Gay marriages

[DN]

As far as them not having children- There are many other familes who would like to adopt (and who are on waiting lists, in fact) that have both a mother and father figure, which I think is very important.

 

I've had this debate many times with friends, and it's one that never gets resolved.

 

Except that according to the article I just posted there are half a million children in the US foster-care programme. Where is the line-up of heterosexual couples waiting to adopt them? Most people who adopt want to adopt babies.

 

So, why are heterosexual the only privilaged ones then? I mean, marriage is a social institution coined by human beings and is not biological, so the fact that gay and lesbian people cannot get married is just another way the majority subjegate the minority, for whatever reasons they do (to feel powerful and vidicated in some way). Typical. If the situation was reversed, i bet heterosexual people would cry blue murder at not being able to get married. Infact, they probably did, hence the laws we have now.

 

Gay people take things pretty easily i think. You (or anybody reading this who is not gay) try to live life in our shoes for a year, or even a day... We are constantly fighting prejudice and standing up for our "love rights"...

 

If we walk down the street with a lover, we get stared at or ostracised, or cheered (!), but If heterosexuals do, it is celebrated and celebrated by marriage. Personally, i would rather be myself and live the life i choose and not be noticed or stand out in any way.

If your comments are aimed at me you might care to re-read the thread to see that I am in favour of gays adopting.

[mgirl]

No DN, my comments weren't aimed at anyone, except those who subjegate us, and i don't think that is you. Whilst i accept everyone's opinion, it disappoints me when basic rights or priviledges aren't extended to us, and for no apparent reason (but i think truthfully, i am having a bad day and am a tad anxious. Lol).

 

Whilst i understand that gay rights have progressed a lot over the past few years, it sometimes seems token or simply that we are "tolerated" in society rather then being "embraced". Think about what happens when a mother/father rejects their child or only shows token affection... This is how we feel (speaking for myself) sometimes, in wider society. A little bit misunderstood, rejected and sometimes stuggling... for basic rights such as love and joy.

[RayKay]

No DN, my comments weren't aimed at anyone, except those who subjegate us, and i don't think that is you. Whilst i accept everyone's opinion, it disappoints me when basic rights or priviledges aren't extended to us, and for no apparent reason (but i think truthfully, i am having a bad day and am a tad anxious. Lol).

 

Whilst i understand that gay rights have progressed a lot over the past few years, it sometimes seems token or simply that we are "tolerated" in society rather then being "embraced". Think about what happens when a mother/father rejects their child or only shows token affection... This is how we feel (speaking for myself) sometimes, in wider society. A little bit misunderstood, rejected and sometimes stuggling... for basic rights such as love and joy.

 

Seeing my brother struggle with acceptance before he officially came out, was tremendously hard on me - because the thing is I ALWAYS knew he was, always. Even when I did not voice it, I always knew he was gay, and it NEVER EVER changed how I felt for him. He was my brother, and I loved him no less, nor did anything change in our sibling rivalry dynamic.

 

When he came out and realized we as a family embraced and loved him 100% he was a whole new person, we have brought his partner into our family just as easily (my mom even things of him as one of her kids now, and talks to my brothers partner almost daily lol).

 

I too wish that it was not such a struggle - and one day I really hope there is that future where it is accepted, and where being gay is neither ostracised, nor seen as a "sideshow" of sorts - where people don't even look back if they see two gays kissing or holding hands - if that makes sense.

 

I just do not understand WHY those basic rights are not extended (ie marriage, adoption). I am fortunate to live in a country that has deemed the limitation of marriage to opposite sex couples only as inhumane and many provinces have already legislated gay marriage, and the fact is that someone whom is gay is NO different that someone whom is straight. They fall in love, get rejected, sometimes their marriages may not work out, they make mistakes as parents and learn from them, they love too much, sometimes not enough, some would make wonderful parents, some horrible ones (I was watching a show last night - Wife Swap - where the one mother basically hated being around her children - she went to the casino daily rather then be with her kids....but of course she is straight, so it's all fine of course... ).

[BillyJean714]

This is just my opinion. I think that Gays (I don't even like using that term, because they are just as human as everyone else) deserve basic human rights such as marriage. It's that simple. How does Gay marriage cause a threat to society? Is the population of Gays really violating the safety of other human beings? No. If we want to get into ethics, I think the bigger question is if Gays can't get married, and it's if it's absolutely immoral, then how can dropping bombs on innocent people be justified? For those who call themselves religious and think it's not okay for Gays to get married but approve of mass genocide, how is killing innocent civillians justified in the name of God? Gay rights doesn't impose an immoral threat, killing does. And, I don't want to get started on molestations issues in regards to the church. Anyway, like I said, everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. It's always good to have varying opinions on this subject matter, but I still think that Gays should have recognized marriages. That's just what I think.

[SeaBisquit]

this just seems so hateful to me. is it really wrong for two people of the same sex to marry and adopt? who are we to judge?

[lunatic]

Now this is my opinions here and I dont want to spark anymore anger. I feel that marrage by difinition is written for a man and woman. I am not saying that gays should not be able to have a union with the same privledges and legal rights. I think it should not be called marriage because the origins of marriage is between a man and woman.

 

I am not saying that gays should not have a union like a marriage I think they should call it something else that the government cannot look away from.

[darkblue]

But the fact remains that we are a societal people. People in general do form their opinions from what others think and generally a consensus emerges that, sooner or later, governs the way society views and legislates issues. But the one constant in this is that the consensus is constantly changing

 

I have to disagree with this statement, as I believe it only applies to the marjority.

 

Some people choose to question societal beliefs. On the most part - it is these people whom are criticised for their views.

 

The rest; I agree with.

[RayKay]

Now this is my opinions here and I dont want to spark anymore anger. I feel that marrage by difinition is written for a man and woman. I am not saying that gays should not be able to have a union with the same privledges and legal rights. I think it should not be called marriage because the origins of marriage is between a man and woman.

 

I am not saying that gays should not have a union like a marriage I think they should call it something else that the government cannot look away from.

 

Well, this is very dependent on where you live however. And marriage is in many laws defined as a legal institution and called marriage.

 

I never understand this argument, because marriage IS a legal arrangement - you must get a marriage certificate from the legal authorities before marriage.

 

Whose origins? Not everyone shares the same "origins". The law was originally written also to have the women as PROPERTY of the man, where the father gave the property of his daughter to the husband - that definition has certainly changed.

 

Laws like anything else, change over time - people create the laws. If the definition of marriage was as it was originally - interracial marriages would not be allowed either, since they were not defined as legal in the law. It was originally written so one could only marry their own race - white man and white woman for example. That was changed at some point amongst much objection, however I think that is now accepted in general. If it can be changed then, why not now?

 

If you are referring to it in the religious definition - then that is purely a religious definition that is defined by the respective Church - some Churches have decided that there is nothing against gay marriage, some have decided it is not permitted - however there is seperation of Church and State and both should be permitted to make their own definition and decisions.

[SeaBisquit]

why do we have to be so critical? gays should be able to choose their lives as they wish. they are being treated as the lesser of the human race. I think that is very much unfair, mostly due to part of our religious beliefs. Do we really know their is a God, no we don't. We believe in someone we have never seen.

[lillady898]

I think that is very much unfair, mostly due to part of our religious beliefs. Do we really know their is a God, no we don't. We believe in someone we have never seen.

 

It's called faith why people believe in something they can't see (aka a god). This is a completely different situation... I don't know what it has to do with this situation. It may for some, but my reasons behind my beleifs go further than religion.

 

One of my friends is gay, and he knows where I stand on the issue. I lie to noone about my beleifs. He understands my point of view, and I understand his. We disagree, but respect for eachother as human beings for having an opinion- Even if it means that I cannot fully support him in certain ways (we try to avoid the subject altogether). The respect has nothing to do with his sexual orientation. It is nothing prejudice. My beleifs are more realistic and well thought out than a prejudice. A prejudice is what a beleif concerning a particular person (or group of people) becomes when you disregard any logical information and base your beleif on pure emotion or analogy. This is not what I'm doing.

 

If we allow gay marriages, let's get rid of all other "prejudices." Let's let 15 year olds get drunk, caucasians work as waiters at an authentic Mexican restaurant, and "rehabilitated" ex-convicts be elementary teachers. When do we draw the line of who can marry who? It's only a matter of time until virtual husbands/wives become socially acceptable.

[OceanEyes]

Being either homosexual or heterosexual has nothing to do with an individual's propensity to be a good, loving, and responsible parent. Just ask someone who has been raised in a dysfunctional/ abusive family whether or not it helped that his/ her parents (or PARENT) were heterosexual.

 

I read on the BBC website recently about a family in Ohio who were adopting children and keeping them caged up in their basement. This is a heterosexual couple, mind you.

 

The only thing that would concern me is society's reaction to a child brought up in a same-sex household. Kids these days already have a tough time with acceptance and peer pressures. It's not the child brought up in a same-sex houshold that would concern me, it's the other children who don't understand, likely because of parents who don't care to explain it. Well, that or parents who are opposed to homosexuality in general. I do, however, feel that same-sex couples are very capable of bringing up children in loving and stable homes.

 

As for marriage, I don't see what the big deal is. Who am I to judge other peoples' lives? The choices they make? Who am I to say what's right and what isn't? I believe that everyone has a right to be happy, and everyone should have a right to enter into a legal marriage. Gays and lesbians deserve the same protection under law for their unions. Should it only be straight people who have their interests protected? I don't think so.

 

Homosexuality is not a new concept. It has been affluent in various cultures and civilizations for centuries. I don't see why straight people take such offence to what other people choose. My guess is that strongly-opposed people have been brought up this way, or have never had the opportunity to know any gays/ lesbians. Is how they live their life affecting how you live yours? Have you ever been wronged by one of these 'people'? They just want to live happily, and with the same rights and civil liberties as you or I. That's not too much to ask.

[sasha12]

oceaneyes, that is exactly how i feel about this topic i just couldn't explain it as well as you did.

[lillady898]

There is always a case of a child being abused or neglected, whether it is in a homosexual or heterosexual family. Just because adoptive parents are homesexual, the child isn't automatically protected from abuse. It happens in any family. Whether it is homosexual or heterosexual, rich or poor, old family or young family.

 

While I was student teaching, there was a sixth grader who had a two lesbian mothers. She was never at school, her grades were declining, and she was a very nervous person. Counselors began questioning... And low and behold, there were problems in the home. My point is, these problems do happen in homosexual families as well.

 

My main concern (not only concern, mind you) with raising a child in a homosexual family is mostly in that the child/children would grow up with only a mother figure or only a father figure. This does affect children. Most who are involved with single-parent homes can tell you how difficult it is. It's not impossible to raise them correctly, but it is near to impossible for it to not affect them, mostly negatively.

[RayKay]

No one said there would be no "bad" gay parents, what they are saying is that heterosexual parents do not automatically make good parents. I think you are arguing the very same point many are making. There can be problems in the home whether the parents are straight, gay, single, nuclear, whatever. That girls problems were not because her parents were lesbian, it was because they were having family problems..plain and simple. Which could of been the same if she had a mother and father.

 

The fact is that there are MANY MANY children who grow up in single parent families who do not suffer from not having the other parent always there, it does NOT preclude them from having positive role models of the opposite sex there. I grew up in a single parent household and I can guarantee that I was not negatively affected, my mother was a fantastic role model of a strong woman, and I had extended family and a somewhat-absent-but-still-around father whom was there to provide me the role model of a male figure. There are also MANY MANY children whom grow up in a family with mother and father who provide terrible "role models" of what a parent, or person should be like.

 

 

I actually found your last statement rather insulting. And honestly, can you tell me that when you are a parent you are going to be perfect? What is "raising them correctly" mean to you? Is that ever going to be the saem for everyone?

[shiminimo]

o.k. here's my question. and i don't mean to offend. if two gay couples are raising up a child do they tend to follow their parents and be gay or do they get raised up being able to choose between straight or gay? will they be influenced at all being raised up by gay parents or will they be able to choose their own sexual preference?

[darkblue]

o.k. here's my question. and i don't mean to offend. if two gay couples are raising up a child do they tend to follow their parents and be gay or do they get raised up being able to choose between straight or gay? will they be influenced at all being raised up by gay parents or will they be able to choose their own sexual preference?

 

Good question - I believe it does influence the child.

 

If you see two males or two females - who have raised you - together. You will see it as a normalicy.

 

It's up to you whether you think that's a bad thing or not.

[RayKay]

o.k. here's my question. and i don't mean to offend. if two gay couples are raising up a child do they tend to follow their parents and be gay or do they get raised up being able to choose between straight or gay? will they be influenced at all being raised up by gay parents or will they be able to choose their own sexual preference?

 

You don't "choose" your sexual preference. I don't know anyone whom is HONESTLY gay who sits there and says "hmm, you know, being gay looks like SO much fun, I am going to pick that!".

 

Studies have shown that being raised by gay parents does not mean you will be any more gay then anyone else, and being raised by straight parents does not guarantee you will be straight either.

 

They may be more tolerant of gay people in life, and I see nothing wrong with that. But you don't pick your sexual orientation and what you are attracted to. You know early on what you are attracted to, and what you are not.

[darkblue]

Another mind-boggling question:

 

If the couple were to split up - who would receive custody?

 

With hetrosexual couples - it's normally the mother who would be looking after the child in the event of a break up.

[RayKay]

Another mind-boggling question:

 

If the couple were to split up - who would receive custody?

 

With hetrosexual couples - it's normally the mother who would be looking after the child in the event of a break up.

 

"Normally" does not mean "right".

 

The tendency to automatically give mother custody has been changing in the past few years to realize that just because they are the mother, does not make them more suitable as parents.

 

I imagine in a gay couple it would be the same, the courts would evaluate the situation on a case by case basis, as it should whether a couple is straight or gay.

[darkblue]

Many conservative groups applauded the Virginia Supreme Court's decision. These groups oppose gay parental rights, maintaining that homosexual parents can irretrievably influence a child to grow up to be gay or lesbian.

Paul Cameron, chairman of the Family Research Institute in Colorado Springs, surveyed studies of children who were raised by gay or lesbian parents. He found that in adulthood, between 8 and 33 percent of the sons considered themselves to be gay or bisexual—a percentage well above the most recent national estimate that 1 to 2 percent of the general population is gay, lesbian, or bisexual.

 

Source: link removed

[RayKay]

Many conservative groups applauded the Virginia Supreme Court's decision. These groups oppose gay parental rights, maintaining that homosexual parents can irretrievably influence a child to grow up to be gay or lesbian.

Paul Cameron, chairman of the Family Research Institute in Colorado Springs, surveyed studies of children who were raised by gay or lesbian parents. He found that in adulthood, between 8 and 33 percent of the sons considered themselves to be gay or bisexual—a percentage well above the most recent national estimate that 1 to 2 percent of the general population is gay, lesbian, or bisexual.

 

Source: link removed

 

Whenever you look at a study - look at the source.

 

And the fact that 1-2 is still an estimate, a lot of people still are not ready to admit being gay or bisexual. Maybe those children were just more accepting of themselves and open to the world then others would be.

 

If you look into Kinsey's research, his would show that almost EVERYONE is on a sliding scale of gay-straight, some having more gay tendencies then others. That would blow the 1-2 % estimate out of the water.

[lillady898]

Excuse me, but I haven't been tearing apart people's opinions piece by piece as many others have been. I am simply stating my beleifs. I do not want a debate, I was just giving another angle to think about since I have considered everyone elses. I don't become critical of other people's opinions until they begin to critisize mine.

 

Everything is a generalization in this debate, whether you're for or against gay rights. It's easy to tear apart the other person's point of view when it is all about generalizations. (i.e. some families are like this, other families are like that)

 

Noone's mind will be changed on a debate like this. I was merely stating my point of view- I wasn't looking for rebutal or my view to be torn apart and anaylized. I'd much rather read other points of view without mine being critisized.

 

I am finished with this thread. Sometimes people with the most "open-minded" views are also the most closed-minded to understand others.

[darkblue]

I'm in agreement with every single word.

 

I will also not be replying again, I fear this topic will become more disrespectful and even more heated.

[RayKay]

Sometimes people with the most "open-minded" views are also the most closed-minded to understand others.

 

I find that more disrespectful then me having objections to your comments and stating them. You state your opinions, which do object to other opinions other said, someone objects to those and states why, and immediately they are close minded? How is it any different then you doing the same by using examples from your own experiences?

 

Sorry if you thought I was tearing it apart - to me part of having opinions is discussing them, and also trying to better understand others whatever they are. I like having my opinions "tore apart" because then I can approach how I think differently - and see my views in a different way, plain and simple.

 

Nor was I trying to change your mind - not my intent at all. I always have debates about EVERYTHING with friends, whether we agree on a certain issue or not, its part about learning to understand not only your own opinions better, but also how people look at the world. Just because someone does not agree with your view, and "picks it apart" does not mean they are being disrespectful.

[RayKay]

link removed

 

Interesting study.