind of places this kind of conversation would not take place unless you want a hail of stones before you are kicked out of the village.

 

[truthseeker]

Thanks you've made my night you have contradicted yourself.

The sexuality of the parents is set in stone 1 man + 1 woman.

*edit* To further my point I never said single mothers are bad parents, that's just a plain silly argument

What I do think is that a child needs the influence of a good man and a good woman, bit like a cup of tea normally has milk they go together very well.

I dont see the contradiction, perhaps you misunderstood my post?

If a child needs the influence of a good man and a good woman then where does that leave single parents?

I agree that in an ideal world all children would have 2 natural parents, one male and one female, but we dont live in an ideal world and given that premise, if a child has already lost out on the ideal - by being in a position of having NO parents and going up for adoption then I dont see why gay parents couldnt make just as good a go of it as non gay parents.

Better than leaving a child to not be adopted at all? Yes - IMO.

Better than an adoption by a straight couple? No, I dont think so.

 

[Caveat]

Slightly OT, but I have to say I'm always a bit skeptical when straight people say "Oh I have loads of gay friends" or "many/most of my friends are gay"

Really. Loads?

You probably don't even have loads of friends never mind gay ones.

If all the straight people, trying to defend accusations of homophobia really had the loads of gay friends that they claim to have, I'm telling you, it would make this country about 40% gay as far as I can see

(I'm not directing this at anyone here BTW, it's a general comment)

 

[Purple]

Slightly OT, but I have to say I'm always a bit skeptical when straight people say "Oh I have loads of gay friends" or "many/most of my friends are gay"

Really. Loads?

You probably don't even have loads of friends never mind gay ones.

If all the straight people, trying to defend accusations of homophobia really had the loads of gay friends that they claim to have, I'm telling you, it would make this country about 40% gay as far as I can see

(I'm not directing this at anyone here BTW, it's a general comment)

Maybe all the homophobes have the same gay friends (who are ass holes and would make crap parents)?

 

[Smashbox]

Maybe all the homophobes have the same gay friends (who are ass holes and would make crap parents)?

Maybe...

 

[S.L.F]

I dont see the contradiction, perhaps you misunderstood my post?

No you said "regardless of the sex of the parents" this doesn't make sense.

If a child needs the influence of a good man and a good woman then where does that leave single parents?

This thread isn't about single parents.

I agree that in an ideal world all children would have 2 natural parents, one male and one female, but we dont live in an ideal world and given that premise, if a child has already lost out on the ideal - by being in a position of having NO parents and going up for adoption then I dont see why gay parents couldnt make just as good a go of it as non gay parents.

The whole point is what is best for the child not whether or not someone can make a go of it.

I could make a go of being a female opera singer but it ain't going to happen

Better than leaving a child to not be adopted at all? Yes - IMO.

Since the number of available children for adoption in this country is far below the numbers wanting to adopt your point is irrelevant

Better than an adoption by a straight couple? No, I dont think so.

This is where we disagree and I think its best to agree to disagree.

Truthseeker I have read a great many of your posts and have enjoyed and agreed with many of them, as I have with other posters.

This is something I just don't agree with, I see us going round and round in circles so I'm leaving this thread and don't plan to comment anymore unless I see something worthwhile to comment on.