Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Gay Adoption

LGBT Adoption

  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#41 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 29 May 2004 - 10:08 PM

Una Salus Lillius, on May 28 2004, 11:21 PM, said:

Actually that was Broph-in the context of making fun of an obvious typo.  Look I am impatient with spelling and grammar and the like myself but honestly aren't there plenty of *real* ways to refute this particular argument without resort to making fun of typos?
But can't we do both? I just had this bizarre image - "And he was gay - and through this gayness, he was [Dun dun DUN] immortal".

It just struck me as incredibly funny - almost as funny as the idea that loving someone is somehow immoral, just because of the sex that someone loves. I'll bet people who are against such things as gay love, marriage and adoption would have a field day with my friend who just went through the sex-change operation.

My gay friends tell me at times that I am just the whitest, unhippest straight person that they every met - and I accept that bit of criticism (because it is woefully true). But it's not like we sit around worrying about each other's sexuality. They don't consider me any more immoral than what I consider them to be. We just are.

#42 taran

taran
  • Just Washed Ashore
  • 5 posts

Posted 31 May 2004 - 03:20 PM

Gay adoption gone wrong.

http://www.nypost.co...lnews/24903.htm

A woman was tricked into being a surrogate mother for two gay men. They won the right to adopt the boy in a "landmark" legal case. Now the six-year-old boy is running around naked, kissing and touching other students inappropriately, and generally displaying severe emotional problems. His mother wants to be in his life, but his "two gay fathers" interfere. The six-year-old boy says he wants to kill himself.

If stopping gay adoption prevents one child from being ruined by self-destructive individuals who like pretending to be parents, then it's worth it. No matter what people say about love, tolerance, and compassion.

How about showing some love to that child?

What about the boy's civil rights? What about the right to be parented by your biological parents, assuming they are not abusive (most are not).

It's like what was said in that Austin Powers movie, "Freedom and responsibility."

#43 Josh

Josh

    He stares...

  • Islander
  • 13,774 posts

Posted 31 May 2004 - 03:30 PM

^

Oh, come on. Now you're just trolling. Knock it off.

If you bothered reading the entire article instead of the parts that supposedly confirmed your beliefs, you would note that it blames his unruliness in part on the "hostility" between his parents.

"His mother and father have always lived apart and have had remarkably significant disputes regarding custody and visitation from very early on," said the report, which recommended that the boy be appointed a law guardian."

This thread is continuing to make me laugh very hard. :p
"THE UNICORNS ARE NOT TO BE TRIFLED WITH!" - John Burke.

#44 Bad Wolf

Bad Wolf

    Luck is when opportunity meets preparation

  • Islander
  • 38,881 posts

Posted 31 May 2004 - 03:30 PM

What about Brittney Spears' spitting on the "sanctity of marriage" with her two minute Vegas flings?  Come now, if you're going to use one example of a bad result as an excuse to ban something altogether we're going to have to ban just about everything.   :rolleyes:
Posted Image

#45 Spacekiddy

Spacekiddy

    Engineer, Keeper of Harper's Wit and File D

  • Islander
  • 1,375 posts

Posted 31 May 2004 - 03:52 PM

Aw man... Josh is right this thread is freaking funny :lol: taran... stop it... you're killin' me here :lol:

no person should be judged on whether or not they should have a child based on their sexual orientation... c'mon.

the sad thing is a lot of my gay friends (girl et guy) has resigned themselves to the fact that they will never have children because they're not straight... and they're 15 and 16 years old. and they love kids.
--Spacekiddy--

A dose of randomness...
If the choice is between red and blue, pick seven.

#46 Gvambat

Gvambat
  • Islander
  • 1,236 posts

Posted 31 May 2004 - 07:56 PM

To paraphrase a source I don't remember:

Once every child in the system has been adopted and every foster family has a spare bedroom, then we can quibble about race and/or orientation.
Electrons behave like waves on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays; like particles on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, and like nothing at all on Sundays.

#47 Peridot

Peridot

    Elf Lynx

  • Islander
  • 2,916 posts

Posted 31 May 2004 - 09:37 PM

Hmmm.....

Well, I'm glad people have been able to take this thread with a generous grain of salt. :blink:

However, as an adoptive parent...*cough*....I do want to point something out.

The whole premise of this thread is what you might call hollow.  There is no such thing as a civil right to adopt, regardless of sexual orientation.  Whether someone is gay or straight, married or single, adoption is a privelege.

What gay couples have the right to---or should have the right to---is to be able to apply to adopt in the same manner as straight couples, without any undue bias on the part of workers or agencies.  They should have the right to have their application evaluated fairly and appropriately.

What every child in the system has the right to, is to be placed with the family or individual that will best meet his or her needs.  Sometimes that's going to be a traditional heterosexual couple with dad at work and mom at home, sometimes it's going to be something very different---a single parent, two working parents, or a gay couple.

Every year there are thousands of children who are waiting for adoptive homes, because they have some special need like a learning disability, emotional difficulties due to past abuse or neglect, physical disability, or simply being a teenager or wanting to be adopted with one or more siblings.  These kids wait, while hopeful couples put their names on waiting lists for "healthy white infants". :pout:

The idea that "gay adoption rights" is one of the major issues of the day totally ignores the realities of the real issues in adoption, and the painful realities of the lives of waiting children.

And frankly, as someone who has worked with abused and neglected children in more than one capacity, I can say that the fact that "most parents"---straight or gay---are not abusive, makes very, very little difference, if any, to the children whose parents are.

Peridot

#48 TechHarper

TechHarper
  • Islander
  • 231 posts

Posted 31 May 2004 - 11:25 PM

taran, on May 31 2004, 08:18 PM, said:

Gay adoption gone wrong.

http://www.nypost.co...lnews/24903.htm

A woman was tricked into being a surrogate mother for two gay men. They won the right to adopt the boy in a "landmark" legal case. Now the six-year-old boy is running around naked, kissing and touching other students inappropriately, and generally displaying severe emotional problems. His mother wants to be in his life, but his "two gay fathers" interfere. The six-year-old boy says he wants to kill himself.

If stopping gay adoption prevents one child from being ruined by self-destructive individuals who like pretending to be parents, then it's worth it. No matter what people say about love, tolerance, and compassion.

How about showing some love to that child?

What about the boy's civil rights? What about the right to be parented by your biological parents, assuming they are not abusive (most are not).

It's like what was said in that Austin Powers movie, "Freedom and responsibility."
http://www.q.co.za/n...gayadoption.htm

This single white gay man in South Africa has given a young black girl a safe and loving home despite prejudice and bigotry based both on colour and sexual orientation.  Therefore all gay men will be able to overcome this kind of prejudice and be superb parents for adopted children!  If promoting gay adoption gives even one child a happy home anywhere in the world it should be allowed for all gay people regardless of their qualifications.

I'm guessing you can now see that making a broad claim based on an isolated case that may or may not be representative of the majority of people is a tad bit... I'll use the word silly for the sake of avoiding flaming.  If you don't like gay people or have some irrational belief that they shouldn't be allowed to have families, that's fine.  The rest of us can just roll our eyes and move along.  If you actually want to have an intelligent and rational debate/discussion regarding this topic, find some solid evidence suggesting that homosexuals are less qualified than their heterosexual counterparts to raise children and maintain a family and THEN try suggesting reasonable solutions rather than simply punishing an entire group of people for the actions of a few.
"When the government fears the people, there is liberty; when the people fear the government, there is tyranny. - Thomas Jefferson
"A nation that limits freedom in the name of security will have neither." - Thomas Jefferson

#49 Shalamar

Shalamar

    Last Star to the Left and Straight on till Morning

  • Forever Missed
  • 17,644 posts

Posted 31 May 2004 - 11:52 PM

Thank you Peridot for your post that cuts to the true heart of the matter.
The three most important R's
Respect for One's Self / Respect for Others / Responsibility for One's Words & Actions.

Posted Image

#50 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 01 June 2004 - 09:49 AM

TechHarper, on May 31 2004, 11:23 PM, said:

If promoting gay adoption gives even one child a happy home anywhere in the world it should be allowed for all gay people regardless of their qualifications.
I couldn't disagree more with the above statement. Whether a couple is Gay or not is *not* the issue, as far as I'm concerned. Their qualifications, however, are most *certainly* relevant. To state that just because a couple is gay, they should be allowed to adopt...regardless of their qualification, is foolish to the extreme. The same way it would be foolish to say a straight couple should be allowed to adopt because they're straight, regardless of their qualifications.

IMO, bottom line is this: If a couple is qualified, and meets the adoption criteria, then they should be allowed to adopt. Whether the couple is Gay or not isn't relevant.

Oh, and Taran, I *love* the way you twisted that article to say what you wanted it to say. Did it ever occur to you that the child's behaviour problems stems from the "hostility" between the mother and father? Or his parent's seperation? Divorce can be rough on children...I seriously doubt the child's behaviour stems from the fact that his dad is Gay.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#51 Peridot

Peridot

    Elf Lynx

  • Islander
  • 2,916 posts

Posted 01 June 2004 - 01:36 PM

^ ^

Errr.....Lord of the Sword, I think the first part of TechHarper's post was meant to be sort of tongue-in-cheek.  At least that's how I interpreted it.

I agree completely with you about what the bottom line is, though. :thumbs-up:


{{{{{{Shal}}}}}}}  

Any time.  :)

And before I forget again....

{{{{{{{{Gvambat}}}}}}}

...'cause you're right on the mark, dead center.

Peridot

#52 TechHarper

TechHarper
  • Islander
  • 231 posts

Posted 01 June 2004 - 03:01 PM

LORD of the SWORD, on Jun 1 2004, 02:47 PM, said:

TechHarper, on May 31 2004, 11:23 PM, said:

If promoting gay adoption gives even one child a happy home anywhere in the world it should be allowed for all gay people regardless of their qualifications.
I couldn't disagree more with the above statement. Whether a couple is Gay or not is *not* the issue, as far as I'm concerned. Their qualifications, however, are most *certainly* relevant. To state that just because a couple is gay, they should be allowed to adopt...regardless of their qualification, is foolish to the extreme. The same way it would be foolish to say a straight couple should be allowed to adopt because they're straight, regardless of their qualifications.

IMO, bottom line is this: If a couple is qualified, and meets the adoption criteria, then they should be allowed to adopt. Whether the couple is Gay or not isn't relevant.
Ouch.  Maybe I should've made a note that that was sarcasm.  I agree completely with you.  As Peridot said, that was meant to be tongue-in-cheek.  My whole point was that sexual orientation is a ridiculous trait with which to judge a person's fitness to be a parent.  Sorry for the confusion.
"When the government fears the people, there is liberty; when the people fear the government, there is tyranny. - Thomas Jefferson
"A nation that limits freedom in the name of security will have neither." - Thomas Jefferson



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: LGBT, Adoption

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users