Political Crossfire Forums

[Luigidel]

It seems today that all you hear about is the fight about gay marriage. Don't get me wrong, i have no problem with gays at all, what they do behnd closed doors is their own business, not for me to interfere with. I don not, however, support gay marriage. Back to my point, I am trying to figure out why everyonme is so wrapped up in the gay marriage issue, when the real issue should be wy is there no legislation preventing gay and lesbian couples from adopting kids. I feel that this is an issue that needs immediate legislation. Why should a child have to suffer being raised in a household with 2 same sex parents. Beside the fact that the childhood experience is completely unnatural and probably not completely healthy, why should a child have to deal with the humilation of all the tormentation that is sure to be experienced by peers

I know this topic was locked last night, but i do not feel as though a clear picture was revealed as to where people actually stand on the issue. THis time, lets attempt to have a reasonable, rational, discussion, without the mudslinging and personal attacks.

[00timh]

Luigidel wrote: It seems today that all you hear about is the fight about gay marriage. Don't get me wrong, i have no problem with gays at all, what they do behnd closed doors is their own business, not for me to interfere with. I don not, however, support gay marriage. Back to my point, I am trying to figure out why everyonme is so wrapped up in the gay marriage issue, when the real issue should be wy is there no legislation preventing gay and lesbian couples from adopting kids. I feel that this is an issue that needs immediate legislation. Why should a child have to suffer being raised in a household with 2 same sex parents. Beside the fact that the childhood experience is completely unnatural and probably not completely healthy, why should a child have to deal with the humilation of all the tormentation that is sure to be experienced by peers

I know this topic was locked last night, but i do not feel as though a clear picture was revealed as to where people actually stand on the issue. THis time, lets attempt to have a reasonable, rational, discussion, without the mudslinging and personal attacks. I think this can be a good topic of discussion. Persoanlly I do not feel that there should be legislation to prevent gay people from adopting or having children. In some cases it is the better choice. I know of one such example. My ex wife's sister is a lesbian. Her live in girlfriend was also a mother of two. Her ex husband was abusive to both her and her son. Her son chose to live with his lesbian mother rather than live with his father who physically abused him.

In most cases I do not condone homosexuals creating families. Especially by means of artifical insemination or a surrogate mother. Save the argument for why it should not be this way for another thread. right now, homosexuality is still an issue that has negative connotations for most kids being raised by a gay parent or gay parents who have adopted them. It still may be a better option but in many cases the children will be resentful of living in this "different" houshold. Especially if insemination or a surrogate mother was involved. They may feel robbed of having a chance at a normal family. Not having a mother or father.

In the situation that I know of the child did have resentment for his mother as well. He felt betrayed by her for not being the person he thought she was. Remember these are feelings that the child had. It would only seem natural. Growing up in a family with an abusive father, leaving him and then being hit with another blow, his mother was gay. It was still the best choice for him. She and me former sister in law did do a good job of raising him. He never went without anything, in fact was probably slightly above middle class. They were supportive and always there for him. I'm pretty certain he endured some ridicule as well.

Sometimes it is the best choice to be made. raising a family and being gay should not be taken lightly. There are many ramifications to consider and the probable negative impact it will have on children.

[Kt]

Hey guess what, no matter HOW MANY TIMES you re-open this thread you're STILL wrong :P

Luigidel wrote: Don't get me wrong, i have no problem with gays at all, what they do behnd closed doors is their own business, not for me to interfere with.

Sorry, but I will call bulls**t when I see it, you are a very homophobic person, homophobic does not neccesarially mean you HATE gay people (which you very well may), it also means you FEAR gay people (which is obvious to anyone). More on this later.

Quote: I am trying to figure out why everyonme is so wrapped up in the gay marriage issue,
Well maybe if you had half of the nation telling you you are unnatural and unhealthy and immoral andthat you should not get married because your love is somehow of LESS VALUE than that of the common heterosexual couple, you'd understand why people are wrapped up in this issue. Come on man, use your head, it's there for you to understand very simple concepts.
Quote:
when the real issue should be wy is there no legislation preventing gay and lesbian couples from adopting kids. I feel that this is an issue that needs immediate legislation.
You would, because you're afraid of homosexuals. (Homophobia)

Quote: Why should a child have to suffer being raised in a household with 2 same sex parents. Beside the fact that the childhood experience is completely unnatural and probably not completely healthy, why should a child have to deal with the humilation of all the tormentation that is sure to be experienced by peers
This is where you are completely wrong, first of all, show us PROOF that raising a kid by parents of the same sex is bad for them, show us PROOF that it is completely unatural and probably not completely healthy and show us PROOF that the children would face humiliation and tormentation from peers.

And if teachers and school staff acctually did their JOB and TAUGHT kids that they need to respect others, and punished them when they tease, humiliation and tormentation by peers would be a NONISSUE. The real issue here is the scourge of homophobia in schools, which is oftentimes not stopped by teachers and even perpetuated by teachers, using this as an arguement against gay parenthood is just plain wrong.

The mere fact that you think gay parenting is unnatural and unhealthy and wrong is homophobic, why can't you accept that you're homophobic?

[F'losrix]

In before the lock :woo:

Luigidel wrote: It seems today that all you hear about is the fight about gay marriage.
Then I'd say you've developed an obsession, as there's plenty of other news being reported.

Quote: Don't get me wrong, i have no problem with gays at all
You obviously do, or this thread wouldn't exist.

Quote: what they do behnd closed doors is their own business
Code for 'shove them back in the closet'.

Quote: not for me to interfere with.
That puts you one step above some of the other ranters on this issue - congrats!

Quote: I don not, however, support gay marriage.
Gay couples don't necessarily need their marriages supported, just legally recognized.

Quote: Back to my point, I am trying to figure out why everyonme is so wrapped up in the gay marriage issue, when the real issue should be wy is there no legislation preventing gay and lesbian couples from adopting kids.
I happen to think there are much more important issues than gay marriage or gay adoption for this country to deal with, but soldier on.

Quote: I feel that this is an issue that needs immediate legislation.
Which would be endlessly challenged in court and likely eventually struck down. If you want to argue the constitutional issues - present them.

Oh, and 'good luck' getting something this draconian through as a constitutional amendment.


Quote: Why should a child have to suffer being raised in a household with 2 same sex parents.
Figured we'd get to this sooner or later. Why do you assume that every child raised by homosexual parents 'suffers', or that they 'suffer' more than children raised by heterosexual parents? A questionable argument presented as established fact, which it is not. We can reasonably reject any subsequent arguments based on this unsupported premise.

Quote: Beside the fact that the childhood experience is completely unnatural and probably not completely healthy
More unsupported conclusions based on additional questionable premises. Why does one familial arrangement qualify as 'natural' and others do not? 'Normal' I would buy, as that would be a statistically provable argument. 'Natural' doesn't fly.

'Probably not completely healthy'? Based on what, precisely?

Quote: why should a child have to deal with the humilation of all the tormentation that is sure to be experienced by peers
I'll fight the temptation to be a grammar nazi here and address the argument you intended. Indeed, why should any child be made to suffer humiliation and torment for having gay parents?

Quote: I know this topic was locked last night, but i do not feel as though a clear picture was revealed as to where people actually stand on the issue.
Well, hopefully we've cleared that up for you now.

Quote: THis time, lets attempt to have a reasonable, rational, discussion, without the mudslinging and personal attacks.
That would require you presenting us with a reasonable, rational introduction of the topic instead of an attack on gay families that I can assure you some of us take very personally.

In other words, this thread is likely to go a lot of nowhere. You can't prevent a flamefest by starting with a troll post.

My feelings won't be hurt if this gets locked again.

[Kt]

PWN3D!

[00timh]

Shim Eun-Ha wrote: PWN3D! How about let's have this discussion becaue there are many of us on here who actually want to have it. It is a real subject. This is a delicate issue within our society. One that some kids have to deal with. I don't want any of this to be in before the lock. I'm glad this was restarted. I hope it stays open.

Let's look at the actual issues instead of trying to pwn someone.

[Enoch]

00timh wrote: Shim Eun-Ha wrote: PWN3D! How about let's have this discussion becaue there are many of us on here who actually want to have it. It is a real subject. This is a delicate issue within our society. One that some kids have to deal with. I don't want any of this to be in before the lock. I'm glad this was restarted. I hope it stays open.

Let's look at the actual issues instead of trying to pwn someone.

Understandable.

To me, the actual issue is that we are facing, as a society, the problem of people trying to legislate based on their own perceptions of morality. Add to that the fact that these same people are attempting to pass personal morality off as "fact" and we can see that it is intellectually dishonest.

Not once has anyone on the "anti gay-marriage" or "anti gay-adoption" debate been able to prove one single harm that WOULD result. The most they can offer is speculation and moral indignation disguised as proof.

It would stand to reason that those who wish to ban gay people from adopting are suffering the position of having to provide the burden of proof here. So far, no one has done so.

And, until such time as proof is offered, we are in a position of arguing nothing more than subjectivity morality and ethicality. To do so leads us in a series of never-ending circular arguments and can quickly degenerate in to personal attacks and spite.

[00timh]

UrielsFyre wrote: 00timh wrote: Shim Eun-Ha wrote: PWN3D! How about let's have this discussion becaue there are many of us on here who actually want to have it. It is a real subject. This is a delicate issue within our society. One that some kids have to deal with. I don't want any of this to be in before the lock. I'm glad this was restarted. I hope it stays open.

Let's look at the actual issues instead of trying to pwn someone.

Understandable.

To me, the actual issue is that we are facing, as a society, the problem of people trying to legislate based on their own perceptions of morality. Add to that the fact that these same people are attempting to pass personal morality off as "fact" and we can see that it is intellectually dishonest.

Not once has anyone on the "anti gay-marriage" or "anti gay-adoption" debate been able to prove one single harm that WOULD result. The most they can offer is speculation and moral indignation disguised as proof.

It would stand to reason that those who wish to ban gay people from adopting are suffering the position of having to provide the burden of proof here. So far, no one has done so.

And, until such time as proof is offered, we are in a position of arguing nothing more than subjectivity morality and ethicality. To do so leads us in a series of never-ending circular arguments and can quickly degenerate in to personal attacks and spite. While slightly breaking my own advice not to bring the argument of should it be acceptble for society to have kids raised in a gay household, I want to reiterate that currently there are negative ramifications involved. For a gay couple who wants to adopt or have an actual biological child from either artificial insemination or surrogate I think it is better to first work to bring society to a level of acceptance before taking on parenting. In some cases though it is the better option for gay people who are already parents. I go back to the one situation that I know of. It was the better option which is why I am against the idea of creating legislation to prevent gay people from adopting. It needs to be looked at as the best option for the chidren and not what gay people want for themselves. When society becomes more accepting of this and children are not exposed to ridicule and any other negative circumstance then perhaps the idea of creating a family will be acceptable. For now we should continue to show in the situations where raising a child in a gay household or by a single gay parent works for the betterment of the child.

[F'losrix]

00timh wrote: It needs to be looked at as the best option for the chidren and not what gay people want for themselves.
We don't place any such onerous burdens on heterosexual couples, though - do we?

Quote: When society becomes more accepting of this and children are not exposed to ridicule and any other negative circumstance then perhaps the idea of creating a family will be acceptable.
Should we prevent interracial heterosexual couples from reproducing and raising children? In many parts of the country, they're subjected to no less ridicule.

If we have to wait for it to become acceptable, then it never will be. In fact, I would assert that for many people, it never will be, period. Do we frame law around what is 'acceptable to society', or around constitutional principles of equality?

Quote: For now we should continue to show in the situations where raising a child in a gay household or by a single gay parent works for the betterment of the child.
How about we start yanking children out of heterosexual homes where the child, while not necessarily abused, is also not demonstrably being 'bettered'?

Sorry if I'm appearing harsh, but you're asking us to preserve a double standard that continues to treat gay people as if they were second class citizens, and I find that intolerable.

[Nelson]

On top of that, let's put in some legislation which forces all children with only -one- parent to go to foster care. It needs to be looked at as the best option for the children.

[00timh]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: 00timh wrote: It needs to be looked at as the best option for the chidren and not what gay people want for themselves.
We don't place any such onerous burdens on heterosexual couples, though - do we?

Quote: When society becomes more accepting of this and children are not exposed to ridicule and any other negative circumstance then perhaps the idea of creating a family will be acceptable.
Should we prevent interracial heterosexual couples from reproducing and raising children? In many parts of the country, they're subjected to no less ridicule.

If we have to wait for it to become acceptable, then it never will be. In fact, I would assert that for many people, it never will be, period. Do we frame law around what is 'acceptable to society', or around constitutional principles of equality?

Quote: For now we should continue to show in the situations where raising a child in a gay household or by a single gay parent works for the betterment of the child.
How about we start yanking children out of heterosexual homes where the child, while not necessarily abused, is also not demonstrably being 'bettered'?

Sorry if I'm appearing harsh, but you're asking us to preserve a double standard that continues to treat gay people as if they were second class citizens, and I find that intolerable. Perhaps you should re read my post. I'm on your side on this. I am objectively looking at this. it is better to work on bringing society to a level of acceptance of this. Does this sound like I am against the idea of gay parenting? How about how I state for now we should show in situations where a child being raised by a gay single parent or a gay household works. this is how we are going to get society to accept this which will lead to a greater amount of choices and options for children to lead a better life.

You might want to throw your anger at those who are actually against this. I'm seriously dissapointed in you. Instead of working to create better solutions and for the betterment of all you are becoming hostile and if anything your attitude leads to a retreat from the progress already made.

[F'losrix]

Nelson wrote: On top of that, let's put in some legislation which forces all children with only -one- parent to go to foster care. It needs to be looked at as the best option for the children.
Or how about we take children away from parents living below a certain income level and place them with rich people. After all, wouldn't that be the best option to ensure their success in life? Or maybe we should make all parents be licensed, with strict requirements for obtaining one.

It all goes back to the basic question of how much liberty are we willing to give up to the government, and why.

[F'losrix]

00timh wrote: Perhaps you should re read my post. I'm on your side on this. I am objectively looking at this.
I'm not persuaded that you are looking at this objectively, though I don't question that you really believe that you are.

Quote: it is better to work on bringing society to a level of acceptance of this. Does this sound like I am against the idea of gay parenting? How about how I state for now we should show in situations where a child being raised by a gay single parent or a gay household works. this is how we are going to get society to accept this which will lead to a greater amount of choices and options for children to lead a better life.
I don't believe that what you're suggesting will accomplish the stated goal. The reason I don't believe it is that gay parents aren't something new. Gay couples have been raising children together for at least 30-40 years, probably more. Parading their successes before people isn't going to persuade the one's that need it most; the mere idea so completely infuriates them that they aren't going to make any kind of an objective assessment and see the positives for what they are.

Quote: You might want to throw your anger at those who are actually against this. I'm seriously dissapointed in you. Instead of working to create better solutions and for the betterment of all you are becoming hostile and if anything your attitude leads to a retreat from the progress already made.
I'm not going to pat you on the back for proposing a solution that I already know is doomed to failure. If my attitude is enough to make people retreat from the progress already made, then I have to question whether much really has been made in the first place.

I take a hard line on these issues as a matter of self-preservation. Just because the issue of gay parenting is getting more attention now, that exposure doesn't necessarily mean we're destined to enjoy greater tolerance of it. If anything, that exposure is getting us a lot of negative attention from the right and that means we have to fight even harder just to keep the few gains we've made. I can't remember a time when there was such a flurry of activity aimed at restricting the rights of gay people to be parents. I don't call it progress.

Edit: I get very tired of trying to coax people into being more tolerant of my existance and to recognize my rights. I'm not going to stop being a strong advocate for those rights just because some people feel like they've already made enough progress in their attitudes toward gay people and don't care to budge an inch further. Some people can be coaxed, others have to be dragged, kicking and screaming. Some aren't reachable at all. Where you fall in the spectrum is entirely up to you, not me.

[00timh]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: 00timh wrote: Perhaps you should re read my post. I'm on your side on this. I am objectively looking at this.
I'm not persuaded that you are looking at this objectively, though I don't question that you really believe that you are.

Quote: it is better to work on bringing society to a level of acceptance of this. Does this sound like I am against the idea of gay parenting? How about how I state for now we should show in situations where a child being raised by a gay single parent or a gay household works. this is how we are going to get society to accept this which will lead to a greater amount of choices and options for children to lead a better life.
I don't believe that what you're suggesting will accomplish the stated goal. The reason I don't believe it is that gay parents aren't something new. Gay couples have been raising children together for at least 30-40 years, probably more. Parading their successes before people isn't going to persuade the one's that need it most; the mere idea so completely infuriates them that they aren't going to make any kind of an objective assessment and see the positives for what they are.

Quote: You might want to throw your anger at those who are actually against this. I'm seriously dissapointed in you. Instead of working to create better solutions and for the betterment of all you are becoming hostile and if anything your attitude leads to a retreat from the progress already made.
I'm not going to pat you on the back for proposing a solution that I already know is doomed to failure. If my attitude is enough to make people retreat from the progress already made, then I have to question whether much really has been made in the first place.

I take a hard line on these issues as a matter of self-preservation. Just because the issue of gay parenting is getting more attention now, that exposure doesn't necessarily mean we're destined to enjoy greater tolerance of it. If anything, that exposure is getting us a lot of negative attention from the right and that means we have to fight even harder just to keep the few gains we've made. I can't remember a time when there was such a flurry of activity aimed at restricting the rights of gay people to be parents. I don't call it progress.

Edit: I get very tired of trying to coax people into being more tolerant of my existance and to recognize my rights. I'm not going to stop being a strong advocate for those rights just because some people feel like they've already made enough progress in their attitudes toward gay people and don't care to budge an inch further. Some people can be coaxed, others have to be dragged, kicking and screaming. Some aren't reachable at all. Where you fall in the spectrum is entirely up to you, not me. I'm not looking for a pat on the back but if you slap away the hand that is lending help you are only going to cause a reversal of progress.

incrementalization is the only way things in society which were previously unacceptable become acceptable. Sociology 101... Interacial marriages, families and positions such as secretary of state were not acceptable the day after the emancipation proclamation was signed.

Widely held beliefs are not going to be changed just because you or anyone else says they are wrong. You have to show them it is wrong. Just like jumping into a cold body of water, the first reaction is shock, then comes the action of getting the hell out. however if you slowly introduce something into society it will gain acceptance over time. That is human nature like it or not. Go against it and you will be farther from your intended goal. Work with it and in the long run you will achieve your goal.

negativity of society will never bring about changes or equality for the betterment of all.

[00timh]

I also would like to add that if you think you have it bad now, would you have rather been alive 100...even 50 years ago. You might want to think about this.

[Kt]

00timh wrote: I also would like to add that if you think you have it bad now, would you have rather been alive 100...even 50 years ago. You might want to think about this.

Yours is an attitude of arrogance.

[00timh]

Shim Eun-Ha wrote: 00timh wrote: I also would like to add that if you think you have it bad now, would you have rather been alive 100...even 50 years ago. You might want to think about this.

Yours is an attitude of arrogance. Yep, it is. I suppose you wouldn't mind answering this question then...

[F'losrix]

00timh wrote: I'm not looking for a pat on the back but if you slap away the hand that is lending help you are only going to cause a reversal of progress.
Pointing out the holes in a theory doesn't equate to slapping away helping hands.

Quote: incrementalization is the only way things in society which were previously unacceptable become acceptable. Sociology 101... Interacial marriages, families and positions such as secretary of state were not acceptable the day after the emancipation proclamation was signed.
Lincoln didn't incrementally end slavery, did he?

Quote: Widely held beliefs are not going to be changed just because you or anyone else says they are wrong. You have to show them it is wrong.
And when they refuse to recognize the evidence plainly before their face, what then? Because that's where we actually are in this timeline, as I see it.

Quote: Just like jumping into a cold body of water, the first reaction is shock, then comes the action of getting the hell out. however if you slowly introduce something into society it will gain acceptance over time.
Differences in perspective. You see us as moving forward. I don't.

Quote: That is human nature like it or not. Go against it and you will be farther from your intended goal. Work with it and in the long run you will achieve your goal.
Human nature is to resist change. Sometimes that resistance is embedded deeply, like a cancer, and the only way to get rid of it is some serious surgery or similarly strong methods of treatment. That is where we are on the issue of gay rights. This isn't a matter of trying to improve the health of the nation by incrementally stepping up it's dosage of truth. It's become a matter of using a carefully guided scalpel to remove the legal impediments to gay people's ability to live their lives with the same kind of freedom AND responsibility that heterosexuals take for granted in our society.

Instead, we have people like the initiator of this thread who want to put society in a full bodycast, thinking that's an effective treatment for a hangnail.

[F'losrix]

00timh wrote: I also would like to add that if you think you have it bad now, would you have rather been alive 100...even 50 years ago. You might want to think about this.
And black people were better off under segregation than they were when slavery was still in full force.

The point being, telling me I should be grateful for what I have doesn't stop me from wanting what I deserve - society's recognition of my full personhood and acknowledgement of my rights.

(And don't go trying to construe this as my comparing the oppression of people of color to the struggles of gay people - that would be insulting to both groups and not at all what's intended.)

[00timh]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: 00timh wrote: I also would like to add that if you think you have it bad now, would you have rather been alive 100...even 50 years ago. You might want to think about this.
And black people were better off under segregation than they were when slavery was still in full force.

The point being, telling me I should be grateful for what I have doesn't stop me from wanting what I deserve - society's recognition of my full personhood and acknowledgement of my rights.

(And don't go trying to construe this as my comparing the oppression of people of color to the struggles of gay people - that would be insulting to both groups and not at all what's intended.) Nope, just showing the reality of progress. Black people were better off under segregation than lsavery, but are better off now than they were in segregation.

The same holds true with homosexuals. You are better off than you were 50 years ago and you will be better off 50 years from now If incrementalization is allowed to continue.