Behavior and prejudice

[WildSweet&Cool]

My daughter is 7 years old. She does not yet know anything about how children are born and knows nothing about sexuality. We haven't had the "birds and bees" discussion with her and would like to wait a few more years before we do . Until then, we would like to continue with keeping her in the dark about sexuality and childbirth (she still believes in Santa Claus). We feel that she's just not ready for that knowledge yet.

There is a gay couple who live on our street who adopted a baby boy about 2 years ago.

Now, I do not force my beliefs on other adults. I have always treated homosexual people the same as any other person. I don't shun them. I respect their intelligence (if they're intelligent). I don't let their sexual preference control how I treat them. I work with and have have been friends with gay people and not had any problems. I don't tell them how to lead their lives, and they have always paid me the same respect.

But I am entitled to my opinion of what is right or wrong, just like any human being. I'm gonna say it right out - I have never and will never approve of gay couples raising children. Now that I have said that, I want to emphasize that I have never treated the gay guys down the street or their son in any negative way whatsoever. The kid certainly doesn't deserve any negative treatment from me, and I don't believe that I should treat the gay parents poorly either.

I have, however, kept our exposure to them limited. At this point in time, I don't want to have to deal with my daughter asking "why does Andy have two daddys? I thought only women can make babies? How are babies made?". I would prefer to choose the time to speak to her about such things, and I would choose such a time when I feel that she is mature enough to comprehend it, and give serious thought and consideration to various points of view on it (the gay guys' point of view, their son's point of view, God's point of view, my point of view, etc.).

Recently, the gay guys invited my daughter to their son's birthday party.

Truthfully, I don't want her to go. My view is that they can live their lives and we can live our lives. And, though I treat them in a dignified manner, I don't approve of them raising a child and I don't want to have to be forced into a situation of having to answer questions from my daughter at a time when I don't feel that she's mature enough to deal with the information. And, honestly, even after I have that talk with her, I still probably won't want her to go (more on that in a moment).

Now, I could concoct an excuse for why we can't go. But there's another issue at hand.

I feel like such an excuse would be preitty transparent. Also, that's only a solution for this occasion. It doesn't solve anything for future occasions. And if we keep turning them down and turning them down, I feel that we're gonna be sending a signal to them that we're prejudiced against them. In fact, I do not approve of their parenthood (is that prejudice?), but have never demonstrated this to them (nor do I want to). This situation, however, forces me into a difficult predicament. I don't want to treat them with prejudice, but I also don't want to participate in and endorse something that I feel is wrong.

Please offer your thoughts.

[pgabriel]

I have difficulty on which side I come down on.

The negative to me is the stigma for the kid. To me the kid is going to be what its going to be. The problem I have is how will that kid deal with it when he/she gets made fun, because kids are cruel. Life as a kid is challenging enough emotionally sometimes.

on the otherhand,

there are so many kids that need to be adopted, that's its kind of hard to turn well-meaning people down.

[JuanValdez]

By going to a birthday party, you will not be participating in, or abetting, or even endorsing a gay a couple raising a child. It's just a birthday party. So go ahead and go.

Your daughter may ask about their relationship, but it is a question that's probably coming soon anyway. And, I don't know if you need to get into the sexuality of it to answer the question. Their son has a mother; he was adopted by one these men. Either way, she does know about the men down the street and their son, right? You may not get to choose when she asks the question. So go ahead and go and have fun.

[Batman Jones]

I have difficulty on which side I come down on.

The negative to me is the stigma for the kid. To me the kid is going to be what its going to be. The problem I have is how will that kid deal with it when he/she gets made fun, because kids are cruel. Life as a kid is challenging enough emotionally sometimes.

on the otherhand,

there are so many kids that need to be adopted, that's its kind of hard to turn well-meaning people down.

The stigma for the kid was the reason for my grandmother's staunch opposition to interracial marriage. And she was right. Kids used to get picked on a whole lot more for being of mixed race. And then they got picked on less as society realized that the stigma of interracial marriage was antiquated and stupid. That is happening with gay marriage/adoption now too.

Wild Sweet & Cool is in large but shrinking company. By the time the kid he describes is in high school there will be a larger stigma attached to opposing gay adoption than there will be to being raised by gay parents -- exactly as it is now with opposition to interracial relationships. Just look at polling on the gay marriage issue. Young people are overwhelmingly in favor of it, while older people are opposed -- as it was with interracial marriage. The stigma is rapidly fading. Hallelujah.

[pgabriel]

The stigma for the kid was the reason for my grandmother's staunch opposition to interracial marriage. And she was right. Kids used to get picked on a whole lot more for being of mixed race. And then they got picked on less as society realized that the stigma of interracial marriage was antiquated and stupid. That is happening with gay marriage/adoption now too.



the only difference is that as a gay person you are living a lifestyle that doesn't "naturally" include children.

its one thing to say a man and woman shouldn't have a kid, its another issue when it comes to adopting.

[Fatty FatBastard]

The stigma for the kid was the reason for my grandmother's staunch opposition to interracial marriage. And she was right. Kids used to get picked on a whole lot more for being of mixed race. And then they got picked on less as society realized that the stigma of interracial marriage was antiquated and stupid. That is happening with gay marriage/adoption now too.

Wild Sweet & Cool is in large but shrinking company. By the time the kid he describes is in high school there will be a larger stigma attached to opposing gay adoption than there will be to being raised by gay parents -- exactly as it is now with opposition to interracial relationships. Just look at polling on the gay marriage issue. Young people are overwhelmingly in favor of it, while older people are opposed -- as it was with interracial marriage. The stigma is rapidly fading. Hallelujah.

It is, for the most part.

And then I see someone like one of my friends who has a gay secretary who was willing to allow his son to get a sex change operation at 15 that raises doubts about it all over again.

[rhester]

[QUOTE]Truthfully, I don't want her to go. My view is that they can live their lives and we can live our lives. And, though I treat them in a dignified manner, I don't approve of them raising a child and I don't want to have to be forced into a situation of having to answer questions from my daughter at a time when I don't feel that she's mature enough to deal with the information. And, honestly, even after I have that talk with her, I still probably won't want her to go.
There's your answer. Honesty is the best policy. Share your heart with humility and love. Though you differ with them you can respect them as a neighbor. You can thank them for the kindness of their offer but that you can also simply state the above, that you are not in agreement.

You don't have to agree with everything in the world just because you are told to. You certainly don't sound mean spirited or judgmental.


In fact, I do not approve of their parenthood (is that prejudice?), but have never demonstrated this to them (nor do I want to). This situation, however, forces me into a difficult predicament. I don't want to treat them with prejudice, but I also don't want to participate in and endorse something that I feel is wrong.

Your first priority is to raise your daughter and to help her mature and deal with issues in the right timing. It is not prejudice to love your daughter enough to care deeply for her emotions and maturity level.

You can certainly show your neighbors a loving respect without feeling you are forced to go against your better judgment to do this.

Stop feeling bad about it, just be honest, sincere, and humble.

[Batman Jones]

the only difference is that as a gay person you are living a lifestyle that doesn't "naturally" include children.

its one thing to say a man and woman shouldn't have a kid, its another issue when it comes to adopting.

Of course there are differences, but the stigma issue you raised is the same. You're worried the kid will get picked on. That's exactly what people argued about the children of interracial unions and, to the extent that it's a valid concern, it was exactly the same.

[Batman Jones]

rhester:

If WS&C's post had been about an interracial couple, would your response have been the same?

[Deckard]

By going to a birthday party, you will not be participating in, or abetting, or even endorsing a gay a couple raising a child. It's just a birthday party. So go ahead and go.

Your daughter may ask about their relationship, but it is a question that's probably coming soon anyway. And, I don't know if you need to get into the sexuality of it to answer the question. Their son has a mother; he was adopted by one these men. Either way, she does know about the men down the street and their son, right? You may not get to choose when she asks the question. So go ahead and go and have fun.
Totally agree. This almost makes too much sense, so I'm sure someone will find fault with it.




D&D. impeach Bush for Promoting Terrorism.

[pgabriel]

Of course there are differences, but the stigma issue you raised is the same. You're worried the kid will get picked on. That's exactly what people argued about the children of interracial unions and, to the extent that it's a valid concern, it was exactly the same.


but there is no right to adopt. i understand your point, the stigma is the same, but having kids is a natural right of a heterosexual couple not of a gay couple. so the stigma maybe the same, but the issue of preventing them from adopting is different, vs. not allowing a heterosexual bi racial couple to have kids.

[rhester]

rhester:

If WS&C's post had been about an interracial couple, would your response have been the same?

that's the whole issue of 'how we are born'

if i believed homosexuality wasn't a behavior i would not have answered that way.

if two people are born in different races that should have no effect at all in a relationship.

if two people behave in a moral way that is difficult for a child to understand a parent must follow their conscience.

it is the parents decision


but no, i would not have answered the same concerning an interracial couple.

it is prejudice to resent someone for something other than behavior

the difference is i believe sexual choices are behaviors not birth wiring

and i don't see any point in debating that one :) many people differ on that issue.

[MR. MEOWGI]

Just think about the kid having a birthday. The party is a celebration of his life. It is not about the parents.

I can't believe that people would rather have children with no parents and family rather than adopted by gay ones. That is just crazy to me.

[MR. MEOWGI]

that's the whole issue of 'how we are born'

if i believed homosexuality wasn't a behavior i would not have answered that way.

if two people are born in different races that should have no effect at all in a relationship.

if two people behave in a moral way that is difficult for a child to understand a parent must follow their conscience.

it is the parents decision


but no, i would not have answered the same concerning an interracial couple.

it is prejudice to resent someone for something other than behavior

the difference is i believe sexual choices are behaviors not birth wiring

and i don't see any point in debating that one :) many people differ on that issue.

So what made you choose to be straight rather than gay?

[Batman Jones]

but there is no right to adopt. i understand your point, the stigma is the same, but having kids is a natural right of a heterosexual couple not of a gay couple. so the stigma maybe the same, but the issue of preventing them from adopting is different, vs. not allowing a heterosexual bi racial couple to have kids.

How quickly they forget. Interracial marriage used to be illegal. I'm pretty sure that in those times a lot of people would have disagreed with your assertion that interracial heteros have a "natural right" to procreate.

There are differences; I already agreed with that. But your argument was about stigma for the kid. Kids got picked on a lot for being the product of interracial marriage, now it's less. The same goes for kids raised by gay couples. There is zero difference there.

But since you're hung up on biology, how would you feel if WS&C's post was about an interracial couple that adopted a kid?

[Batman Jones]

So what made you choose to be straight rather than gay?

And was it a difficult choice?

[pgabriel]

How quickly they forget. Interracial marriage used to be illegal. I'm pretty sure that in those times a lot of people would have disagreed with your assertion that interracial heteros have a "natural right" to procreate.




you don't understand what i'm saying two women ****ing or two men ****ing doens't produce children. there is no natural right for two men ****ing to have a kid. it has nothing to do with the damn law.

[Batman Jones]

if i believed homosexuality wasn't a behavior i would not have answered that way.

the difference is i believe sexual choices are behaviors not birth wiring


Do you feel that whites are "birth wired" to love blacks? Or do you believe that's "behavioral?" My grandmother, rest her soul, would have told you that interracial marriage was a choice and a selfish one at that.

[Batman Jones]

you don't understand what i'm saying two women ****ing or two men ****ing doens't produce children. there is no natural right for two men ****ing to have a kid. it has nothing to do with the damn law.

I understand what you're saying. And now we get to the truth. You're against gay adoption because you think homosexuality is unnatural, not because you worry about the kid being stigmatized. That was just a beard for your problem with gays, just as my grandmother's concern for the children was a veil for her soft bigotry against blacks.

[Rashmon]

By going to a birthday party, you will not be participating in, or abetting, or even endorsing a gay a couple raising a child. It's just a birthday party. So go ahead and go.

Your daughter may ask about their relationship, but it is a question that's probably coming soon anyway. And, I don't know if you need to get into the sexuality of it to answer the question. Their son has a mother; he was adopted by one these men. Either way, she does know about the men down the street and their son, right? You may not get to choose when she asks the question. So go ahead and go and have fun.

Ditto.

You may find that after getting to know this couple that they are wonderful people, great parents, and dare I say it, role models. Regardless of your personal belief on the morality of their relationship we are talking about the happiness of children.

[pgabriel]

I understand what you're saying. And now we get to the truth. You're against gay adoption because you think homosexuality is unnatural, not because you worry about the kid being stigmatized. That was just a beard for your problem with gays, just as my grandmother's concern for the children was a veil for her soft bigotry against blacks.


a gay person can have a kid, go **** a woman or a man.


batman, are you this dumb. there is no civil right to adopt kids last i checked. people get turned down for adoption for all kinds of reason.

but i like the attempt at psychoanalysis. though :rolleyes:

[rimrocker]

...

Now, I do not force my beliefs on other adults. I have always treated homosexual people the same as any other person. I don't shun them. I respect their intelligence (if they're intelligent). I don't let their sexual preference control how I treat them. I work with and have have been friends with gay people and not had any problems. I don't tell them how to lead their lives, and they have always paid me the same respect.

... I want to emphasize that I have never treated the gay guys down the street or their son in any negative way whatsoever. The kid certainly doesn't deserve any negative treatment from me, and I don't believe that I should treat the gay parents poorly either.



There's your answer.

You're absolutely right that the kid is not responsible for what you're thinking, so why punish the kid (and why punish your kid by not going)? If you truly believe that gay couples raising kids is wrong, why not go and show the kid what a loving, supportive family with a mommy and daddy look like? Of course, you might recognize that the two guys are also a loving and supportive family... and that might change your thinking somewhat. Have the courage to go and find out.

As to your daughter, you can easily deal with this without going into sexuality. Explain that some families are different, but what's important is that whoever has responsibility for a child protects and nourishes them in a loving way, just like you and your wife do for your kid.

[pgabriel]

your point about interracial couples is idioic because i don't think it was ever illegal for an interracial couple to have kids. just look at the fair skinned black folks walking around. how do you think we got this way.

[Invisible Fan]

the only difference is that as a gay person you are living a lifestyle that doesn't "naturally" include children.

its one thing to say a man and woman shouldn't have a kid, its another issue when it comes to adopting.

So are you more comfortable if the kid was raised primarily by one parent?

I suspect the attitude against parent's children interacting with gay couple's children is a projection that homosexuality is somehow contagious and its endorsement would plop that uncomfortable situation down on the parent's doorstep.

[pgabriel]

So are you more comfortable if the kid was raised primarily by one parent?

.


:confused:

there is no civil right to adopt, and i bet its harder for a single parent to adopt than a gay couple so i have no idea what point you're trying to make.

[Batman Jones]

pgab:

I'm sorry to come off as judgmental. I used to feel the way you do and I didn't harbor any ill will toward gays so I understand. Likewise, my grandmother didn't harbor any ill will toward blacks. She just thought it was unnatural for the races to mix. That is something of an outrageous belief today but it wasn't twenty or thirty years ago.

Getting back to natural rights, how do you feel about a man and woman that cannot conceive children of their own adopting? Do they have a natural right to that? Or would it be unnatural? There are many couples that are unable to produce children of their own -- it's not just gays.

[pgabriel]

Getting back to natural rights, how do you feel about a man and woman that cannot conceive children of their own adopting? Do they have a natural right to that? Or would it be unnatural? There are many couples that are unable to produce children of their own -- it's not just gays.


see now that's a good point. the purpose of adoption is to increase the value of a kid's life. kid's need parents. like i said in the first post, i understand there a lot of kids that need to be adopted. so given that in general if they are good people then i have no problem with it.

but i think the stigma is something that needs to come into consideration.

[Trader_Jorge]

1) Interracial marriage has NOTHING to do with this situation, Batman, so please do not distract the rest of us with this bait.

2) I too feel that gays should NOT be allowed to adopt and raise a child. I feel this way because I do not believe it provides a child with a good upbringing -- a balanced life, a strong moral code, good role models, and a healthy mother/father figure that provides input on how to prepare one's self for adulthood. So I am thinking about the issue on behalf of the child, not on behalf of the gays.

I would not send my child to the home of a gay couple at that age. Later in life, when the child has figured out the differences between right and wrong, I would not have a problem with it.

[Batman Jones]

your point about interracial couples is idioic because i don't think it was ever illegal for an interracial couple to have kids. just look at the fair skinned black folks walking around. how do you think we got this way.

I raised the issue of interracial couples because you asserted that your issue here was concern for the stigma the children of a gay couple would face. I happen to know that that argument was employed in opposition to mixed races because my grandmother made it to me. I also went to a predominantly black elementary school in which taunts of "oreo" were not rare.

I'm not saying there was ever a law against interracial procreation, but I damn well know it was frowned upon. And not so many years ago you would have gotten a very strange response to asserting you as a black man had a "natural" or "civil" right to couple with a white woman. I'm pretty sure blacks were killed on more than one occasion for doing just that.

My point in all this is to explain that prejudice exists but (thankfully) fades over time as people grow to accept each other's differences. That has happened with mixed race children and it is happening with the children of gay couples. Thankfully.

[Batman Jones]

see now that's a good point. the purpose of adoption is to increase the value of a kid's life. kid's need parents. like i said in the first post, i understand there a lot of kids that need to be adopted. so given that in general if they are good people then i have no problem with it.

but i think the stigma is something that needs to come into consideration.

That's cool. But I have to ask again then, since I don't feel you've addressed it, do you believe my grandmother was right to worry about the very real stigma that children of interracial marriages experienced?

[pgabriel]

That's cool. But I have to ask again then, since I don't feel you've addressed it, do you believe my grandmother was right to worry about the very real stigma that children of interracial marriages experienced?

its a non issue. not to avoid the question. it just has nothing to do with this conversation. if she was sincere, than that's her belief. but there was nothing to stop it from happening so what your grandmother believed really doesn't matter.

for example, i worked with a gay guy who is living with another guy who has little girl that is biologically his. there is nothing society can do to take that kid away.

adoption is a whole other subject.

[Batman Jones]

its a non issue. not to avoid the question. it just has nothing to do with this conversation. if she was sincere, than that's her belief. but there was nothing to stop it from happening so what your grandmother believed really doesn't matter.

for example, i worked with a gay guy who is living with another guy who has little girl that is biologically his. there is nothing society can do to take that kid away.

adoption is a whole other subject.

Sorry, but you're really dodging the question. You call it a non-issue because you believe it should be one, not because it is.

Your whole premise here is that adoption is a choice. So is having a child with a person of another race. Both the child of a mixed marriage and the adopted child of a gay couple face a stigma. In both cases the child's parentage is the result of a choice. In both cases the child faces a stigma or would have faced a stigma in the past. In both cases the stigma was/is wrong. And in both cases that wrong stigma is no reason that the choice to raise the child in a loving household is wrong.

And I assert again, in ten years there will be a greater stigma toward WS&C if he continues to disagree with gay adoption than there will be toward the kid he's concerned about. Just as has proven to be the case with the children of mixed marriages, which was my whole point in bringing it up.

[Invisible Fan]

:confused:

there is no civil right to adopt, and i bet its harder for a single parent to adopt than a gay couple so i have no idea what point you're trying to make.

It's possible that one of the two could be a biological parent of the child. I guess I misread you in describing the stigma for the kid being raised by gay couples. I'd think the stigma would be the same because the main issues is the gay parents, despite whether the kid was totally adopted or had a 3rd minor parent.

[pgabriel]

again batman, its not a choice. kids are put into parents homes by society to be taken care of. if a couple has a child its their decision. not even close to being analogous.

[wnes]

because i don't think it was ever illegal for an interracial couple to have kids.

Never in the history of US was it illegal for interracial couple to have kids?

Are you sure about that? :confused:

[pgabriel]

Never in the history of US was it illegle for interracial couple to have kids?

Are you sure about that? :confused:


do you know how many black children are the descendants of slave masters. do you know that thomas jefferson has a whole family descended from him that he started with a slave? whether it was legal or not, there were plenty of interracial kids.

[Batman Jones]

again batman, its not a choice. kids are put into parents homes by society to be taken care of. if a couple has a child its their decision. not even close to being analogous.

Okay, I really don't think you're listening and I don't think you've addressed what is a very clear and very reasonable analogy at all -- two kids experiencing stigma for different specific reasons but the same general reason (because they are different), both stigmas wrong, both stigmas fading.

But I've made my point a few times now. You don't have to agree. No hard feelings.

[pgabriel]

But I've made my point a few times now. You don't have to agree. No hard feelings.


you can't stop interracial mixing. even if interracial marriages were illegal, there were mixed kids. so it doesn't matter. now if you want to argue is interracial marriage and gay marriage being illegal the same, that's a debate.

you don't need to be married to have kids. so its a non issue. the kids are there, you can't stop people from having sex, and therefore kids will be born. you can stop people from adopting.

[pgabriel]

again, a gay couple can get around having a kid. there is nothing illegal about having kids. not allowing someone to have kids, and not allowing someone to be married are two different subjects.

i understand the question, does having kids who will be ridiculed provide enough reason to make interracial marriage illegal. but marriage and adoption are two different issues so it doesn't matter. if an interracial couple wanted to have a kid, they don't need to be married.

[rhester]

Do you feel that whites are "birth wired" to love blacks? Or do you believe that's "behavioral?" My grandmother, rest her soul, would have told you that interracial marriage was a choice and a selfish one at that.

I didn't say interracial marriage wasn't a choice, I said that race wasn't a choice.


Moral behavior has nothing to do with race. I personally believe that you can't say you love God if you have prejudice or racism going on. That is what the bible says in my opinion. A Christian should be humble enough to over come the cultural racism, I know many Christians are prejudice but I can't excuse that in my understanding of God's love.

Everyone is born with a selfish nature. But that doesn't excuse moral accountability.


The poster said and I quote "Until then, we would like to continue with keeping her in the dark about sexuality and childbirth (she still believes in Santa Claus). We feel that she's just not ready for that knowledge yet.
There is a gay couple who live on our street who adopted a baby boy about 2 years ago.
Now, I do not force my beliefs on other adults. I have always treated homosexual people the same as any other person. I don't shun them. I respect their intelligence (if they're intelligent). I don't let their sexual preference control how I treat them. I work with and have have been friends with gay people and not had any problems. I don't tell them how to lead their lives, and they have always paid me the same respect.
But I am entitled to my opinion of what is right or wrong, just like any human being."

I just wanted to post that he is right, he should make these decisions for his own child and it is certainly a moral decision and he is entitled to his opinion right or wrong.

I love people. No need to stigmatize anyone; even if you don't agree with their behavior. I am not for passing anti gay laws or doing any of this anti gay stuff I see in some churches.

I don't think it is right for a man to ***************another man. It is morally wrong.

Homosexuality is a sexual behavior.

I decided how I would approach this subject with each of my 5 children.
I have never let my children make gay jokes or disrespect the gay community, we just don't see life that way. However we discussed when they were mature enough the questions they had about sex.

I have been preaching for over 25 yrs and I have never preached a sermon on homosexuality. Not one, why would I?

I have cared for those with aids and spent many times counselling with gay individuals. I have prayed, hugged, laughed and cried with several. I never have told a gay person that they were a sinner, (unless they point blank put me on the spot ;) you know like "tell me pastor is it a sin to ***** another man, now tell me plain and to the point")

I don't remember Jesus going around telling people they were sinners. That is so unloving.

I'm a bigger sinner anyways. :)

Thought I would get all that out, before I was asked. :D

[Batman Jones]

So now your argument is that one is unavoidable. Okay. I've never tried to assert that two inherently different things were exactly the same. My entire point is that it is wrong to let even serious consideration of the stigma a child of gay parents will experience result in opposition to gay adoption because the stigma is wrong. I employed the example of bi-racial kids because they also experienced a wrong stigma and I believe in those cases too that that stigma must not win out.

This is pretty played out at this point. But it was impossible for me not to respond to your original post about the stigma the child would face as it was my grandmother's (and many other people's) EXACT reason for opposing mixed marriages.

[ima_drummer2k]

Personally, I don't see any problem with having her go to the birthday party. I really don't think there are going to be a bunch of drag queens molesting children there or anything like that, so I don't know what harm could possibly come to your daughter. It sounds like it's just going to be a normal kids birthday party.

But she's your daughter and you have the right to raise her any way you see fit. I don't begrudge anyone's method of raising their children unless it's illegal or immoral. I respect that you even started this thread, because it's obvious that you just want what's best for your daughter.

[pgabriel]

This is pretty played out at this point. But it was impossible for me not to respond to your original post about the stigma the child would face as it was my grandmother's (and many other people's) EXACT reason for opposing mixed marriages.

you still don't get it. there is no civil right to have adopt kids. the issue is the kids. i understand that gay people want to adopt, but the main concern is the kids. and that's what you don't get. i don't care if gays have kids are not, i do care about adopted kids. they have enough going on in their lives.

[rhadamanthus]

I don't think you've addressed what is a very clear and very reasonable analogy

Analogies and pgab don't always mix very well. ;)

[pgabriel]

Analogies and pgab don't always mix very well. ;)


seriously, he doesn't get it. the issue is the kid's welfare. period. in gay/interracial marriage, the issue happiness of the couple. see the difference.

[Batman Jones]

you still don't get it. there is no civil right to have adopt kids. the issue is the kids. i understand that gay people want to adopt, but the main concern is the kids. and that's what you don't get. i don't care if gays have kids are not, i do care about adopted kids. they have enough going on in their lives.

You still don't get it. When choices are made on behalf of children due to what bigots might do, the bigots win. Period. And the only way that bigotry changes over time is that people refuse to accept it.

And besides that, you are completely overstating the problem of the stigma by projecting your experience as a child on the children of today. They are far less bigoted or creeped out by homosexuality than kids were when we were young. And we're talking about a 2 year old. High school kids today are overwhelmingly in favor of gay marriage. When today's elementary school kids get to high school those numbers will rise. When this 2 year old gets old enough to experience the stigma you predict he will face, the stigma will have faded further.

WS&C's discomfort with homosexuality (and apparently yours too to whatever degree) is not consistent with kids today. They are far more enlightened as a group than our generation is. And they become more enlightened and accepting of difference all the time.

[rhester]

WE needed this thread, I was getting tired of the political ones. :D

[pgabriel]

So I am thinking about the issue on behalf of the child, not on behalf of the gays.




trader gets it

[pgabriel]

You still don't get it. When choices are made on behalf of children due to what bigots might do, the bigots win. Period. And the only way that bigotry changes over time is that people refuse to accept it.




why should we put a kid in a home that may make their life miserable to overcome the bigotry against gays? so now we have to sacrifice kids for gay rights. that's exactly what i wanted you to say, because that's the point i'm making. people take gay rights too far.

[rhadamanthus]

seriously, he doesn't get it. the issue is the kid's welfare. period. in gay/interracial marriage, the issue happiness of the couple. see the difference.

I don't think I am capable of judging if a kid's welfare is negatively impacted simply based on the parent's sexuality. It might be, but I'd wager that's less to do with sexuality as it is parenting and regardless, it's something I'd have to gauge from more than simple "gayness".

[pgabriel]

I don't think I am capable of judging if a kid's welfare is negatively impacted simply based on the parent's sexuality. It might be, but I'd wager that's less to do with sexuality as it is parenting and regardless, it's something I'd have to gauge from more than simple "gayness".


it has nothing to do with inside the home, its outside the home that i'm concerned about.

[Batman Jones]

seriously, he doesn't get it. the issue is the kid's welfare. period. in gay/interracial marriage, the issue happiness of the couple. see the difference.

The kid's welfare has a lot more to do with being raised in a loving family than what some other kid might say to him.

By your standard, adults with gigantic noses should be concerned about procreating because they will likely produce offspring that will be teased for having a big nose. Same goes for dwarves. Or ugly people.

I can't help but conclude that you single out the teasing the child of a gay adoption might face at the exclusion of all other teasing because you're uncomfortable with gay people.

[rhadamanthus]

it has nothing to do with inside the home, its outside the home that i'm concerned about.

Than Batman's analogy to interracial kids is perfect. QED

[Batman Jones]

trader gets it

Trader is a racist, bigoted, xenophobic homophobe. You think he gets it because, in this case, his bigotry is not far out of line with your own.

[Batman Jones]

why should we put a kid in a home that may make their life miserable to overcome the bigotry against gays? so now we have to sacrifice kids for gay rights. that's exactly what i wanted you to say, because that's the point i'm making. people take gay rights too far.

My grandmother would have told you the EXACT same thing about blacks and whites mixing and she would have (and did) say, "I'm not prejudiced, but people take rights for blacks too far." Asserting that bigotry against blacks is wrong while defending a black man's right to procreate with the person he loves is not sacrificing the kid for "black rights."

You will continue to set gays apart from all other unfairly persecuted classes because, in the end, you don't have a big problem with them being persecuted.

[pgabriel]

The kid's welfare has a lot more to do with being raised in a loving family than what some other kid might say to him.

By your standard, adults with gigantic noses should be concerned about procreating because they will likely produce offspring that will be teased for having a big nose. Same goes for dwarves. Or ugly people.

I can't help but conclude that you single out the teasing the child of a gay adoption might face at the exclusion of all other teasing because you're uncomfortable with gay people.


yes, being raised by ugly parents is the same is being raised by parents that represent only ten percent of society that isn't fully accepted. brilliant analogy.

again, people get turned down for adoption for all kinds of reasons. its not a right.

[pgabriel]

You will continue to set gays apart from all other unfairly persecuted classes because, in the end, you don't have a big problem with them being persecuted.


not being able to adopt a kid that isn't yours=persecution.

more brilliance

[rhadamanthus]

not being able to adopt a kid that isn't yours=persecution.

more brilliance

I didn't know you could adopt a kid that was yours!

Brilliant!!

[pgabriel]

I didn't know you could adopt a kid that was yours!

Brilliant!!


my point


-----------------


your head


not being able to adpot isn't persecution. the point i'm making is you're not taking a kid away from someone, that would be persecution.

[Batman Jones]

I don't assert that gays have (or that anyone has) the right to adopt willy nilly. I assert that they have the right not to be discriminated against or judged by a different standard due to their gayness. I would assert that that is a "civil" right or a "natural" right, though it is not yet a legal right in most cases (just as civil and natural rights were once not enshrined in law for blacks... hmmm...).

Attitudes are changing and I'm grateful for that. (I'll never forget my best friend in elementary school - a black kid - telling me the Green Bay Packers didn't have a chance because they started a black quarterback and he felt blacks weren't smart enough to be quarterbacks.) But they don't change overnight. You're a reasonable guy, pgabriel, and you'll get there eventually though I obviously won't be the one to change your mind. In any case, I'm rooting for you.

[gifford1967]

yes, being raised by ugly parents is the same is being raised by parents that represent only ten percent of society that isn't fully accepted. brilliant analogy.

again, people get turned down for adoption for all kinds of reasons. its not a right.


You're right, people do get turned down to adopt for all kinds of reasons.

Should a racially mixed couple be denied the opportunity to adopt, because some people might tease the kid?

[pgabriel]

I don't assert that gays have (or that anyone has) the right to adopt willy nilly. I assert that they have the right not to be discriminated against or judged by a different standard due to their gayness. I would assert that that is a "civil" right or a "natural" right, though it is not yet a legal right in most cases (just as civil and natural rights were once not enshrined in law for blacks... hmmm...).

Attitudes are changing and I'm grateful for that. (I'll never forget my best friend in elementary school - a black kid - telling me the Green Bay Packers didn't have a chance because they started a black quarterback and he felt blacks weren't smart enough to be quarterbacks.) But they don't change overnight. You're a reasonable guy, pgabriel, and you'll get there eventually though I obviously won't be the one to change your mind. In any case, I'm rooting for you.


first of all, all the black analogies are patronizing at best. blacks and gays fight many different prejudices. i really wish you would lay off.

secondly, i'm glad you're rooting for me.

[pgabriel]

Should a racially mixed couple be denied the opportunity to adopt, because some people might tease the kid?


maybe, if you believe its the same stigma. I happen not to.

[rhadamanthus]

not being able to adpot isn't persecution. the point i'm making is you're not taking a kid away from someone, that would be persecution.

I don't really want to argue with you, because I already know you to be rather thickheaded, but the above is (unintentionally, no doubt) some of the funniest "logic" I've ever seen. It is, shall we say, brilliant.



idiot

I might be, but that does not mean that Sura isn't one.



EDIT: you are really wasting your time, BJ.

[Batman Jones]

yes, being raised by ugly parents is the same is being raised by parents that represent only ten percent of society that isn't fully accepted. brilliant analogy.

Thanks. I thought it was good too. By the way, what percent of American society did blacks represent during the civil rights movement? Were they fully accepted then? You're right, pgabriel! That was a brilliant analogy!

again, people get turned down for adoption for all kinds of reasons. its not a right.

And in this case you are saying that gays should be turned down for the reason that kids will make fun of them. Too bad you weren't a white man in the 60s. You would have made a great advocate for segregation and a great opponent of interracial marriage, since your argument is identical to the ones used by those people then.

[pgabriel]

i'm incapable of arguing with you,







fixed it, unless you want to challenge that statement i made

[Batman Jones]

first of all, all the black analogies are patronizing at best. blacks and gays fight many different prejudices. i really wish you would lay off.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I will not be laying off.

[pgabriel]

And in this case you are saying that gays should be turned down for the reason that kids will make fun of them. Too bad you weren't a white man in the 60s. You would have made a great advocate for segregation and a great opponent of interracial marriage, since your argument is identical to the ones used by those people then.


uh no, since you know so much about black history, why don't you go look up the legal reasons used to ban interracial marriage. i believe they are mostly christian. so again, lay off the black anaolaogies, they are patronizing at best, ill-informed at worst.

[rhadamanthus]

fixed it, unless you want to challenge that statement i made


not really. It's analogous to our last argument. So much so, in fact, that I find this exchange between you and Batman just awesome, inasmuch as BJ is a much better writer than I am.

Carry on, o fearless defender of the black analogy!

[Batman Jones]

uh no, since you know so much about black history, why don't you go look up the legal reasons used to ban interracial marriage. i believe they are mostly christian. so again, lay off the black anaolaogies, they are patronizing at best, ill-informed at worst.

I never said I was talking about the legal reasons -- I'm not aware that the stigma you're worried about is the legal reason people argue against gay adoption either.

I'm sorry you're offended, pgabriel. But I will never lay off the black analogies as they are at the heart of my thinking on this subject.

Back in elementary school, when I first learned about slavery and the general persecution of blacks I was amazed and horrified at what crimes had been committed by our society. And I resolved at that early age I would look for similar discrimination in our contemporary society. I found it in attitudes toward gays though it took me a long time to recognize it, as it is taking you a long time as well.

And I continue to find it and to find meaningful and blatant - sometimes even identical parallels - in those two struggles. Your concern for the stigma faced by kids of gay couples is one of those identical parallels. Your words are a direct match for my grandmother's. You are using the EXACT same argument. Asking me not to point that out is ludicrous.

[pgabriel]

I never said I was talking about the legal reasons -- I'm not aware that the stigma you're worried about is the legal reason people argue against gay adoption either.

I'm sorry you're offended, pgabriel. But I will never lay off the black analogies as they are at the heart of my thinking on this subject.

they're the only ones that matter, with all due respect, your grandmother's opinion doesn't coutn

Back in elementary school, when I first learned about slavery and the general persecution of blacks I was amazed and horrified at what crimes had been committed by our society. And I resolved at that early age I would look for similar discrimination in our contemporary society. I found it in attitudes toward gays though it took me a long time to recognize it, as it is taking you a long time as well.

so now you are arguing that slavery=not letting gay couples adopt. more brilliance, that's so offensive all i can do is laugh at your insanity in trying to continue the equating.

And I continue to find it and to find meaningful and blatant - sometimes even identical parallels - in those two struggles. Your concern for the stigma faced by kids of gay couples is one of those identical parallels. Your words are a direct match for my grandmother's. You are using the EXACT same argument. Asking me not to point that out is ludicrous.

what you don't understand for the umpteenth time is the concern isn't gays, its the kids.

[Batman Jones]

Legal opinions are not the only opinions that count as they are a direct result of societal opinions. Like yours. You, like my grandmother, feel that a certain class of people shouldn't be allowed to raise children with the people they love because those children will endure teasing. You, like my grandmother, represent a very large group of people. And you, like my grandmother, are perpetuating stereotypes that are outdated and dangerous.

I don't "equate" slavery with anything. But I imagine that when the various horrible manifestations of discrimination against blacks were occurring at their most horrible levels, there were plenty of people who found nothing wrong with that. And that was reflected in the law. That blew my freaking mind as a kid. And for more than a year after learning it I was mad at all white adults for not being more outraged. I thought, how could that have happened? How could people have thought that was okay? And then I thought, what are we doing now that we believe is fine but is actually repugnant?

It's not a matter of direct matches. That's not what analogies are. (A thing you seem to have a remarkably difficult time understanding.)

And, with that, you have officially worn me out. I'll be back if you have anything new.

[gifford1967]

maybe, if you believe its the same stigma. I happen not to.


What does your belief about it being the same stigma have to do with the effect teasing will have on the kid?

Do you think the kid is going to make a distinction between being teased because his parents are ****, or because him mom is a n_gger lover.

[pgabriel]

What does your belief about it being the same stigma have to do with the effect teasing will have on the kid?

Do you think the kid is going to make a distinction between being teased because his parents are ****, or because him mom is a n_gger lover.

this is getting silly. having gay parents has issues that go waaaaayyyy beyond teasing, you're trying to boil it down to this to make your argument. and that's fine, that's what you should do. but its beyond that.

[pgabriel]

race and sexuality are two totally separate issues.

a better analogy is would you allow a swinging couple to adopt?

[cson]

It's getting so heated in here it makes me want to go to a gay birthday party! Heeeeeeeey!

[Batman Jones]

race and sexuality are two totally separate issues.

a better analogy is would you allow a swinging couple to adopt?

Interracial marriage and gay marriage are two very similar issues in certain ways.

They both revolve around a struggle to be allowed to love the person you love, free from discrimination regardless of segments (or even a majority) of society believing that love is "unnatural."

And, sorry in advance for the snark, but please don't presume to know what constitutes a good or better analogy. You have demonstrated fairly clearly that you don't fully understand the word.

[thegary]

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/baycVMsqVNQ"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/baycVMsqVNQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

[pgabriel]

Interracial marriage and gay marriage are two very similar issues in certain ways.

d.

for the fifitieth gazzilion time, the issue isn't allowing people to marry. its allowing them to adopt.

[Batman Jones]

for the fifitieth gazzilion time, the issue isn't allowing people to marry. its allowing them to adopt.

Right, okay. Remind me too how it's about the kids who will be stigmatized by other kids (who by and large are not freaked out by gays) and not by totally reasonable people like you (who by and large are).

[DaDakota]

You daughter won't be bothered one bit, you might be, but she won't.

DD

[pgabriel]

Right, okay. Remind me too how it's about the kids who will be stigmatized by other kids (who by and large are not freaked out by gays) and not by totally reasonable people like you (who by and large are).


the kid already has to deal with one stigma, being adopted. we can sit here and argue about gay rights, and acceptance, but now you are going to put two on the kid. not fair to the kid.

[thegary]

not fair to the kid.

how is it not fair to have gay parents?

[Batman Jones]

the kid already has to deal with one stigma, being adopted. we can sit here and argue about gay rights, and acceptance, but now you are going to put two on the kid. not fair to the kid.

DD's got it right, above.

You're a funny person to be arguing that the kid won't be accepted due to his parents' sexuality -- maybe you're saying that from a position of knowledge as you intend to stigmatize him for it, but without instruction from bigoted adults children will not. Homophobia, like racism and other forms of bigotry, is learned.

EDIT: I've thought it over and decided you are right that it's not fair to the kid, which puts me in the uncomfortable position of also having to now agree with my grandmother and oppose bi-racial couples adopting kids. After all, they already have to deal with one stigma.

[Batman Jones]

how is it not fair to have gay parents?

Men can't **** each other and make babies. pgabriel already explained this. Please pay attention, thegary.

[pgabriel]

EDIT: I've thought it over and decided you are right that it's not fair to the kid, which puts me in the uncomfortable position of also having to now agree with my grandmother and oppose bi-racial couples adopting kids. After all, they already have to deal with one stigma.


ugh, if this was 1955.

[DaDakota]

EDIT: I've thought it over and decided you are right that it's not fair to the kid, which puts me in the uncomfortable position of also having to now agree with my grandmother and oppose bi-racial couples adopting kids. After all, they already have to deal with one stigma.

I disagree, I don't think there are all that many stigmas attached to being raised by a gay couple, it beats bouncing around from foster home to foster home, or being in an orphanage.

What happens to the kids that are born to a man and a women then one of the parents figures out they are gay?

Kids are a lot more resiliant than parents, they could care less about the mommy daddy situation, they just want to play and eat cake, you are not going to harm them ONE bit by going to a birthday party, and you might find out that your prejudices are unfounded as well and make a friend or two.
DD

[pgabriel]

how is it not fair to have gay parents?


because i feel the kid would have to deal with issues having to do with having gay parents.

none of us know how a kid would react to that.

[Batman Jones]

ugh, if this was 1955.

NOW we're getting somewhere...

pgab: Would you have opposed bi-racial adoption in 1955 on the grounds that it would be unfair to the kid? I'm on pins and needles.

[Batman Jones]

because i feel the kid would have to deal with issues having to do with having gay parents.

none of us know how a kid would react to that.

ugh. If this was 1985.

[pgabriel]

NOW we're getting somewhere...

pgab: Would you have opposed bi-racial adoption in 1955 on the grounds that it would be unfair to the kid? I'm on pins and needles.


as i said earlier, i'm not going to use to kids to help gay people fight prejudices.

[pgabriel]

What happens to the kids that are born to a man and a women then one of the parents figures out they are gay?




what happens?

[Batman Jones]

as i said earlier, i'm not going to use to kids to help gay people fight prejudices.

Please answer the question, pgabriel. You have acknowledged that if this was 1955 a child adopted by a bi-racial couple would encounter bias (I would argue that that bias would extend WELL past 1955). So, okay. Would you oppose bi-racial couples being allowed to adopt in 1955?

Yes or no?

[thegary]

because i feel the kid would have to deal with issues having to do with having gay parents.

none of us know how a kid would react to that.


good god, everyone has issues. you underestimate humanity.

[pgabriel]

Would you oppose bi-racial couples being allowed to adopt in 1955?

Yes or no?

this is really a non issue also, because black couple's can't adopt kids anyway because there are too many black kids that need to be adopted. in 1955 i wouldn't care if a white couple adopted a black kid.

[Batman Jones]

this is really a non issue also, because black couple's can't adopt kids anyway because there are too many black kids that need to be adopted. in 1955 i wouldn't care if a white couple adopted a black kid.

It's telling that you're scared to answer the question.

In 1955, if a black/white couple wanted to adopt would you be in favor of allowing that even knowing the child would be stigmatized?

Yes or no?

[pgabriel]

also do you see how that analogy doesn't work. the people who are going to have to deal with adopting the kid are the parents, the kid is going to be ridiculed in 1955 anyway because they're black.

[Master Baiter]

the kid already has to deal with one stigma, being adopted. we can sit here and argue about gay rights, and acceptance, but now you are going to put two on the kid. not fair to the kid.
I don't understand this. There isn't a kid on earth that has not been teased in some form or fashion about something. Guess what, that's life. Deal with it.

There are people that have to brave the adversity that comes with change. Kids can make that difference and are pretty damn resilient.

I also think that the more exposure that kids have with gays, the less taboo it will be. To get to that point, there are going to be bumps in the road. Even if you don't agree with being gay, they are still people. You or your kids are not going to get the gay by being around them. There are plenty of things that straight people do that I don't agree with but that doesn't mean that I judge them or stop being their friend. It isn't my job.

To the thread starter, I think you are punishing the birthday kid by not attending. I also think that kids can understand a whole hell of a lot more than you give them credit for. You don't have to go into the mechanics of sex to explain two men or two women living together just like you don't have to explain it when a man and a woman live together.

I know I'm probably in the minority on this but I believe in being very open with my kids. There is very little that I filter from them. I don't go out of my way to expose them to things but I also don't hide things from them either. I want them to know that they can always come to me and know that they are going to get a straight answer and not be judged.

[pgabriel]

It's telling that you're scared to answer the question.

In 1955, if a black/white couple wanted to adopt would you be in favor of allowing that even knowing the child would be stigmatized?

Yes or no?


a black kid, no i wouldn't have a problem with. but its a none issue, a terrible analogy.

[pgabriel]

I don't understand this. There isn't a kid on earth that has not been teased in some form or fashion about something. Guess what, that's life. Deal with it.

There are people that have to brave the adversity that comes with change. Kids can make that difference and are pretty damn resilient.




and i don't think a kid should be put in that situation for the benifit of gay rights. would it help, sure it would. but that's not the responsibility of kids that need to be adopted.

[gifford1967]

this is getting silly. having gay parents has issues that go waaaaayyyy beyond teasing, you're trying to boil it down to this to make your argument. and that's fine, that's what you should do. but its beyond that.


Your the one who cited the stigma a kid will face as a reason to deny gay couples the opportunity to adopt. I was addressing your arguement. Now you're saying it goes waaaaaaayyy beyond that, but don't say how. I can't really address an arguement you don't make.


But back to the real issue- kids well being. Right now there are way more kids in need of stable families than there are families willing to adopt. This means you have a large # of kids living in less than permanent situations with foster families and group homes. I GUARANTEE you that these kids would be better off being adopted by a gay couple, that were loving, stable parents, than living in the uncertainty of the foster care system.

[Batman Jones]

a black kid, no i wouldn't have a problem with. but its a none issue, a terrible analogy.

Weird that you would make that distinction. Your habit of calling any argument you don't have an answer for a "non issue" is also weird.

Okay. So you wouldn't have a problem with it if it was a black kid, since he would be stigmatized already (geez, pgab, that kid already has two strikes against him - why give him a third?). Would you have a problem with a black/white couple adopting a white kid in 1955?

[Batman Jones]

and i don't think a kid should be put in that situation for the benifit of gay rights. would it help, sure it would. but that's not the responsibility of kids that need to be adopted.

You are the only person I've ever heard suggest that a kid would be doing gay parents a favor by being adopted by them. If you were truly concerned about the benefit of the kids you would favor finding them a loving home, regardless of your opinion of the parents' choice of life partners, well over your concern that they might get teased.

[pgabriel]

Weird that you would make that distinction. Your habit of calling any argument you don't have an answer for a "non issue" is also weird.

Okay. So you wouldn't have a problem with it if it was a black kid, since he would be stigmatized already (geez, pgab, that kid already has two strikes against him - why give him a third?). Would you have a problem with a black/white couple adopting a white kid in 1955?


he doesn't have two strikes against him. he's black, are white kids gonna ridicule him because he has white parents? that's stupid. they're going to ridicule him because he's black, that's it. its a non issue. a black couple wouldn't be allowed to adopt a white kid, so that's a non issue, then or now. a mixed couple probably wouldn't either. i answered your question, now you have a problem with the answer, geez.

[pgabriel]

But back to the real issue- kids well being. Right now there are way more kids in need of stable families than there are families willing to adopt. This means you have a large # of kids living in less than permanent situations with foster families and group homes. I GUARANTEE you that these kids would be better off being adopted by a gay couple, that were loving, stable parents, than living in the uncertainty of the foster care system.

maybe, maybe no, but at least you're addressing the issue i have. instead this stupid ass argument about interracial marriage. thank you seriously

[Batman Jones]

he doesn't have two strikes against him. he's black, are white kids gonna ridicule him because he has white parents? that's stupid. they're going to ridicule him because he's black, that's it. its a non issue. a black couple wouldn't be allowed to adopt a white kid, so that's a non issue, then or now. a mixed couple probably wouldn't either. i answered your question, now you have a problem with the answer, geez.

I meant black (strike one) and adopted (strike two). But how would black kids feel about him being adopted by whites?

[rhadamanthus]

and i don't think a kid should be put in that situation for the benifit of gay rights. would it help, sure it would. but that's not the responsibility of kids that need to be adopted.

I thought being adopted was a benefit to the child. I was unaware that gay people were using these kids as a weapon against hate.

Trust the gays to screw up a wonderful thing like adoption. I recommend we nip this in the bud and forbid anyone who is persecuted from adopting - after all, the kid should only be in non-persecutable arenas, like foster care.

[rhadamanthus]

I don't understand this. There isn't a kid on earth that has not been teased in some form or fashion about something. Guess what, that's life. Deal with it.

There are people that have to brave the adversity that comes with change. Kids can make that difference and are pretty damn resilient.

I also think that the more exposure that kids have with gays, the less taboo it will be. To get to that point, there are going to be bumps in the road. Even if you don't agree with being gay, they are still people. You or your kids are not going to get the gay by being around them. There are plenty of things that straight people do that I don't agree with but that doesn't mean that I judge them or stop being their friend. It isn't my job.

To the thread starter, I think you are punishing the birthday kid by not attending. I also think that kids can understand a whole hell of a lot more than you give them credit for. You don't have to go into the mechanics of sex to explain two men or two women living together just like you don't have to explain it when a man and a woman live together.

I know I'm probably in the minority on this but I believe in being very open with my kids. There is very little that I filter from them. I don't go out of my way to expose them to things but I also don't hide things from them either. I want them to know that they can always come to me and know that they are going to get a straight answer and not be judged.

You sound like an absolutely fantastic father, MB.

[Batman Jones]

maybe, maybe no, but at least you're addressing the issue i have. instead this stupid ass argument about interracial marriage. thank you seriously

The argument was about the children of interracial marriage. But I will be careful in the future to remember that you have a very difficult time with the concept of analogy and only understand those ones that compare, say, one golden delicious apple picked by Mr. C.W. Jones from this tree in his back yard but not that one to another golden delicious apple picked by Mr. C.W. Jones from this tree in his back yard but not that one. Of course, those wouldn't be analogies, but I get now that you have your own definition of the word.

So, in 1955, you might oppose a bi-racial couple adopting a white kid (though not a black one, since he's screwed already). How about in 1965? (Warning: this might take a while.)

[pgabriel]

I thought being adopted was a benefit to the child. I was unaware that gay people were using these kids as a weapon against hate.







you took that totally out of context. batman argues that adoption can help fight against gay prejudice. I say that isn't kids' responsibility.

[thegary]

pgab, are you a ninny, do people pick on you, do you stand there and take it? if you are scarred from verbal abuse in your childhood, i'm sorry about that. i hope you can come to terms with it one day.

[pgabriel]

So, in 1955, you might oppose a bi-racial couple adopting a white kid (though not a black one, since he's screwed already). How about in 1965? (Warning: this might take a while.)


oh my god, what don't you understand, a bi racial couple can't adopt a white kid. its a non issue. a white couple can adopt a black kid, i have no problem with it. i answered your question. move on to the next subject.

[pgabriel]

:rolleyes: pgab, are you a ninny, do people pick on you, do you stand there and take it? if you are scarred from verbal abuse in your childhood, i'm sorry about that. i hope you can come to terms with it one day.


more pyschoanalysis :rolleyes:

[ima_drummer2k]

You don't have to go into the mechanics of sex to explain two men or two women living together just like you don't have to explain it when a man and a woman live together.
This is so simple, yet so true.

It's ironic that most of the things we adults are so hung up on kids finding out about are things that most kids couldn't give a frog's fat ass about. They just want to run around and eat cake and ice cream.

[rhadamanthus]

you took that totally out of context. batman argues that adoption can help fight against gay prejudice. I say that isn't kids' responsibility.

I don't think batman is making that argument per say.

I think being adopted is better than being in foster care hell. You disagree, if the couple in question is gay, because then the child may have to deal with bigotted retards. I think that's lunacy.

[Batman Jones]

you took that totally out of context. batman argues that adoption can help fight against gay prejudice. I say that isn't kids' responsibility.

No I don't. I argue that gays, should they pass the screen that anyone else would, should be allowed to adopt because it's in the kids' interest to be placed in a loving home. And I argue that opposing it based on their gayness is bigotry.

[rhadamanthus]

No I don't. I argue that gays, should they pass the screen that anyone else would, should be allowed to adopt because it's in the kids' interest to be placed in a loving home. And I argue that opposing it based on their gayness is bigotry.

Agreed - as I presumed.

[thegary]

:rolleyes:


more pyschoanalysis :rolleyes:


no dude, i'm just trying to figure out what your problem is.

[Batman Jones]

oh my god, what don't you understand, a bi racial couple can't adopt a white kid. its a non issue. a white couple can adopt a black kid, i have no problem with it. i answered your question. move on to the next subject.

Oh man, you're not just hamstrung by analogies (a simple concept, I'd thought) but also by hypotheticals. Let me try again:

IF the question were to arise in 1965, would you be in favor of allowing a biracial couple to adopt a white kid or would you (maybe) oppose it like you maybe would have in 1955? What about 75? 85? 2005?

[pgabriel]

no dude, i'm just trying to figure out what your problem is.


i'm thinking of the kids. but why do i have to have a "problem" because i think differently on the issue. if you feel that way i already no what your problem is, you're an asshole who can't accept a different opinion.

[pgabriel]

this is one thing conservatives are sooooooooooo right on and its a shame. have a difference of opinion with a liberal and you have a problem, are you're secretly trying to deal with your own issues, or blah blah blah. geez

[DaDakota]

i'm thinking of the kids. but why do i have to have a "problem" because i think differently on the issue. if you feel that way i already no what your problem is, you're an asshole who can't accept a different opinion.


Thinking of the kids? Is it better for them to bounce around from Orphanage to orphanage or foster home to foster home, or be raised by two loving adults?

I choose the latter....

The kids could care less, it is the parents problem not the kids.

DD

[thegary]

you're an asshole

i am an asshole but not because i'm not open-minded. i hate bigotry and intolerance, i love freedom.

[Master Baiter]

i'm thinking of the kids. but why do i have to have a "problem" because i think differently on the issue. if you feel that way i already no what your problem is, you're an asshole who can't accept a different opinion.
You have really become ornery lately. I know we don't usually have similar ideas but you didn't seem to be nearly so pissy. I hope everything is cool with you.

[pgabriel]

No I don't. I argue that gays, should they pass the screen that anyone else would, should be allowed to adopt because it's in the kids' interest to be placed in a loving home. And I argue that opposing it based on their gayness is bigotry.

this is you

I also think that the more exposure that kids have with gays, the less taboo it will be. To get to that point, there are going to be bumps in the road. Even if you don't agree with being gay, they are still people.

[pgabriel]

You have really become ornery lately. I know we don't usually have similar ideas but you didn't seem to be nearly so pissy. I hope everything is cool with you.


you're never onery :rolleyes: i have never seen you mock a post, call some a name or anything. you're an angel

[NewYorker]

A child's welfare comes first. I think so long as there is no proof that being raised by a gay couple results in some negative impact on the child, than adoption should be ok. I haven't seen anything to demonstrate negative impact on children from having homosexual parents.

All I can say if I had a kid and there was another adopted kid with gay parents, I'd let my kid go to the b-day party. Kids have an amazing ability to accept things, understand, and have tolerance. And I'd want my kid to be exposed to the diversity of humanity - it's a great experience. Just like traveling to another place and seeing something new.

And if such a kid asked me why does timmy have two dads? I'd just say that some kids have two dads, and some have too moms. And if my kids asked me how a baby is made. I'd tell them, it's and egg from a woman fertilized by the sperm from a man. Or I'd make up something completely silly, like babies come from outer space - just like superman. Guess it depends on the mood i was in.

But peopel have a right to raise thier kids the way they want. But I'd say, show your kid the world, because that's part of the wonder of being a kid.

[pgabriel]

I choose the latter....

The kids could care less
DD


exactly

[pgabriel]

A child's welfare comes first. I think so long as there is no proof that being raised by a gay couple results in some negative impact on the child, than adoption should be ok.


i agree, everyone is saying kids are resiliant, blah blah blah, the fact is we don't know, and i would like to be sure first.

[Master Baiter]

you're never onery :rolleyes: i have never seen you mock a post, call some a name or anything. you're an angel
I've always been like that as it's just my personality. You just seem different as of late, hence the post. I seriously wasn't being a jerk about it and I'm sorry if I offended you.

[pgabriel]

I've always been like that as it's just my personality. You just seem different as of late, hence the post. I seriously wasn't being a jerk about it and I'm sorry if I offended you.


no dude, i'm as onery as ever. i really try not to be onery, what got me going in this thread is the bigot accusations. i try to explain my side that my concern isn't really the welfare of gays, its kids, and people still accuse me of having issues. because they don't want to debate the real issue imo.

[thegary]

i agree, everyone is saying kids are resiliant, blah blah blah, the fact is we don't know, and i would like to be sure first.

so you think we should outlaw gay couples adopting babies until we are sure?

[pgabriel]

i am an asshole but not because i'm not open-minded. i hate bigotry and intolerance, i love freedom.


again, how am i infringing on gay people's freedoms. this has been addressed. there is no right to be able to adopt. if gay people really want kids, there are other ways to go about it.

but if setting up the straw man makes it easier because you can't debate the real issue, have it.

[Batman Jones]

this is you

The first one's mine, not the second. Not that I don't agree with it, but it's not mine. I still never suggested using children in order to advance gay rights. That's a made up thing and you're the one that made it up. It's also a position one could only take if they believed adoptions by loving gay families were in any way bad for kids, which I clearly do not.

[pgabriel]

so you think we should outlaw gay couples adopting babies until we are sure?


i think it should be studied, yes.

[Batman Jones]

again, how am i infringing on gay people's freedoms. this has been addressed. there is no right to be able to adopt. if gay people really want kids, there are other ways to go about it.

but if setting up the straw man makes it easier because you can't debate the real issue, have it.

Get on the record here so we know what we're talking about.

Is it true or not true that you oppose gay people adopting?

If it is true, is that purely because you believe they will be mocked in school or are there other reasons as well? You insinuated before that there was some crazy long list of issues associated with gay adoption, but you declined to say what they were even though at least one person asked.

I'm sorry you felt I called you a bigot. I don't think you are one, but I do think you're uncomfortable with homosexuality and I think further that you project that onto the kids you imagine will do the harassing.

[cson]

i think it should be studied, yes.
Queer

[Batman Jones]

i think it should be studied, yes.

How do you suggest that might happen? And what criteria would you like the studies to consider? Like, what are the potential problems?

[pgabriel]

my bad for the misquoting, batman and master baiter, whom i quoted

[ico4498]

let the kid eat cake. if your daughter is as unaware of sexuality as you think, her only questions will be was it good cake and ice cream or not?

blocking her interaction will almost certainly raise more questions.

on the tangential question of gays adopting ... loving parents are the best defense against the certain challenges of life, ie being teased. the benefits of caring parents far outweigh the certainty of listening to some jerk spout off about whats wrong with your life.

[pgabriel]

How do you suggest that might happen? And what criteria would you like the studies to consider? Like, what are the potential problems?


the potential problems are the issues the kid grows up with. you keep trying to bait me into saying something stupid or prejudiced against gays. i'm not because i'm not. i don't know how to go about it. that's not my expertise.

[thegary]

that's not my expertise.

what is your expertise?

[pgabriel]

what is your expertise?


winning debates

seriously, it doesn't matter, why even ask that question

[thegary]

I have difficulty on which side I come down on.

The negative to me is the stigma for the kid. To me the kid is going to be what its going to be. The problem I have is how will that kid deal with it when he/she gets made fun, because kids are cruel. Life as a kid is challenging enough emotionally sometimes.

on the otherhand,

there are so many kids that need to be adopted, that's its kind of hard to turn well-meaning people down.

^this was your first post, a fair one i might add. then this thread turned into a "debate", one you're bent on "winning" and you choose a side and argue it like a rabid dog. oh, i see, this is your expertise.

[NewYorker]

so you think we should outlaw gay couples adopting babies until we are sure?

there are studies that show that babies through a certain age must have a mother and a certain amount of exposure to a mother to develop correctly - and a man is no replacement for whatever reason.

There are developmental issues here.

It's one thing if a child is with one of their natural biological parents, but for a gay couple adopting a baby - there should be some concern. An older child is probably not much concern though.

That being said, I think having two gay parents is preferable to having no parents at all.

[thegary]

there are studies that show that babies through a certain age must have a mother and a certain amount of exposure to a mother to develop correctly - and a man is no replacement for whatever reason.

There are developmental issues here.



link please.

[pgabriel]

^this was your first post, a fair one i might add. then this thread turned into a "debate", one you're bent on "winning" and you choose a side and argue it like a rabid dog. oh, i see, this is your expertise.


no, that is the position batman chose to attack.

[thegary]

no, that is the position batman chose to attack.


so argue the other side then.

[ico4498]

there are studies that show that babies through a certain age must have a mother and a certain amount of exposure to a mother to develop correctly - and a man is no replacement for whatever reason.

if true, it would be an issue if folks were taking babies from available moms and forcing two dads on 'em. as to the question of providing parents to orphans, totally irrelevant.

[pgabriel]

so argue the other side then.


with who?

[thegary]

with who?


so you are just arguing for arguments sake?
wow, you are lame. some people actually have feelings about the issue.

[pgabriel]

so you are just arguing for arguments sake?
wow, you are lame. some people actually have feelings about the issue.

so now i can't discuss something unless i have "feelings" on the issue. keep trying dude, its really funny

[thegary]

its really funny

to whom?

[pgabriel]

to whom?


its funny to me that you have some issue with me because i argued one way, and then you say i have issues. i don't even know you. its just an opinion. you have issues so much you want to continue this silly conversation, i know i play a part in it, but i don't know what you're trying to get at.

[thegary]

i have no issues with you personally but realize that you're running some kind of game and don't really have an opinion. the devil's advocate, how very original.

[pgabriel]

i have no issues with you personally but realize that you're running some kind of game and don't really have an opinion. the devil's advocate, how very original.


dude, just because i think there are other issues to weigh, doesn't mean i don't have an opinion. that's stupid, and closed-minded, what you accuse me of.

this is complicated topic, there are multiple issues to consider. welfare of kids being first and foremost. that encompasses the need to be adopted vs. the situation you're putting them in.

my welfare of the kids point was responded to, i responded back. and lastly, most of this debate involved batman trying to make it something that it wasn't about.

[thadeus]

Fast forward to ------> a little boy, sitting at a big table wearing a party hat, taking a deep breath to blow out the candles on his birthday cake ... and he's alone.

What did he wish for?

[mc mark]

dude, just because i think there are other issues to weigh, doesn't mean i don't have an opinion. that's stupid, and closed-minded, what you accuse me of.

this is complicated topic, there are multiple issues to consider. welfare of kids being first and foremost. that encompasses the need to be adopted vs. the situation you're putting them in.

my welfare of the kids point was responded to, i responded back. and lastly, most of this debate involved batman trying to make it something that it wasn't about.


That's BS

You're couching your homophobia with some lame ass "save the children" rant. You've been doing it the whole thread.

[pgabriel]

That's BS

You're couching your homophobia with some lame ass "save the children" rant. You've been doing it the whole thread.


another pyschoanalysis, you guys should start a practice. you think there issues to be considered in gays adopting kids=homophobia. stick to your day job

there is no right to adopt

[thegary]

Fast forward to ------> a little boy, sitting at a big table wearing a party hat, taking a deep breath to blow out the candles on his birthday cake ... and he's alone.

What did he wish for?



a pony :confused:

[MR. MEOWGI]

Are there any studies at all that show having same sex parents are harmful to a child?

[thadeus]

a pony :confused:

No, for the Rockets to get past the first round.

because, thegary, that little kid ... is all of us.

[thegary]

another pyschoanalysis,pyschoanalysis,pyschoanalysis,pyschoanalysis, pyschoanalysis,pyschoanalysis,pyschoanalysis,pyschoanalysis, pyschoanalysis,pyschoanalysis,


man, you sure are paranoid. yes, now i really think you do have "issues".

[thadeus]

man, you sure are paranoid. yes, now i really think you do have "issues".

hmm.... psychoanalysis.

Coincidence? I think NOT.

[thegary]

oh thaddy

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/8090/dawsoncryingwb7.jpg

[mc mark]

another pyschoanalysis, you guys should start a practice. you think there issues to be considered in gays adopting kids=homophobia. stick to your day job

there is no right to adopt


And there is no right for you to stop them from adopting.

I know several adopted kids with same sex parents and they are more grounded, well adjusted and "normal" than a majority of kids from straight couples.

[pgabriel]

man, you sure are paranoid. yes, now i really think you do have "issues".


:confused:

[pgabriel]

I know several adopted kids with same sex parents and they are more grounded, well adjusted and "normal" than a majority of kids from straight couples.


how well do you know them, really I would like to know your experiences with them.

[thegary]

how well do you know them, really I would like to know your experiences with them.


i bet you would ;) ;)

[thadeus]

WS&C, for all the debate going on here, the only thing that's really happening is a little kid's having a birthday party and his parents are inviting other little kids over for it. It's been happening forever. Going isn't giving your tacit approval to gay adoption or ancient potlatch ceremonies or satanic ritual or anything else. It's just a birthday party.

Worrying about social stigma and homosexual marriage and all that is something you can do with other adults. This little boy is going to be far more ****ed up by throwing a birthday party that no one shows up for than anything else.

P.S. making a b-day present of assless chaps is very bad taste, in case you were wondering.

[pgabriel]

i bet you would ;) ;)

oh man, a gay joke, and i have issues

[thadeus]

pgabriel and thegary are totally gonna make out.

[mc mark]

how well do you know them, really I would like to know your experiences with them.

One set I've known for 16 years. Their daughter just got accepted to NYU law school. Another couple of boys I know are on their second adoption and are all coming over for dinner on Saturday. They have a 5 year old and are about to adopt a two year old. The five year old is home schooled and just got accepted to St James prep in New York (one of the more prestigious private schools in the city.

All of them are bright, outgoing, happy kids and their parents are very open about their relationships and are not ashamed about their circumstances. Oh and they all have tons of friends

[thegary]

pgabriel and thegary are totally gonna make out.

and then tag team thadeus :eek:

[pgabriel]

One set I've known for 16 years. Their daughter just got accepted to NYU law school. Another couple of boys I know are on their second adoption and are all coming over for dinner on Saturday. They have a 5 year old and are about to adopt a two year old. The five year old is home schooled and just got accepted to St James prep in New York (one of the more prestigious private schools in the city.

All of them are bright, outgoing, happy kids and their parents are very open about their relationships and are not ashamed about their circumstances. Oh and they all have tons of friends

thanks for shaing, sounds like success stories, i'm sure they fared alot better being adopted than not.

edit: you know that's all you had to say instead of the homophobia attack

[thadeus]

and then tag team thadeus :eek:

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e212/clonedhuman/56.jpg

[mc mark]

thanks for shaing, sounds like success stories, i'm sure they fared alot better being adopted than not.

edit: you know that's all you had to say instead of the homophobia attack

sorry about the attack pgabriel. It one of the reasons I've stayed out of this thread. It's just a pet peeve about the misconceptions about gays and kids, whether adopted or biological.

[DaDakota]

sorry about the attack pgabriel. It one of the reasons I've stayed out of this thread. It's just a pet peeve about the misconceptions about gays and kids, whether adopted or biological.


The bottom line should be what is good for the kids....nothing else matters.


And back on topic, it would be GOOD for the girl to go to the birthday party....

DD

[Rocket River]

Do you feel that whites are "birth wired" to love blacks? Or do you believe that's "behavioral?" My grandmother, rest her soul, would have told you that interracial marriage was a choice and a selfish one at that.


Interracial Marriage is *not* a choice?
:confused:

Rocket River
I thought all marriage was a choice

[Rocket River]

There's your answer.

You're absolutely right that the kid is not responsible for what you're thinking, so why punish the kid (and why punish your kid by not going)? If you truly believe that gay couples raising kids is wrong, why not go and show the kid what a loving, supportive family with a mommy and daddy look like? Of course, you might recognize that the two guys are also a loving and supportive family... and that might change your thinking somewhat. Have the courage to go and find out.

As to your daughter, you can easily deal with this without going into sexuality. Explain that some families are different, but what's important is that whoever has responsibility for a child protects and nourishes them in a loving way, just like you and your wife do for your kid.

His 1 responsibility is to his child
and
he is about installing his values on his child as he wants
it is not PUNISHING his kid
it is protecting his child from what he feels is a potentially harmful situation

Whether you agree with his sentiment or not
HE SHOULD PROTECT *HIS* CHILD
no matter what
you can argue about his views. . that is something different

The read i get is that in protecting his child . . IHO . . he will offend these people
and he does not want to offend them . . but he does not want to participate
in something he feels is morally wrong and may cause some discomfort in HIS household

*HIS* responsibility is to *HIS* household 1st, foremost, and always

My Advice is simple. . he should do what is in *his* best interest
he needs to think it through but at the end. . it is HIS INTEREST
HIS CHILDS INTEREST
that are paramount

Rocket River

[Batman Jones]

no, that is the position batman chose to attack.

I didn't attack anything. You made a point about stigma that was identical to one my grandmother used to make about interracial couples having kids. I was trying to make the point that what people had trouble accepting then is totally acceptable now and that the trend is good with the children of gays as well. Go back and read my post. I also thought your first post was fair and that the stigma thing was a reasonable, if a little outdated, concern.

It was when you insisted that there was no commonality between the stigma of being the kid of gays and the (mostly former) stigma of being the kid of interracial parents that we had something to argue about.

[Deckard]

there are studies that show that babies through a certain age must have a mother and a certain amount of exposure to a mother to develop correctly - and a man is no replacement for whatever reason.

There are developmental issues here.

It's one thing if a child is with one of their natural biological parents, but for a gay couple adopting a baby - there should be some concern. An older child is probably not much concern though.
That being said, I think having two gay parents is preferable to having no parents at all.
Link, please? As a male parent who spent the vast majority of the time taking care of our two kids growing up, due to their mother having a more important job than I at the time, please educate me as to how they suffered and what developmental issues they clearly must have.

By the way, we have gotten countless kudos from others as to how well behaved they are, they are both "gifted and talented" straight A students, in magnet school programs and the Junior Honor Society. Clearly, they are screwed up. Having made me do what seems like bragging on the two, although it is simply the truth, you could also tell me how they have suffered being raised by two liberal Democrats... the horror!

Thanks in advance.



D&D. Impeach Bush for Promoting Torture.

[Rocket River]

it has nothing to do with inside the home, its outside the home that i'm concerned about.


Actually I am the opposite
What happens outside the home is irrelevent
people are going to be jerks and *ssholes no matter what

The concern for me in those senarios is what happens in the home
Confusion of Sexuality, Social Mores and Folkways etc
These type of things may lead to issues dealing in society

There are not enough longitudinal studies to see if they make an impact

I had a friend he was gay
Turns out . . his father was gay
Nature right
well
then it turns out that both his father and he were molested by men
in their formative years
Nuture right?

My views are this: Homosexuality is a choice . . . like liking chocolate, strawberry or vanilla
Heterosexuality is like needed to eat food . .it is necessary for life to continue [for the race ,humanity, to go on]

If guess a more basic analogy . .. though on I am sure most would blow up with anger is this
Sexuality is the need to eat to survive
Homosexuality and Heterosexuality are choices on what to eat
Nature defaults to the RIGHT for continued survival of humanity . . .heterosexuality
Whereas Homosexuality is like eat the wrong food . . it is not condusive to the survival of humanity . . .
i.e. eating Rocks is not natural . . and will lead to my death . . but i can chose to eat rocks
Maybe the analogy is getting screwy . . and out of hand

Rocket River
I don't think one should be condemned or stones or treated badly for their choice.

[Batman Jones]

there is no right to adopt

True and I'm glad of that because it means that people that might make bad parents (not just because they're gay) might be weeded out. But there certainly should be a right not to be discriminated against based on sexual preference.

[Batman Jones]

Interracial Marriage is *not* a choice?
:confused:

Rocket River
I thought all marriage was a choice

I think so too, because it is. I was responding to pgabriel saying that he didn't believe gayness was "birth wired." My response was meant to convey that neither is marrying outside one's race.

[Rocket River]

Thinking of the kids? Is it better for them to bounce around from Orphanage to orphanage or foster home to foster home, or be raised by two loving adults?

I choose the latter....

The kids could care less, it is the parents problem not the kids.

DD

ASIDE: I think we need to fix the orphanage/foster home system. Long term solutions to this particular issue.

Rocket River

[Rocket River]

Fast forward to ------> a little boy, sitting at a big table wearing a party hat, taking a deep breath to blow out the candles on his birthday cake ... and he's alone.

What did he wish for?

QUESTION: Do you put your child in harms way to protect someone else's child's feelings?

That is the question at hand
Now you will say. . BUT THE CHILD IS NOT IN HARMS WAY . . .and the answer is THAT IS YOUR OPINION .. . the thread starter has another one . .and it is his right

so answer the Question Do you put your child in harms way to protect someone else's child's feelings?
Think about what you consider HARM . . and use that as an analogy

We arguing whether his opinion is valid or not. . but honestly. . it is irrelevent to his question

His question is simple: Do you put your child in harms way to protect someone else's child's feelings? How do you handle it

Whether Harm is juggling firecrackers or running in the street . . . .
the answer is no . . . never put YOUR child in harms way for ANYONE ELSE

now you can go back to arguing about the validity of his opinion

Rocket River

[Rocket River]

Are there any studies at all that show having same sex parents are harmful to a child?

Devils Advocate: Are there any studies showing that having same sex parents is NOT harmful to kids?

Rocket River
:D

[Apollo Creed]

I have no problem with gay adoption or parents...because it's definitely better than the alternative.

But I have to say...I would've hate to have grown up without a mother. A couple of fathers isn't the same...even if one of them is, uh, more motherly.

A loving family is a loving family, though.

I am also of the opinion that opposition to this will die down in the coming years, like interracial marriage. There are people who considered it (and some still do) just as unnatural. It's sad.

[thadeus]

Kids have been raised by straight parents for a really long time now, and plenty of them end up totally brain****ed.

[thadeus]

That is the question at hand
Now you will say. . BUT THE CHILD IS NOT IN HARMS WAY . . .and the answer is THAT IS YOUR OPINION .. . the thread starter has another one . .and it is his right

It's perfectly legitimate here, I think, to question the validity of his opinion. No one's asking him to feed his kid a slice of AIDS cake at the Super-Gay Birthday Penis Bash. His question was essentially one of community - how does he navigate this situation without having to explain to his daughter his opinion on homosexuality?

The answer is: he doesn't have to explain. She's not going to be hurt in anyway by going to this kid's birthday party. Also, if she never asks her dad why Billy has two daddies, she's eventually gonna have it explained to her anyway - probably by other kids who will be far more indelicate about it than he will.

The point I was making with the little sentimental post was that the only thing really at stake here is the little boy having the birthday party, because if WS&C is worried that attending will somehow suggest that he implicity supports gay adoption (and it would be quite a leap for a little girl to even ask the question "Is gay adoption right or wrong?" in the first place, let alone query the opinions of adults on it), then chances are his neighbors are doing the same.

If he "doesn't approve of the gay lifestyle," then that's fine. If he wants to pass that prejudice on to his daughter, then that's his choice to make. But going to some kid's birthday party isn't going to jeopardize or complicate any of that.

If the concern is the kids, then it's only fair to point out that none of this is of any concern to these kids, and that the opinion of the adults is something they should deal with some other way than by boycotting some little boy's birthday party in order to make a statement about their political/religious beliefs. Find a different soapbox - you know - one without a little kid trapped under it.

[Rocket River]

It's perfectly legitimate here, I think, to question the validity of his opinion. No one's asking him to feed his kid a slice of AIDS cake at the Super-Gay Birthday Penis Bash. His question was essentially one of community - how does he navigate this situation without having to explain to his daughter his opinion on homosexuality?

The answer is: he doesn't have to explain. She's not going to be hurt in anyway by going to this kid's birthday party. Also, if she never asks her dad why Billy has two daddies, she's eventually gonna have it explained to her anyway - probably by other kids who will be far more indelicate about it than he will.

The point I was making with the little sentimental post was that the only thing really at stake here is the little boy having the birthday party, because if WS&C is worried that attending will somehow suggest that he implicity supports gay adoption (and it would be quite a leap for a little girl to even ask the question "Is gay adoption right or wrong?" in the first place, let alone query the opinions of adults on it), then chances are his neighbors are doing the same.

If he "doesn't approve of the gay lifestyle," then that's fine. If he wants to pass that prejudice on to his daughter, then that's his choice to make. But going to some kid's birthday party isn't going to jeopardize or complicate any of that.

If the concern is the kids, then it's only fair to point out that none of this is of any concern to these kids, and that the opinion of the adults is something they should deal with some other way than by boycotting some little boy's birthday party in order to make a statement about their political/religious beliefs. Find a different soapbox - you know - one without a little kid trapped under it.

You assmume that she won't be harmed
What if there are other Same Sex couples that
what if they have Public Displays of Affection - Kissing etc
I'm not stereotyping here. . but I am saying it *COULD* happen
That would require some explaination . . .

Rocket River
Just because I don't take my kid to see broke back mountain
don't mean I hate gays

[mc mark]

Rocket River
Just because I don't take my kid to see broke back mountain
don't mean I hate gays

If you just don't like the actors, director, westerns, yes, fine.
If you're not going because of the content, then yes, you are being intolerant.

[Rocket River]

If you just don't like the actors, director, westerns, yes, fine.
If you're not going because of the content, then yes, you are being intolerant.


I don't think it is appropriate content for a 9 yr old

Rocket River
if that makes me intolerant. . . so be it

[mc mark]

I don't think it is appropriate content for a 9 yr old

Rocket River
if that makes me intolerant. . . so be it


understood

No offense to you parenting skills meant RR

[Achilleus]

Young children shouldn't watch any R-rated movies...

[NewYorker]

Link, please? As a male parent who spent the vast majority of the time taking care of our two kids growing up, due to their mother having a more important job than I at the time, please educate me as to how they suffered and what developmental issues they clearly must have.

By the way, we have gotten countless kudos from others as to how well behaved they are, they are both "gifted and talented" straight A students, in magnet school programs and the Junior Honor Society. Clearly, they are screwed up. Having made me do what seems like bragging on the two, although it is simply the truth, you could also tell me how they have suffered being raised by two liberal Democrats... the horror!

Thanks in advance.



D&D. Impeach Bush for Promoting Torture.

I think it applies in the early development phase, first two years or something. Anyway, I remember it from a book called, "A General Theory of Love". I have it, but I think i've loaned it out to one of my employees. It goes on extensively regarding attachments, namely what a baby makes to the mother.

What I will do is try to get my copy back and see if they quote the studies, and then we can try to track them down. Also, you can find this book in probably most bookstores or check it out on Amazon.

If I forget to do it, just remind me sometime.

[ima_drummer2k]

I thought all marriage was a choice
WRONG.

[Deckard]

I think it applies in the early development phase, first two years or something. Anyway, I remember it from a book called, "A General Theory of Love". I have it, but I think i've loaned it out to one of my employees. It goes on extensively regarding attachments, namely what a baby makes to the mother.

What I will do is try to get my copy back and see if they quote the studies, and then we can try to track them down. Also, you can find this book in probably most bookstores or check it out on Amazon.

If I forget to do it, just remind me sometime.
I would like to think that my wife pumping milk from her breasts at work for over a year with each kid wasn't in vain. Perhaps they could taste her love. ;)

Certainly, she had all they could handle when she was with them. That would fall under the "quality versus quantity of love and attention" kerfluffle, but I certainly believe, based on personal experience, that fathers can be just as good at bringing up young children as the mother. Obviously, both parents are ideal, whether a traditional man and woman, or a loving gay couple of either sex, but that can't always happen, and doesn't happen in our society nearly as much as would be "ideal." My wife says that the fact that I largely brought them up, at least during the day, if she wasn't out of town (then it was 24/7, so to speak), accounts for how well they turned out. That men in a traditional male/female marriage/cohabitation far too often leave the bulk of the child rearing to the female, with the children not receiving nearly enough attention from them, and that kids from families where the husband spends a significant amount of time actually child-rearing... changing diapers, the whole nine yards, are better adjusted, better behaved, better for it (she says a great deal more about the subject, but I'm keeping it short).

There are countless books on child rearing. I know, because we bought a cart-load of them when we were going to have our first, having waited very late to start our family. You can find a book to support any argument concerning raising a child. ANY argument. I wouldn't put too much stock in any particular book. Read a variety of things, use your instincts, and spend some freakin' time with your kids. If they aren't well behaved when you take them out, act on it, immediately. I did that from the time they were an infant. And for the love of god, be consistent. My children have always behaved well in a public setting. The kids of people I know, including good friends, who catered to their children's every whim, who would let them raise hell in a restaurant, etc., all had trouble with them as a result. The amount of trouble varied, of course, but they were the ones who always told us, "Just wait until you have kids. You don't understand!" So their kids are college age or older, and we have a 12 year old daughter (her birthday was today) and a 16 year old son taking 5 freshman college courses as a junior in high school. I wish we were younger, but being older isn't necessarily a disadvantage, I guess.

Sorry for rambling on. My little girl just turned 12! She still thinks her Daddy is wonderful. I'm enjoying it while it lasts.

And now, back to your local station. (or kerfluffle)




D&D. Impeach Bush for Promoting Torture.

[professorjay]

Damn, 10 pages. Threads like this remind me that as far as we've gone, we still have a ways to go. Seriously. It's kind of depressing.

[MrRolo]

Fast forward to ------> a little boy, sitting at a big table wearing a party hat, taking a deep breath to blow out the candles on his birthday cake ... and he's alone.

What did he wish for?


A mother.

Edit: I just realized my sig is a nice touch to this thread.

[NewYorker]

I would like to think that my wife pumping milk from her breasts at work for over a year with each kid wasn't in vain. Perhaps they could taste her love. ;)

Certainly, she had all they could handle when she was with them. That would fall under the "quality versus quantity of love and attention" kerfluffle, but I certainly believe, based on personal experience, that fathers can be just as good at bringing up young children as the mother. Obviously, both parents are ideal, whether a traditional man and woman, or a loving gay couple of either sex, but that can't always happen, and doesn't happen in our society nearly as much as would be "ideal." My wife says that the fact that I largely brought them up, at least during the day, if she wasn't out of town (then it was 24/7, so to speak), accounts for how well they turned out. That men in a traditional male/female marriage/cohabitation far too often leave the bulk of the child rearing to the female, with the children not receiving nearly enough attention from them, and that kids from families where the husband spends a significant amount of time actually child-rearing... changing diapers, the whole nine yards, are better adjusted, better behaved, better for it (she says a great deal more about the subject, but I'm keeping it short).

There are countless books on child rearing. I know, because we bought a cart-load of them when we were going to have our first, having waited very late to start our family. You can find a book to support any argument concerning raising a child. ANY argument. I wouldn't put too much stock in any particular book. Read a variety of things, use your instincts, and spend some freakin' time with your kids. If they aren't well behaved when you take them out, act on it, immediately. I did that from the time they were an infant. And for the love of god, be consistent. My children have always behaved well in a public setting. The kids of people I know, including good friends, who catered to their children's every whim, who would let them raise hell in a restaurant, etc., all had trouble with them as a result. The amount of trouble varied, of course, but they were the ones who always told us, "Just wait until you have kids. You don't understand!" So their kids are college age or older, and we have a 12 year old daughter (her birthday was today) and a 16 year old son taking 5 freshman college courses as a junior in high school. I wish we were younger, but being older isn't necessarily a disadvantage, I guess.

Sorry for rambling on. My little girl just turned 12! She still thinks her Daddy is wonderful. I'm enjoying it while it lasts.

And now, back to your local station. (or kerfluffle)




D&D. Impeach Bush for Promoting Torture.

I'm sure you are an excellent father, and I wouldn't question that, nor do I have any desire to do so. And I am sure your kids are just fine.

This book isn't about child rearing - it's more about how humans form attachments and it was quoting studies that demonstrated how the attachment between a mother and child is irreplaceable. Now, as it concerns you and your family, I wouldn't worry about it too much. As you mentioned, everything is fine in that area.

But, where this does become an issue is with what happens with very young children (babies) going to two gay men? But you know, this may be larger - maybe it's just anyone who's not the mother. I really can't remember.

But I was astonished by the study, which is why I remember it from this book. I'll check up on it just for interests sake. Of course, one study doesn't prove anything in and of itself.

The point though that I think we all agree on, and it makes sense - that we are evolved to form a special bond with our mothers right from the get go - that's been developed for a million years of huminoid evolution. We don't know what happens when we decide to go against that.

Again, it might be moot since the baby is up for adoption and not with it's mother anyway. I simply can't say.

[Rocket River]

WRONG.


I forgot the shotgun variety
didn't mean to leave you out ;)

Rocket River

[WildSweet&Cool]

Batman and pgabriel, I appreciate your passionate input; however, you guys have been going back and forth about whether not interracial coupling is a good analogy. Why do we even need an a analogy? Let's just discuss the situation as I described it.

Of the posts that I've seen here, Rocket River's posts have been the most accurate to my sentiments. One thing that I would also state, though, is that I believe the following:

IF homosexuality is genetic in any way, I believe that only a very, very small percentage of the human populous is genetically predispositioned to homosexuality. I believe that the vast majority of homosexuality comes as a result of external influence. Sometimes someone may become gay because their best friend is gay and they want to be cool. Maybe a loner kid becomes gay in a form of rebellion. Maybe it's some kind of abuse. I don't know. My point is that it's a response to some kind of influence. This doesn't really make it a conscious choice, per se. You'll hear some gay people say, "I didn't choose to be this way" and I might agree with that. I'd feel that it would probably be the result of some form of influence that directly or indirectly guided them toward homosexuality.

As a parent, I can say something of which I am completely sure. Parents are guides for their children. In fact, that is a tremendous understatement. Parents are outstandingly powerful guides for their children. We are guides to them in every way you can think of... financially, religiously, morally, sexually, socially.. you name it.

I intend to guide my children toward heterosexuality. Now, I know that one day, as an adult, they may come to me and tell me they're gay. That will be out of my control. I won't shun them (just as I don't shun anyone for being gay). I will always love them. But while they are children, and while I have control of how to guide them, I will guide them toward heterosexuality.

But wait... there's more....

I don't believe that it is prejudice to disapprove of someone else's lifestyle, nor is it prejudice to pass that to my children. I may disapprove of a person's choice to practice skydiving... or someone's choice to be a stripper... or someone else's choice to leave his wife. I might believe that those are bad choices, that they're wrong, and maybe even sinful. And I might guide my child to also believe such things. But which one of us has NOT done something bad, wrong, or sinful? I will also teach my child that we all make our own, different choices in life, many of which may be bad, wrong, or sinful. And that we should treat others with dignity and respect even if, we do not approve of their path.

That is NOT prejudice.

If you disagree, you should know that prejudice is an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand (preconceived) or without knowledge, thought, or reason. I (obviously) have given this a lot of thought, looked into others' opinions, and am trying to approach this as reasonably as possible. I don't have to like your life path, and just because I disagree with your life path doesn't make me prejudice.

I don't consider it "hiding" my daughter from the subject. There is no doubt in my mind that I will be speaking to her someday about this topic. However, I would prefer to choose when I speak to her about it. As I've stated, I believe my daughter is not yet mature enough to be told about gay parents.

Additionally, though, by attending the party, we are making a statement to the gay couple that we have no problems with them at all, that we don't mind our daughter being there, and we'd be glad to participate in more activities with them in the future. I do not want to make these statements to them, however, because, honestly, they are not true. I do not approve of their parenthood. I don't want my daughter there, and I don't want to participate with them in future parties. I will respect them and will not force my beliefs on them; however, I do not approve of their parenthood and I do not want to insinuate that I have no problem with it.

It also makes a statement to my daughter that her daddy feels like it's okay for a child to have two daddys who live together and raise the child. This is not a statement that I want to make to my daughter.

I agree that not-attending is the equivalent of punishing their son for his parents being gay. That is unfortunate, and is not something I want to do. But I place a higher priority on the upbringing of my daughter than on their son's party, and if the two are in conflict, I will choose my daughter every time.

[MR. MEOWGI]

Which way to you choose to see direction of spinning?

http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5693171,00.gif

[Batman Jones]

If you think someone can be "guided" toward heterosexuality, you are naive. If any of your children is gay and you take pains to "guide" them in another direction you will only wind up convincing them to lead unhappy, closeted lives.

[thegary]

is it religion that causes you to disapprove?
if not, what is it exactly that you have a problem with?
what's wrong with grown men sticking their thingies in one another?

[WildSweet&Cool]

Which way to you choose to see direction of spinning?

http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5693171,00.gif

Let's be civil, shall we?

[WildSweet&Cool]

is it religion that causes you to disapprove?
if not, what is it exactly that you have a problem with?
what's wrong with grown men sticking their thingies in one another?

Religion and nature.

[Rashmon]

because i feel the kid would have to deal with issues having to do with having gay parents.

none of us know how a kid would react to that.

The children I have known (personally and professionally) who have been adopted or born into a gay relationship have proven to be more emotionally stable and understanding of differences than many adults posting in this thread.

[WildSweet&Cool]

If you think someone can be "guided" toward heterosexuality, you are naive. If any of your children is gay and you take pains to "guide" them in another direction you will only wind up convincing them to lead unhappy, closeted lives.

As I said, I believe that IF homosexuality is genetic in any way, only a very minute percentage of the human populous is as such. If my children become gay it will probably be because of outside influence.

As their guide, I intend for their primary influences to direct them toward heterosexuality.

[Batman Jones]

Religion and nature.

I think you should just tell the parents how you feel and explain that it's a result of your religious beliefs. Gay people experience disapproval due to religious beliefs all the time. While they'd probably be disappointed, I'm sure they'd understand. And once it was out in the open you wouldn't have to have these awkward situations resulting from them thinking you aren't judging them. Meanwhile, though I am not religious, I will pray for you.

[Batman Jones]

As I said, I believe that IF homosexuality is genetic in any way, only a very minute percentage of the human populous is as such. If my children become gay it will probably be because of outside influence.

As their guide, I intend for their primary influences to direct them toward heterosexuality.

A lot of people feel the way you do. I can't understand why someone would become gay "to be cool" as you suggested, since gay people experience all sorts of intolerance, prejudice and disapproval. (Some people think they shouldn't even be allowed to raise children.) But if you think people can be guided or directed toward one sexuality or another, I think you are passing naive and I worry a little for your kids.

[rhadamanthus]

If my children become gay it will probably be because of outside influence.


What on earth does this even mean? For someone to "become gay" they must be attracted to the same sex. There is no outside influence possible - it's an internal feeling of attraction. End of story.

What you are referring to as "becoming gay" is simply someone realizing they are gay.

That being said, allow me to caveat the above by saying that I don't really believe in homo or hetero sexuality. Just sexuality - however someone feels that should be expressed.

My two cents.

[rhester]

what's wrong with grown men sticking their thingies in one another?

Don't think you can answer that question without trying it yourself.

If someone would have to force you into that circumstance then you have your answer. ;)

[rhester]

I think you should just tell the parents how you feel and explain that it's a result of your religious beliefs. Gay people experience disapproval due to religious beliefs all the time. While they'd probably be disappointed, I'm sure they'd understand. And once it was out in the open you wouldn't have to have these awkward situations resulting from them thinking you aren't judging them. Meanwhile, though I am not religious, I will pray for you.


good post :)

[rhester]

But if you think people can be guided or directed toward one sexuality or another, I think you are passing naive and I worry a little for your kids.

No, he would be accurate as far as my own discussions with many homosexuals. I have not ever talked to one who wasn't guided or directed towards homosexuality and I have spoken with many.

My sample size may be less than 100 but the response was 100% a matter of influence, guided and directed.

[rhester]

I worked for years with a ministry on Montrose in Houston that cared for aids patients at the hospice and counselled homosexuals.

I never counselled homosexuals about their sex life either, they had many deeper contributing problems... severe abuse from parents other authorities and peers etc.

[gifford1967]

Batman and pgabriel, I appreciate your passionate input.....

If you were preventing your daughter from attending a birthday party because the parents were drug addicts, or alcoholics, or violent it would be perfectly reasonable because she might be in danger or exposed to behavior that concretely, objectively is harmful.

You have every right to not let your daughter go to this party, but make no mistake, you are acting in a bigoted way.

I would ask you to articulate how exactly homosexual behavior harms anyone. When we ostracize people, not because their actions cause harm to others, but just because their behavior is "different", we are being bigots.

[MR. MEOWGI]

Let's be civil, shall we?

:confused:

Have you seen this thread?
http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=135745

My point is that dispositions can be biological. Some people see the figure rotating clockwwise, some see it rotating counter-clockwise. Some see both. Why would sexuality be different? That is nature.

I didn't choose to be left handed even though only 10% of people are. So I can relate to homosexuality being biological. When I was in a classroom and saw 40 people writing with their right hand and I was the only one with my pen in my left, I realized people can be born differently from the majority.

My brother-in-law came out of the closet after 2 kids and 10+ years of marriage. He wasn't lead anywhere. He was living a lie.

[rhester]

I would ask you to articulate how exactly homosexual behavior harms anyone. When we ostracize people, not because their actions cause harm to others, but just because their behavior is "different", we are being bigots.

There are three misleading thoughts you have made.

First, he didn't say that his daughter was going to be harmed by the homosexuals. He didn't want to explain the situtation to her at a young age.

Second, physical harm is not the only issue, there is emotional harm also. I know people who were picked up and seduced with the aid of alcohol and drugs. They were taken advantage of and several were minors. This happens. It happens on the streets of Houston at parties and clubs. There are many hurting homosexuals who have suffered serious emotional abuse because of so called 'loving' sex.

Third, Bigotry is hate. There is no need to hate a prostitute, a minister or a homosexual. The poster never once gave grounds for hating. I don't believe he hates homosexuals at all. He loves his daughter and he has parental responsibilities and whatever he decides to do I don't think hate is a motive in my opinion.

[rhester]

:

My brother-in-law came out of the closet after 2 kids and 10+ years of marriage. He wasn't lead anywhere. He was living a lie.

My step mother went in the closet 5 years ago, she came out of the closet 2 years ago and that was after 4 kids and 20+ years of marriage. Her girlfriend and her will be the first to say they weren't born that way, but they prefer it to heterosexual marriage and they are quite happy with their choice.

[gifford1967]

There are three misleading thoughts you have made.

First, he didn't say that his daughter was going to be harmed by the homosexuals. He didn't want to explain the situtation to her at a young age.

You've made my point. I'm saying that he is ostracizing gay people because their behavior is "different", not because their is cause for concern his daugher would be harmed, or that homosexual behavior harms anyone. And this is bigoted.


Second, physical harm is not the only issue, there is emotional harm also. I know people who were picked up and seduced with the aid of alcohol and drugs. They were taken advantage of and several were minors. This happens. It happens on the streets of Houston at parties and clubs. There are many hurting homosexuals who have suffered serious emotional abuse because of so called 'loving' sex.

How is this different than the millions of people, many of them minors, who have been "picked up and seduced with the aid of alcohol and drugs." This happens. It happens on the streets of every city in the world, at parties and clubs. There are many hurting heterosexuals who have suffered serious emotional abuse because of so called 'loving' sex.


Third, Bigotry is hate. There is no need to hate a prostitute, a minister or a homosexual. The poster never once gave grounds for hating. I don't believe he hates homosexuals at all. He loves his daughter and he has parental responsibilities and whatever he decides to do I don't think hate is a motive in my opinion.

Bigotry is not necessarily hate at all. I've known many people that were bigoted towards different groups, but were warm, I would say even loving towards individual members of those groups. This is not uncommon. However, bigoted attitudes are hurtful and cause damage, even when they are accompanied by warmth or compassion. Rhester, I think you are a perfect example of this. I totally believe that you have cared for and ministered to homosexuals, with love in your heart. But you believe that a core part their being is "sinful". Think about how that affects them (if they are aware of your beliefs). Here is this warm, loving person that they probably admire deeply, who thinks that something as basic to their humanity as who they are physically attracted to is fundamentally wrong. If someone I admired felt that way about my sexuality it would cut me to the bone.






...........

[mc mark]

^^^ Jesus is that you?

:D

[Rashmon]

For those masquerading their "concern for the children" for their disdain for gays.

From the American Psychological Association:

"As the social visibility and legal status of lesbian and gay parents has increased, three major concerns about the influence of lesbian and gay parents on children have been often voiced (Falk, 1994; Patterson, Fulcher & Wainright, 2002). One is that the children of lesbian and gay parents will experience more difficulties in the area of sexual identity than children of heterosexual parents. ... A second category of concerns involves aspects of children's personal development other than sexual identity. ... A third category of concerns is that children of lesbian and gay parents will experience difficulty in social relationships. For example, some observers have expressed concern that children living with lesbian mothers or gay fathers will be stigmatized, teased, or otherwise victimized by peers. Another common fear is that children living with gay or lesbian parents will be more likely to be sexually abused by the parent or by the parent's friends or acquaintances.

Results of social science research have failed to confirm any of these concerns about children of lesbian and gay parents (Patterson, 2000, 2004a; Perrin, 2002; Tasker, 1999). Research suggests that sexual identities (including gender identity, gender-role behavior, and sexual orientation) develop in much the same ways among children of lesbian mothers as they do among children of heterosexual parents (Patterson, 2004a). Studies of other aspects of personal development (including personality, self-concept, and conduct) similarly reveal few differences between children of lesbian mothers and children of heterosexual parents (Perrin, 2002; Stacey & Biblarz, 2001; Tasker, 1999). However, few data regarding these concerns are available for children of gay fathers (Patterson, 2004b). Evidence also suggests that children of lesbian and gay parents have normal social relationships with peers and adults (Patterson, 2000, 2004a; Perrin, 2002; Stacey & Biblarz, 2001; Tasker, 1999; Tasker & Golombok, 1997). The picture that emerges from research is one of general engagement in social life with peers, parents, family members, and friends. Fears about children of lesbian or gay parents being sexually abused by adults, ostracized by peers, or isolated in single-sex lesbian or gay communities have received no scientific support. Overall, results of research suggest that the development, adjustment, and well-being of children with lesbian and gay parents do not differ markedly from that of children with heterosexual parents."

http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/policy/parents.html

http://www.psych.org/news_room/press_releases/adoption_coparenting121802.pdf

Some other resource information:

http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/fightforfamily2.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/29/politics/29marry.html

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=273

[WildSweet&Cool]

:confused:

Have you seen this thread?
http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=135745


I'm sorry. No, I hadn't seen that thread, and I thought you were accusing me of putting a "spin" on a situation.

[basso]

My daughter is 7 years old. She does not yet know anything about how children are born and knows nothing about sexuality. We haven't had the "birds and bees" discussion with her and would like to wait a few more years before we do . Until then, we would like to continue with keeping her in the dark about sexuality and childbirth (she still believes in Santa Claus). We feel that she's just not ready for that knowledge yet.

There is a gay couple who live on our street who adopted a baby boy about 2 years ago.

Now, I do not force my beliefs on other adults. I have always treated homosexual people the same as any other person. I don't shun them. I respect their intelligence (if they're intelligent). I don't let their sexual preference control how I treat them. I work with and have have been friends with gay people and not had any problems. I don't tell them how to lead their lives, and they have always paid me the same respect.

But I am entitled to my opinion of what is right or wrong, just like any human being. I'm gonna say it right out - I have never and will never approve of gay couples raising children. Now that I have said that, I want to emphasize that I have never treated the gay guys down the street or their son in any negative way whatsoever. The kid certainly doesn't deserve any negative treatment from me, and I don't believe that I should treat the gay parents poorly either.

I have, however, kept our exposure to them limited. At this point in time, I don't want to have to deal with my daughter asking "why does Andy have two daddys? I thought only women can make babies? How are babies made?". I would prefer to choose the time to speak to her about such things, and I would choose such a time when I feel that she is mature enough to comprehend it, and give serious thought and consideration to various points of view on it (the gay guys' point of view, their son's point of view, God's point of view, my point of view, etc.).

Recently, the gay guys invited my daughter to their son's birthday party.

Truthfully, I don't want her to go. My view is that they can live their lives and we can live our lives. And, though I treat them in a dignified manner, I don't approve of them raising a child and I don't want to have to be forced into a situation of having to answer questions from my daughter at a time when I don't feel that she's mature enough to deal with the information. And, honestly, even after I have that talk with her, I still probably won't want her to go (more on that in a moment).

Now, I could concoct an excuse for why we can't go. But there's another issue at hand.

I feel like such an excuse would be preitty transparent. Also, that's only a solution for this occasion. It doesn't solve anything for future occasions. And if we keep turning them down and turning them down, I feel that we're gonna be sending a signal to them that we're prejudiced against them. In fact, I do not approve of their parenthood (is that prejudice?), but have never demonstrated this to them (nor do I want to). This situation, however, forces me into a difficult predicament. I don't want to treat them with prejudice, but I also don't want to participate in and endorse something that I feel is wrong.

Please offer your thoughts.

my daughter's five, and is part of the post 9/11 baby boom that has overrun parts of manhattan, particularly the west side, where there are now 30% more children than there were 5 years ago.

the other day we were walking to school, and for some reason she made a comment about 9/11, and i said, yeah, but that happened before you were born. she said, "right, i was still in mommy's belly" and i said, "uh, not quite," to which she responded, "oh, yeah, i was still in a refrigerator in new jersey with carl..."

point being, conception and sex have little to do with one another, and sex and parenting have nothing to do with one another. my children have friends with two mommies, two daddies, a step mom or a step dad, or just one parent. some families adopt children, and some families need help from a doctor to have children. they also have lots of friends with a mother and a father. to them, there's lot's of different ways to be a family, and all of them are special.

as far as the stigma that might be associated with being the child of gay parents, it's your job as a parent to teach your kids that there isn't one. the best way to do that is go to the birthday party, and show everyone how "cool" you really are.

[rhester]

You've made my point. I'm saying that he is ostracizing gay people because their behavior is "different", not because their is cause for concern his daugher would be harmed, or that homosexual behavior harms anyone. And this is bigoted.

nope, he is not ostracizing them, like refusing to talk to them, refusing to serve them at a grocery store, make them use a different public rest room etc that is oastracizing. What he is doing is trying not to have to explain something to his daughter that he is uncomfortable explaining to her at her maturity level. You are over reacting and it is not bigoted in the least.


How is this different than the millions of people, many of them minors, who have been "picked up and seduced with the aid of alcohol and drugs." This happens. It happens on the streets of every city in the world, at parties and clubs. There are many hurting heterosexuals who have suffered serious emotional abuse because of so called 'loving' sex.
I didn't say it was a different kind of abuse (though it does cause a different set of issues) I said that there is emotional abuse and there is. If you are trying to argue there isn't then say so. I don't think getting abused by a heterosexual is somehow 'better' than getting abused by a homosexual. What's with that?


Bigotry is not necessarily hate at all. I've known many people that were bigoted towards different groups, but were warm, I would say even loving towards individual members of those groups. This is not uncommon. However, bigoted attitudes are hurtful and cause damage, even when they are accompanied by warmth or compassion. Rhester, I think you are a perfect example of this. I totally believe that you have cared for and ministered to homosexuals, with love in your heart. But you believe that a core part their being is "sinful". Think about how that affects them (if they are aware of your beliefs). Here is this warm, loving person that they probably admire deeply, who thinks that something as basic to their humanity as who they are physically attracted to is fundamentally wrong. If someone I admired felt that way about my sexuality it would cut me to the bone.

Bigots cover up hate, so what. If you don't love someone because of something they cannot change and if you are mean spirited, demeaning or you degrade them then you are a bigot and it is because you are hateful.

I do not think anyone has a pure, holy core being. Not a heterosexual, nor a homosexual. I think our core beings are sinful. We lie, have pride and arrogance, we are selfish and we covet just to give the short list. By Christ's grace alone we yield to His love that accepts homosexuals and heterosexuals.
Not accepting wrong, but respecting the opportunity for redemption.

Being physically attracted is not fundamentally wrong at all. There are many emotional factors in attraction and many many causes. But love itself is a choice not an emotion.

I don't think it is right for a man to stick another man. That is not because of any feelings, it is a moral issue for me. I know people who love crack cocaine like I love going to church. Fundementally I never try convincing someone that their core make up is addiction or obsessive or lustful whether it be sexual, emotional or mental. These are behaviors that can be under the control of a core sinfulness, but in themselves they are not unchangeable.

[mc mark]

That was a nice post basso.

[basso]

That was a nice post basso.

thanks-

WildSweet&Cool: buy your kids, and yourself, this book (http://www.amazon.com/Family-Book-Todd-Parr/dp/0316738964/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-4607089-8882425?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1192214346&sr=8-1).

the text will be too young for her, but i think you'd both do well to learn the concepts. your daughter probably already instinctively knows there's nothing wrong with gay parents, or their kids. As Oscar Hammerstein wrote:

You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed
In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!

[Batman Jones]

That was a nice post basso.

Ditto.

[Rashmon]

...
as far as the stigma that might be associated with being the child of gay parents, it's your job as a parent to teach your kids that there isn't one. the best way to do that is go to the birthday party, and show everyone how "cool" you really are.

Well said, and with that post you make me feel bad about some of my prior perceptions of you.

[gifford1967]

nope, he is not ostracizing them, like refusing to talk to them, refusing to serve them at a grocery store, make them use a different public rest room etc that is oastracizing. What he is doing is trying not to have to explain something to his daughter that he is uncomfortable explaining to her at her maturity level. You are over reacting and it is not bigoted in the least.



I didn't say it was a different kind of abuse (though it does cause a different set of issues) I said that there is emotional abuse and there is. If you are trying to argue there isn't then say so. I don't think getting abused by a heterosexual is somehow 'better' than getting abused by a homosexual. What's with that?




Bigots cover up hate, so what. If you don't love someone because of something they cannot change and if you are mean spirited, demeaning or you degrade them then you are a bigot and it is because you are hateful.

I do not think anyone has a pure, holy core being. Not a heterosexual, nor a homosexual. I think our core beings are sinful. We lie, have pride and arrogance, we are selfish and we covet just to give the short list. By Christ's grace alone we yield to His love that accepts homosexuals and heterosexuals.
Not accepting wrong, but respecting the opportunity for redemption.

Being physically attracted is not fundamentally wrong at all. There are many emotional factors in attraction and many many causes. But love itself is a choice not an emotion.

I don't think it is right for a man to stick another man. That is not because of any feelings, it is a moral issue for me. I know people who love crack cocaine like I love going to church. Fundementally I never try convincing someone that their core make up is addiction or obsessive or lustful whether it be sexual, emotional or mental. These are behaviors that can be under the control of a core sinfulness, but in themselves they are not unchangeable.



1. He said he wanted to avoid interacting with them in social situations. That's one of the reasons he doesn't want to go the party. So they don't invite him and his daughter to other events. And he doesn't want his attendance at the party or other events to be interpreted as condoning their way of life. I call that ostracizing them. If you don't like that word you could say he is shunning them.

2. Why bring up the example of people harmed by abusive, or exploitive homosexual relationships if you don't think that is inherent to homosexuality? What specifically is inherently harmful about homosexual sex, that is not caused by other peoples attitudes or reaction to it?

3. The problem is that you lump homosexuality in with other "sins" or behaviors that are objectively, inherently destructive, like drug addiction, lying, or being selfish. When you do that you are causing harm, whether you mean to or not. Please explain how the act of having sex with someone from the same gender causes any harm, that couldn't also be caused by having sex with someone of a different gender.

[pgabriel]

For those masquerading their "concern for the children" for their disdain for gays.




edit: sorry,

I'm really not concerned about gay people. I don't care if its a choice, or nature. there always have been and always will be gay people. i understand that.

[hotballa]

ah, good to see another sexual preference thread pop up every now and then to liven up the old D&D

Anyway, if they're not the types to flaunt base their entire self on their preferences in the bedroom, I don't see the harm in it. If they're the types who feel that they must declare their sexual preferences every 5 minutes, then I'd avoid them, whether they're straight or gay.

[pgabriel]

what's so funny about the accusations of hating gay people is, if i didn't like gay people i would just come out and say it. its just a web site. i don't have to hide anything from any of you, i don't even know you guys. its just plain stupid.

[hotballa]

what's so funny about the accusations of hating gay people is, if i didn't like gay people i would just come out and say it. its just a web site. i don't have to hide anything from any of you, i don't even know you guys. its just plain stupid.

why you so ig-nerant? ssstop being so ig-nerant...cm'on sstop

[NewYorker]

what's so funny about the accusations of hating gay people is, if i didn't like gay people i would just come out and say it. its just a web site. i don't have to hide anything from any of you, i don't even know you guys. its just plain stupid.

problem is that some people don't see this as a website, they think it's their life. And they think if you are being sarcastic you must be telling the truth, and then they use it to call you a liar.

Then they follow you around on every thread and derail it by calling you juvenille names.

you can't take those who attack you personally seriously.

[cson]

Well said, and with that post you make me feel bad about some of my prior perceptions of you.


Me too basso!

[Master Baiter]

problem is that some people don't see this as a website, they think it's their life. And they think if you are being sarcastic you must be telling the truth, and then they use it to call you a liar.

Then they follow you around on every thread and derail it by calling you juvenille names.

you can't take those who attack you personally seriously.
You are starting to turn into MacBeth type character where everyone is out to get you. It's amazing how you can't see how retarded the vast majority of your posts really are.

[mc mark]

Well said, and with that post you make me feel bad about some of my prior perceptions of you.

basso is a creature of the arts so like me, I'm sure he's exposed to the gay lifestyle more than most. Although I've heard that the ratio for gay people in opera is actually lower than the acting community.

go figure

[Rocket River]

OK
Let me attempt an Analogy

Let's Say it was a BIG LOVE Type family Party
BIG LOVE is that show on HBO about the Guy with Three Wives

If he did not agree with that lifestyle and chose not to go
and have to Explain to his little girl why Bill has 3 mommies
Would you still be as Strong in you opinion that she should go?
Would you be arguing that they are as discriminated against as Gays

By all accounts on the show hey ok people . . ..

Let's go WEEDS Type Family Party
WEEDS - the show about the family that grows pot i beleive on ShowTime
Mommies why does her cigarette smell funny?
Would you still be as Strong in you opinion that she should go?
Would you be arguing that they are as discriminated against as Gays

Let's Pull out the Satanist Card
Mommy . . . Why is everything black and got blood on it?
Would you still be as Strong in you opinion that she should go?
Would you be arguing that they are as discriminated against as Gays

The issue at hand is this
DO YOU PROTECT YOUR CHILD . . .if it offends someone else
[this is not to make gays = satanist/weedhead/bigamist]
The point is . .. .we all make a judgement of what is good and right for our child
IF
someone is doing something we don't beleive is good for our child to witness
or be a part of. .. . . we censor it .. . or at least we should
children should be censored form something until a time they can ingest it

This is not a Gay Rights issue. . it is a parenting issue

Rocket River

[NewYorker]

You are starting to turn into MacBeth type character where everyone is out to get you. It's amazing how you can't see how retarded the vast majority of your posts really are.

Not at all, I think the coorelation between the left-wing nutz and the guys who attack my race and beliefs is quite clear.

I mean, I understand it and don't think they are out to get me. I think I pissed them off when I called them out and showed how radical and far away from the mainstream they actually are, and a handful responded with a smear campaign, and now they are doing it to pgabriel.

[thegary]

basso is a creature of the arts so...

...he likes war.

basso is a well known gay 3>er but not so much a homo 3>er

[basso]

basso is a creature of the arts so like me, I'm sure he's exposed to the gay lifestyle more than most. Although I've heard that the ratio for gay people in opera is actually lower than the acting community.

go figure

never did a head count, but there are certainly many gay men and women in opera.

what's 3>er?

[basso]

...he likes war.


http://www.arkivmusic.com/graphics/covers/full/38/381430.JPG

[thegary]

what's 3>er?

it's dislexic for <3er

[rimbaud]

Although I've heard that the ratio for gay people in opera is actually lower than the acting community.

Opera is muy macho.

Whew, I just read through this whole beastie of a thread. It was a rollercoaster of emotions, laughs, comfusion, and wonderment. As a result of these 13 pages of loooong reading I thought, "this thread needs more words" so here goes:

WS&C - I think somebody asked this already but never saw you answer...has your daughter seen these two men before? Together? Same car/house/whatever? Does she know that their child exists? If so, going to a birthday party should not be anything new or anything that she doesn't already compute. Her asking you about them having a kid is no different than her asking about why those two men (on the street) are holding hands or living together or whatever. They are gay - you will or perhaps already have dealt with that. Only addition in this situation is that they adopted. She knows what adoption is. Child needs home, people apply and bring baby to home. Any kind of commentary or editorializing you choose to do is obviously your call but she already knows things and if she knows that they all exist going to a party changes nothing.

In general about gay adoption (and again has been mentioned but nobody "against" has really answered) - we have a system/culture that produces a lot of unwanted kids. The system we have set up to take care of them is garbage overall. Poorly funded, poorly supervised, often poorly trained people, etc., are all part of the foster/adoption/orphan problems. Getting children out of the system is the best thing that can be done. The longer they are in it, the less chance they have. Pity the poor souls who last until their 18th birthday when they are booted onto the street to fend for themselves. My mother has worked around these places so I know way too may horror stories and have met hundreds of kids with emotional disabilities due to their situation.

As such, again, "thinking of the children" really is about getting them out of there (within reason) and putting them somewhere safe, stable, and with love. If a gay couple can provide that, then they are automatically better off, not worse just because the parents are gay.

Further, NewYorker, adoption is not just about kids under 1...there are huge numbers of older kids that need homes. In this situation, having a male and female influence for early development are out the window.

More recently, rhester - I take issue with your portrayal, backing up WS&C, of every homosexual you have known being somewhat pushed/convinced into it. I believe you but I do not trust your environment/context. Most likely your discussion with homosexuals has centered around your preaching. If you are talking with some who have come to you in that context. So, again, I believe you but I think your situation is unique in a way that distorts your experiences.

Of course, I can counter with all of the homosexuals I have known in my life (a lot since I am another arts guy) and none of them were influenced into being gay. These are friends I have had for years, decades and have known very very well. No point in individual stories because that would get silly. Anyway, at worst we cancel out each other, so there!

[basso]

it's dislexic for <3er

which is?

[thegary]

which is?


ihttp://img339.imageshack.us/img339/5528/32016705im4.jpg ny