Do you think it's ok for gays to adopt?

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Actually, I do. I think that considering all elements of the child's well-being, that the tradition should win out if it is an equal tie between the adoptive parents.

Call me a sell-out if you want, but we are talking about a child's life here. That child must come before any political correctness. Now, if the gay couple is more stable, has a better income, and shows a marked achievement in the parenting arena over the straight couple, then by all means, give the child to the best home.

Yet when I say this I'm accused of wanting to go back to the 18th century.

 

[mixedmedia]

Yet when I say this I'm accused of wanting to go back to the 18th century.

Call me a sell-out if you want, but we are talking about a child's life here. That child must come before any political correctness. Now, if the gay couple is more stable, has a better income, and shows a marked achievement in the parenting arena over the straight couple, then by all means, give the child to the best home.

Right the child must come before any political correctness but also before personal bias.

I think I understood that this is what you meant, Trajan. :2wave:

The same determinations that are made between two propsective sets of straight parents should also determine placement between prospective straight and homosexual parents. Anyone who cannot agree to this logic is operating out of personal bias and it has no place in the determination of another's right to the best life possible.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Right the child must come before any political correctness but also before personal bias.

I think I understood that this is what you meant, Trajan. :2wave:

The same determinations that are made between two propsective sets of straight parents should also determine placement between prospective straight and homosexual parents. Anyone who cannot agree to this logic is operating out of personal bias and it has no place in the determination of another's right to the best life possible.

Yes that is my point but my other point is that if all things are equal then preference should be given to traditional family units consisting of one man and one woman.

 

[mixedmedia]

Yes that is my point but my other point is that if all things are equal then preference should be given to traditional family units consisting of one man and one woman.

Well, I tend to think it should be determined the same way as it would between two sets of straight parents, all things being equal. But boy, Trajan, if I could come this close to agreeing with you on other topics it just might precipitate world peace or somethin'. :lol:

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Well, I tend to think it should be determined the same way as it would between two sets of straight parents, all things being equal. But boy, Trajan, if I could come this close to agreeing with you on other topics it just might precipitate world peace or somethin'. :lol:

Well I tend to think that gender rolls is a factor which need to be considered in and of itself which is why if all things were equal then that would be the only variable which would tilt the scale in favor of the straight capital.

As for world peace from my signature:

"Let us recollect that peace or war will not always be left to our option; that however moderate or unambitious we may be, we cannot count upon the moderation, or hope to extinguish the ambition of others." - Alexander Hamilton

 

[steen]

Are you denying that all things being equal the best environment for child rearing is a one man one woman household? When deciding who should be allowed to adopt all variables about the couple should be considered, like it or not being gay in and of itself is a factor that needs to be considered.

Why? YOU claim so, but certainly the research disproves you. So how is there a reason other than your conservative bigotry-driven bias as justification for this?

I think that if a kid is adopted the best thing for that child is for him not to know he is adopted at all but with a homosexual couple that is impossible as it would be impossible for a couple of a different race than said child.

I find it fascinating that you will to that extend lie to a kid as to try not to tell them the truth of them having been adopted. Do you hate the kids so much that you will let them get the trauma later because parents lied to them? You really don't know much about adopted kids, do you?

 

[steen]

I think we are kind of going around and around on this thread........As I said I think the best possible scenario for a child be adopted is to be placed with a father and a mother

No, it is to be adopted into a family.

but I am not against lesbians adopting if there is no other options..........

When it comes to gay men adopting I have to think about that one.........

So your views are driven solely by bigotry.

 

[Stace]

I don't think young children need to know that they're adopted during their development years, because I doubt that they can grasp the situation, the adoption issue has a potential to manifest itself in negative psycholigical effects later on in life; such as, abandoment issues. When the child is of a mature age and can grasp the situation then they should be told but with a gay couple that is impossible.

And what about older children? Newborns aren't the only ones that are adopted; older children will obviously know what's going on. Even newborns are aware of changes in their environment, though they adapt much more easily once they are provided with something consistent. But there comes a time when every responsible adoptive parent must reveal the fact that the child is adopted....such as when that child is old enough to have children of their own, and starts to question medical history so as to determine what their own child could be at risk for.

Why do you think it is impossible with a gay couple? It is possible for them to have biological children, you know. They work out deals with friends of the opposite sex, there's procedures such as artificial insemination.....and I believe in another post you also brought up children of different races....I'm sure you've seen interracial couples. Everything is not as black and white as you're making it out to be.

The point remains, though - a homosexual couple can provide just as loving and stable of a home as a heterosexual couple, sometimes even more so.

 

[steen]

I've never seen my birth certificate

Really? You have never had to show it anywhere?

and regardless when they do find out it will be when they're adults and can understand it better.

And you are claiming that this is better than their adoptive parents having been honest with them rather than deceiving them for years?

Notice I said to raise a child? Once the child has already been raised it will become less of an issue.

It is much more of an issue that the only family the child has known lied to them for years and that nobody can be trusted. Again, your knowledge of adoptive kids seem limited. I work with them every day, and your solution, while creating job security for me, would be inhumane and dishonest. While you might be in favor of deceiving and lying to kids, I don't share that conviction.

Furthermore; all things being equal the fact is that a traditional one man one woman household is the best environment to raise a child,

You CLAIM this to be a fact. Do you have evidence? Up above, I linked to a previous post in this tread where I provided the evidence to the contrary. Now it is your turn to prove your unsubstantiated claim.

men and women simply have separate rolls to play in child rearing ex: the mother is the nurturer the father is the disciplinarian, it's not about sexual preference it's about gender rolls.

Good heavens. This view from the Victorian society is old and outdated, even for a conservative.

 

[Jerry]

To deni a difference between a homosexual couple and a heterosexual couple is to deni a difference between a father and a mother.

Surly a homosexual couple can provide a loving and stable home for children, but to deni a difference is a slap in the face to both the roles of mothers and fathers. No man can be a mother. No Woman can be a father.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Why? YOU claim so, but certainly the research disproves you. So how is there a reason other than your conservative bigotry-driven bias as justification for this?

Yes yes, I'm a bigot and a fanatical homophobe to boot. :roll: I love how you people are misrepresenting my argument, I said that I support gay adoption but when considering which couple will be able to adopt the child if all things are equal then preference should be given to traditional family units IE one man and one woman, gender roll is a factor which needs to be considered in and of itself. When all things are equal then the only variable left is the gender of the perspective parents and that is a variable which will tip the scale in favor of the heterosexual couple.

I find it fascinating that you will to that extend lie to a kid as to try not to tell them the truth of them having been adopted. Do you hate the kids so much that you will let them get the trauma later because parents lied to them? You really don't know much about adopted kids, do you?

You really are unbelievable, what I said was that young children don't need to know that they're adopted during their developmental stage for obvious psychological issues ie a sense of abandonment and lack of self worth, and instead they should be told when they are old enough to fully comprehend the situation. You see sir it is you who has the bigotry-driven bias in that you automatically assumed that because I am a conservative I would by default be against gay adoption without even reading all of my posts on this matter, just another in a long line of stereotyping conservatives by our hypocritical friends on the left who claim to be the epitomy of tolerance and open mindedness while simultaneously labeling all conservatives as bigoted hay seed redknecks who hate all gays, Muslims, and blacks. Do you know what they say about assumption?

 

[alphamale]

I think it's OK, from what I've read there are no ill effects on the children. Also, with more people ready to adopt, there may be less children aborted.

 

[steen]

omfg, that's not it at all and you know it,

That sure is what it sounds like. You are not married, are you? happy singledom, it will last a very long time.

the traditional family unit consisting of one man and one woman is the most stable environment for a child

And your evidence is..?

I don't see how there is any denying this,

Easily. The research data we provided earlier is directly disproving that theocratic fundie idea.

with gay adoption it's the same thing as a single parent household,

And the research I references showed that you are wrong.

no one is saying that gay people couldn't be just as good at being parents as straight couples

Some posters here just did. They just insisted that in any case, the straight family should have preference. So now you are saying that they lied?

but everyone gets so wrapped up in the question of could without stopping to ask themselves if they should. All things being equal preference should be granted to traditional family units, the best possible family should win out in every situation.

So, straight families are better, but either are as good as the other as parents? I think the Native Americans here in the US called that to speak with a forked tongue. Which is it? Are you saying that homosexuals are worse parents? Because right here, you implied that, while claiming that you are not saying that.

 

[Jerry]

.......just another in a long line of stereotyping conservatives by our hypocritical friends on the left who claim to be the epitomy of tolerance and open mindedness while simultaneously labeling all conservatives as bigoted hay seed redknecks who hate all gays, Muslims, and blacks. Do you know what they say about assumption?

....and Jews, everyone hates Jews :lol:

 

[steen]

I never did deny that, I think gay people should be allowed to adopt but that all things being equal traditional family units should be granted preference, because if all things are equal then the only other variable is the gender of the couple but that in and of itself is a factor that needs to be considered.

Who does it need to be considered? Please provide the evidence that shows such a necessity. No You don't have it, and your entire argument is based on your personal bias? Why am I not surprised.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

....and Jews, everyone hates Jews :lol:

Yes them too, and let's not forget liberals. :lol:

 

[steen]

So when you have two couples of equal parenting skills each vying for adoption you don't think that the one man one woman couple should be given preference?

No, not at all. The issue is the support and comfort of the child, not what some fundies have to say about the parents. there is absolutely NO evidence that your concern is an issue. On the contrary, the evidence says that it is a non-issue. SO the ONLY reason to make a big deal out of this is bias or bigotry. It certainly is not based on any reality.

 

[steen]

Well I tend to think that gender rolls is a factor which need to be considered in and of itself...

Why, when all evidence point towards it being irrelevant. Should we also concern ourselves with the hair color or right/left handedness of the parents? After all, if they don't fit what YOU have decided as the "norm," then are they second-class, despite the research saying otherwise?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Who does it need to be considered? Please provide the evidence that shows such a necessity. No You don't have it, and your entire argument is based on your personal bias? Why am I not surprised.

Yes yes, I'm a bigot and a fanatical homophobe to boot. :roll: I love how you people are misrepresenting my argument, I said that I support gay adoption but when considering which couple will be able to adopt the child if all things are equal then preference should be given to traditional family units IE one man and one woman, gender roll is a factor which needs to be considered in and of itself. When all things are equal then the only variable left is the gender of the perspective parents and that is a variable which will tip the scale in favor of the heterosexual couple. I didn't say that gay couples couldn't be just as good of parents or even better parents than heterosexual couples what I was saying is that all things being equal traditional family units are the best possible environment to raise a child in.

You see sir it is you who has the bigotry-driven bias in that you automatically assumed that because I am a conservative I would by default be against gay adoption without even reading all of my posts on this matter, just another in a long line of stereotyping conservatives by our hypocritical friends on the left who claim to be the epitomy of tolerance and open mindedness while simultaneously labeling all conservatives as bigoted hay seed redknecks who hate all gays, Muslims, and blacks. Do you know what they say about assumption?

You're really not worth my time, because all you're doing is straw manning my whole argument and trying to paint me as a homophobic bigot.

 

[steen]

To deni a difference between a homosexual couple and a heterosexual couple is to deni a difference between a father and a mother.

And there are differences between blondes and redhead parents. But is it a difference that matters one bit? the reserahc says no, it doesn't matter. Do you have evidence to the contrary, based on anything other than personal bias and theocratic intolerance?

 

[Jerry]

No, not at all. The issue is the support and comfort of the child, not what some fundies have to say about the parents. there is absolutely NO evidence that your concern is an issue. On the contrary, the evidence says that it is a non-issue. SO the ONLY reason to make a big deal out of this is bias or bigotry. It certainly is not based on any reality.

You're saying that mothers are identical to fathers? That they behave the same way, that women interact with children identically as men?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Why, when all evidence point towards it being irrelevant. Should we also concern ourselves with the hair color or right/left handedness of the parents? After all, if they don't fit what YOU have decided as the "norm," then are they second-class, despite the research saying otherwise?

Because gender rolls aren't irrelevant no matter how much you wish them to be. Men and women are different both physically and psychologically it's as simple as that. Now watch as you claim me to be a sexist, note I didn't say that they are unequal just different.

 

[steen]

Yes yes, I'm a bigot and a fanatical homophobe to boot. :roll:

Get a grip, I was characterizing the conservatism you spout, not you yourself. Go re-read what I wrote.

I love how you people are misrepresenting my argument, I said that I support gay adoption but when considering which couple will be able to adopt the child if all things are equal then preference should be given to traditional family units IE one man and one woman, gender roll is a factor which needs to be considered in and of itself.

Yes, you keep CLAIMING THIS. What is your evidence beyond your own biased, "just because I say so" claim? You have been presented with evidence to the contrary, and obviously are completely ignoring it. I must wonder why. Is there really so strong a bias in you that you can't accept the facts of research data?

When all things are equal then the only variable left is the gender of the perspective parents and that is a variable which will tip the scale in favor of the heterosexual couple.

"all things being equal"? Ah, you mean like they are both eat fish rather than chicken, they both have red hair, they both are left handed, and all those other irrelevant point, just like the gender of the parents is irrelevant, per clear scientific research.

Now, what if one parent is a liberal? Would you say that is a less-suited environment because of all sorts of biases?

How if they are Mormons? How if they live in an apartment rather than owning their own house?

What does "all things being equal" mean? How much bias and discrimination over irrelevant stuff are you willing to push?

You really are unbelievable,

:roll:

what I said was that young children don't need to know that they're adopted during their developmental stage for obvious psychological issues ie a sense of abandonment and lack of self worth, and instead they should be told when they are old enough to fully comprehend the situation.

And when is that? What kind of abandonment do you think they feel when they find out they were lied to for years and that their parents tried to hide that they were adopted?

You see sir it is you who has the bigotry-driven bias in that you automatically assumed that because I am a conservative I would by default be against gay adoption

Nope. I have actually READ the posts here and seen that you are not opposed to them. That is a lot more than YOU can say, as you obviously have NOT read the posts here. So you can drop that lame attempt at a counter attack just because your bias and discriminatory tendencies have been exposed.

without even reading all of my posts on this matter,

Ah, but I have, so you are again spewing falsehoods.

just another in a long line of stereotyping conservatives

Actually, everything I have posted was per the content of the posts I replied to, so you are incorrect.

by our hypocritical friends on the left who claim to be the epitomy of tolerance and open mindedness while simultaneously labeling all conservatives as bigoted hay seed redknecks who hate all gays, Muslims, and blacks.

Really? All? Who said that?

Do you know what they say about assumption?

Yeas, look in the mirror. Now, since you have the hypocrisy of talking about assumptions, do you care to look at the actual scientific data regarding homosexual adoptions, as I have provided previously?

 

[steen]

You're saying that mothers are identical to fathers? That they behave the same way, that women interact with children identically as men?

Rather, the difference between the genders is less than the difference within the gender. The distinction you are trying to make is artificial with no foundation in reality. research directly contradicts your claim.

 

[Jerry]

Rather, the difference between the genders is less than the difference within the gender. The distinction you are trying to make is artificial with no foundation in reality. research directly contradicts your claim.

Research contradicts my claim that men and women are different?