Gay Marriage and Raising Children: The Elephant in the Room

reply to post by LadyGreenEyes

I don't think of homosexuals as something other than people, either.
Just people with some confusion over certain issues.

I'm bisexual so I am either half confused or two times as confused depending on how you look at it. Just letting you know, in case my responses are confusing

Well I read your post to me, and honestly the best reply I feel I can give is repeating this.

If we want the data we need to allow them to produce the data. So after 'long term' lets look at the data objectively and see what it tells us about same-sex parents and families.

LadyGreenEyes:

I don't think of homosexuals as something other than people, either.
Just people with some confusion over certain issues.

Can you please explain what homosexuals are confused about?

Homosexuality is basically the same difference as Ethnicity is in Humans. Just a Human with something different about them in their DNA, just another one of God's creations.

Originally posted by DaesDaemar
reply to post by otherpotato

 

And if science can find a way to make sure you don't have gay children, are you then still on the side of science? It's a never ending circle.

Way to introduce an argument totally unrelated to the question you were asked by way of avoiding an answer.

The science of fertility medicine exits and helps many infertile couples become parents as well as allowing same sex couples to do the same. Like many things in this profit-based world we live in if you can afford it the door is open to you. For the rest, there's always the "science" of the turkey baster. Determining who a person "is" before they're born so that you can change it is a completely different topic.

Am I to assume that your equating of actual science with unrelated hypotheticals is your way of subtly answering the question? Are you saying you're against fertility medicine as a means for couples to have children who wouldn't otherwise be able to have them? I can see no other reason why you would ask "where does it end?"

Or is it that you simply don't have a good argument against the question you were asked and felt the need to turn to sensationalism as a distraction?

reply to post by LadyGreenEyes


Let's look at what constitutes a mental illness. If you look at the DSM IV-TR you will find that almost every illness listed has a similar symptom. This is that the illness prevents the person from going about their every day life. Now I'm sure there are plenty of pedophiles/psychopaths/etc out there that feel their behavior does not impede with their life, but at the same time there are those out there that hate what they do but they can't control themselves. Barring this there is one other universal symptom that marks when a behavior moves into mental illness. That's when it becomes a danger to the person or others. Pedophilia/psychopathy/etc clearly present a danger to others. Homosexuality on the other hand does not.

Homosexuality does not impede on one's life. Homosexuality does not pose a threat to you or others. So why is there this need to associate it with mental illnesses when it does meet the criteria for being classified as one?

I probably shouldn't be, but I am truly amazed. Back when this thread started, tothetenthpower and I had a very polite, factual discussion of the issue. I actually discovered some information on this issue that caused me to question my initial feelings.

Then the brigade came to everyone's rescue.

Gay marriage is a political issue today. That is a fact. Gay marriage is a new subject to US culture. That as well is a fact. Changes to traditionally accepted cultural conditions require acceptance by the citizenry of the country in the US. That, like it or not, is also a fact.

But as usual, the tactic used is to deny the facts above, unilaterally declare that "my way is right and the rest of you shut up", spew horrific misinformation about how the law works in the US, demonize anyone who dares to question the issue, and demand society do as one says. Then the other side starts stretching refuting arguments to the point of insanity and the whole thing escalates.

Yesterday I entered this thread unsure of whether a gay couple could effectively raise a child without some emotional scarring, but still absolutely opposed to removing children from biological parents over this one issue. I left thinking that the likelihood was closer to the household genders perhaps being irrelevant. Today I return to the thread and find myself disgusted again at the thought that such hateful, ignorant, oblivious people should be allowed to exist in the same state as a child!

I refer not only to the gay marriage supporters, but also to those on the other side who even refuse to discuss the issue.

Way to sway public opinion.

I have learned one thing: there are a lot of good people out there whose only difference with me is who they sleep with at night (probably the most minor difference I can think of). There are also a lot of hateful intolerant people who are obviously using the gay rights issues to hate me and everything about me over some sort of vengeful agenda which I believe is based on no less than rage at perceived historic wrongs. Some happen to be homosexual.

You want to know my real feelings? I think everyone should be treated equally, and everyone should have freedom to live their life as they see fit while not prohibiting others from doing so. But that belief means I cannot support gay marriage in the US at this time, much less gay adoption/conception, because it is painfully obvious to me that those arguing in this thread, as well as the even greater number of similar individuals not on ATS, are interested more in punishing me for perceived wrongs by violating my right to believe as I choose. Because that is what this is really about for the majority of supporters: revenge, not equality. Revenge against religious beliefs, hate toward religious beliefs, a sincere and wanton desire to see others embarrassed, humiliated, perhaps even stripped of their freedoms.

Heaven forbid children be exposed to this level of hateful intolerance!

I predict a storm now of people trying to refute this; don't even try. It makes you look hypocritical and confused. You have already accomplished this quite well.

Even more troubling is the fact that amidst this turmoil of hate, there are a good number of people who truly desire equality and nothing more. They have my deepest sympathies, for their reasonable demands have been hijacked by the mob mentality that now controls this topic. I anxiously await the day I can join them in their struggle for justice, just as soon as the hate dies down.

Who is who? I think everyone already knows which side they are on.

TheRedneck

The lack of ability to tolerate questioning of the "party line" on this issue is the astounding.

Mark my words: the atmosphere of hysterical rigidity, fantacism, personal attack, and inflexibility in the face of any questioning or skepticism whatsoever that emanates from the more strident Gay Rights voices is far more dangerous to the Gay Rights movement than any external "oppression" or bigotry out there today. It creatIes rankor and enimnity where none existed before.

reply to post by FailedProphet

Mark my words: the atmosphere of hysterical rigidity, fantacism, personal attack, and inflexibility in the face of any questioning or skepticism whatsoever that emanates from the more strident Gay Rights voices is far more dangerous to the Gay Rights movement than any external "oppression" or bigotry out there today. It creatIes rankor and enimnity where none existed before. (emphasis mine)

"For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." -Sir Isaac Newton

Though he was speaking about physical forces, this is true for political issues as well.

This "hysterical rigidity, fantacism, personal attack, and inflexibility" is in direct reaction to the very same attitudes shown by some gay rights opposers.

You are absolutely correct except for the last words on which I placed emphasis. I did not like that you placed blame solely on one side.

Historical anecdote: In the war of 1812, the United States invaded the British colony of Canada with the intent to break the British hold on North America to allow easier trade and western expansion. The British retaliated to the invasion and destroyed the White House and Capitol building in Washington and attempted an invasion of Louisiana which was defeated. The war raged with neither side gaining a significant advantage until the political atmosphere which created the war had dissipated. USA and Britain have had a good peaceful relationship ever since.

As TheRedneck (an individual for whom I hold great respect) has already stated, this issue will not be resolved until the flames of hatred on both sides are extinguished.

reply to post by TheRedneck


As you've said this has become a political issue. As with every political issue those who are most vocal are the extremists. We don't judge all Christians based on the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church. So why should all homosexuals be judged based on those who are more militant in their approach. I'm not saying that you aren't entitled to your opinion. It just seems kind of rash to base your opinion on the words of the vocal minority.

As the OP says in his opening post what we should really be worried about is the children. I just fail to see how the current views on homosexuality in any way. The current political and social stigma against homosexuality as caused untold amounts of pain, anguish, and scarring in homosexual children and adolescence. There are thousands of children looking for a good home and according to current research a same-sex household can provide that home. However, once again thanks to this stigma it seems people would rather have these children go environments that have been shown to be harmful to development such as foster care and group homes. And what of the children who already live in a same-sex household? Quality of life for these children would most likely increase by allowing their parents to marry.

This shouldn't be a political issue. This shouldn't be a religious issue. It should be an issue about doing what is right. There is no evidence to suggest that any children would be worse off by allowing same-sex couples to adopt and marry. There is evidence to suggest that many children would benefit from allowing these things to occur.

As I said before you are free to have and express your opinion. Just like I am free to express that your opinion doesn't make sense to me. Why base it off the actions of a vocal minority? Every issue, especially one as heated as this, has its more militant aspects but these rarely reflect the actions and desires of the good hearted people that make up the core. Should we ignore the well being of the whole because of the few?

Now I may have misread or misinterpreted something you wrote and if I did I apologize. These are simply my views on the topic. As I said above this isn't about politics or religion or even sexual orientation. It's about what's right. It's about the fact that there is no evidence to suggest that same-sex marriages can make the world any worse and some evidence to suggest it could help make things better. It's about the fact that these people are as human as you and I and yet in many ways they're still treated as second class citizens. We live in an enlightened time where concepts like equality and freedom are far reaching. However, we still allow these concepts to become muddled by applying labels to everyone. There aren't good and bad homosexuals. Just like there aren't good and bad heterosexuals. There are simply good and bad people that may have different things they like to do in their free time.

This post ended up being longer than I expected. I also feel like I kind of went off on a tangent there. If I offended or angered you in anyway I apologize. It was not my intention. I merely meant to express my own thoughts that were inspired by your post.

Hmm - - let me see - - factual debate on the rights of this specific minority.

A group born with a difference - - that was forced by main stream society - - to live a life of lies - - and create their own sub-culture on the edge of society - - just to survive and have some kind of normalcy.

A minority group that finally organized and spoke up for their Equal Rights.

vs

A majority group spending BILLIONS of dollars to keep them from having Equal Rights.

Including the equal right of having a family

Pretty simple to me.

reply to post by Xcalibur254

It's not about offense or anger... it is more about frustration for me. I can emphasize with those who, as I said, desire only a chance to live their life the way they see as right. My opinion on homosexuality should have no bearing on that ability.

But you said it well:

As the OP says in his opening post what we should really be worried about is the children.

But what do I hear, not just here, not just in every thread touching this subject on ATS, but everywhere the topic comes up? Hate... I hear how gays hate Christians (when I know the vast majority do not), how Christians hate gays (when I know they do not), how religion is evil, how anyone who does not agree with every syllable spoken is "homophobic" (an inaccurate word that frankly disgusts me), and how I should be ashamed of myself for doing something that is instead being done by my accusers: hating others for their beliefs.

I'm frankly tired of it. I'm tired of people with agendas as transparent as a spiders web denying them anyway. I'm tired of having every word I say twisted around to make me look like a monster. I'm tired of being told that everything I think, do, or say is an abomination to society.

So... if gay rights means in any way these same people gain any additional political power over me, I oppose the package deal. I also mourn for the true cause.

The current political and social stigma against homosexuality as caused untold amounts of pain, anguish, and scarring in homosexual children and adolescence.

Look to those who continue to chant how special and different and unique homosexuals are: there you find your cause for this stigma.

Those of us who are asking questions and looking for similarities are not the cause... not any more.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by Xcalibur254

This shouldn't be a political issue. This shouldn't be a religious issue. It should be an issue about doing what is right. There is no evidence to suggest that any children would be worse off by allowing same-sex couples to adopt and marry. There is evidence to suggest that many children would benefit from allowing these things to occur.

No it should not be a religious issue in a secular government.

And it should not be a majority voting on the rights of a minority. Especially since that majority is opposed because of religious belief.

However - - I am intelligent enough to know our government is letting the process slowly evolve in order to get people used to the idea. Kinda sucks for the minority. Is it any wonder that some are very frustrated and have lost patience?

I'm not gay - - and I'm frustrated and have lost patience with this process.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


I think 'long-term" has been and gone.

If we are honest with ourselves. the only real argument is religious. And we know how that kind of thing goes.

reply to post by TheRedneck

Originally posted by TheRedneck
Gay marriage is a political issue today. That is a fact.

Absolutely true. It has to be a political issue. That's how laws get changed. As it is, the law denies equal rights to gay couples. Marriage has state and federal benefits attached. Each state offers this contract to its people ... UNLESS they are gay. State laws are denying equal treatment under the law, therefore the laws need to change. It's a civil rights issue.

Changes to traditionally accepted cultural conditions require acceptance by the citizenry of the country in the US. That, like it or not, is also a fact.

I agree again. But as long as the (supposedly secular) government sanctions the unequal treatment of gay people, the culture has no motivation to accept the equality of people. Cultural acceptance will only come after the laws have changed.

Look at the black civil rights evolution. The laws were changed decades ago, yet we still have many people (and cultural enclaves) that do not accept the equality of blacks and whites. We didn't wait around for the culture to accept black equality and THEN change the laws. It will never happen that way.

Today I return to the thread and find myself disgusted again at the thought that such hateful, ignorant, oblivious people should be allowed to exist in the same state as a child!

That's the ebb and flow of these threads, A good discussion goes on for pages because the hate-spewers aren't interested in debate and then they come back and the debaters go away because it gets sickening.

The reason my first post in this thread was so scathing is because I had just spent pages in the last few days having a VERY reasoned and wonderful debate on the subject in another thread only to have the thread deteriorate into the mud pit you found here. It's frustrating. And I do apologize for my rant on the first page... We all have bad days.

You want to know my real feelings? I think everyone should be treated equally, and everyone should have freedom to live their life as they see fit while not prohibiting others from doing so. But that belief means I cannot support gay marriage in the US at this time, much less gay adoption/conception, because it is painfully obvious to me that those arguing in this thread, as well as the even greater number of similar individuals not on ATS, are interested more in punishing me for perceived wrongs by violating my right to believe as I choose. Because that is what this is really about for the majority of supporters: revenge, not equality. Revenge against religious beliefs, hate toward religious beliefs, a sincere and wanton desire to see others embarrassed, humiliated, perhaps even stripped of their freedoms.

Heaven forbid children be exposed to this level of hateful intolerance!

By that reasoning, you wouldn't support straight people or religious people having children, either. Why is the "hateful intolerance" attributed to gay people, when it clearly is a trait of individuals on "both sides" of this issue? PEOPLE have the capacity for hatred and intolerance. Gay and straight alike. Religious and non-religious alike.

No one can violate your right to believe as you chose. Unless they use mind control.

Even more troubling is the fact that amidst this turmoil of hate, there are a good number of people who truly desire equality and nothing more.

You may be surprised at the numbers who truly want equality, but sometimes get FRUSTRATED and spew a little venom at the roadblocks. That doesn't mean we want some sort of revenge on religion. I strongly believe in freedom of religion, JUST as I do in equality and equal treatment. I'm sure you've been frustrated about something and said something hateful in the moment. It doesn't mean you're a hater, any more than it means that I am.

Who is who? I think everyone already knows which side they are on.

I am on the side of the Constitution. Freedom of religion AND equal treatment under the law can and should coexist. That is my position.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

 

I think 'long-term" has been and gone.

If we are honest with ourselves. the only real argument is religious.

Absolutely!

Although NOM (National Organization for Marriage) - - - you know them.

Train their workers and volunteers not to use religion for reasons to oppose gays.

Their training manual says: focus on children and how it harms children.

"We are doing it for the children"

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

BH, I have always found you an insightful, reasoned opponent, even if we do usually come down on opposite sides of the issues.

As it is, the law denies equal rights to gay couples.

That is not a given. Homosexuals and heterosexuals are subject to the exact same law. The difference is that homosexual desires lie outside that law while heterosexual desires do not.

That is not to say the law is as it should be; it is only to explain that the blanket statement "The law does not allow gays to marry" is a bit misleading in a technical sense. The law must be changed to allow for an expanded definition; it is not in itself discriminatory.

Marriage has state and federal benefits attached.

Which I do not believe it should have. If marriage is a religious institution (as I consider it), it should not be recognized by the state for anyone. The benefits should be shifted to a similar secular arrangement that does not carry the religious implications and can be extended to all consenting adults without affecting religious views, if society deems those benefits important.

Of course, that concept is one of those which immediately brands me a "homophobe".

Cultural acceptance will only come after the laws have changed.

Then it can never come.

Cultural acceptance is not based on laws; it is based on personal attitudes. Laws are quite often in direct opposition to cultural acceptance, and this is the reason people generally mistrust the government in the first place. True equality for blacks took 150 years (and there are still some remnants of racism to be found today). Why did it take so long? Because no one can legislate or adjudicate personal feelings.

You may find this hard to believe, but the civil rights movement for blacks was well under way before the Civil War. Public opinion was turning away from slavery. That war was never about anything more than states' rights. The terrific displays of racism that unfolded across the South after the war were not despite the war, but because of it.

I believe in my heart that, had the Civil War not happened, slavery would still have been abolished before 30 more years had passed, and racism today would be the realm of distant history. Feel free to disagree, but remember I live in the culture we speak of and have researched my family tree to the extent of understanding how it has evolved.

Shall we repeat the lesson and keep those pockets of anger around for gays as well?

That's the ebb and flow of these threads, A good discussion goes on for pages because the hate-spewers aren't interested in debate and then they come back and the debaters go away because it gets sickening.

And such is the reason for my post above. That is not productive in any way, and is actually hurtful to any reasonable resolution to an issue. You know this as well as I.

Because something is, it does not follow it must be... or should be.

By that reasoning, you wouldn't support straight people or religious people having children, either.

Please tell me I am misreading this.

I do not support hateful, intolerant people. Why does that have to then be divided into gay and straight? Why? Is there nothing more important to those who support gay rights than sex? Is their entire life defined solely by their private parts? And further, are you seriously insinuating that all straight people are such or that all religious people are such?

I'm going to withhold comment until you can interpret this statement for me. I think I know you better than that.

I hope I do.

No one can violate your right to believe as you chose.

Oh, but they can.

Communist China
The USSR
Nazi Germany
The Spanish Inquisition
The Church of England

...need I go on?

History is rife with examples of oppression of various peoples... and it shows that all people of all races and origins are at risk.

You may be surprised at the numbers who truly want equality, but sometimes get FRUSTRATED and spew a little venom at the roadblocks.

Of course they do! And that is completely understandable. But I refer to those who regularly, continuously, predictably rail about the same old tired subject using the same of tired sound bytes and never give a reasoned response to any query that might not benefit their cause. That is the majority in these threads.

I am on the side of the Constitution. Freedom of religion AND equal treatment under the law can and should coexist. That is my position.

Can and should exist, absolutely. Will exist? Not if the extremists have their way.

TheRedneck

reply to post by Sinny


The only problem I have with gays is the human-borne diseases that they may pass to others.

Let me clarify. I have known folk who are supposedly gay, but are actually Bi-sexual.

In their minds, they are not relevent, unless they are screwing something. Anything. Just to achieve orgasim.

A true gay will not pass one these pathogens, except to their same-sex willing partners. And that is the risk we all take when having sex.

But other than that, pretty much no problem.

reply to post by FailedProphet


When gay couples get asked by their raised child how babies are made, I wonder how they will respond? Or when the child becomes a teenagers how the gay parents will explain practicing safe sex.

Originally posted by Skywatcher2011
reply to post by FailedProphet

 

When gay couples get asked by their raised child how babies are made, I wonder how they will respond?

I'd probably explain the sperm cell and the egg, cellular division, etc...with diagrams to help them understand. I'd be sure to point out that usually this is done with sex between a man and a woman but also mention the other ways it can be done.

Or when the child becomes a teenagers how the gay parents will explain practicing safe sex.

edit on 10-8-2012 by Skywatcher2011 because: bold

Pretty simple as well. Safe sex with condoms and birth control can prevent the egg from being fertilized during/after sex. Condoms can also prevent the spread of STI's so make sure you always use one no matter what, junior

Why do you think this would be such a difficult concept to explain to my kids?

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by davjan4
Traditional families now have to defend themselves,

HA HA HA HA HA HA

That is so stupid. There is zero reason for Traditional Family to defend themselves. What exactly are they defending themselves against"

Who exactly is the opposing force of Traditional Family that they feel so threatened?

Now THAT'S funny. Where have you been the past 30 years?

I'll just mention one recent thing and leave it at that rather than writing a book about it: The head of a fast food restuarant voices support for traditional families. Several city governments publicly state that they do not want this restuarant in their city, so disgusted are they at the mere mention of support for the traditional family.

So, "zero reason"? When government entities start in on you and denying you the ability to do business, that's a good reason to have to defend yourself. Think it's not? Let's flip the coin and say that those same cities stated that homosexual owned business are not welcome. Feel the urge to defend? There would be RIOTS over a statements like that.

Originally posted by Glass

Originally posted by Skywatcher2011
reply to post by FailedProphet

 

When gay couples get asked by their raised child how babies are made, I wonder how they will respond?

I'd probably explain the sperm cell and the egg, cellular division, etc...with diagrams to help them understand. I'd be sure to point out that usually this is done with sex between a man and a woman but also mention the other ways it can be done.

Or when the child becomes a teenagers how the gay parents will explain practicing safe sex.

edit on 10-8-2012 by Skywatcher2011 because: bold

Pretty simple as well. Safe sex with condoms and birth control can prevent the egg from being fertilized during/after sex. Condoms can also prevent the spread of STI's so make sure you always use one no matter what, junior

Why do you think this would be such a difficult concept to explain to my kids?

edit on 10/8/2012 by Glass because: (no reason given)

A penis does not belong in a rectum. Rectums are designed for fecal matter. But hey! Let's cal it "gay" (used to mean carefree and happy) and wrap it all in a rainbow!!