Behavior and prejudice

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

rhester:

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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?

 

And was it a difficult choice?

 

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.

 

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 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.

 

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.