Would you say this is a universal right?

[Speculator]

Holy Crap , are you seriously serious??

Sometimes in life you have to discriminate, and -shock horror- that may involve discriminating against somebody based on factors outside of their control.

If you were running a strip joint for example and a man or a very ugly fat lady turned up for a job, would you hire them on the basis that discrimination is wrong? Of course not, you'd do what's right for the business and hire somebody else.

I'm not saying that gay people are inferior to straight people, but for the purpose of adoption I think it's a disadvantage. Not a major one, but enough to tip the balance if they were up against a similar straight couple.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

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.

Just exercising my right to "free speech" just like you do around here. And I would care if you were put off by my language, but seeing that you don't care if you antagonize people then I don't really care if you don't like what I have to say.

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.

But you clearly ignored your own rhetoric about this issue being about the kid and his rights. I don't have to lead you anywhere. I'm more than content to provide a question and let you walk off your own cliff.

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

So in other words, even though you claimed that "It's not about YOU and YOUR civil rights, it's about the kid"... it's really about your beliefs and making sure everyone else adheres to them. Unfortunately, your suspicions and fears are not grounds to deny any couple their right to adopt. And once again, you indirectly try to associate gays & lesbians wanting to start families as being some kind of political agenda... as if all gay & lesbian couples are "liberal" even with the obvious existence of gay & lesbian conservatives who believe they should have the right to adopt as well.

I know it you know it and 99% of people out on the street know it too, but nobody is prepared to say it.

You can't even accurately pinpoint (or define) my political beliefs, nevermind talk about what 99% of people on the streets would be thinking.

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.

And yet, somehow I don't believe you. Never mind. It's not as if it really matters anyhow.

 

[Industrialsize]

Sometimes in life you have to discriminate, and -shock horror- that may involve discriminating against somebody based on factors outside of their control.

If you were running a strip joint for example and a man or a very ugly fat lady turned up for a job, would you hire them on the basis that discrimination is wrong? Of course not, you'd do what's right for the business and hire somebody else.

I'm not saying that gay people are inferior to straight people, but for the purpose of adoption I think it's a disadvantage. Not a major one, but enough to tip the balance if they were up against a similar straight couple.

You just did.

 

[Speculator]

So in other words, even though you claimed that "It's not about YOU and YOUR civil rights, it's about the kid"... it's really about your beliefs and making sure everyone else adheres to them. Unfortunately, your suspicions and fears are not grounds to deny any couple their right to adopt. And once again, you indirectly try to associate gays & lesbians wanting to start families as being some kind of political agenda... as if all gay & lesbian couples are "liberal" even with the obvious existence of gay & lesbian conservatives who believe they should have the right to adopt as well.

Adoption isn't a right, it's a privilege, a privilege that you have to earn and one you can be denied if you fail to meet the requirements. Couching it in terms of rights isn't very helpful as it tends to confuse who's at fault here, but then I guess that's the point. Either that or you're genuinely confused and don't know the difference between the two. Have a look at the U.S constitution, it may be able to clear the matter up.

Is this about my beliefs? Depends, I happen to believe that if given the choice between a good straight couple and a good gay couple most people capable of making the decision would opt for the straight couple. We can test this if you like by collecting data, but that's not really practical for an internet discussion. Do you disagree with this statement?

Therefore if my statement holds true and the child isn't able of making the decision the hypothetical straight couple should be chosen over the gay couple. I happen to believe that it would make it easier for the child too as some parents might not as ok with it as others.

And yet, somehow I don't believe you. Never mind. It's not as if it really matters anyhow.

You think I'm spinning you a line so that you'll like me? Fat chance.

The reason you don't believe me is because in your libtarded brain there are two types of people in the world, those that think like you and everybody else, who are clearly fascists. Then when the Others try and talk reasonably you're simply cannot compute the concept, so instead you resort to tired stereotypes and caricatures. That makes it all feel better, even if it's tripe.

 

[Industrialsize]

Required reading for Speculator:

Kids From Gay or Straight Parents Fare The Same in Life - ParentDish
Gender Across Borders
World Slowly Discovers That Good Parents Are Good Parents, Gay Or Straight
Straight-Out Truth on Gay Parents - Los Angeles Times
Gay Parents Have Well-Adjusted Kids | Psych Central News
Kids with Lesbian Parents May Do Better Than Their Peers - TIME
Adoptive gay parents
Gay parents and heterosexual parents – any difference?
Gay couples as fit to adopt as heterosexuals: study | Reuters
Gay Dads: Also Better than Straight Parents? | Gay Rights | Change.org
Research Shows Two Gay Parents Are Better Than A Single Straight One
Same-Sex Couples Match Heterosexual Couples In Performance As Adoptive Parents, UVA/GWU Study Finds

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Adoption isn't a right, it's a privilege, a privilege that you have to earn and one you can be denied if you fail to meet the requirements.

Which many gay & lesbians couples earn, only to face opposition from people like you when it comes to issues surrounding adoption because you have "suspicions" that they're doing it out of spite to go against some facetious "status quo" that you'd rather have maintained.

Couching it in terms of rights isn't very helpful as it tends to confuse who's at fault here, but then I guess that's the point. Either that or you're genuinely confused and don't know the difference between the two. Have a look at the U.S constitution, it may be able to clear the matter up.

Someone as intellectually unenlightened as yourself should reexamine their narcissistically appointed "self enlightenment" before going to such extremes to challenge my comprehension. And take the Constitution out of your sniveling hands because the drool from your bigoted, political banter is starting to smudge the ink.

Is this about my beliefs? Depends, I happen to believe that if given the choice between a good straight couple and a good gay couple most people capable of making the decision would opt for the straight couple. We can test this if you like by collecting data, but that's not really practical for an internet discussion. Do you disagree with this statement?

Again, I don't give a damn if you can find a million links of distorted information, charts and statistics to back your claims out there. I can do the same to back my opinions as well, but all you'd do is write it off as being a "liberal agenda" anyhow because this is what you always do when presented a viewpoint that challenges your own. The issue of adoption isn't determined by societal majority rule. Each case is dealt with on an individual, case by case basis. So whether or not you feel that straight couples are more ideal than gay couples for adoption is irrelevant. Therefore if we go back to the original question posed by the OP, is there a universal right to start a family with someone you love regardless of sex? The answer is yes... and that is something you can't change.

Therefore if my statement holds true and the child isn't able of making the decision the hypothetical straight couple should be chosen over the gay couple. I happen to believe that it would make it easier for the child too as some parents might not as ok with it as others.

That's fine. Many disagree, and luckily if I ever chose to adopt I don't have to seek out your blessings.

You think I'm spinning you a line so that you'll like me? Fat chance.

Believe me, I'm so heartbroken that you don't like me. The feeling's very mutual.

The reason you don't believe me is because in your libtarded brain there are two types of people in the world, those that think like you and everybody else, who are clearly fascists. Then when the Others try and talk reasonably you're simply cannot compute the concept, so instead you resort to tired stereotypes and caricatures. That makes it all feel better, even if it's tripe.

Yep, just keep telling yourself that. Keep following the script that has been bestowed upon you by the socially ignorant. That way you can be on your merry little way and the rest of us can go on and live our lives.

Apparently, the bear has spread to another thread topic.

 

[Speculator]

Which many gay & lesbians couples earn, only to face opposition from people like you when it comes to issues surrounding adoption because you have "suspicions" that they're doing it out of spite to go against some facetious "status quo" that you'd rather have maintained.

If you think "people like me" are a threat to you then you've seriously taken your eye off the ball. I'm not religious, I don't advocate the removal of basic human rights for gay people, I don't even believe that gay people should be prevented from adopting, I just think straight people might make better adoptive parents in some situations.

But it bugs me when you start harping on about your civil rights, that's when I get suspicious as it suggests you're prepared to use your gay status as leverage to get what you want, when you want, or you'll cry "discrimination". Ironically it's quite threatening in a way.

 

[Industrialsize]

If you think "people like me" are a threat to you then you've seriously taken your eye off the ball. I'm not religious, I don't advocate the removal of basic human rights for gay people, I don't even believe that gay people should be prevented from adopting, I just think straight people might make better adoptive parents in some situations.

But it bugs me when you start harping on about your civil rights, that's when I get suspicious as it suggests you're prepared to use your gay status as leverage to get what you want, when you want, or you'll cry "discrimination". Ironically it's quite threatening in a way.

I guess you didn't bother to read any of the numerous links I provided just for you.

 

[Countryguy63]

Sometimes in life you have to discriminate, and -shock horror- that may involve discriminating against somebody based on factors outside of their control.

If you were running a strip joint for example and a man or a very ugly fat lady turned up for a job, would you hire them on the basis that discrimination is wrong? Of course not, you'd do what's right for the business and hire somebody else.

I'm not saying that gay people are inferior to straight people, but for the purpose of adoption I think it's a disadvantage. Not a major one, but enough to tip the balance if they were up against a similar straight couple.

Bud, you missed my question.

"Straight couples don't come with all this emotional baggage." was bolded on purpose. You really believe that straight couples don't come with emotional baggage?
More "straight couples" can come with more baggage than LAX could handle

 

[nudeyorker]

I don't know how to really address the question without offering some background on my own decision not to become a parent.
When I was with my first partner we discussed all of our options regarding adopting or finding a surrogate. We were both well educated and had the means and the emotional stability and love to be wonderful parents. We spent the better part of a year discussing every aspect of changing our life from being a couple to being parents. In the end I wanted it and he was willing to go along for the ride and I realized that without both of us equally committed to being parents our chances of being a success were compromised.

My current partner and I had the same conversation a few years ago and this time it was I who was not committed to it. At the time I was traveling about 100,000 miles a year and was rarely home. In addition to the fact that I pointed out that I would be _____ years old by the time we raised the child and got him/her through college.

Both decisions were very difficult for everyone in both cases. I'm convinced I (we) would make wonderful parents but the value the conversation and our willingness to examine our strengths and weakness as potential parents were very valuable. I think that if everyone took more time into the consideration becoming parents that there would be more happy children and parents in the world.

On the issue of emotional baggage and being a fit parent; it seems that every horrific news story I read or see on the news regarding the horrifying things that parents could possibly inflict on a child have been (as far as I know) heterosexual parents. I have not seen any (as far as I know) with gay parents. So that emotional baggage argument is a load of crap!
In closing I don't think being a parent is a right per se, but a privilege if you are willing to take responsibility for your decision to become a parent.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

If you think "people like me" are a threat to you then you've seriously taken your eye off the ball. I'm not religious, I don't advocate the removal of basic human rights for gay people, I don't even believe that gay people should be prevented from adopting, I just think straight people might make better adoptive parents in some situations.

You don't have to be religious or want to remove basic civil rights to have an ignorant ideology.

But it bugs me when you start harping on about your civil rights, that's when I get suspicious as it suggests you're prepared to use your gay status as leverage to get what you want, when you want, or you'll cry "discrimination". Ironically it's quite threatening in a way.

Cut the bullshit. I don't use the fact that I'm gay to get something you or anyone else cannot have. This isn't an issue regarding special rights. It's about getting the same rights as everyone else regardless if they lay down with someone of the same sex at the end of the night. I don't sympathize with you if some of your beliefs fall under the terms of discrimination and you don't like being called out for it. But if you don't want the titles, then change your way of thinking. Otherwise, DEAL WITH IT.

 

[DaveyR]

I got married two months ago to my partner of over 23 years. We first talked about adopting many years ago. We decided firmly against it for the simple reason that we felt selfish in that we were not prepared to compromise our lifestyle. We both enjoyed working full time and neither was prepared to give up and we felt to be fair to the kid one should, or at least reduce working hours drastically. We also enjoy being able to do what we want when we want. Meeting up and going out after work and not having to consider a 3rd party etc etc.

We talked about it again earlier this year and decided against for exactly the same reasons.

I know for a fact that had things been different and we did adopt then that kid would have had the best childhood any kid could hope for. I'm not talking materialistically but emotionally and a loving supportive home.

It's a fucking shame that so many straight people don't go through a similar thought process and more long term consideration before deciding to have kids. I see so many households run like a military operation day in and day out to fit the kids into a lifestyle that hasn't changed any since the kids came along. These kids must at time feel like they are a nuisance to the household rather than the blessing they should be.

How the fuck dare anyone say that because mine is a same sex relationship a child would be better placed elsewhere.

 

[maxcok]

You think it's "totalitarian" for society to be careful when deciding who's allowed to adopt vulnerable children?

But of course I didn't say that. Already the spin begins in the first line of your rebuttal. So much for me bothering to give you a thoughtful, well-reasoned on topic response as you demanded in our last meeting.

What I said was it strikes me as totalitarian for the state to require any couple to wait five years to adopt, much more specifically require gay couples to prove that "they're not messing about just proving points and winding people up" for five years as you proposed in your post.

You really are an ignorant fool, . . .

And there it is friends, the name calling. Right off the top.

Hmmm . . . this reminds me of something you said in our last meeting:

I've encountered enough activists on the web to realise that leftists have a greater propensity to immediately resort to name calling when faced with a statement they disagree with. It's almost painful to watch sometimes, it clearly causes a lot of mental anguish. I think this is secretly guilt because they know they're wrong, but they can't help but lash out at those that try and help them.

... :chairfall: :lmao: Oh the hypocrisy. Oh the irony. Help me. Help me.

And there's more hilarity friends. You really should follow that link and read the rest of his quote.

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.

This is very true, and it's exactly what I addressed in my post. In some ways committed gay parents might very well be better suited and more serious when making the decision to have children. Precisely because it's not assumed or expected of them as it generally is with straight couples, and because it requires much more complicated planning and creative thinking, they are less likely to do it without careful forethought. They are also more likely to adopt "undesireable" children. Not to mention, gay couples are practically immune to accidental unplanned pregnancies. :wink:

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, . . .

The fact is there are many elements of society that are conspiring against them, and as long as there is unequal treatment under the law, the state itself is conspiring against them. People with your backward attitudes are the biggest part of perpetuating that conspiracy of inequality.

You speak exactly like the ignoramuses during the Civil Rights movement who thought people like Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King were "troublemakers" -- "with a chip on their shoulder".

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 -

Sticking it to "the man"? Are you fukin serious? Where are you from, 1969? That would be hilarious if it weren't one of the stupidest statements I've ever seen posted on this board. Did it ever occur to you that gay couples might want to get married for exactly the same reasons straight couples do -- out of love and a desire for companionship for example? To have their unions recognized and celebrated the same as straight couples?
Did it ever occur to you that if gay people have "a chip on their shoulder" it is precisely because they are discriminated against and denied this basic human experience, along with so many other basic rights and experiences, simple to profound, that straight people take for granted every day of their lives?

YOU sir, are the "ignorant fool".

So in addition to earlier outing yourself as a proud racist and a white supremacist, you now reveal yourself as a stupid homophobe as well. I don't think there's anything else of value you can contribute to this "discussion", not that that's ever your intention anyway. I certainly won't waste any more of my time on a hateful ignorant forum troll who ignores the content of my posts and uses his response to spout a shitload of intentionally provocative homophobic nonsense. Talk about "winding people up". It's your modus operandi, and I for one can see right through it.

 

[Industrialsize]

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.

And I thought I married my husband because I love him......

 

[maxcok]

I don't know how to really address the question without offering some background on my own decision not to become a parent.
When I was with my first partner we discussed all of our options regarding adopting or finding a surrogate. We were both well educated and had the means and the emotional stability and love to be wonderful parents. We spent the better part of a year discussing every aspect of changing our life from being a couple to being parents. In the end I wanted it and he was willing to go along for the ride and I realized that without both of us equally committed to being parents our chances of being a success were compromised.

My current partner and I had the same conversation a few years ago and this time it was I who was not committed to it. At the time I was traveling about 100,000 miles a year and was rarely home. In addition to the fact that I pointed out that I would be _____ years old by the time we raised the child and got him/her through college.

Both decisions were very difficult for everyone in both cases. I'm convinced I (we) would make wonderful parents but the value the conversation and our willingness to examine our strengths and weakness as potential parents were very valuable. I think that if everyone took more time into the consideration becoming parents that there would be more happy children and parents in the world.

On the issue of emotional baggage and being a fit parent; it seems that every horrific news story I read or see on the news regarding the horrifying things that parents could possibly inflict on a child have been (as far as I know) heterosexual parents. I have not seen any (as far as I know) with gay parents. So that emotional baggage argument is a load of crap!
In closing I don't think being a parent is a right per se, but a privilege if you are willing to take responsibility for your decision to become a parent.

I got married two months ago to my partner of over 23 years. We first talked about adopting many years ago. We decided firmly against it for the simple reason that we felt selfish in that we were not prepared to compromise our lifestyle. We both enjoyed working full time and neither was prepared to give up and we felt to be fair to the kid one should, or at least reduce working hours drastically. We also enjoy being able to do what we want when we want. Meeting up and going out after work and not having to consider a 3rd party etc etc.

We talked about it again earlier this year and decided against for exactly the same reasons.

I know for a fact that had things been different and we did adopt then that kid would have had the best childhood any kid could hope for. I'm not talking materialistically but emotionally and a loving supportive home.

It's a fucking shame that so many straight people don't go through a similar thought process and more long term consideration before deciding to have kids. I see so many households run like a military operation day in and day out to fit the kids into a lifestyle that hasn't changed any since the kids came along. These kids must at time feel like they are a nuisance to the household rather than the blessing they should be.

How the fuck dare anyone say that because mine is a same sex relationship a child would be better placed elsewhere.

^ This is what I'm sayin:

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".

 

[Speculator]

The fact of the matter is there are many elements of society that are conspiring against them, and as long as there is unequal treatment under the law, the state itself is conspiring against them. People with your attitude are the biggest part of perpetuating that conspiracy of inequality.

..........it is precisely because they are discriminated against and denied this basic human experience, along with so many other basic rights and experiences, simple to profound, that straight people take for granted every day of their lives?

So you've finally admitted it then? Gay people in your own words are "discriminated against" on a regular basis and denied the "basic human experience", are you brainwashed enough to believe that adoption agencies shouldn't take these sorts of admissions into acount when deciding where to place vulnerable children? Please just step back from the argument for one second and think about what you're saying here.

An adoptees' life is hard enough as it is, is there any need to make it even tougher by throwing them into environments where their carers find it difficult to live a normal life? It's less than ideal, particularly if a viable alternative presents itself.

You can label me whatever you want, but I won't be brow beaten by your libtarded, quota-driven "civil rights" obsessed brain. Times have changed and your 90's era drivel just isn't relevent anymore, you won't be getting much sympathy for your ill-thought through cause when inflation hits 20% and people can no longer afford the necessities of life. The end of lefty moralism is one of the few benefits of the recession.

 

[Kotchanski]

The good news is: If Speculator ever becomes king of the world and stops gay men from adopting, there are plenty of women more than happy to provide a safe haven for 9 months...

I find it absolutely astonishing that in a day where we have children popping out kids left right and centre, children in and out of care, new born babies unwanted by their parents and countless single parents of both genders, that we're still debating if two people of the same sex should have this right.

Wanting a family is the most natural desire of all time, there can be nothing more natural. Not being able to biologically produce one of your own hasn't stopped countless women in that situation from having one, so why should it men?

Explain to me the difference between two men raising a child, and a single man raising a child? The only obvious one I can see is that the couple aren't as likely to have countless women popping into the childs life and back out a week later.

Ridicule? Maybe, but lets face it, bullies are bullies, if it isn't the kids name, it's their hair, if it isn't that it's because they have spots, don't wear the right shoes, the parents don't piss it up down the pub like all the others... Hell, I was bullied because of my parents bloody job (which was a particularly noble job imo) Doesn't matter what it is, they'll always find something.

Yes for adoption they should be subjected to the same testing criteria as the rest, but adding more criteria? Fuck off, no seriously, just fuck off.

They stand no more or less chance of screwing it up than the rest of us, so why should they be offered less of a chance to try?

I'm friends with a gay couple who would make absolutely wonderful parents should they so choose to be at some point, and the thought that they may never get that chance is upsetting to say the least.

 

[LadyJaneGrey]

An adoptees' life is hard enough as it is, is there any need to make it even tougher by throwing them into environments where their carers find it difficult to live a normal life? It's less than ideal, particularly if a viable alternative presents itself.

By that logic many other minorities should not be allowed to adopt either.

Is that what you are saying?

Adoption should only be for white hetro couples?

 

[Drifterwood]

I don't think anyone, regardless of age, sex, orientation etc etc, has any more right to have children, as I have the right to win an Olympic Gold.

If you are able to have children, you are able to have children.

If there are children available for and needing adoption, I don't believe that the State has the right to discriminate as to who are suitable parents based upon orientation.

 

[Speculator]

Explain to me the difference between two men raising a child, and a single man raising a child? The only obvious one I can see is that the couple aren't as likely to have countless women popping into the childs life and back out a week later.

It's a bit weird seeing a single dad waiting for his kid to finish school everyday because it's a role that is normally undertaken by women (waits for the howls of "sexist" for pointing out the obvious), the mums would think he's a bit of a loser too and wonder why he wasn't out at work. Well times that by 10 and have a gay couple and their adoptive kid, they certainly won't be invited to the coffee mornings hosted by the yummy mummies.

I don't make the rules up, it's just the way it is.