gay people raising children

rightondude wrote:

I'm a firm believer that every single thing we think, and do, we do because we desire it.

Stutters just stutter because they want to? Alzheimer's patients forget shit because they desire to not remember? Damn. I thought there was some physiology behind this stuff.

rightondude wrote:

A portion of it is how many cards we get dealt at birth, and in life, and what those cards are.

Wait, you acknowledge that we are dealt cards at birth? Which cards are those? Eye color? Skin color? Sexual orientation? Cognitive abilities?

Ahnimus wrote:

Maybe I am an android and I don't know it. I don't get emotional like these kinds of people do. I don't look at a man or a woman and feel emotionally drawn to them. I see sexy legs and a slim waistline.

This thread is about people raising children. You making this statement makes me doubt whether you would be able to raise children! When you see a child crying, you don't get emotional? You see salty water and you hear noise?

It's funny how the thread has turned into a nature/nurture/emotions/genetics/choices debate.

Having read it all, it seems that most people who accept homosexual parents believe that it's nature as well as nurture and that most people who are against homosexuals reproducing believe it's all about emotions and (wrong) choices and genetic flaws. This in itself is interesting.

I for one will be a homosexual parent at some point. This thread has proven to me, that even if me and my partner provide a loving, caring home and a sensible upbringing, there will be a lot of people out there who will think it's all doomed from the start. We can deal with that, we've got enough practice, as even without children, we have encountered enough people who don't accept us. Thank God for the people who do

I think that for my own sanity I should stop reading the thread from here on.

It's been interesting though. Thanks to all involved

Peace out

It's just not a yes or no type of question.

IndianSummer wrote:

i read about 4 pages of this meandering thread and then gave up.

i think i created a monster.

i'm so glad you did though.....its helps me better understand the issues my cousin may take into consideration.

IndianSummer wrote:

fine, be glad.

but let me add a final spin to this thread.

those of whom who said YES - try to empathise with the kid. what did he/she deserve to get two homosexual parents instead of a dad and a mom??


those of whom who said NO - what about the fact that 1000s of kids are orphans?? in the light of that, should same sex couples be debarred from adopting them??


i think the "compromise solution" is the best. the same sex couple SHOULD be alowed to raise kids, but not go for "sperm donation" or "surrogate mothers" and deliberately spawn a newborn, knowing that the child would have 2 moms or 2 dads. instead since they are so interested to have kids, they should adopt someone. they get their wish, the orphan has peopel to take care of them, and no child is deliberated spawned to abnormal parents.

besides, even if same sex couples are allowed to have kids, either through surrogate moms (2 dads) or sperm donors (2 moms), notice that only one of the homo-couple will be the child's parent in any case. adopting a child - where none of them are in any way his/her parent, doesnt seem that bad now.

if you're talking about not having a dad or mom in same sex parents. i think the child would be smart enought to identify with a parental or maternal figure, you know someone to take him paintballing or to a bridal shower, for example, in other people....family or friends. its like my complaining not having a sister. plus, whenever my parents were busy, i always had uncles, aunts, friends to identify with.

same sex couples deserve to have natural children as much as the next person, this is just evolution. families don't look like they do anymore. there isn't a stereotype family anymore.

why should same sex couples be left to deal with a problem that wasn't created by homosexuality. we shouldn't rely on the homosexual population to fix that for us. instead, we need to come up with a better prophalytic solution.....like condoms, birth control, masturbation.....do you know what i mean?

i'm sorry, but for me there is no compromise on my view of this. its such about unconditional support.

thanks again.

Milhouse VanHouten wrote:

It's also a "yes or no" question in the sense that "yes", we should encourage any loving, responsible couple who wants to raise children every opportunity to do so. "No", we shouldn't support legislation or any other deprivation of rights solely based on things like a religious/moral objection to someone's sexual preference.

Also, I can't believe that someone actually used the phrase "It's Adam & Eve, not Adam & Steve" unironically in this thread. So fucking lame. I'd prefer something like:

"It's Adam & Eve, not Lance & Andre".

right.....everyone has a preference.
i guess my preference is just more.....okay....whomever are the amazing parents that raise me well.....
on that note, the traditional family worked out for me.....so no complaints.

Milhouse VanHouten wrote:

What the hell do swinger parties and nudist colonies have to do with same sex marriage??

yeah, the only thing that holds these topics together is that they branch from sex.
however one is human sexuality, and nudist coloies and swinger parties are more of sexual behavior.
can't compare how human beings are born (human sexuality) to how they act (sex-based behavior).