Full rights for the LGBT community.

alastair

fran17 wrote: »

sounds like a cop out to me

You can jump through hoops for the man if you like - I'm not going to.

jill_valentine

fran17 wrote: »

sounds like a cop out to me

BB has already been provided with an embarrassment of riches in response to every "concern" he's raised. His response is to a) Not read the stuff he's demanded and been given, b) Make vague suggestions it proves nothing anyway or else retcon the nature of the argument to start with, and c) Scramble frantically for some new and equally bizarre new angle to start the cycle afresh.

See how he responds to the material he's just been provided with to get an idea of his routine and then bear in mind we have seen it play out, step for step, literally dozens of times.

Nodin

fran17 wrote: »

sounds like a cop out to me

I'd suggest you aren't sufficiently familiar with BB in this thread.

Brown Bomber

fran17 wrote: »

sounds like a cop out to me

Yeah me too. If what I suspect is true, that he hasn't read any actual studies, and it seems to be the only reasonable explanation to not actually produce these so-called peer-reviewed studies showing that children of gay parents don't get bullied more because of it, then he has no choice but to "cop out" and weasel his way out of it.

Brown Bomber

oldrnwisr wrote: »

Well, no actually. The current reality is that some children with LGBT parents experience homophobic bullying. Some. The majority don't and even those who do are not necessarily negatively impacted. The number of children with LGBT parents who may resort to measures like self-harm is only a percentage of what is already a minority.

So now, in a discussion of gay rights, the welfare of "minorities" all of sudden don't matter???


Reply to the rest of the post later when time permits.

EDIT: Just scanning through the first link. You are serving me hamburgers again.

Despite the many strengths of the present study, however,
we also acknowledge several limitations. For instance, parents
were not asked directly about their sexual identities,
and we were thus forced to rely on indirect assessments
(e.g., parents’ reports of being in a “marriage or marriagelike
relationship” with a person of the same sex). The
sample size of the current study is larger than those of much
of the previous research with this population, but the finding
of no group differences would be strengthened by replication
in larger samples. Results that include variables with
lower reliabilities should be interpreted with caution pending
replication. Finally, our assessment of victimization did
not include verbal harassment or bullying, and any interpretation
of these data must consider this fact.
Major theories of human development have often

alastair

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Yeah me too. If what I suspect is true, that he hasn't read any actual studies, and it seems to be the only reasonable explanation to not actually produce these so-called peer-reviewed studies showing that children of gay parents don't get bullied more because of it, then he has no choice but to "cop out" and weasel his way out of it.

I think everyone is clear as to who's doing the 'weaseling' on this thread.
I love the 'so-called' peer-reviewed business all the same - particularly from a man afraid to read them.

Delirium

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So now, in a discussion of gay rights, the welfare of "minorities" all of sudden don't matter???


Reply to the rest of the post later when time permits.

Says the person arguing that bullies should determine adoption policies.

alastair

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So now, in a discussion of gay rights, the welfare of "minorities" all of sudden don't matter???

Heh. About the most skewed strawman argument ever - and this is saying something, given the calibre of distortion you normally serve up.

_Redzer_

So I've yet to hear a counter argument against same sex adoption that wasn't utter bollocks. What's new I guess

PopePalpatine

fran17 wrote: »

sounds like a cop out to me

BB has done a lot of that in this thread.

oldrnwisr

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So now, in a discussion of gay rights, the welfare of "minorities" all of sudden don't matter???

Where are you getting this from? The point I made was that the subset of youth with LGBT parents who experience homophobic bullying is in a minority (~30%). Youth who are negatively impacted by such bullying are a small subset of that again. So when you make broad sweeping generalisations like saying that placing adoptive children with LGBT parents is placing them in a "high-risk" category for bullying, you are making yet another fallacious argument.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

EDIT: Just scanning through the first link. You are serving me hamburgers again.

What the hell are you talking about?

Firstly, I never claimed that these studies were going to be definitive nor did you demand any such studies in relation to bullying.

Secondly, the authors comment:

" The sample size of the current study is larger than those of much of the previous research with this population, but the finding of no group differences would be strengthened by replication in larger samples."

The dataset on which this study was based, as I previously mentioned is the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. It is a nationally representative dataset and has formed the basis of over 1900 peer-reviewed publications to date. As I have pointed out, it has been found in the literature that LGBT households make up a very small percentage of all households in the US. Therefore, even a national dataset will only contain relatively few subjects eligible for a study on gay parenting. Therefore, the authors suggest that getting a larger sample would be helpful. The only way to do this would be at a transnational level with a body like the WHO or UNICEF collecting the data. However, since, for the moment, the WHO is focused on achieving their Millennium Development Goals it is unlikely that they would turn their attention to such a study before 2015.

The authors also comment that:

"Finally, our assessment of victimization did not include verbal harassment or bullying, and any interpretation of these data must consider this fact."

What the authors point out here is that the adolescents were not directly questioned about bullying or harrassment. However, this does not mean that the study cannot make any conclusions about bullying. The negative impact of bullying can have several effects and the most commonly cited effect noted in the literature is truancy. Indeed, the study you posted from Egale claims that LGBT parents were "3 times as likely" to skip school because they felt unsafe. This study finds that nationally, the truancy rates of youth with LGBT parents are not statistically significantly different from youth with heterosexual parents.


I look forward to your other bogus criticisms when you read the rest of the studies.

Zubeneschamali

BB, gay adoption could be the biggest reason bullies cite for bullying children in the best study ever peer reviewed, and it wouldn't matter a jot to the new rules, because, wait for it...

Gay adoption is already legal, and OK with the adoption authorities rules.

The change being brought in is joint adoption for same sex couples. Now, perhaps you can tell us how being jointly adopted by a same sex couple will cause more bullying than being adopted by one member of a same sex couple?

Or just keep rambling on about your opposition to current standards if you want. Not sure why that should be in this thread, though.

aloyisious

It seem's this thread has reached the level of debating of how one minority should be seen as against another, rather than the equalization of existing laws for it's citizens, with direct reference to those enjoyed by Straight people, as against those NOT enjoyed by Gay people. I'm using the word gay as a cover-all title for ALL LGBT citizens here in our republic. I'm beginning to sense the use of "the orphan children" here akin to the way anti-abortion campaigners use "will no one think of the babies", that a similar "rights of the children" term is being deployed as a weapon against the equalization of Civil Adoption law here, the fears being expressed that it would bring about an increase in the bullying of children due to whom their new parents are. The reasons being given for NO equalization do not face up to the fact that a bully seizes upon any excuse to bully others, even faked "reasons" for it. Stop rolling out the "excuse" of supposed future bullying as a reason to deny equalization of ADOPTION IN Civil law. If you don't, it'll be used next to oppose equalization of Civil Marriage; think of the future children, any children, within Gay families, if gays are allowed marry.

Penn

Equal rights far outweighs perceived(1) potential(2) bullying(3)

1 - no proof that it will definitely happen
2 - no proof that it will happen to all such children even if it happens to some
3 - should always be combated regardless of the nature of the bullying

Making equal rights a reality and treating everyone as equal in the eyes of the law will trickle down to children. Homosexuality is natural. Homophobia isn't. That is something learned from our culture and society. If children are taught that homosexuality is different, they very well might bully others for those differences. But remove the concept of it being somehow negative and children will accept it as being natural. Different to them, but equal at the same time.

Besides which, bullies will pick on absolutely anything they can. Race, weight, glasses, wealth, surname that rhymes with something funny, not being good at something, being too good at something, etc etc. If the biggest obstacle to same-sex adoption is bullying, punish the bullies.

aloyisious

With ref to the awakened interest in sexual practices usually attributed to male homos, it seem's that up to 1993, the law in the Republic saw acts of anal sex practiced by both heterosexuals and homsexuals as equally criminal acts, so it's apparent it recognized the reality that homosexuals weren't alone in being sodomites, LOL.

In the Republic, the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act, 1993 abolished the offence of "buggery between persons". The 1993 Act created an offence of "buggery with a person under the age of 17 years" penalised similar to statutory rape, which also had 17 years as the age of consent The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2006 replaced this offence with "defilement of a child", encompassing both "sexual intercourse" and "buggery".

The age of consent gap (listed below) between Male homosexual teens, lesbian teens and hetero teens with ref to anal sex seem's to be covered by that last listed offence. Currently the law in the republic is that for Male homosexuals the age of consent for oral and anal sex is seventeen (17), for lesbians the age of consent is fifteen (15) - though the type of sexual activity is not shown. For hetero teen's oral sex is legal at fifteen (15).

Edit: there are changes on the way/may have arrived for act following a 2012 S/Court decision about the legality of the age differences in the act. This Indo report refers (though why the report lists Michael McDowell as MOJ when A Shatter got the job in 2011, is confusing).

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.ie%2Firish-news%2Fsex-consent-age-to-drop-for-girls-and-gays-26412445.html&ei=w31qU5PbO6nR7AaA2YGQBQ&usg=AFQjCNGW-Har05ksvyP7sFBvBoDG9ww0-A&bvm=bv.66111022,d.ZGU

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

Equal rights far outweighs perceived(1) potential(2) bullying(3)

1 - no proof that it will definitely happen
2 - no proof that it will happen to all such children even if it happens to some
3 - should always be combated regardless of the nature of the bullying

Making equal rights a reality and treating everyone as equal in the eyes of the law will trickle down to children. Homosexuality is natural. Homophobia isn't. That is something learned from our culture and society. If children are taught that homosexuality is different, they very well might bully others for those differences. But remove the concept of it being somehow negative and children will accept it as being natural. Different to them, but equal at the same time.

If we apply your logic above consistently then you are against convicted sex offenders; who have paid their debt to society, being discriminated against as adoptive parents.


Is this the case? Are you okay with convicted sex offenders becoming adoptive parents? (1 - no proof that it will definitely happen
2 - no proof that it will happen to all such children even if it happens to some) Or do you get to pick and choose when this applies?

Penn wrote: »

Besides which, bullies will pick on absolutely anything they can. Race, weight, glasses, wealth, surname that rhymes with something funny, not being good at something, being too good at something, etc etc. If the biggest obstacle to same-sex adoption is bullying, punish the bullies.

You make it sound like certain people are pre-destined for bullying. I, Thankfully was never bullied nor bullied anyone else. I had straight parents. If I was raised by gay parents I would automatically enter a high-risk category for homophobic bullying. I conceivably now could be now an emotional wreck, with multiple suicide attempts and be long-term unemployed after dropping out of school due to this bullying.


Your idea of crime and punishment isn't anything novel nor is it effective. Has criminalising street drugs reduced drug use?

Brown Bomber

SW wrote: »

Says the person arguing that bullies should determine adoption policies.

You are twisting the reality.


I am saying the bullied/victims should be considered in the adoption process.

Penn

Brown Bomber wrote: »

If we apply your logic above consistently then you are against convicted sex offenders; who have paid their debt to society, being discriminated against as adoptive parents.


Is this the case? Are you okay with convicted sex offenders becoming adoptive parents? Or do you get to pick and choose when this applies?

Yes, I would be against convicted sex offenders becoming adoptive parents. Degree matters. The risk to the child's safety and well-being is far greater if placed with convicted sex offenders than with same-sex parents, in the exact same way that the risk to the child's safety and well-being is far greater if placed with convicted sex offenders than with male/female parents. Let's not conflate the issue with wild, unjustifiable comparisons and instead discuss it for what it is.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You make it sound like certain people are pre-destined for bullying. I, Thankfully was never bullied nor bullied anyone else. I had straight parents. If I was raised by gay parents I would automatically enter a high-risk category for homophobic bullying. I conceivably now could be now an emotional wreck, with multiple suicide attempts and be long-term unemployed after dropping out of school due to this bullying.

No, I'm saying bullies will pick on anything they can. That's why they're bullies. And if they can't find something, they'll make sh*t up. And while you could conceivably be all that you said, you could also conceivably be a well-adjusted, happy person with a great job, loving family and great life. Or, you could have grown up in an orphanage as there weren't enough couples willing to adopt (in the scenario that same-sex couples weren't allowed to adopt). That could have made you an emotional wreck, with multiple suicide attempts and be long-term unemployed after running away and becoming homeless because you didn't have a family.

We could both throw around wild hypotheticals to prove our points for another few pages, or again, we could take things as they are most likely to be. Many people go through school being bullied for a wild variety or reasons. It greatly affects some, others deal with it, and for some it's water off a duck's back. It's the bullying which should be combated.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Your idea of crime and punishment isn't anything novel nor is it effective. Has criminalising street drugs reduced drug use?

Again, let's stick to the topic at hand. There are already numerous real examples of same-sex couples raising children in this country and in other countries. Have there been numerous cases of these children becoming emotional, unemployable, suicidal wrecks?

Delirium

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You are twisting the reality.


I am saying the bullied/victims should be considered in the adoption process.

I never said they shouldn't be considered. I don't agree with your suggestion that it should bar parents from adopting for X reason.

marienbad

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You are twisting the reality.


I am saying the bullied/victims should be considered in the adoption process.

So then Brown Bomber will you answer my question now and in the light of the above

Should the adoption of Caucasian kids by now-white parents be stopped ?

Corkfeen

Same sex parents risk of child being bullied conflated with risk of sex offenders. There is some bloody insane logic occurring. The risks are not in any way comparable.

By BB's logic a straight red blooded male with a wife that isn't too attractive or too ugly as the child may be bullied over either are the only acceptable adoptive parents so it's around 2 potential adoptive parents in the country. If even.

Zubeneschamali

Brown Bomber wrote: »

If we apply your logic above consistently then you are against convicted sex offenders; who have paid their debt to society, being discriminated against as adoptive parents.

So the only reason you can imagine for barring sex offenders from adopting is that their children might get bullied by classmates when they find out the Dad is a perv?

Delirium

Comparing sex offenders and same-sex couples with regards to adoption is a bit daft.

Sex offenders have been convicted of directly harming person(s) sexually.

Same-sex couples are to be excluded because someone else might bully the adoptive child.

glued

SW wrote: »

Comparing sex offenders and same-sex couples with regards to adoption is a bit daft.

Sex offenders have been convicted of directly harming person(s) sexually.

Same-sex couples are to be excluded because someone else might bully the adoptive child.

I agree with your premise but there is a high chance that the child will be bullied as a result of both of their parents being LGBT.

I don't that that should exclude LGBT couples from adopting though. I think adoptive procedures are strict enough and the most suitable home should be the one selected for the child.

I do feel that discrimination would still be a major issue. Without knowing a whole amount on the issue; how many countries currently allow LGBT couples to adopt? And out of those LGBT couples that choose to adopt are they successful? It would be very interesting to see any studies done on the topic.

NuMarvel

glued wrote: »

I agree with your premise but there is a high chance that the child will be bullied as a result of both of their parents being LGBT.

I don't think we know for certain there's a high chance. Bomber has shown one study that shows a higher chance, but the numbers were still very low.

glued wrote: »

I do feel that discrimination would still be a major issue. Without knowing a whole amount on the issue; how many countries currently allow LGBT couples to adopt? And out of those LGBT couples that choose to adopt are they successful? It would be very interesting to see any studies done on the topic.

According to Wikipedia, 16 countries and 30 or states permit full joint adoption, and another 6 countries allowing stepchild adoption. I'm not aware of any studies carried out specifically on adoption by gay couples, but there are links to wider studies earlier in the thread, which show that children raised by gay couples fare just as well as children raised by opposite sex couples.

aloyisious

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brown Bomber View Post
If we apply your logic above consistently then you are against convicted sex offenders; who have paid their debt to society, being discriminated against as adoptive parents.


Quote; by Zubeneschmali..
So the only reason you can imagine for barring sex offenders from adopting is that their children might get bullied by classmates when they find out the Dad is a perv?

Ouch.

Brown Bomber

NuMarvel wrote: »

I don't think we know for certain there's a high chance. Bomber has shown one study that shows a higher chance, but the numbers were still very low.



According to Wikipedia, 16 countries and 30 or states permit full joint adoption, and another 6 countries allowing stepchild adoption. I'm not aware of any studies carried out specifically on adoption by gay couples, but there are links to wider studies earlier in the thread, which show that children raised by gay couples fare just as well as children raised by opposite sex couples.

LGBT people have a unique set of psychological and mental health challenges because of discrimination in society. A 2009 study of over 1,100 LGBT people in Ireland** titled Supporting LGBT Lives: A Study of the Mental Health and Well-Being of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People yielded the following results and more. 80% of LGBT people in Ireland have been verbally abused as a consequence of their sexuality. 25% have been punched, kicked or beaten as a result of their LGBT status. 8% have been attacked with a weapon – a knife, gun, bottle or stick – on at least one occassion as a result of being LGBT. 9% have been the victim of a sexual attack as a consequence of being LGBT. 50% have been called abusive names related to their sexual orientation in school. Over 25% have been verbally abused in the workplace. 10% admit to missing work because they were afraid of being attacked or threatened in the workplace for being LGBT. A staggering 90% of LGBT people have experienced feelings of depression at some point, and 60% directly link that depression to social and / or personal challenges connected with LGBT identity including stigma and social isolation. 25% have taken medication prescribed by a doctor for anxiety or depression. 84% engage in binge drinking intermittently or regularly, 60% feel they should reduce their intake of alcohol. The study found that heavy alcohol consumption was strongly associated with a need to ‘mask’ distressing emotional states, and using alcohol as a coping mechanism or form of self-medication. 27% have self-harmed at least once. 18% have attempted suicide at least once. If producers and presenters looked at these statistics, and realised the heightened vulnerability of LGBT people’s mental health before engaging in another ruthless marriage equality debate, they might rethink ‘balance’.

http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/poplife/2013/04/11/gay-bashing-gay-marriage-and-how-the-media-needs-to-get-a-grip/

oscarBravo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/poplife/2013/04/11/gay-bashing-gay-marriage-and-how-the-media-needs-to-get-a-grip/

So gays should get back in the closet where it's nice and safe?

Delirium

Brown bomber would do well to read article he posted as it touches on how LGBT are affected by anti-equality people.

Like how hurtful it is to compare same-sex couples and sex offenders with regards to adoption for example.

glued

NuMarvel wrote: »

I don't think we know for certain there's a high chance. Bomber has shown one study that shows a higher chance, but the numbers were still very low.

Certainly in my experience any child that was of a different colour, race, religion was bullied in some shape or form in my school. If you were different you can be sure you were probably going to be bullied. I would like to think that nobody would be bullied in any situation and hopefully I'm proven wrong.

According to Wikipedia, 16 countries and 30 or states permit full joint adoption, and another 6 countries allowing stepchild adoption. I'm not aware of any studies carried out specifically on adoption by gay couples, but there are links to wider studies earlier in the thread, which show that children raised by gay couples fare just as well as children raised by opposite sex couples.

Thanks for the information. I would wonder is their any level of discrimination from the adoption agencies or what experiences couples have had. Again being quite ignorant on the issue you have to wonder what experiences LGBT couples have had trying to adopt from Eastern Europe, Asia etc.

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

Yes, I would be against convicted sex offenders becoming adoptive parents. Degree matters. The risk to the child's safety and well-being is far greater if placed with convicted sex offenders than with same-sex parents, in the exact same way that the risk to the child's safety and well-being is far greater if placed with convicted sex offenders than with male/female parents. Let's not conflate the issue with wild, unjustifiable comparisons and instead discuss it for what it is.

You'll find I am discussing it "for what it is", you are trying to deflect because you have noticed the hole in your bucket.

You said yourself that it is a difference of degree not of kind. I should make absolutely clear, and by right should have done so before that that the example given of the sex offender was not to conflate prospective gay parents with sex offenders. I just wanted to demonstrate what the natural, albeit extreme, extension of your logic was. You could replace sex offenders with blind people, the effect is exactly the same - the risk is greater of the child coming to harm.

Placing an orphan with the convicted sex offender increased the risk of the child coming to harm (sexual assault).

Placing the orphan with gay parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (homophobic bullying).

You are arguing that the potential harm for the child shouldn't be a factor to consider when trying to find the best possible home for an orphan as the harm hasn't actually happened yet.

Penn wrote: »

No, I'm saying bullies will pick on anything they can. That's why they're bullies. And if they can't find something, they'll make sh*t up. And while you could conceivably be all that you said, you could also conceivably be a well-adjusted, happy person with a great job, loving family and great life. Or, you could have grown up in an orphanage as there weren't enough couples willing to adopt (in the scenario that same-sex couples weren't allowed to adopt). That could have made you an emotional wreck, with multiple suicide attempts and be long-term unemployed after running away and becoming homeless because you didn't have a family.

Do you or don't you accept that that you are far likelier to suffer homophobic bullying if, all else being equal you are raised by two gay people than raised by a regular mum and dad? Nothing else is really relevant here.

Penn wrote: »

We could both throw around wild hypotheticals to prove our points for another few pages, or again, we could take things as they are most likely to be. Many people go through school being bullied for a wild variety or reasons. It greatly affects some, others deal with it, and for some it's water off a duck's back. It's the bullying which should be combated.

Assuming this bullying is "combatable" why not wait is "until it is combatted" for their children's sake? The number of would-be adoptive parents far exceeds the number of orphans in Ireland. And since you are speaking in military terms why must we place these children on the front lines?

Penn wrote: »

Again, let's stick to the topic at hand. There are already numerous real examples of same-sex couples raising children in this country and in other countries. Have there been numerous cases of these children becoming emotional, unemployable, suicidal wrecks?

I personally know of only 1 girl who was raised by gay parents, well one was the biological mother and the other was her live-in girlfriend. She is in her mid-20s, has never had a job, didn't finish school, has 4 kids by four different dads iand is living off the state. I can't comment on her mental condition.

Otherwise. Here is the frank account of a man who was raised by his gay mother and her girlfriend. He is employed, an English Professor no less but he ticks all the other boxes.

Whether homosexuality is chosen or inbred, whether gay marriage gets legalized or not, being strange is hard; it takes a mental toll, makes it harder to find friends, interferes with professional growth, and sometimes leads one down a sodden path to self-medication in the form of alcoholism, drugs, gambling, antisocial behavior, and irresponsible sex. The children of same-sex couples have a tough road ahead of them—I know, because I have been there.

alastair

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You make it sound like certain people are pre-destined for bullying.

LOL. Says the man pitching gay parents as a pre-destined journey of suicidal bullying, with sprinkles on the side.:pac:

alastair

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Placing an orphan with the convicted sex offender increased the risk of the child coming to harm (sexual assault).

Placing the orphan with gay parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (homophobic bullying).

Placing the orphan with ginger parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (ginger bullying).

Placing the orphan with baldy parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (baldy bullying).

Placing the orphan with short-arse parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (short-arse bullying).

Placing the orphan with stutterer parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (stutterer bullying).

Placing the orphan with culchie parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (culchie bullying).

Placing the orphan with rugby-head parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (rugby-head bullying).

Placing the orphan with hippy parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (hippy bullying).

Repeat ad-infinitum.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I personally know of only 1 girl who was raised by gay parents, well one was the biological mother and the other was her live-in girlfriend. She is in her mid-20s, has never had a job, didn't finish school, has 4 kids by four different dads iand is living off the state. I can't comment on her mental condition.

LOL. More jumping the shark. The lesbian offspring are getting free buggies Joe - it's a disgrace!

Corkfeen

Okay,so you're now posting anecdotal accounts from the lustrous Witherspoon Institute. So Sonics anecdotal account is of no value to you. But an account of a guy in an extremely dodgy think tank that funded a study that has been debunked which he praises is all good?

I have no issue with anecdotal experiences however if you're going to use that as representative of a majority. He makes many claims in his anecdote,saying that same sex parents is likely drive one to a life of substance abuse,increased promiscuity etc. However the simple fact is,if you were to be bothered to read the research. The vast majority of children of same sex couples live as normal lives as any other. The simple fact is,one negative experience doesn't make all experiences negative. I can find numerous people who had ****e childhoods,it does happen regardless of orientation of parents.

Also,he states that he didn't know how to make himself attractive to girls, implying that same sex parents are the reason for this. I similarly didn't know, I'm not particularly sure still(improving with age) and had heterosexual parents alongside tonnes of brothers and sisters. What do I blame?:rolleyes:

Now are you going off to search for more conservative think tanks to backup your views? While ignoring all actual research. You'd be taken a lot more seriously if you didn't leap in points so often while basically concluding the only legit 'research' is from a bunch of nutters.

Delirium

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I personally know of only 1 girl who was raised by gay parents, well one was the biological mother and the other was her live-in girlfriend. She is in her mid-20s, has never had a job, didn't finish school, has 4 kids by four different dads iand is living off the state. I can't comment on her mental condition.

Are you suggesting this is the outcome for any children adopted by same-sex parents?

alastair

Corkfeen wrote: »

Also,he states that he didn't know how to make himself attractive to girls, implying that same sex parents are the reason for this.

In the same-sex parents lottery he could have hot the jackpot with two dads - and all the chick-pulling personal grooming tips he could shake a stick at.

Penn

Brown Bomber wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/poplife/2013/04/11/gay-bashing-gay-marriage-and-how-the-media-needs-to-get-a-grip/

That's for LGBT people, not children raised by LGBT parents. And denying LGBT people equal rights is part of what contributes to that.

oscarBravo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I personally know of only 1 girl who was raised by gay parents, well one was the biological mother and the other was her live-in girlfriend. She is in her mid-20s, has never had a job, didn't finish school, has 4 kids by four different dads iand is living off the state.

...and, of course, you've never met or even heard of anyone in comparable circumstances who was raised by hetero parents.

NuMarvel

Brown Bomber wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/poplife/2013/04/11/gay-bashing-gay-marriage-and-how-the-media-needs-to-get-a-grip/

I was responding to a post about hypothetical bullying experienced by children raised by gay couples. Care to point me to the section of the article that's relevant to that point?

glued wrote: »

Certainly in my experience any child that was of a different colour, race, religion was bullied in some shape or form in my school. If you were different you can be sure you were probably going to be bullied. I would like to think that nobody would be bullied in any situation and hopefully I'm proven wrong.

I was teased because I liked Star Trek, I pronounced my 'th's properly, and I didn't swear. Paradoxically, I was a hero because I had no problems using words like penis or breasts (in the proper context). Kids are weird.

The thing about bullying is that it can unfortunately happen to anyone, at any time. The important thing is to make sure the child knows they can go to their parents about it and that the parents know how to deal with it properly. I'd wager social workers bear this in mind during the adoption process and have ways of assessing a couple's typical response to bullying.

glued wrote: »

Thanks for the information. I would wonder is their any level of discrimination from the adoption agencies or what experiences couples have had. Again being quite ignorant on the issue you have to wonder what experiences LGBT couples have had trying to adopt from Eastern Europe, Asia etc.

Most of the countries that permit full joint adoption also offer full marriage equality, so I imagine gay couples are treated as equals in the adoption process in those countries.

In terms of Irish couples adopting from abroad, overseas adoption agencies are free to set their own rules, and there are definitely at least a few countries and agencies that bar gay couples (in Ireland or anywhere else) from adopting. But couples adopting from overseas can happen. This article from 2012 mentions three couples having applied to adopt from overseas, and a fourth couple having gone through the process and waiting on final approval.

Locally, adoption agencies can set their own rules, but their procedures must also be in line with the various equality acts. If they wish to bar particular people from applying, they must have valid grounds for doing so. After that, decisions about adoption are made on a case by case basis. Social workers first assess if the applicant(s) would be suitable adoptive parents, and if they are, they only have a child placed with them when the agency thinks they are best suited to meet the child's needs. But as a regulated profession, social workers have to have an evidence based approach to their assessments, and they can't make decision just based on whims or personal beliefs.

All that said, very few children are adopted in Ireland; around 50 per year for the last few years. And around a third of those are step-family adoption, which is where a child is adopted jointly by an existing parent and a step-parent. That might increase a bit when changes are made to how foster children can be adopted, but we're still talking about relatively small numbers.

Penn

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You'll find I am discussing it "for what it is", you are trying to deflect because you have noticed the hole in your bucket.

You said yourself that it is a difference of degree not of kind. I should make absolutely clear, and by right should have done so before that that the example given of the sex offender was not to conflate prospective gay parents with sex offenders. I just wanted to demonstrate what the natural, albeit extreme, extension of your logic was. You could replace sex offenders with blind people, the effect is exactly the same - the risk is greater of the child coming to harm.

Placing an orphan with the convicted sex offender increased the risk of the child coming to harm (sexual assault).

Placing the orphan with gay parents increased the risk of the child coming to harm (homophobic bullying).

You are arguing that the potential harm for the child shouldn't be a factor to consider when trying to find the best possible home for an orphan as the harm hasn't actually happened yet.

No, you extended the logic into an area where it is completely different and therefore incomparable. It's a rabbit hole we don't need to go down. You want to discuss homophobic bullying, let's discuss homophobic bullying.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Do you or don't you accept that that you are far likelier to suffer homophobic bullying if, all else being equal you are raised by two gay people than raised by a regular mum and dad? Nothing else is really relevant here.

Homophobic bullying? Yes. Bullying? No. You are again completely ignoring the fact that bullying happens for a wide variety of reasons, and that the bullies will pick on anything. Calling it "homophobic bullying" instead of "bullying" doesn't make it into a bigger issue than it already is.

Being raised by mixed-race parents increases the risk of racial bullying
Being overweight increases the risk of fat bullying
Having a disability increases the risk of disabled bullying
Being adopted at all increases the risk of bullying of that nature even with male/female parents
Having divorced parents increases the risk of bullying because of that
Being gay (as opposed to have gay parents) increases the risk of actual homophobic bullying (where the victim is the target)

And anything that the bullies can't find, they will just make up. I remember a guy in our school who was bullied because some of the lads made up a story about him (which couldn't have been true) and spread it around.

Bullies will bully people for any possible reason. How they pick their victims or why, is beyond me. But "homophobic bullying" in the context which you are using it (having same-sex parents as opposed to the victim themselves being homosexual) is nothing unique.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Assuming this bullying is "combatable" why not wait is "until it is combatted" for their children's sake? The number of would-be adoptive parents far exceeds the number of orphans in Ireland. And since you are speaking in military terms why must we place these children on the front lines?

How is it supposed to be changed (to avoid the use of a "military term") if homosexuality is still treated as something which is less than equal? If we teach children that homosexuality is somehow wrong or abnormal, they will view it as such. Teach them that it's somewhat different, but still normal and fine, and they will view it as such. It's not about placing them on "the front line", it's about demonstrating and teaching children that just because it's different to their family, doesn't mean it's in any way less than equal. How can we expect children to learn that if the State and it's citizens don't treat them as equals?

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I personally know of only 1 girl who was raised by gay parents, well one was the biological mother and the other was her live-in girlfriend. She is in her mid-20s, has never had a job, didn't finish school, has 4 kids by four different dads iand is living off the state. I can't comment on her mental condition.

Well I know two people raised by gay parents and they have great lives. Means nothing in the context of this discussion though.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Otherwise. Here is the frank account of a man who was raised by his gay mother and her girlfriend. He is employed, an English Professor no less but he ticks all the other boxes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ

Again though, means nothing in the context of this discussion. Singular personal experiences can be as varied as the personal experiences of children raised by both biological parents. Being a biological parent doesn't make you a good parent. Being an adoptive parent doesn't make you a good parent. Being a heterosexual parent doesn't make you a good parent. Being a homosexual parent doesn't make you a good parent.

However, none of those things make you a bad parent either.

Penn

Actually, if I may ask another question of Brown Bomber:

A Muslim family moves into a small community. Sending their children to the only school in the vicinity will greatly increase the risk of their children facing Islamaphobic bullying. What should happen?

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

Actually, if I may ask another question of Brown Bomber:

Of course.

Penn wrote: »

A Muslim family moves into a small community. Sending their children to the only school in the vicinity will greatly increase the risk of their children facing Islamaphobic bullying. What should happen?

In fairness to you you are new to this thread but I've answered these kind of questions multiple times already. What should happen is that the parent(s) should decide what are in the best interests of their child. The state and least of all me shouldn't interfere in the private and unique relationship between parent and child, be they black, white, Muslim, atheist gay or straight. This is of course assuming their parenting is operating within the law of the land.

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

No, you extended the logic into an area where it is completely different and therefore incomparable. It's a rabbit hole we don't need to go down. You want to discuss homophobic bullying, let's discuss homophobic bullying.

I am discussing homophobic bullying, in relation to your very own statement:

Originally Posted by Penn
Equal rights far outweighs perceived(1) potential(2) bullying(3)

1 - no proof that it will definitely happen
2 - no proof that it will happen to all such children even if it happens to some

It is clear that you are arguing that risk shouldn't be factor in deciding the best home for a child. It is my opinion that risk should always be a factor.

As for "equal rights" nobody has any "right" to expect to raise someone else's child. However, living free from violence is a basic human right whether you are a child or not.

Penn wrote: »

Homophbic bullying? Yes. Bullying? No.

That doesn't actually make any sense at all.

Penn wrote: »

How is it supposed to be changed (to avoid the use of a "military term") if homosexuality is still treated as something which is less than equal?

You tell me. You are the one with the plan to "combat" it. Exactly what practical changes are going to dramatically change the landscape overnight? Whatever the reason, tolerance towards gays has increased massively in my lifetime, amongst adults at least. I can think of no good reason why this trend can't continue.



And the question still stands - For the sake of the child, why not wait until homophobic bullying is eradicated?

Penn wrote: »

Again though, means nothing in the context of this discussion. Singular personal experiences can be as varied as the personal experiences of children raised by both biological parents. Being a biological parent doesn't make you a good parent. Being an adoptive parent doesn't make you a good parent. Being a heterosexual parent doesn't make you a good parent. Being a homosexual parent doesn't make you a good parent.

However, none of those things make you a bad parent either.

You can be the best parent in the world and your adopted child can still hang herself in her room because of the homophobic bullying she suffers on a daily basis.

Delirium

How does allowing same-sex couples to adopt infringe on the childs right to freedom from violence?

marienbad

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Of course.

In fairness to you you are new to this thread but I've answered these kind of questions multiple times already. What should happen is that the parent(s) should decide what are in the best interests of their child. The state and least of all me shouldn't interfere in the private and unique relationship between parent and child, be they black, white, Muslim, atheist gay or straight. This is of course assuming their parenting is operating within the law of the land.

Sorry BB you haven't answered these questions .I have asked you a similar question repeatedly and you have either ignored it or danced round it.

So one last time - are gay couples the only category you would rule out as adoption parents due to the risk of bullying ?

Brown Bomber

marienbad wrote: »

Sorry BB you haven't answered these questions .I have asked you a similar question repeatedly and you have either ignored it or danced round it.

So one last time - are gay couples the only category you would rule out as adoption parents due to the risk of bullying ?

I have answered your questions. You have repeatedly ignored the responses and just rephrased your questions. I have been quite clear in not "ruling out" gay adoptive parents over homophobic bullying. Not once have I done this!

I have repeatedly stated that the child's welfare should be paramount and therefore if a straight couple can offer a comparable home to a gay couple minus the high-risk of the homophobic bullying then it is regrettable, but then the state must discriminate against the gay couple for the child's sake and place the child with the straight couple i.e. I am putting the child first.

Anyone who says different can dress it up all they like they are putting their personal political agendas before the actual child involved.

Penn

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Of course.

In fairness to you you are new to this thread but I've answered these kind of questions multiple times already. What should happen is that the parent(s) should decide what are in the best interests of their child. The state and least of all me shouldn't interfere in the private and unique relationship between parent and child, be they black, white, Muslim, atheist gay or straight. This is of course assuming their parenting is operating within the law of the land.

That in no way answers the question. If a Muslim couple can send their children to a school where there is the possibility of the children experiencing direct Islamaphobic bullying, why can't a same-sex couple send their children to a school where there is the possibility of the children experiencing indirect homophobic bullying?

Brown Bomber

SW wrote: »

How does allowing same-sex couples to adopt infringe on the childs right to freedom from violence?

This is how:
http://www.thejournal.ie/homophobia-ireland-1313875-Feb2014/

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

That in no way answers the question. If a Muslim couple can send their children to a school where there is the possibility of the children experiencing direct Islamaphobic bullying, why can't a same-sex couple send their children to a school where there is the possibility of the children experiencing indirect homophobic bullying?

I'm going to explain this one last time.

A child with parents has his parents to make decisions that are best for him/her.
An orphan has no parents and the state must fill the void and act in the best interests of the child - Not people who want to raise it.

alastair

Brown Bomber wrote: »

An orphan has no parents and the state must fill the void and act in the best interests of the child - Not people who want to raise it.

Which they already do - even when the adoptive parent is gay, and which they will continue to do, when gay couples have the discriminatory bar removed. Since they are proven to pose no additional risks to the child.

I'm sure this won't be the last time this is explained to you, in the absence of your ability to read the peer-reviewed research.