Would you say this is a universal right?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by blondetwink11, Nov 25, 2010.

  1. blondetwink11

    blondetwink11 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    241
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    32
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Chicago
    The right to start a family with someone you love regardless of sex.

    Do any other men want families? I know I do, and is anyone else afraid that the state might have the power to remove children from same-sex households?
     
  2. BJs4You IL

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Messages:
    559
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Lansing (MI, US)
    Verified:
    Photo
    it's not uncommon these days for same sex couples to have children. the possibility of the government taking away rights is always there, for everyone. it shouldn't stop people from doing what they can legally do.
     
  3. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    I'm actually conflicted on this one.

    On the one hand, I don't believe the government should have any power to discriminate on who can raise children based on their sexual orientation.

    On the other, I personally believe most people are shit parents and shouldn't be allowed to reproduce at all, so... :biggrin1:
     
  4. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,897
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    600
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    depends wht you mean by a right. If you mean a baby should be obtained by the state and provided for any couple who want one, as a right, then no. If you mean should people who make some sort of consensual agreement about who will bring up which children be able to do so, then yes, they should be able to get on with it.
     
  5. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    From what I've observed, same sex couples make exceptional parents. They certainly should be allowed to adopt. However, as long as there are uber religious people who believe they are better than anyone else, there will always be the threat of "them" lobbying to create laws preventing from same sex couples adopting.

    And HazelGod is quite correct in his observation that most people who can have children, without any restrictions, tend to be shit parents.
     
  6. BadBoyCanada

    BadBoyCanada New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    East Coast
    I agree with the general consensus, that having a child isn't a Universal Right, more like an earned honor.

    It's too bad there aren't tests before anyone becomes a parent. As far as same sex couples, I am too torn. I believe men can become great dads, but women just have something that no man can provide. I would also make sure that if I was a gay couple, I would raise that child in a "liberal" area. Life is hard for teens, no reason to subject them to more harassment because their parent is trying to make a political statement.
     
  7. Tee&A

    Tee&A New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    5
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Cali
    Things I've observed in my 34 years on this Earth:

    1) Having children makes you no more a parent than having a piano makes you a pianist (can't remember right now to whom that quote belongs, but it seemed appropriate to state).

    2) There is no handbook for parenting (although some people sorely need one tattooed on their asses).

    3) There is something terribly wrong when a drug-addicted crack whore of a mother can continually regain and retain custody of her child simply because said child exited her vagina, but another well-adjusted, sane, stable mother has to "prove" her worth in raising a child simply because she happens to be in love with/married to/living with another woman.

    4) The whole system is fucked. Ask any foster child--especially where I'm from--who was tossed through the system with wild abandon if they would have rather had a stable home with two same-sex parents or the royal screwing they received from being raised by the state. My vote leans towards the stable, same-sex home (and before anyone comes in and says it, let me head you off at the pass: No, I, Tee&A, am in no way implying that every same-sex household is stable and free from abuse, neglect, or any facsimile thereof. A'thank you).
     
  8. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    I think if you're biologically capable of starting a family, then you should be able to start a family.

    With that said, I agree with others that it's one's character that matters when parenting, not your 'stats' or whatever.
     
  9. Speculator

    Speculator New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    Starting a family should be a universal right, I agree.

    But I get the feeling that some gay couples want to prove a point to society on this issue -like with gay marriage- to demonstrate that they're equal to conventional couples, so there's a danger they might be starting a family for all the wrong reasons.

    At least with marriage there are no third parties involved so the damage can be limited if it breaks down, but this isn't the case with adoption as there's the kid to think about.

    If a gay couple stays together for 5 years then I don't see why they should be prevented from adopting. It's an arbitrary number I know, but it shows they're not messing about just proving points and winding people up.
     
    #9 Speculator, Nov 29, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010
  10. maxcok

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,392
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    I think it's rather presumptuous to suggest gay couples want to become parents in order to make a political statement. Straight couples frequently produce children without any real forethought and/or for all the wrong reasons. If anything, I would think it's much more of a conscious thought out decision and a commitment for gay couples generally speaking, since it doesn't happen "by accident".

    "Messing about", "proving points" and "winding people up"? Please. Yeah, that's the movement for LGBT equality in a nutshell, alright. Those damn gays, "messing about" for equal rights. :rolleyes:

    Your entire post trivializes gay relationships and is rife with stereotypes. Gay couples are equal to straight (conventional??) couples. They are deserving of all the same legal rights and responsibilities afforded straight couples. ALL.

    As noted to the poster above, straight couples have children all the time for all the wrong reasons or "by accident". Your suggestion that gay couples want to have families to "prove a point" is specious and a stupid stereotype. Furthermore, gay parenthood does not always involve adoption. As often as not, one of the couple is the biological parent. In the case of adoption, gay parents often adopt older children or other "undesireables" who would otherwise be raised in foster care or end up in institutions. And I don't get your "third party" argument at all. How is the impact of divorce any different on a biological child vs. an adopted child? Not to mention, there are plenty of straight couples with adopted children. Your point makes no sense at all.

    50% of first marriages among straight couples end in divorce, 20% in the first five years. If gay marriages were institutionalized, I expect the divorce statistics would not be that much different. In fact, in the states where gay marriage is legal, so far the divorce rate among gay couples is lower. Putting a time restriction on gay adoption would be discriminatory. Putting that kind of restriction on any couple strikes me as totalitarian.

    That being said, I would personally have no problem incentivizing couples to attend parenting classes, say by tying it to the child tax credit. I would also end additional child tax credits after the second child for all couples. There are too damn many people in the world already, and the state has no business subsidizing babies.
     
    #10 maxcok, Nov 29, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010
  11. Speculator

    Speculator New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kent, UK


    You think it's "totalitarian" for society to be careful when deciding who's allowed to adopt vulnerable children? You really are an ignorant fool, children aren't there to satisfy social engineers with PC agendas, they're real people that deserve a a home with the most suitable parents. The parents in question may be gay or they may not, what's important is that they're serious about it.

    Like it or not some gay people go around with a chip on their shoulder as they believe (wrongly as it happens) that society is conspiring against them, these sort of people shouldn't be allowed to adopt imo, not because they're gay but because of their attitude. There is an element of rebelliousness in gay marriage - being unconventional and sticking it to the man - which is fair enough when only adults are involved, but don't drag kids into that nonsense!

    Also if you went out and collected data on this I expect *all things being equal* most people would prefer to be brought up by a conventional couple rather than a same sex one. If this is the case it shouldn't be ignored when drawing up adoption procedures. The rights of the kid is more important than the "rights" of gay parents, as they're conflicting you have to make a decision.
     
    #11 Speculator, Nov 29, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010
  12. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Don't bother with the "speculative one", maxcok... he's as societally backwards as they come.
    I gotta admit though, watching someone try to label gay marriages as a form of "rebellion" was quite hysterical. As if gay & lesbian people can't be doing it out of love just like those hetero ones. Oh darn, we're so selfish! We want civil rights, want to do our part in the raising of children. Since when did we want to do anything more than go to bathhouses and circuit parties?! LOL!!!
     
  13. Speculator

    Speculator New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kent, UK

    It's not about YOU and YOUR civil rights, it's about the kid.

    Straight couples don't come with all this emotional baggage.
     
  14. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
    See, that's the problem with your need to overly generalize things. You come up with these unbelievably ridiculous one liners that are so out there it completely deflates your argument. Straight couples don't come with emotional baggage? Ever watch an episode of Maury, sweetie?
     
  15. Speculator

    Speculator New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kent, UK

    I said this emotional baggage, all the "if you don't give me the kid you're denying me my civil rights" tripe. Straight couples don't have these concerns.

    It's not about rights anyway its about merit, who's going to be able to give the child a better home?

    As I say *all things being equal*, i.e equal income, no obvious drug/alcohol problems, the couples have been together for the same amount of time etc etc and it was an adoption I'd pick the straight couple over the gay couple. I think it would make it easier for the child in question to have a more "normal" upbringing, if you think this tramples over your rights then I'm sorry.

    It's not me that oversimplifies it's you. Because I don't agree with your libtard view of the world and actually think these things through on a case by case basis you write me off as the next Adolph Hitler. Yeah it's easy to say equal rights, adoption for all, free health blah blah blah like me like me, but you end up with a narrow and incomplete understanding of how the world really works. A black or white outlook such as yours is too simple, I prefer a more subtle approach, even if it means saying stuff that people won't necessarily like.
     
  16. Countryguy63

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    14,488
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,448
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    near Monterey, Calif.
    Verified:
    Photo

    Holy Crap :eek:, are you seriously serious?? :confused:
     
    #16 Countryguy63, Nov 29, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010
  17. B_Marius567

    B_Marius567 New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,952
    Likes Received:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    gay men can not have children so how do you have kids?
     
  18. Countryguy63

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    14,488
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,448
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    near Monterey, Calif.
    Verified:
    Photo
    There are multiple ways. Surrogate Mothers, adoptions, just to name a couple
     
  19. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Equating what is a civil right denied by others based on their on societal bigotry to "emotional baggage" is insanely ignorant. How dumb are you?

    That's true. And in several instances, the gay and/or lesbian couple can provide such a thing.

    Oh yes, the tired "all things equal" argument. Such a safe bet to bask your bigotries because it portrays an image that everyone is the same and are treated the same when we all know that doesn't happen. Besides, everyone knows there's rarely ever a time where two candidates with the same exact credentials are after the same prize.

    But if you want to play this dishonest game, say that the two fictional families you conceived do exist. Also, keep in mind that you said it's about the kid's wishes and rights. What if the child looks at the two different families and decided that he/she liked the gay couple better?

    I would never write you off as being the next Adolph Hitler. First off, Hitler had charisma. He also was a smart individual (despite the fact he used his knowledge for something that was unforgivingly evil). You're just an idiot who discriminates.

    And this is coming from a bigoted person who only views issues in binary and visualizes all of his opponents as "libtards". Hypocrite.
     
    #19 B_VinylBoy, Nov 29, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010
  20. Speculator

    Speculator New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    What are you talking about? Please read and think about what's been said before you reply, I'm a little tired of your verbiage. I used it so you couldn't pipe up with, "but what if the gay couple are richer, smarter, have more friends" etc etc, in other words I controlled the variables to stop you leading me down a cul-de sac.

    All things being equal I'd opt for the straight couple because it would give the kid a more conventional upbringing. If the child was placed into the care of the gay couple I'd be suspicious that politics -i.e "civil rights"- had influenced the decision and merit had been thrown out the window. Being gay is a disadvantage in this area if you're comparing against couples with the same credentials, I know it you know it and 99% of people out on the street know it too, but nobody is prepared to say it.


    Then the kid goes with the gay couple. As I said before it's not about you it's about what's best for the kid.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted