Homosexuality: What do you think?

sock puppet

Fad wrote: »

So single mothers/fathers also shouldnt be allowed to parent?

Well actually single people aren't allowed to adopt children.

Pigwidgeon

sock puppet wrote: »

Well actually single people aren't allowed to adopt children.

I don't think Fad meant by adoption, but by the logic of needing a male and female parent, then single parents shouldn't be allowed to have children at, like in the cases of desertion, divorce, death etc.

Fad

sock puppet wrote: »

Well actually single people aren't allowed to adopt children.

No, I meant that if homosexual people shouldnt be allowed to adopt/foster/have kids through ivf on the basis that the arent providing a balanced male/female influence to the child, I think the same should be applied to every single parent, because they arent able to provide the balanced influences, which are apparently important.

soccymonster

Usually single parents don't have a choice though to be actual single parents. I see where norwegianwood is coming from like and i agree with her in a way.

Extrasupervery

Hetero majority? Boooring

Arcade Panda

norwegianwood wrote: »

Personally, I don't have any problem with gays. It's the 21st century, and that people are still made to feel they have to defend their lifestyle choice is ridiculous. At the same time, i don't think same sex couples should be allowed to adopt, because a child should have a strong male and female influence in thier lives, but that's just my opinion.

I agree with you and I know that's not the popular view but that's just the way I feel. I think we need a strong male and female influence in our lives. Having just one isn't natural.

Fad wrote: »

So single mothers/fathers also shouldnt be allowed to parent?

Of course they should be allowed parent. But that's totally different, a lot of girls become single parents by accident. Homosexual people can't accidently have a child. They have to adopt. And for the record I'd have the same problem with single straight people adopting or having a baby when they know they will be bringing up that child on their own. It's a two person job. Two of my best friends mothers had them when they were 16 and they bought would have really liked to have had fathers.

I have nothing against homosexual people, I believe that it's natural for some people to fall in love with the same sex and have a relationship. I don't think it's natural for them to have children though.

Fad

soccymonster wrote: »

Usually single parents don't have a choice though to be actual single parents. I see where norwegianwood is coming from like and i agree with her in a way.

People by and large dont choose to be gay, and the fact that they dont choose to be different means I dont think they should be excluded from having children.

(not bothered going back to quote arcade panda, but I think doing things on the basis that they're natural is horseshít, but anyway)

hitlersson666

Fad wrote: »

People by and large dont choose to be gay, and the fact that they dont choose to be different means I dont think they should be excluded from having children.

(not bothered going back to quote arcade panda, but I think doing things on the basis that they're natural is horseshít, but anyway)

+1 lots of single parents have kids and there grand! (has anyone noticed on tv though that gay teens/young adults r in a single parent family e.g.glee):pac::pac:

Extrasupervery

One of my best friends was raised by two moms and never knew her dad...who was never intended to be a father. She's been subjected to all sorts of prejudice growing up but is one of the kindest, funniest most well balanced people I know. Loving parents are loving parents.

Fad

Arcade Panda wrote: »

Of course they should be allowed parent. But that's totally different, a lot of girls become single parents by accident. Homosexual people can't accidently have a child. They have to adopt. And for the record I'd have the same problem with single straight people adopting or having a baby when they know they will be bringing up that child on their own. It's a two person job. Two of my best friends mothers had them when they were 16 and they bought would have really liked to have had fathers.

I have nothing against homosexual people, I believe that it's natural for some people to fall in love with the same sex and have a relationship. I don't think it's natural for them to have children though.

They dont HAVE to adopt, they can have surrogate mothers, be treated with IVF, it's not as black and white anymore!

sock puppet

Anywat from a practical point of view discussing gay adoption at the moment is pointless. Only married couples can adopt (and I don't see that changing any time soon) and as of yet Ireland doesn't recognise same-sex marriages.

edit: Though as Fad says with IVF etc. gay couples are able to have children so the idea that gay couples shouldn't raise children is certainly outdated.

Fad

sock puppet wrote: »

Anywat from a practical point of view discussing gay adoption at the moment is pointless. Only married couples can adopt (and I don't see that changing any time soon) and as of yet Ireland doesn't recognise same-sex marriages.

And that should be changing soon (well the marriage bit anyway), so discussing it is by no means pointless.

And discussing the ethics of it is hardly a terrible idea.....

Pigwidgeon

So if a child were in a family where one parent is abusive but there is a male and female influence, are they better off there than with same sex parents?
It really shouldn't matter as long as the child is happy, healthy and safe what gender their parents are.

sock puppet

Fad wrote: »

And that should be changing soon, so discussing it is by no means pointless.

And discussing the ethics of it is hardly a terrible idea.....

But the adoption laws will still have to be changed to count same-sex unions. And I think it would be disgraceful if the government allowed homosexual couples to adopt but didn't extend this right to co-habiting heterosexual couples.

Konata

sock puppet wrote: »

But the adoption laws will still have to be changed to count same-sex unions. And I think it would be disgraceful if the government allowed homosexual couples to adopt but didn't extend this right to co-habiting heterosexual couples.

If and when same-sex marriages become legal in Ireland, then the adoption laws could be changed to count same-sex marriages. Adoption laws recognise marriages, co-habiting couples (hetero or homo) are a completely seperate argument. I don't think that allowing homosexual married couples to adopt has on bearing on allowing co-habiting heterosexual couples to adopt.

sock puppet

Hotaru wrote: »

If and when same-sex marriages become legal in Ireland, then the adoption laws could be changed to count same-sex marriages. Adoption laws recognise marriages, co-habiting couples (hetero or homo) are a completely seperate argument. I don't think that allowing homosexual married couples to adopt has on bearing on allowing co-habiting heterosexual couples to adopt.

Yes but same-sex marriage is not what's going through the Dail at the moment. afaik the government are pushing this, as to allow same sex marriage would require a change to the constitution. Someone better informed may want to correct me here.

Also even when same-sex couples get full marriage rights and if they are allowed adopt, the government would be signalling that they are not bound by tradition. There is little difference imo between a couple of 20 years and a married couple of 20 years.

Konata

sock puppet wrote: »

Yes but same-sex marriage is not what's going through the Dail at the moment. afaik the government are pushing this, as to allow same sex marriage would require a change to the constitution. Someone better informed may want to correct me here.

Also even when same-sex couples get full marriage rights and if they are allowed adopt, the government would be signalling that they are not bound by tradition. There is little difference imo between a couple of 20 years and a married couple of 20 years.

True. Except for one thing - marriage. Adoption laws only allow married people to adopt because of the whole legality of the thing. I'm no expert on the legal bindings involved in marriage but as far as I know, those legal bindings are the key to being allowed to adopt at all. A co-habiting couple have little or no legal bindings to each other.

Anyway, digressing a bit from the original topic here.

soccymonster

kateos2 wrote: »

So if a child were in a family where one parent is abusive but there is a male and female influence, are they better off there than with same sex parents?


It really shouldn't matter as long as the child is happy, healthy and safe what gender their parents are.

for the first part of that, if a member of the family was being abusive (different sex or not), the child shouldn't be in that environment anyways...
I see where you're coming from with the last part of your post. I have nothing against same sex parents btw, i just think that a male-female influence would be better for a child. And that's my opinion. I don't really care if people criticize it.

me_right_one

Homosexuality is wrong. Its unnatural.

Pigwidgeon

soccymonster wrote: »

for the first part of that, if a member of the family was being abusive (different sex or not), the child shouldn't be in that environment anyways...
I see where you're coming from with the last part of your post. I have nothing against same sex parents btw, i just think that a male-female influence would be better for a child. And that's my opinion. I don't really care if people criticize it.

I wasn't really directing that at you, it was just more because some people seem to have the opinion of a male-female environment is better, full stop. Not considering, how destructive that environment could be, I was just using that as an example.

Fad

me_right_one wrote: »

Homosexuality is wrong. Its unnatural.

*foams at mouth*

Pigwidgeon

me_right_one wrote: »

Homosexuality is wrong. Its unnatural.

Tbh i think the unnatural thing is opinions like that.

sock puppet

soccymonster wrote: »

for the first part of that, if a member of the family was being abusive (different sex or not), the child shouldn't be in that environment anyways...
I see where you're coming from with the last part of your post. I have nothing against same sex parents btw, i just think that a male-female influence would be better for a child. And that's my opinion. I don't really care if people criticize it.

Any basis for this opinion other than the prejudices they'll face?

hitlersson666

me_right_one wrote: »

Homosexuality is wrong. Its unnatural.

hmm i want to report u but i dont know if i can..
although u could be trolling but it is unlikeley??

soccymonster

me_right_one wrote: »

Homosexuality is wrong. Its unnatural.

well that's harsh like. But if it's your opinion...

And sock puppet, i don't mean to sound like a smartass but what?

Extrasupervery

You can't report someone for expressing an opinion ^

However fúcked up it is, I think everyone else's reactions have done the job.

You'll find idiots everywhere.

Fad

soccymonster wrote: »

well that's harsh like. But if it's your opinion...

Never got that entitled to an opinion lark, especially if the persons opinion is factually incorrect.....

soccymonster

hitlersson666 wrote: »

hmm i want to report u but i dont know if i can..
although u could be trolling but it is unlikeley??

why would you report him/her? The OP did ask a question?

hitlersson666

soccymonster wrote: »

why would you report him/her? The OP did ask a question?

me smells a troll

Fad

soccymonster wrote: »

why would you report him/her? The OP did ask a question?

I reported it, stating you think it's wrong is fine, even stating you think its unnatural is grand, but stating that it is wrong and is unnatural shouldnt really be allowed.....