Gay Parenting

[Beirut]

Gotta admit, this is the strangest group of people I have ever come across. I have never seen people not only against the idea that a mother and father is best for a child, but hostile to it.

Another fall of man, as King Henry would say.

[PanzerJaeger]

Gotta admit, this is the strangest group of people I have ever come across. I have never seen people not only against the idea that a mother and father is best for a child, but hostile to it.

Another fall of man, as King Henry would say.

There is little to be gained from trying to frame this as pro/anti mother and father. No one is questioning the legitimacy of that setup. I am against the idea that a same sex couple cannot be equally effective at parenting.

Maybe it would be more productive if you shared some specific problems that you believe arise from same sex parenting. What can a mother and father give (materially, mentally, emotionally, or any other way) a child that two fathers or mothers cannot? How exactly is it an inferior family situation?

[Samurai Waki]

Gotta admit, this is the strangest group of people I have ever come across. I have never seen people not only against the idea that a mother and father is best for a child, but hostile to it.

Another fall of man, as King Henry would say.

I don't think anyone is hostile to that, as that is the norm. You've been hostile to the idea that anyone but a man and a woman can raise a child, and that's a short-sighted and totally unreal expectation you're putting on a society that can't cope with the reality that there's more children than parents that are willing to care for them..

[Askthepizzaguy]

I've been part of some twisted debates in my time, but never one as demented as this.

Having to defend the concept of a child being raised by a mother and father... good God. We might might as well cash our chips in right now and hope the next species does better.

Beirut, you're faithfully committed to the rightness of your position, and I respect that.

However, most of your posts on this subject have been:

1. Assertions that you're correct.
2. Musings on how absurd it is that others feel differently.
3. Argument from "common sense" (meaning: your opinion, as others have sense, and are common, and they disagree...)
4. Openly dismissing ALL scientific evidence that someone on the fence might consider as valid information to have a discussion with, by painting everything as unreliable. "Well I've seen studies that actually prove that chocolate is better than carrots!" Isn't really a serious argument, and you know that what you're saying is baloney when you go there.
5. Stating that you know what's best for every child, without being able to articulate why your position is better.
6. Repeating that you're correct and it's all common sense, and how absurd this all is, and that you don't need a scientist to tell you things because you have common sense.... etc, etc, etc.

I'm sure we all understand by now what your position is, and that you're very certain you're correct. That said, you haven't offered more to the discussion than that. That is the thing which is twisted about the debate; not your opinion or others'. It's the fact that this isn't even a debate, but an attempted one, and a failed one.

I am sure it is disconcerting to see something that you feel should be common sense questioned so widely and so often; I feel that way about treating gay people equally. Of course we should.... why shouldn't we? It's common sense.

But we get nowhere in a discussion if both sides claim common sense is their argument. I'm certain we can do more than that here.

[Riedquat]

When I've read Beirut's first post felt the same many of you, but after reading this entire thread I fail to see how none of you understand what he is saying... really! Considering I don't speak English at all, that is a lot to say...

All you think its better for the child to have gay parents than straight ones? Because all is resumed there... he isn't saying don't give kids to gays at all... nor I, just lets try to accomplish the right of the kids to have a mom and a dad... old fashioned ones...

As a bigot I would say, first show me a gay couple making a child naturally and then we speak about their natural right to be dads.... umm... that would be my dad speaking...

Edit: and thats the whole point! this is not about their right to be dads but about the right of the child to have a family; a couple years ago people of same sex weren't able to form a family, not on the society eyes; now we are discussing if they are able to rise kids, and nobody said they shouldn't...

Having two couples, one straight and the other gay, both wanting to a adopt, both with the same socio-cultural profile, same economical status, (same race and religion), are you telling here you will roll a dice to decide which couple gets the child? Really? Wow...

[Askthepizzaguy]

When I've read Beirut's first post felt the same many of you, but after reading this entire thread I fail to see how none of you understand what he is saying... really! Considering I don't speak English at all, that is a lot to say...

There's not much to understand. His opinion is that it's "common sense" that gays are inferior parents to straight parents.

A number of people disagree, indicating that it may not be common, or even sense.

All you think its better for the child to have gay parents than straight ones? Because all is resumed there... he isn't saying don't give kids to gays at all... nor I, just lets try to accomplish the right of the kids to have a mom and a dad... old fashioned ones...

"Better"? Better implies discrimination against straight couples. No one has said that.

Equality is what is being presumed here.

As a bigot I would say, first show me a gay couple making a child naturally and then we speak about their natural right to be dads.... umm... that would be my dad speaking...

Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people have biological children all the time.

Edit: and thats the whole point! this is not about their right to be dads but about the right of the child to have a family;

Where is this right, and how is it guaranteed? My parents divorced when I was 4.

What right did I have to a father? What if my parents died? Does my right to a mother and a father bring them back to life?

How is a child being raised by a gay couple not a family, if a child being raised by a straight single parent is a family?

a couple years ago people of same sex weren't able to form a family, not on the society eyes; now we are discussing if they are able to rise kids, and nobody said they shouldn't...

Yes, people have said they shouldn't.

Having two couples, one straight and the other gay, both wanting to a adopt, both with the same socio-cultural profile, same economical status, (same race and religion), are you telling here you will roll a dice to decide which couple gets the child? Really? Wow...

How about a million couples, and ten million unwanted children?

Are you saying you're going to deny the child a family because you don't like gay people?

[Fragony]

A number of people disagree so it's not that common... there has got to be an award for that for that. A lot of people disagree, so it's common sense to prefer heterosexual couples just for that, like it was better to have a two parents instead of a single mom. Still is. Again, this is about gay equality, don't use kids as the stormtroopers of progres, fight this one yourself.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Again, this is about gay equality

Assuming gays are equal, straight couples shouldn't be given preferential treatment.

[Beirut]

Wow, busy for a few days and this thread is still buzzing.

There's not much to understand. His opinion is that it's "common sense" that gays are inferior parents to straight parents.

Actually, I'm not sure I ever said that. What I said, ad what I will continue to say, is that this has nothing to do with the parents, it has everything to do with the kid. And, for ump-teenth time, a kid is better off with a mother and a father.

The observation of, and the input from, both genders in their roles as parents is crucial for a child, And though it really pizzes some people off to hear this, it is normal as well. It is healthy and normal for a child to see a mother and father love each other, and is it also healthy and normal for a child to watch the conflicts, reasoning, and reconciliation between a mother and father. The learning from, and the interaction with, a mother and a father is how a kid learns to deal best with real life because real life has both sexes.

I have no doubt gay people can be great parents. And I don't care. This isn't about gay people, gay rights, or the parents at all. As I've said - parents have no rights. The kids have all the rights and kids have a right to a mother and father.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Actually, I'm not sure I ever said that. What I said, ad what I will continue to say, is that this has nothing to do with the parents, it has everything to do with the kid. And, for ump-teenth time, a kid is better off with a mother and a father.

I know you've said it before, Beirut. But saying it umpteen times doesn't make you any more correct.

There are well more kids waiting for adoption than there are parents waiting to adopt, if I am not mistaken. Every straight couple who meets the criteria who wants a child will get one. I believe every gay couple who meets the criteria should as well.

Even then, there will still be kids without parents, sorry to say.

I do not believe it is the false choice you're making it out to be. Gays are not going to stop straights from adopting. They aren't going to get preferential treatment, either. And, sorry to say, there will likely be bigots in the adoption agencies who rarely ever allow gay couples to adopt, even if the law says they should be treated equally.

You're probably going to get your wish even if the law is changed to reflect equality. But I think it's still a shame.

The observation of, and the input from, both genders in their roles as parents is crucial for a child, And though it really pizzes some people off to hear this, it is normal as well. It is healthy and normal for a child to see a mother and father love each other, and is it also healthy and normal for a child to watch the conflicts, reasoning, and reconciliation between a mother and father. The learning from, and the interaction with, a mother and a father is how a kid learns to deal best with real life because real life has both sexes.

I am unmoved by arguments related to "normalcy". The child has already lost their parents and is sitting in some orphanage or foster home. Their lives are far from normal.

I don't like how the only way they can be happy, now, is that they have to have the perfect 50's-style nuclear family with 1.5 other kids in the house, 1 dog and 1 cat, and a father who smokes a pipe and a wife who cleans house and bakes. And while you're not arguing for that, you are basically saying the only way you'll permit these kids to be happy is if they are raised by parents you find fit, when the data and real life experiences show that parents you don't think are as good as the ones you prefer, do just as fine a job raising the kids.

Sorry, I feel you are wrong, even if your heart is in the right place. Normal isn't a moral value, it's argument from popularity. And I really gotta tell ya, I've never found popular opinion to be all that enlightened.

The kids have all the rights and kids have a right to a mother and father.

Yep, and if their new mother and father are both women, that is infinitely better than staring at a wall in an orphanage and getting no presents on Christmas. And I am very, very unconvinced that the fact that they are both women makes them unworthy of consideration, when there is a male and female as the alternative. I don't see it, even if you do, and I am still unmoved by the soaring rhetoric about how only men can teach you how to play catch, and only women can show you how to bake, and how a child has a god-given right to learn how to play catch and bake cookies.

I don't buy it. I think it is sexism.

[PanzerJaeger]

What I said, ad what I will continue to say, is that this has nothing to do with the parents, it has everything to do with the kid.

Obviously not. Your continued attempt to frame this as a kids versus gay rights issue is particularly disingenuous.

If this was really about the kids and not you clinging to some outdated conception of what the family should look like, you would take the time to read the studies instead of dismissing them outright. You would take the time to read the history of family structure beyond the relatively new and limited Western model. You would read the conclusions of every major psychological and children's health group in the Western World. You would read the vast amount of literature published by the children of gay couples themselves on the subject. You would listen to your own words.

I have no doubt gay people can be great parents. And I don't care.

Instead, you would keep kids languishing in the system while you sit back and claim to be on their side. Instead of placing them with loving, 'great parents', you'd sentence them to a far worse fate simply to enforce your old and outdated conception of what a family should look like that is admittedly based on absolutely nothing but your own common sense. In your common sense world, an orphanage, group home, or the foster system are as close as these kids will ever get to a loving home.

So you can cut the 'it's for teh children!' BS. Nobody's buying it.

The observation of, and the input from, both genders in their roles as parents is crucial for a child, And though it really pizzes some people off to hear this, it is normal as well. It is healthy and normal for a child to see a mother and father love each other, and is it also healthy and normal for a child to watch the conflicts, reasoning, and reconciliation between a mother and father. The learning from, and the interaction with, a mother and a father is how a kid learns to deal best with real life because real life has both sexes.

None of this has anything to do with gender.

Since you dodged the question before, I'll ask it again.

Maybe it would be more productive if you shared some specific problems that you believe arise from same sex parenting. What can a mother and father give (materially, mentally, emotionally, or any other way) a child that two fathers or mothers cannot? How exactly is it an inferior family situation?

[Riedquat]

There's not much to understand. His opinion is that it's "common sense" that gays are inferior parents to straight parents.

Thats the whole point you keep making up! That is not what he is saying, or at least not what I interpret from what he is saying! Nobody is telling they are inferior or bad parents, you are looking at the problem from the wrong side of the street, gay couples can be the more loving and caring parents in the entire world but that is beside the point, the common sense point is directed at what is more natural for the child, an imposed (by the state/government/laws/whatever) mother who biologically is a man or an imposed mother who biologically is a woman, (same could apply to the imposed father) and please try to see this with the child eyes... thats the point, the important point to consider, the common sense, the natural view.

Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people have biological children all the time.

No!? Really? the wonders of nature! And? Whats the point of that point? I didn't say they not deserve to be parents, nor that they aren't... I'm lost...

Where is this right, and how is it guaranteed? My parents divorced when I was 4.

Do you keep one at a time didn't you? Not both at same time but at least both were alive...

What right did I have to a father? What if my parents died? Does my right to a mother and a father bring them back to life?

Ufff...!!! What are we talking about? Of course that right isn't wrote in stone, honestly don't know where it is in my own country laws, know in our constitution is mentioned the right of child to be happy but not much more, and of course there is no guaranty. What I think? I think every child in the world has the right to be happy with his family and if for any reason they lack both fathers they have the right to get the best father possible the society can bring...

How is a child being raised by a gay couple not a family, if a child being raised by a straight single parent is a family?

Where on earth did I say that?
A single person independent of his/her sexuality can be a good father? yes of course; the number of parents doesn't matter, the importance is about the quality not quantity, quality in a sense beyond the mere meaning of the world; again, don't know how are things there but here singles can adopt, don't know if as a single you are requested to inform about your sexuality... and don't think it matters anyway. But we keep mixing things, stop looking under the carpet for weird examples, we are talking about orphans...

Yes, people have said they shouldn't.

Bah! Fachos! Guess you call them bigots...

How about a million couples, and ten million unwanted children?

Are you saying you're going to deny the child a family because you don't like gay people?

Uh? UH!!?? Do you think/believe I've said that?? Perhaps if i write in Spanish you will understand me better....

I don't know there but here orphanages (sp) are full of kids, there are not enough people wanting to adopt, the adoption process is slow as molasses, the bureaucracy behind the process is sick, usually couples wanting to adopt end abandoning the legal system and getting the child from other sources (a majority!). So the few who wants to adopt are discouraged for the system, the same system that is about to collapse... ||Mental pause... posting from work sucks big time... diluting brain fart|||

Everyone goodhearted with the will to adopt should be given the opportunity

[Fragony]

You are a child of nature, I like.