Same Sex Parenting - For it or against it?
Poll: Same Sex Parenting - For it or against it?
Total Members Polled: 482
Discussion
C8PPO said:
captainzep said:
we do live amongst an ageing population of sterile, beige Howard and Hildas whose dogmatic, sneering disregard for anything different drives healthy Daily Mail and indigestion tablet sales.
Oh that we were all uber-cool and on message, eh?I'm only being like this because I downloaded a fapp onto my i-oblong called "Be fair to people". Next week I'll probably download one called "Needless predjudice" and purchase some obscure trainers.
I wasn't going to post on this subject but, having seen how those in the "against" camp are being derided and abused I feel I should state my case.
As said, I don't agree with same-sex parenting.
Before anyone starts, I know that mixed-sex parents are often not the best, single parents bring up kids all the time etc etc. But the fact is, in my mind and in a perfect world, all kids would be brought up by a loving mum and dad. The fact that this doesn't always happen doesn't mean I should change my view on same-sex parenting.
My reasons are simple. Children should have the influence of a mum and dad. I know the "N" word is not allowed on this topic, and I'm sure I'll be called a bigot for using it, but a child raised by a man and woman is normal (and by that I mean the majority) whether you like it or not.
Sure, times have changed. Years ago kids of mixed-race parentage would have been mocked and thankfully that doesn't happen any more. However, one this that hasn't changed and never will is the ability for two men or two women to create a child naturally.
Now, I know we do a lot of things that are against nature. IVF for those that can't conceive is one of them and I have no issue with that. We are simply making up for a medical condition in the same way as we are when we take penicillin. A same sex couple that cannot conceive is not a medical condition. It is a fact of nature. It can't happen and I don't believe we should enable it to. And my reason goes back to my first point: a child should, in an ideal world, have a mum and a dad.
So, I've stated my reasons and will probably get abuse for them. But the fact is, they are my views and are right in my mind and this is supposed to be a sensible discussion on the fact. I won't try to change your mind and I don't believe you will change mine, but I'm more than willing to hear why my views may be wrong.
As said, I don't agree with same-sex parenting.
Before anyone starts, I know that mixed-sex parents are often not the best, single parents bring up kids all the time etc etc. But the fact is, in my mind and in a perfect world, all kids would be brought up by a loving mum and dad. The fact that this doesn't always happen doesn't mean I should change my view on same-sex parenting.
My reasons are simple. Children should have the influence of a mum and dad. I know the "N" word is not allowed on this topic, and I'm sure I'll be called a bigot for using it, but a child raised by a man and woman is normal (and by that I mean the majority) whether you like it or not.
Sure, times have changed. Years ago kids of mixed-race parentage would have been mocked and thankfully that doesn't happen any more. However, one this that hasn't changed and never will is the ability for two men or two women to create a child naturally.
Now, I know we do a lot of things that are against nature. IVF for those that can't conceive is one of them and I have no issue with that. We are simply making up for a medical condition in the same way as we are when we take penicillin. A same sex couple that cannot conceive is not a medical condition. It is a fact of nature. It can't happen and I don't believe we should enable it to. And my reason goes back to my first point: a child should, in an ideal world, have a mum and a dad.
So, I've stated my reasons and will probably get abuse for them. But the fact is, they are my views and are right in my mind and this is supposed to be a sensible discussion on the fact. I won't try to change your mind and I don't believe you will change mine, but I'm more than willing to hear why my views may be wrong.
wiggy001 said:
I wasn't going to post on this subject but, having seen how those in the "against" camp are being derided and abused I feel I should state my case.
So, presumably you're going to put in a compassionate call to Childline or The Guardian to get some support for poor, sensitive C8PPO and his fragile human rights:C8PPO said:
It's more than "not right" IMO. Yes, I realise that what I'm about to say will unleash the hounds, but I feel very strongly about this "same sex parent" b
ks. It's wrong, wrong, wrong, and it should be banned by statute. "Oh, but what about their human rights", I hear some tree-hugger say. Well, for me, it's quite simple...
and ring the FBI to put a stop to this international abuse and derision:ks. It's wrong, wrong, wrong, and it should be banned by statute. "Oh, but what about their human rights", I hear some tree-hugger say. Well, for me, it's quite simple... American Psychological Association said:
"...In summary, there is no evidence to suggest that lesbian women or gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of lesbian women or gay men is compromised relative to that among offspring of heterosexual parents. Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents."
And the world will be a happier place?wiggy001 said:
Now, I know we do a lot of things that are against nature. IVF for those that can't conceive is one of them and I have no issue with that. We are simply making up for a medical condition in the same way as we are when we take penicillin. A same sex couple that cannot conceive is not a medical condition. It is a fact of nature. It can't happen and I don't believe we should enable it to. And my reason goes back to my first point: a child should, in an ideal world, have a mum and a dad.
This statement is contradictory. On the one hand, you're claiming you're opposed to single sex parenting because it's biologically impossible, but then you're saying you're opposed to it because a child should have a mum and a dad.Should we assume you're only opposed to gay men raising children? It is, after all, far easier for a lesbian to spread her legs and think of babies with a willing male volunteer than it is for a heterosexual woman to be impregnated via IVF.
wiggy001 said:
Your sarcasm just proves my first point.
What sarcasm? 
You are simply putting up completely flawed logic. It is potentially far easier for a lesbian to conceive than it it for a heterosexual woman who needs IVF. Hiding behind a throwaway comment about sarcasm and refusing to respond doesn't make your logic any less flawed.
Kermit power said:
wiggy001 said:
Now, I know we do a lot of things that are against nature. IVF for those that can't conceive is one of them and I have no issue with that. We are simply making up for a medical condition in the same way as we are when we take penicillin. A same sex couple that cannot conceive is not a medical condition. It is a fact of nature. It can't happen and I don't believe we should enable it to. And my reason goes back to my first point: a child should, in an ideal world, have a mum and a dad.
This statement is contradictory. On the one hand, you're claiming you're opposed to single sex parenting because it's biologically impossible, but then you're saying you're opposed to it because a child should have a mum and a dad.Should we assume you're only opposed to gay men raising children? It is, after all, far easier for a lesbian to spread her legs and think of babies with a willing male volunteer than it is for a heterosexual woman to be impregnated via IVF.
The point I was trying to make (badly) is that I think a kid should have a mum and a dad where possible. Giving same-sex couples a child is not the same as a couple having IVF, as some had hinted at earlier by comparing the two.
And no, my view applies to male and female same-sex parents.
wiggy001 said:
Apologies Kermit, the sarcasm comment was aimed at the previous poster with nothing useful to add, not you.
OK.Here's something new to add.
From the fairly conservative, capital punishment favouring Florida courts (Re: Gill case Sept 2010)
"Based on the robust nature of the evidence available in the field, this Court is satisfied that the issue is so far beyond dispute that it would be irrational to hold otherwise; the best interests of children are not preserved by prohibiting homosexual adoption."
http://www.3dca.flcourts.org/Opinions/3D08-3044.pd...
More context on pages 16-17
most animals tend to have worked out that a male and female is needed for families to work, only humans have same sex couples, so not natural
good chance of a boy adopted by 2 gays of becoming gay himself, guess the same for a girl and 2 lesbians
one of the downsides of the human rights act as gays need others to help them, 1 guy shagging another guy up the bum is not going to get him a baby
good chance of a boy adopted by 2 gays of becoming gay himself, guess the same for a girl and 2 lesbians
one of the downsides of the human rights act as gays need others to help them, 1 guy shagging another guy up the bum is not going to get him a baby
Scraggles said:
most animals tend to have worked out that a male and female is needed for families to work, only humans have same sex couples, so not natural
Really? Take a look here --> http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718....Scraggles said:
good chance of a boy adopted by 2 gays of becoming gay himself, guess the same for a girl and 2 lesbians
And doubtless you have empirical evidence to support this assumption? 
Just out of interest... These two gays adopting a boy and turning him gay... I assume you assertion would be that they themselves were turned gay when they were adopted by two gay men? It couldn't possibly be that the overwhelming majority of gays come from normal, heterosexual parenting backgrounds, could it?
You plank!
Scraggles said:
most animals tend to have worked out that a male and female is needed for families to work, only humans have same sex couples, so not natural
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5550488/Homosexual-behaviour-widespread-in-animals-according-to-new-study.htmlhttp://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/07...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_i...
Scraggles said:
good chance of a boy adopted by 2 gays of becoming gay himself, guess the same for a girl and 2 lesbians
Really?American Psychological Association 2005 said:
A number of investigators have also studied a third component of sexual identity, sexual orientation (Bailey, Bobrow,Wolfe, & Mickach, 1995; Bozett, 1980, 1987, 1989; Gottman, 1990; Golombok & Tasker, 1996; Green, 1978; Huggins, 1989; Miller, 1979; Paul, 1986; Rees, 1979; Tasker & Golombok, 1997). In all studies, the great majority of offspring of both lesbian mothers and gay fathers described themselves as heterosexual. Taken together, the data do not suggest elevated rates of homosexuality among the offspring of lesbian or gay parents.
I think that we are still in the early stages of life changing as we know it - I will try to explain what I think....
100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
HoHoHo said:
I think that we are still in the early stages of life changing as we know it - I will try to explain what I think....
100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
But weren't same sex relationships "normal" in Greek times?100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
NoelWatson said:
HoHoHo said:
I think that we are still in the early stages of life changing as we know it - I will try to explain what I think....
100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
But weren't same sex relationships "normal" in Greek times?100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
HoHoHo said:
NoelWatson said:
HoHoHo said:
I think that we are still in the early stages of life changing as we know it - I will try to explain what I think....
100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
But weren't same sex relationships "normal" in Greek times?100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
I agree with most of what you say save that there is no early/late stages...life changes, evolves, moves on, I don't think it is possible for it to be static.
edit
wiki link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_love
Edited by Halb on Friday 31st December 14:00
NoelWatson said:
HoHoHo said:
I think that we are still in the early stages of life changing as we know it - I will try to explain what I think....
100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
But weren't same sex relationships "normal" in Greek times?100 years ago or even 50 years ago, mixed race marriages were a no no - my first wife's Dad was a Black Jamaican who fell in love with a white girl from Hounslow. To this day there are still people on both sides of the family who are upset by that marriage, yet on a day to day basis we are now used to such events and only have happy thoughts for the couple.
Gay relationships are the norm, but due to some opposition, some chose to keep their sexuality quiet. Same sex marriages have only very recently become legal (not sure of the exact date?) and fostering/adoption/surrogacy within those relationships are still new, and in general not understood, perhaps even frowned upon by those who are getting used to this event.
Once we get through the next how ever many years until this is a 'normal accepted' part of life, there will be opposition from certain quarters.
I understand what I'm saying - hope you do!
None of it was considered wrong until about 4-500AD when Augustus re-wrote the Bible and Mohammed popped up and penned his little handbook.
Animals are not religious so they still run around happily bumming each other.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff