Gay Parenting

[Andres]

If the people who raise the child love it, then I don't see the problem, really.

My wife and I raise our son together. Now that he's no longer breastfed, there's nothing that she can do what I can't as well and vice versa. We can both change his diaper, give him his milk, carry him around, play with him, give him his bath etc etc. I love doing all those things and so does she. I don't see how me being heterosexual or homosexual would make me a better or worse parent. My sexual orientation has nothing to do with my capabilities of raising my child, thank you very much.

Also, this:

As for parents in the sense of adult raisings children. The natural way of things is to raise children in an extended family. A nuclear family of father, mother, and two children is decidely unnatural, it is recent and geographically limited. Two gay parents is scarcely less unnatural than just two parents, or even one.

A child has not to be exclusively raised by its' mother and its' father, that's a pretty modern concept. If children have been raised by their extended family for centuries, then how would two men or two women raising a child be "wrong"?

Also, there's a lot of hypocrisy with this subject. Let's be honest here, the "problem" is not two women raising a child, the "problem" is two men raising a child. I'm personally offended by that. Me being a man does not make me a worse parent than my wife.

I do everything my wife does and my son seems perfectly happy, so screw all those with their prejudice that a male is somehow, for some weird, outdated reasons, less fit for parenthood than a female for the sole reason that he's male.

[Louis VI the Fat]

screw

Et tu, Andres?


Other than that, give Andres jr. a quick little hug from me and whisper in his ear that he couldn't have wished for a finer papa.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I could, given a few minutes of effort, cite philosophy, demographics, and cultural conventions that would make stuffed penguins look like the best possible parents for human babies. But sometimes, as Freud said, a cigar is just a cigar, and a kid deseves a mother and a father regardless of the sophist's art.

So much then for my plan to raise my kids together with their hot three lesbian mothers...


Also, I see why you would identify with certain backwards Middle Eastern cultures...

[Husar]

If gays interact with children like all other people do as well, then there shouldn't be any problem for the children and their development.
Whether the kids get bullied at school also depends on what the parents of the other kids say at home I guess.

[Andres]

Indeed, if the child of a gay couple gets bullied, then the problem is not the child being raised by homosexuals. The problem is the bullies and the bigotted parents/teachers who indoctrinated them with backwards ideas.

If society makes it harder for gay parents to raise their children or for their children to be accepted, then the problem is society, not the child being raised by gays.

Off topic, but I want to get this off my chest: If judges after parents broke up systematically appoint mothers to take care of the child and give fathers nothing more than 1 week-end every fortnight, then society is sick. My mariage is going fine, don't worry about that, but I can feel rory's pain. It would be outrageous and infuriating if some backwards, bigotted judge would ordeal that the mother is a better parent than the father for the sole fact of she being female (yeah yeah, you wouldn't read that in the judgement, but let's not be hypocrites here). I think it's time for some maninism and ewomancipation. It's time for fathers to claim their right to be recognised as just as good as anyone else from a different gender to raise a child.

[Hax]

Also, I see why you would identify with certain backwards Middle Eastern cultures...

Ah yes, I was wondering when this would show up in the discussion.

Come on guys, what is this, the "Political Mudpit" of TWcenter?

[Fragony]

Muhahaha way ahead of us in the very very liberal department, 'Bacha Bazi'

http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/wp-co...ha_Bazi_25.jpg

Congratulation it's a boy!

Common Hax you are Dutch, if you aren't rediculed you aren't in

[Beirut]

Ah yes, I was wondering when this would show up in the discussion.

Come on guys, what is this, the "Political Mudpit" of TWcenter?

It was a coward's remark and will be disregarded as one.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Ah yes, I was wondering when this would show up in the discussion.

Come on guys, what is this, the "Political Mudpit" of TWcenter?

Gah! Why is it the part about my three lesbians lovers that gets disregarded as rhetorical fantasy!?

[Askthepizzaguy]

Indeed, if the child of a gay couple gets bullied, then the problem is not the child being raised by homosexuals. The problem is the bullies and the bigotted parents/teachers who indoctrinated them with backwards ideas.

This a million times.

Much like the army using the argument that a homosexual person is unfit to serve in the army because their sexuality might be disruptive to others in their unit, or because someone might blackmail them, etc, etc, once again, the problem is never the actual homosexuality itself, but the heterosexuals who haven't grown the heck up.

You know, there would be no negative consequences to being gay if it weren't for the straight people persecuting them. It really isn't they gay people who are the problem, and I'm really getting tired of seeing rights denied to these people because of what straight people might do in their company.

On that same topic, here are some arguments that homosexuality is somehow wrong or abnormal:

1. Fewer people are known to be gay than straight. (Of course, there are fewer people who are white than there are non-white, I guess that makes being Caucasian sick and wrong and unnatural too.) This is argument from majority, which is wrong.

2. Due to a lack of stable long-term relationships, gay people are more prone to STDs. Therefore being gay is immoral, and straight is great. (Of course, if they were allowed to have stable long-term relationships, such as marriage, which they have been asking for for some time now, or if society wouldn't treat their relationships like gutter trash, then there would be no difference between gay and straight in that regard.) This ignores the artificial differences created by the restrictions placed on gay people and the harsh, unwelcome environment they find themselves in.

3. Being raised by gay people might make the child get bullied more. (Sure, I was never bullied as a child because my parents were divorced, or because I was short, or wore glasses, or kept to myself and was socially awkward. I guess that means straight people are unfit parents too.) This argument implies that it is the fault of gay people that straight people have issues with them, which I find disgusting. That's like blaming black folks for the Ku Klux Klan. Maybe black people shouldn't be allowed to have children because some Neo-Nazi group might persecute them? TOTALLY THE MOST AWESOMEST REASONING EVAR.

4. My Bible says it is wrong! (Your Bible also says that polygamy, concubines, slavery and incest are perfectly fine. The religion contradicts itself on these points at times as well. Also, divorce is not to be allowed either. The Bible is very clear on this one: No divorcing. You can't do it. Because when you marry someone, according to Mark 10:8, you "are no longer two, but one flesh." And, Mark 10:9 reads, "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." Mark 10:11-12, "And He said to them, 'Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.'" Let's suggest that a lot of the arguments that suggest the Bible isn't exactly the greatest source of moral righteousness often rely on the Old Testament, which doesn't apply to modern Christianity. Sure, ignore the OT all you like. But then again, that's where the section on homosexuality being an abomination is. So let's pick and choose which verses we like, and which we don't like. Leviticus 19:19 reads, "You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together." My goodness. Cross-breeding animals? Farming with two kinds of seed? Blended fabrics? The Lord has a long list of strange things he finds evil. It almost sounds like someone just made this stuff up to control people, but that couldn't possibly be true, or else we'd all look pretty foolish. Better stick with it, or else this could get embarrassing. I guess being gay is wrong, because that's better than the rest of us being somehow wrong. Let's also ignore 90% of what the Bible says is wrong and what the prescribed punishments for those wrongs are, because strictly adhering to the Bible would be wrong. But ignoring that one part in Leviticus, well we can't do that, because not strictly adhering to the Bible would be wrong.

5. It just feels wrong to me. I can't ignore my gut on this one. I just know being gay is wrong or inferior to being straight. My emotions never lie! As Ron White said, "the next time you have a thought: let it go." If you can't even articulate why it is wrong beyond your own particular prejudice towards it, maybe that's because it's nothing but straight-up prejudice, and there is no reason for it. Once again, gay people are forced to suffer because other people are the ones with the problem. It's the same old story, over and over again.



Need I really repeat my point about the fact that gay people already can and do have biological children and raise them just as well as straight people? It's not like there is no data on this point. We have data. The data is, they're no different from us, and at worst, any problems the children have fitting in are a result of intolerance on the part of other children, who by the way, are notorious for having absolutely no reason to behave like little balls of rancid [blank], but do so anyway and in the most cruel fashion. I suppose we should take our cues for how to have an advanced, mature society from schoolyard bullies, because they obviously aren't maladjusted hateful little attention whores, but paragons of virtue and enlightenment we should emulate in adulthood.

Some folks aren't going to change their mind on this, and I don't mean to be abusive toward them personally. It's the idea of it which I feel is worthy of criticism, direct and pointed criticism. And this is an idea which is worthy of being widely criticized, and hopefully soon, forgotten entirely, like the idea that people of different races shouldn't intermarry, because their children will be treated differently and have a harder time growing up, or for other more disgusting reasons that the aforementioned "reason" is meant to cover up and apologize for. That idea is equally as valid as this idea, and based on the same stellar logic, frankly.



There are times when I honestly can't see how this is even still being debated, because I feel that anyone who looks at this objectively and with a clear head would come to the same conclusion, if they are a fair-minded person; but then I remember that we can't seem to agree on what constitutes justice and fairness on practically any issue, and being fair-minded isn't a requirement for having an opinion.

[Fragony]

Wouldn't make out a point of how it is today, as gay parenting gets more accepted they also have to prove less. They have to run a little faster now. There will also be absolute scumbags once it's more normalised. Don't think it's all that much an argument against the father/mother thing. I'm with you guys but walking with caution

[Beskar]

This a million times.

Much like the army using the argument that a homosexual person is unfit to serve in the army because their sexuality might be disruptive to others in their unit, or because someone might blackmail them, etc, etc, once again, the problem is never the actual homosexuality itself, but the heterosexuals who haven't grown the heck up.

You know, there would be no negative consequences to being gay if it weren't for the straight people persecuting them. It really isn't they gay people who are the problem, and I'm really getting tired of seeing rights denied to these people because of what straight people might do in their company.

On that same topic, here are some arguments that homosexuality is somehow wrong or abnormal:

1. Fewer people are known to be gay than straight. (Of course, there are fewer people who are white than there are non-white, I guess that makes being Caucasian sick and wrong and unnatural too.) This is argument from majority, which is wrong.

2. Due to a lack of stable long-term relationships, gay people are more prone to STDs. Therefore being gay is immoral, and straight is great. (Of course, if they were allowed to have stable long-term relationships, such as marriage, which they have been asking for for some time now, or if society wouldn't treat their relationships like gutter trash, then there would be no difference between gay and straight in that regard.) This ignores the artificial differences created by the restrictions placed on gay people and the harsh, unwelcome environment they find themselves in.

3. Being raised by gay people might make the child get bullied more. (Sure, I was never bullied as a child because my parents were divorced, or because I was short, or wore glasses, or kept to myself and was socially awkward. I guess that means straight people are unfit parents too.) This argument implies that it is the fault of gay people that straight people have issues with them, which I find disgusting. That's like blaming black folks for the Ku Klux Klan. Maybe black people shouldn't be allowed to have children because some Neo-Nazi group might persecute them? TOTALLY THE MOST AWESOMEST REASONING EVAR.

4. My Bible says it is wrong! (Your Bible also says that polygamy, concubines, slavery and incest are perfectly fine. The religion contradicts itself on these points at times as well. Also, divorce is not to be allowed either. The Bible is very clear on this one: No divorcing. You can't do it. Because when you marry someone, according to Mark 10:8, you "are no longer two, but one flesh." And, Mark 10:9 reads, "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." Mark 10:11-12, "And He said to them, 'Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.'" Let's suggest that a lot of the arguments that suggest the Bible isn't exactly the greatest source of moral righteousness often rely on the Old Testament, which doesn't apply to modern Christianity. Sure, ignore the OT all you like. But then again, that's where the section on homosexuality being an abomination is. So let's pick and choose which verses we like, and which we don't like. Leviticus 19:19 reads, "You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together." My goodness. Cross-breeding animals? Farming with two kinds of seed? Blended fabrics? The Lord has a long list of strange things he finds evil. It almost sounds like someone just made this stuff up to control people, but that couldn't possibly be true, or else we'd all look pretty foolish. Better stick with it, or else this could get embarrassing. I guess being gay is wrong, because that's better than the rest of us being somehow wrong. Let's also ignore 90% of what the Bible says is wrong and what the prescribed punishments for those wrongs are, because strictly adhering to the Bible would be wrong. But ignoring that one part in Leviticus, well we can't do that, because not strictly adhering to the Bible would be wrong.

5. It just feels wrong to me. I can't ignore my gut on this one. I just know being gay is wrong or inferior to being straight. My emotions never lie! As Ron White said, "the next time you have a thought: let it go." If you can't even articulate why it is wrong beyond your own particular prejudice towards it, maybe that's because it's nothing but straight-up prejudice, and there is no reason for it. Once again, gay people are forced to suffer because other people are the ones with the problem. It's the same old story, over and over again.



Need I really repeat my point about the fact that gay people already can and do have biological children and raise them just as well as straight people? It's not like there is no data on this point. We have data. The data is, they're no different from us, and at worst, any problems the children have fitting in are a result of intolerance on the part of other children, who by the way, are notorious for having absolutely no reason to behave like little balls of rancid [blank], but do so anyway and in the most cruel fashion. I suppose we should take our cues for how to have an advanced, mature society from schoolyard bullies, because they obviously aren't maladjusted hateful little attention whores, but paragons of virtue and enlightenment we should emulate in adulthood.

Some folks aren't going to change their mind on this, and I don't mean to be abusive toward them personally. It's the idea of it which I feel is worthy of criticism, direct and pointed criticism. And this is an idea which is worthy of being widely criticized, and hopefully soon, forgotten entirely, like the idea that people of different races shouldn't intermarry, because their children will be treated differently and have a harder time growing up, or for other more disgusting reasons that the aforementioned "reason" is meant to cover up and apologize for. That idea is equally as valid as this idea, and based on the same stellar logic, frankly.



There are times when I honestly can't see how this is even still being debated, because I feel that anyone who looks at this objectively and with a clear head would come to the same conclusion, if they are a fair-minded person; but then I remember that we can't seem to agree on what constitutes justice and fairness on practically any issue, and being fair-minded isn't a requirement for having an opinion.

This post wins thread. Here is your answer, LeftEyeNine.