Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
should same-sex couples be allowed to raise kids?
Topic Started: Jan 6 2007, 06:04 PM (1,036 Views)
dolmansaxlil
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Riley,
We've had some confrontations with parents at the school. Not with me personally at this point - at least, not over that sort of issue. Steps I've taken because kids were in trouble (not necessarily abuse, but a variety of situations) have helped. Steps that my coworkers and administration have helped. Unfortunately, it's not always easy. Deciding whether a child is in "danger" is a very hard call to make.
"Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst." ~ Henri Cartier-Bresson

My Flickr Photostream


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dolmansaxlil
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Riley
Jan 7 2007, 02:06 AM
BUT, unfortunately, these kids are still likely to encounter bullying, because their parents are gay.

It isn't fair, but it would happen.

Riley,
Kids with gay parents will encounter jerks who tease them and bully them.

Kids whose parents are poorer than the majority will be teased and bullied.

Kids whose parents are richer than the majority will be teased and bullied.

Kids who like reading more than sports will be teased and bullied.

Kids who are perceived as being dumber than the majority will be teased and bullied.

Kids who are perceived as being smarter than the majority will be teased and bullied.

Kids who wear second hand clothes will be teased and bullied.

Kids who are always at the height of fashion will be teased and bullied.

Kids with glasses will be teased and bullied.

Kids who are raised in conservative homes and go to church will be teased and bullied.

Kids who are raised in very liberal homes who don't believe in god will be teased and bullied.

ANY difference will be preyed upon. Whether the difference is real or perceived. Yeah, a child with gay parents has a fairly obvious difference, but kids will find differences no matter what. They're really good at it.
"Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst." ~ Henri Cartier-Bresson

My Flickr Photostream


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Riley
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
I still think it would be more prominent, than the other reasons they may be teased.

It is also one of the only ones that would be likely to last right through to the end of high school.

A lot of high school kids are very homophobic.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kenny
HOLY CARP!!!
Riley
Jan 6 2007, 10:25 PM
I still think it would be more prominent, than the other reasons they may be teased.

It is also one of the only ones that would be likely to last right through to the end of high school.

A lot of high school kids are very homophobic.

So feed their homophobia by catering to their wishes?
Gee, that's progress. :rolleyes:

BTW when it is no longer taboo to be gay the numbers WILL rise.

But the numbers will not actually not rise.
Those men who got married, had kids, then came out, (or patronized the gay bath houses in secret) will just not bother pretending to be straight like they do today.

Acceptance doesn't make you gay, but it can prevent you from living a lie.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Riley
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
kenny
Jan 7 2007, 01:59 AM
Riley
Jan 6 2007, 10:25 PM
I still think it would be more prominent, than the other reasons they may be teased.

It is also one of the only ones that would be likely to last right through to the end of high school.

A lot of high school kids are very homophobic.

So feed their homophobia by catering to their wishes?
Gee, that's progress. :rolleyes:

BTW when it is no longer taboo to be gay the numbers WILL rise.

But the numbers will not actually not rise.
Those men who got married, had kids, then came out, (or patronized the gay bath houses in secret) will just not bother pretending to be straight like they do today.

Acceptance doesn't make you gay, but it can prevent you from living a lie.

I hate admitting I'm wrong, but I agree with that.

I change my vote.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dolmansaxlil
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Let me tell you a story.

My kids are at the height of homophobia. 13 and 14 year olds only know a very limited set of circumstances, and anything outside of that is weird, and therefore up for ridicule. As I said, it's a small, rural, blue collar town. Gays are something these kids see on tv, in the most stereotypical manner possible. Insults like fag are thrown around like they don't mean anything. One day, it got to me, and I sat down with my kids, and talked to them about it. I talked about the origins of the term fag. I talked about their desire - one they constantly express - to have a safe and welcoming classroom environment. I talked a little bit about the civil rights movement - about seperate drinking fountains and the harrassment black kids endured. They were appalled. I asked if they thought that, during that time, a black child would have felt safe in a classroom. Of course not. I then asked them if they knew - knew for certain - that one of the people in their class didn't have a gay older brother or a favourite uncle that happened to be gay. Would that person feel safe in the classroom?

Last month, a group of kids found out that a co-op student we had at our school last year was gay. They all liked this kid a lot. A couple of the kids were a bit shocked, a bit upset. Then one of the kids said, "You were right. We wouldn't make the comments if we thought we were really hurting someone we knew. I wouldn't want to hurt him."

We're afraid of what we don't know. These kids got a bit of a lecture from me, and had it solidified by finding out that the guy they liked so much, who they respected, was from this group that they all feared. Suddenly, it's not so scary. Not so foreign.

Some of them still use the term. But not as often. And the other kids will call them on it. All I have to do is raise an eyebrow and they apologize. They use it a lot less.

It would be hard on a kid, sure. But we don't make other people more tolerant of an idea or a lifestyle by hiding it. We make them more tolerant by exposing them to whatever they're afraid of.

Would it always be easy for a kid raised by two gay parents? Of course not. Would it be harder than the situation a lot of kids are in? Maybe. But you also have to remember that kids think "normal" is whatever situation they live in. My school has a high divorce rate. My kid comes from a divorced home. For him, everyone goes to mommy's house sometimes and daddy's another. That's normal for him. A kid with gay parents would have their version of normal. Yeah, he'll get teased for it sometimes. But I don't think that's any reason to ban two people from raising a child in a loving home. As has been said earlier in the thread, there are no "surprise" babies in this situation. No one has a kid in a gay relationship when they don't really, truly want it. It's just too hard. That's a better start than a lot of kids with "normal" parents get.
"Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst." ~ Henri Cartier-Bresson

My Flickr Photostream


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Surprise surprise, I voted no.

Despite my various reasons for that, let me just throw a caveat out there that whatever is best for the child is most important. If raising a child in a homosexual environment is better than the alternative, then that is fine. Therefore although my default answer is no, I would support a case-by-case judgement made in the interest of the child.

Any responsible adult(s) should be allowed to raise kids. This is regardless of their sexual habits in the bedroom, whether its one, two, or ten adults. Whether they are gay, straight, bi, trans, whatever. Whether its a brother and sister raising kids. Regardless of religion or lack thereof, etc. As you can see...this isn't a homosexuality issue, but rather an issue of if the requesting parent(s) are responsible adults, then that is fine as long as its giving the child a better environment than what he or she is currently in.

However, the caveat notwithstanding and as a *general* policy, I believe that responsible and stable mother/father couples should be the only ones by default allowed to adopt children.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mmmaestro007
Member Avatar
Middle Aged Carp
LWpianistin
Jan 7 2007, 02:33 PM
mmmaestro007
Jan 6 2007, 11:10 PM
kenny
Jan 7 2007, 12:33 PM
The Kids will pick on them" was one argument used for not allowing black kids into a white school.

Isn't school a place to teach reading rithmatic and social skills too?

yes, but this issue is a lot deeper than black and white, i think it's to do with nature and i think it's a time bomb for kids in this situation

That's just it. It ISN'T deeper than the issue of integration was in the 50s and 60s. If we went back in time (and they had internet back then), you would be on this board defending segregation, and I would be supporting integration, along with Dol, Riley, and others. It's the same argument, just in a different era.

never - so now i'm a racist - then i suspect you are either stupid or a person of very low morals!
"Madam, you have between your legs an instrument capable of giving pleasure to thousands, and all you can do is scratch it!"

Sir Thomas Beechem, conductor
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mmmaestro007
Member Avatar
Middle Aged Carp
John D'Oh
Jan 7 2007, 01:18 PM
mmmaestro007
Jan 6 2007, 10:10 PM
kenny
Jan 7 2007, 12:33 PM
The Kids will pick on them" was one argument used for not allowing black kids into a white school.

Isn't school a place to teach reading rithmatic and social skills too?

yes, but this issue is a lot deeper than black and white, i think it's to do with nature and i think it's a time bomb for kids in this situation

What is this 'nature' to which you so blithely refer, and which is unique to sexual preference?

well it has to do with design - i think two guys should be able to raise kids if they can conceive and give birth - you know, the way all animals reproduce - what do you think about that?
"Madam, you have between your legs an instrument capable of giving pleasure to thousands, and all you can do is scratch it!"

Sir Thomas Beechem, conductor
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
What if one of the gay parents is the biological parent? Have you thought of that?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Would it be alright if, say, a kid lost his biological parents and his grand-pa takes him in and raises him with his still-single uncle? No sex between the grand-pa and the uncle, just two men working together to raise a kid. Would you have a problem with that?

Would you have a problem with "two men raising a kid" if those two men weren't having sex with each other?

Or would you force the kid into a forster home or get another hetero-couple to adopt the kid?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mmmaestro007
Member Avatar
Middle Aged Carp
Axtremus
Jan 7 2007, 05:52 PM
Would it be alright if, say, a kid lost his biological parents and his grand-pa takes him in and raises him with his still-single uncle? No sex between the grand-pa and the uncle, just two men working together to raise a kid. Would you have a problem with that?

Would you have a problem with "two men raising a kid" if those two men weren't having sex with each other?

Or would you force the kid into a forster home or get another hetero-couple to adopt the kid?

no to all
"Madam, you have between your legs an instrument capable of giving pleasure to thousands, and all you can do is scratch it!"

Sir Thomas Beechem, conductor
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mmmaestro007
Member Avatar
Middle Aged Carp
Bernard
Jan 7 2007, 02:45 PM
mmmaestro007
Jan 6 2007, 06:33 PM
Jack Frost
Jan 7 2007, 11:50 AM
Yes, of course.

Why even ask?

jf

the answer to that is simple - it is happening now for the first time since we started walking this planet and down the track we will be dealing with the ramifications be it good or bad!

Remind me again... what planet did you say you were from?

planet Earth - you know a lot of gay couples that are raising kids legally?
"Madam, you have between your legs an instrument capable of giving pleasure to thousands, and all you can do is scratch it!"

Sir Thomas Beechem, conductor
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dolmansaxlil
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
mmmaestro007
Jan 7 2007, 05:17 AM
Bernard
Jan 7 2007, 02:45 PM
mmmaestro007
Jan 6 2007, 06:33 PM
Jack Frost
Jan 7 2007, 11:50 AM
Yes, of course.

Why even ask?

jf

the answer to that is simple - it is happening now for the first time since we started walking this planet and down the track we will be dealing with the ramifications be it good or bad!

Remind me again... what planet did you say you were from?

planet Earth - you know a lot of gay couples that are raising kids legally?

I know a few personally.
"Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst." ~ Henri Cartier-Bresson

My Flickr Photostream


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
My next door neighbors are two women raising a child. Should I call the police?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
mmmaestro007
Jan 7 2007, 04:30 AM
Axtremus
Jan 7 2007, 05:52 PM
Would it be alright if, say, a kid lost his biological parents and his grand-pa takes him in and raises him with his still-single uncle? No sex between the grand-pa and the uncle, just two men working together to raise a kid. Would you have a problem with that?

Would you have a problem with "two men raising a kid" if those two men weren't having sex with each other?

Or would you force the kid into a forster home or get another hetero-couple to adopt the kid?

no to all

So your objection is not with "two men raising a kid,"
but with "two men who have sex with each other raising a kid."

No if I take "raising a kid" out of the equation, do you object to "two men having sex with each other"?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Nobody's Sock
Jan 6 2007, 10:49 PM
Really!! I'm afraid to go to Canada now.

Scary place.

Well, at least we don't have to call the police in Toronto..

Canadian Boy Can Have Two Moms And A Dad High Court Rules

(Toronto, Ontario) An Ontario boy can legally have two mothers and a father, the province's highest court ruled Tuesday.

The same-sex partner of the child's biological mother went to court seeking to also be declared a mother of the boy.

After hearing arguments in 2003, Superior Court Justice David Aston dismissed the application saying he didn't have the jurisdiction to rule in the case.

Court was told the child has three parents: his biological father and mother (identified in court documents as B.B. and C.C., respectively) and C.C.'s partner, the appellant A.A.

A.A. and C.C. have been in a stable same-sex union since 1990. In 1999, they decided to start a family with the assistance of their friend B.B.

The two women would be the primary caregivers of the child, but they believed it would be in the child's best interests that B.B. remain involved in the child's life.

The boy refers to A.A. and C.C. as his mothers.

Aston indicated that had he thought he had jurisdiction, he would have made ruled that A.A. was also the boy's mother.

``The child is a bright, healthy, happy individual who is obviously thriving in a loving family that meets his every need,'' the decision reads.

``The applicant has been a daily and consistent presence in his life. She is fully committed to a parental role. She has the support of the two biological parents who themselves recognize her equal status with them.''

A.A. and C.C. did not apply for an adoption order because, if they did so, B.B. would lose his status under the Child and Family Services Act.

``Perhaps one of the greatest fears faced by lesbian mothers is the death of the birth mother,'' the appeal court heard. ``Without a declaration of parentage or some other order, the surviving partner would be unable to make decisions for their minor child, such as critical decisions about health care.''

The Children's Law Reform Act does not reflect current society, the appeal court judges ruled.

``There is no doubt that the Legislature did not foresee for the possibility of declarations of parentage for two women, but that is a product of the social conditions and medical knowledge at the time,'' they wrote. ``The Legislature did not turn its mind to that possibility, so that over 30 years later the gap in the legislation has been revealed.''

As a result, the statute does not provide for the best interests of the child in this case, the judges said.

``The Act does not deal with, nor contemplate, the disadvantages that a child born into a relationship of two mothers, two fathers or as in this case two mothers and one father might suffer.''

The Attorney General for Ontario did not chose to intervene to support the legislation, the ruling noted.
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Thanks for posting the article, George.

The whole concept of "parentage" in the legal sense really needs to be generalized quite a bit. I hope the law would just deal with "legal guardianship" and not deal with "parentage." (Must like I'd like to see the law deals solely with "civil union" and not deal with "marriage".)
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
One of the arguments about same-sex parenting and gay marriage is that it's the beginning of a slippery slope. I'm not sure I buy into all that, but the fact that the Canadians say that "Johnny can have two mommies, and a daddy" opens another can of worms, no?
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
George K
Jan 7 2007, 11:25 AM
One of the arguments about same-sex parenting and gay marriage is that it's the beginning of a slippery slope. I'm not sure I buy into all that, but the fact that the Canadians say that "Johnny can have two mommies, and a daddy" opens another can of worms, no?

Yes. But I think ignoring the can of worm is even worse.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
I'd like to say something about the slippery slope argument regarding same-sex marriage. It's based on the idea that only procreative sex acts are moral. What it's saying is that all other sex acts are not moral. If all other sex acts are not moral then there is no difference between two men having sex and men having sex with dogs and men having sex with children and men having sex with dead bodies etc. I've seen a lot of this type of argument from different sources. It is bigotry not to put too fine a point on it.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
mmmaestro007
Jan 7 2007, 03:59 AM
LWpianistin
Jan 7 2007, 02:33 PM
mmmaestro007
Jan 6 2007, 11:10 PM
kenny
Jan 7 2007, 12:33 PM
The Kids will pick on them" was one argument used for not allowing black kids into a white school.

Isn't school a place to teach reading rithmatic and social skills too?

yes, but this issue is a lot deeper than black and white, i think it's to do with nature and i think it's a time bomb for kids in this situation

That's just it. It ISN'T deeper than the issue of integration was in the 50s and 60s. If we went back in time (and they had internet back then), you would be on this board defending segregation, and I would be supporting integration, along with Dol, Riley, and others. It's the same argument, just in a different era.

never - so now i'm a racist - then i suspect you are either stupid or a person of very low morals!

Neither, actually. I have very high personal morals, and am not known as the stupid kid. Maybe the weird one, but not stupid. I also care about other humans, especially children.

I am not saying you are racist, I'm just saying that it IS the same argument. Bigots back then were as afraid of integration as you are of gays raising kids.
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
Daniel
Jan 7 2007, 08:08 AM
I'd like to say something about the slippery slope argument regarding same-sex marriage. It's based on the idea that only procreative sex acts are moral. What it's saying is that all other sex acts are not moral. If all other sex acts are not moral then there is no difference between two men having sex and men having sex with dogs and men having sex with children and men having sex with dead bodies etc. I've seen a lot of this type of argument from different sources. It is bigotry not to put too fine a point on it.

Cripes... If oral sex were outlawed, I guess I'd be one hell of a criminal!! :lol2: :fallenhalo:
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Racism is arguing for biology as the basis for social order. Denying civil rights to homosexuals is very much the same type of argument. It's saying "you're different" so you don't get treated the same while ignoring the fact that the difference is irrelevant.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Frank_W
Jan 7 2007, 08:18 AM
Daniel
Jan 7 2007, 08:08 AM
I'd like to say something about the slippery slope argument regarding same-sex marriage.  It's based on the idea that only procreative sex acts are moral.  What it's saying is that all other sex acts are not moral.  If all other sex acts are not moral then there is no difference between two men having sex and men having sex with dogs and men having sex with children and men having sex with dead bodies etc.  I've seen a lot of this type of argument from different sources.  It is bigotry not to put too fine a point on it.

Cripes... If oral sex were outlawed, I guess I'd be one hell of a criminal!! :lol2: :fallenhalo:

Hands above the sheets! :lol2:

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3