Gay Parenting

[Beirut]

There have been many people throughout history who have ignored science in favor of their own conceptions of common sense.

Wanting a child to have a mother and father is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.

Well, call me old fashioned.

Common sense is generational.

Some is, and some is for all time. Like the common sense I mentioned above.

[ajaxfetish]

It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.

Or alternatively, maybe there's actual evidence supporting the idea that working, responsible, non-criminal behavior is beneficial, and others would agree with you on this issue while at the same time disagreeing on the fitness of gay couples to raise children.

Ajax

[PanzerJaeger]

Wanting a child to have a mother and father is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.

Well, call me old fashioned.

Denying the legitimacy of same-sex parenting also has nothing to do with 'responsibility' and 'good conduct' either, despite your ridiculous equivocation.

The truth is that it is just an outdated opinion that has been completely invalidated through scientific research. May I suggest that you bring some verifiable facts with you next time as this isn't working for you.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Well some points from the study...

"o Teenage boys raised by lesbians are more sexually restrained, less aggressive and more nurturing then boys raised in heterosexual families."

Well clearly all that is bad, why not just castrate them?

"o Adolescent and young adult girls raised by lesbian mothers appear to be more sexually adventurous and less chaste. Sons of lesbians display the opposite – boys are choosier in their relationships and tend to have sex at a later age than boys raised by heterosexuals."

Bad again.

Interesting. I read both points as positives. I don't see the value in raising boys to be lecherous, aggressive, and uncaring and girls to be socially conditioned to accept the double standard. I suppose gender roles are subjective.

Here are some other points:

o It is more common for both lesbian moms to be employed, to earn similar incomes and to cut back on their hours of paid work in order to nurture young children. Some research indicates that egalitarian parenting contributes to child well-being, Stacey said.

o Same-sex couples proved better at managing disagreements and anger than did comparable heterosexual married couples. Research suggests that parental conflict may be one of the most significant sources of difficulty for children, Stacey said.

Now, I could spin these two points to argue that gay parents are actually better than straight ones, but it is probably better to look at the broader conclusion.

According to the study:

One area the researchers found no differences in was the mental health of children or their quality of relationship with parents. Children brought up by lesbians and gay men are well-adjusted, have good levels of self-esteem and are as likely to have high educational attainments as children raised in more traditional heterosexual families.

I don't know what the 'typical dynamics' of a heterosexual relationship are, but the study suggests same-sex parenting yields well adjusted children with no noticeable relationship dysfunction.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Go get 'em, Panzer!


Both the mayor of Paris and of Berlin are very openly gay, have been for a decade now. Times have changed. This one we are winning.


(although the gay mayor of Paris is most unpopular with the you-know-who, one of whom tried to butcher him with a knife in broad daylight, loudly shouting homosexuals needed to die )

[Crazed Rabbit]

There are two important points to me:

One, that there is a shortage of parents of any type adopting kids.

Two, the gender of the parents seems to matter less than the fitness of the parents.

However, I still oppose forcing any religious orphanages to allow gay couples to adopt kids.

CR

[Beirut]

The truth is that it is just an outdated opinion that has been completely invalidated through scientific research.

Scientific research shows that a mother and father are not best for a child?



This is hands down the silliest, most deranged debate I'ver ever been in. I've debated guys who thought ten-year olds should carry knives to school for protection and others who thought God was made out of spaghetti and meatballs, but never have I come across a group of people saying a human child is not best served by having a mother and father.

What's next; have Fido nurse the baby because more teats means more love?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Scientific research shows that a mother and father are not best for a child?



This is hands down the silliest, most deranged debate I'ver ever been in. I've debated guys who thought ten-year olds should carry knives to school for protection and others who thought God was made out of spaghetti and meatballs, but never have I come across a group of people saying a human child is not best served by having a mother and father.

What's next; have Fido nurse the baby because more teats means more love?

This is inane.

orgahs: Juices can be healthy and substitute for water in human diet.
beirut: Never in my life have I seen people claim that people aren't best served by drinking water! everyone knows you have to drink water to live, how silly!

[a completely inoffensive name]

This is inane.

orgahs: Juices can be healthy and substitute for water in human diet.
beirut: Never in my life have I seen people claim that people aren't best served by drinking water! everyone knows you have to drink water to live, how silly!

Thank you so much Sasaki. He can't handle thinking his views on what is best for a child could be flawed because dare I say it? Nah. Needless to say, what else does he have to get around this? Strawman. Strawman. Strawman.

[LeftEyeNine]

Lads.

[Beirut]

Thank you so much Sasaki. He can't handle thinking his views on what is best for a child could be flawed because dare I say it? Nah.

If you can say it, I can take it.

Needless to say, what else does he have to get around this?

I'm a parent and I care more about kids than about adult ideologies that seek to profit through kids. That's what I have.

Strawman. Strawman. Strawman.

Dorothy. Dorothy. Dorothy.

[Andres]

Scientific research shows that a mother and father are not best for a child?



This is hands down the silliest, most deranged debate I'ver ever been in. I've debated guys who thought ten-year olds should carry knives to school for protection and others who thought God was made out of spaghetti and meatballs, but never have I come across a group of people saying a human child is not best served by having a mother and father.

What's next; have Fido nurse the baby because more teats means more love?

Nobody said homo's are better suited for parenthood than hetero's

People merely said that there's no difference and that sexual orientation is irrelevant when it comes to being fit for parenthood.

You've been obtuse for this entire thread now.

[Fragony]

Nobody said homo's are better suited for parenthood than hetero's

People merely said that there's no difference and that sexual orientation is irrelevant when it comes to being fit for parenthood.

You've been obtuse for this entire thread now.

Of course there is a difference otherwise we wouldn't call it gay parenting but just parenting, you are kinda giving away that you know that when you do. Not that it's bad, but there is a difference. I agree with my favorite Scottish relinut, it's a farce. It's all ok, but don't expect me to play along and see it for full. Studies mean zip by the way, maybe results count when comparing it again over 30 years, at the moment they have something to prove so they will try harder to be excellent parents. Means nada

edit: also agree with Beirut, get these 'scientific' reports out of my face, it's plane common sense.

[Andres]

One would think that, after reading this thread, it's clear enough that your "common sense" doesn't seem to be so common at all.

[Fragony]

One would think that, after reading this thread, it's clear enough that your "common sense" doesn't seem to be so common at all.

Yeah yeah but I don't. People on the org almost exclusively of higher education and often (but not always) very open to other's people take on things. It's simply common sense because a child raised by gays is a curiosity. And for some gays a statement. I always go for my intuition first and intuition says that this is more about gay equality than it's about gay parenting, a kid as a crown-jewel of gay activism.

[Beirut]

I always go for my intuition first and intuition says that this is more about gay equality than it's about gay parenting, a kid as a crown-jewel of gay activism.

Brilliant!

(Insert thunderous applause here.)

[Fragony]

Brilliant!

(Insert thunderous applause here.)

Allow me to indulge I don't get many of them

[PanzerJaeger]

Scientific research shows that a mother and father are not best for a child?

I understand now that the problem is one of comprehension and not belief.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Scientific research shows that a mother and father are not best for a child?

Let me sum up your position as '1 - A mother and father are best, and 2 - the interest of the child should be the overriding, if not sole, consideration'.


Let present you with a few choices, for the sake of curiousity:



1) Louis and his wife have a baby. The wife dies. Should the baby now:
a) stay with single parent Louis
b) be taken away to be raised by a mother and father


2) Louis and his wife have a baby. The wife dies. Louis now accepts he's always been gay and marries Andres. Should the baby now:
a) stay with dad and dad Andres and Louis
b) be taken away to be raised by a mother and father


3) Louis is gay. Proletariat is lesbian. We want children, so we decide to get marry and have a baby together. Should the baby now:
a) stay with its gay and lesbian mother and father Louis and Prole
b) be taken away to be raised by a heterosexual mother and father

[Fragony]

Let me sum up your position as '1 - A mother and father are best, and 2 - the interest of the child should be the overriding, if not sole, consideration'.


Let present you with a few choices, for the sake of curiousity:



1) Louis and his wife have a baby. The wife dies. Should the baby now:
a) stay with single parent Louis
b) be taken away to be raised by a mother and father


2) Louis and his wife have a baby. The wife dies. Louis now accepts he's always been gay and marries Andres. Should the baby now:
a) stay with dad and dad Andres and Louis
b) be taken away to be raised by a mother and father


3) Louis is gay. Proletariat is lesbian. We want children, so we decide to get marry and have a baby together. Should the baby now:
a) stay with its gay and lesbian mother and father Louis and Prole
b) be taken away to be raised by a heterosexual mother and father

You really don't get it, you can fool yourselves all you want but you can't fool nature.

[Louis VI the Fat]

You really don't get it, you can fool yourselves all you want but you can't fool nature.

Homosexuality is natural. What is unnatural, is the repression of homosexuality in some local and modern human societies. This repression goes against both human and other mammalian nature:

[Fragony]

Homosexuality is natural. What is unnatural, is the repression of homosexuality in some local and modern human societies. This repression goes against both human and other mammalian nature:

It's not about homosexuality it's about gay parenting. They know that it will be seen and treated differently. Yet insisting, for what and most importantly who. I think they care more about being accepted as parents rather than actually being it. And of course people that devoted will be excellent parents, whole world is watching after all. But who's in the middle of it. So to prefering heterosexual, YES absolutely. If you want a different world fix it yourself.

[Beirut]

Homosexuality is natural. What is unnatural, is the repression of homosexuality in some local and modern human societies. This repression goes against both human and other mammalian nature:

So we should change the nature of the family and human culture because a couple of male koalas got high smoking eucaliptis leaves and went a'bonking?



I like you - you're funny.

[Beirut]

Let me sum up your position as '1 - A mother and father are best, and 2 - the interest of the child should be the overriding, if not sole, consideration'.


Let present you with a few choices, for the sake of curiousity:



1) Louis and his wife have a baby. The wife dies. Should the baby now:
a) stay with single parent Louis
b) be taken away to be raised by a mother and father


2) Louis and his wife have a baby. The wife dies. Louis now accepts he's always been gay and marries Andres. Should the baby now:
a) stay with dad and dad Andres and Louis
b) be taken away to be raised by a mother and father


3) Louis is gay. Proletariat is lesbian. We want children, so we decide to get marry and have a baby together. Should the baby now:
a) stay with its gay and lesbian mother and father Louis and Prole
b) be taken away to be raised by a heterosexual mother and father

A woman who has a baby, unless proven unfit as a mother - and being a lesbian does not mean she is unfit - is entitled to raise that child.

A gay man who fathers a baby, unless proven unfit as a father - and being gay does not mean he is unfit - is entitled to raise that child.

If gay man and a straight woman, or a straight man and a gay woman, or a heterosexual couple, have a child and decide to divorce, the courts must decide how the child will be raised on a case by case basis.

Is the state has authority over a child up for adoption, priority must go to seeing that the child is placed in a home where the child has both a mother and a father.

People have rights to have children and to keep children, but not to get children.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Is the state has authority over a child up for adoption, priority must go to seeing that the child is placed in a home where the child has both a mother and a father.

Failing to find the post 1950 western nuclear family, which would you prefer:

a) The child goes goes to a single mother household
b) The child goes to a two mother household


Another choice:

a) The child goes goes to a single mother household, not a homo in sight
b) The child goes to an intergenerational household, consisting of a loving grandmother, 62, and a single widower, 36, gay


Another choice:

a) The child goes to a single mother, heterosexual, working two shifts
b) The child goes to an intergenerational household, consisting of a mother and father, heterosexual, and loving grandmother, 68, who's engaged in lesbian relationships in college in 1968

[Ironside]

Scientific research shows that a mother and father are not best for a child?



This is hands down the silliest, most deranged debate I'ver ever been in. I've debated guys who thought ten-year olds should carry knives to school for protection and others who thought God was made out of spaghetti and meatballs, but never have I come across a group of people saying a human child is not best served by having a mother and father.

What's next; have Fido nurse the baby because more teats means more love?

You are aware that one of the big fundamental things in science is that it can prove common sense wrong? Otherwise it would always be about how large the expected outcome would be.

Continents moving? Hah, that would be as silly as we're constantly moving more than 100.000 km/h. Or that electrons can create wave interference with itself.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Wanting a child to have a mother and father is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.

Well, call me old fashioned.

Wanting a child to have parents is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Unfortunately common sense doesn't teach them to argue well :(

Well some points from the study...

"o Teenage boys raised by lesbians are more sexually restrained, less aggressive and more nurturing then boys raised in heterosexual families."

Well clearly all that is bad, why not just castrate them?

"o Adolescent and young adult girls raised by lesbian mothers appear to be more sexually adventurous and less chaste. Sons of lesbians display the opposite – boys are choosier in their relationships and tend to have sex at a later age than boys raised by heterosexuals."

Bad again.

Kids need the one mum/dad dynamic because unless they really can catch the gayness from homosexual parents, they will need to learn the typical dynamics of a heterosexual relationship (for the love of God, don't start going on about generalisations because 1% of couples differ from the norm) for later in life. If its a boy they need the male rolemodel, if its a girl the female.

Your article already shows that changing this dynamic does have a big influence on the kids.

Yes, when I read this I thought "well, this is exactly the thing they are going to complain about". But fact is you can substitute "liberal" for lesbian and get the same result here. No duh, gay couples aren't conservative and traditional.