TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- gay adoption [debate]
Pages (8): [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 »

gay adoption [debate]

Ok, I hadn't thought about this much until wednesday night when i saw an episode of law & order SVU;

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0629609/

basic idea was a little girl who had a gay mother was being bullied in a catholic school & attacked a lad who'd been bullying her. It came down to a case of the lawyer poisoning the grandparents of the girl to testify that her guardian (mums gf) had abused her & raised many issues. I turned over from this to the news to see that the catholic church is having a huge row on gay adoption & how it was being seen as government vs church.


the news story i found behind it

ow Over Gay Adoption
Updated: 21:42, Tuesday January 23, 2007

Catholic adoption agencies could be forced to close if they are made to comply with new gay rights laws.

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, the head of the Catholic church in England and Wales, has said Christian teaching prevents its agencies placing children with homosexuals.

But Tony Blair said the Government had yet to make up its mind on the issue.

Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor is asking for an exemption from laws banning discrimination against gay people.

Both Mr Blair and communities minister Ruth Kelly - a prominent Catholic - are reported to favour an opt-out that would allow the church's adoption services to turn away gay couples.

But the Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, has insisted it is "difficult to see" how an exemption could be justified.

"I don't want to see any adoption agencies, which do a very good job, closing," he told BBC Radio 4.

"But we've committed ourselves to anti-discrimination law - on the grounds of sexual orientation - and it's extremely difficult to see how you can be excused on the grounds of religion."

He added: "If we take the view that we shouldn't discriminate against people who are homosexual, you can't give exclusions to people on the grounds that their religion or their race says 'we don't agree with that'."

Asked about reports that Mr Blair backed the church's stance, he said simply: "The Cabinet has got to make a conclusion about it, but what I set out is the principles which should be applied."

just wondering what people thought (I would ask this in pdd but it'd probably turn into a debate about some sort of american conspiracy or something )

Too many people with titles in front of their names.

My stance is they shouldn't be aloud to adopt children. A child needs a Mother and Father. Not two Fathers and not two Mothers. A child adopted by a same sex marriage will be ridiculed and bullied in school. It's unfair on the kid at the end of the day.

Hey, look at that. The Catholic church once again proving how closed-minded and archaic its beliefs are.

we're all human beings.

catholics for the lose.

quote:

Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan My stance is they shouldn't be aloud to adopt children. A child needs a Mother and Father. Not two Fathers and not two Mothers.

quote:

Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan My stance is they shouldn't be aloud to adopt children. A child needs a Mother and Father. Not two Fathers and not two Mothers. A child adopted by a same sex marriage will be ridiculed and bullied in school. It's unfair on the kid at the end of the day.

Agreed.

So you'd rather have a foster child shipped off to a home with a shitty mother and father than to a family of two dads or moms who are willing to give the child love and support?

i dont really see any problem with it. and it would certanly put an end to the "my dad can kick your dad's ass" comments.....

one of my best friends was raised by her mother and her mother's "partner". they were lesbians and my friend was artificially inseminated. she really struggled growing up with that secret.

she's now a lesbian and she seems ok, but she's got a lot of mental issues and resented the shit out of her mom who died a couple of years ago. i honestly think that it was like a big burden off of my friend when her mom died. at least that's the impression i got. but it's a long story. her mom was bipolar n shit..lol

quote:

Originally posted by Slylee her mom was bipolar n shit..lol

seriously. sexuality has nothing to do with it. they should screen parents for mental issues first before handing off a kid to them, or giving them one through art. insem.

i'm just saying there's shitty parents on both sides of the "spectrum", it's important to screen parents regardless of sexuality and not be biased based on that fact.

I also agree that a child should have a mother and father in order tobe adopted. Not trying to be disrespectful to the gay community or anything, but i jsut think its in the child's best intrests...

what do you give to the paedophile who has everything?



































a bigger parish

quote:

Originally posted by UWM So you'd rather have a foster child shipped off to a home with a shitty mother and father than to a family of two dads or moms who are willing to give the child love and support?

There are plenty of decent childless couples out who are unable to conceive children who should adopt. Shipping a kid off to a same sex union is setting a child up for a hard time. Imagine on parents evening or picking the kid up at the school gates.

If kids were educated properly and told to be responsible for their actions we wouldn't even have this adoption debate.

Az

I don't see a problem so long as the relationship is stable & healthy for the kid. You see so many single parents now & their kids often run riot and have no discipline.

quote:

Originally posted by Az what do you give to the paedophile who has everything? a bigger parish

i say you ship those children to the desert island that CORe is stranded on, then we don't have to kill one of our own and have some sweet tender child meat for dinner... ohh snap, look at that, reference to one of my threads. suck my shit, that's right suck on my shit like a gay man would.

quote:

Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan There are plenty of decent childless couples out who are unable to conceive children who should adopt. Shipping a kid off to a same sex union is setting a child up for a hard time. Imagine on parents evening or picking the kid up at the school gates. If kids were educated properly and told to be responsible for their actions we wouldn't even have this adoption debate.

I never said that there weren't couples who were unable to conceive, and subsequently would be willing and fitting matches for adoption.

What I did say was that, in my opinion, a child who is adopted by a loving, supportive gay couple is better off that a child who is sent to foster care under a family who couldn't care less about that child's welfare.

Should a man or woman be disallowed the right to raise children because of their sexual predisposition?

quote:

Originally posted by UWM So you'd rather have a foster child shipped off to a home with a shitty mother and father than to a family of two dads or moms who are willing to give the child love and support?

If these 'shitty mothers and fathers' had half a mind, they should be able to realise how bad their paretal skills are and do something about it. If not, then they shouldn't have the right to be parents in any circumstances.

I have nothing against the gay community, I know a few people who are gay and I'm sure there are plenty who would make good parents but my opinion stands; it's the child's welfare I'm more concerned about.

quote:

Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan There are plenty of decent childless couples out who are unable to conceive children who should adopt. Shipping a kid off to a same sex union is setting a child up for a hard time. Imagine on parents evening or picking the kid up at the school gates. If kids were educated properly and told to be responsible for their actions we wouldn't even have this adoption debate.

Not to mention the potential psychological effects on the kid while he's growing up, outside of school and being made fun of.

quote:

Originally posted by pvdAngel If these 'shitty mothers and fathers' had half a mind, they should be able to realise how bad their paretal skills are and do something about it. If not, then they shouldn't have the right to be parents in any circumstances. I have nothing against the gay community, I know a few people who are gay and I'm sure there are plenty who would make good parents but my opinion stands; it's the child's welfare I'm more concerned about.

You seem to be missing the point. Either that, or you're completely clueless to the state of social services. Maybe it's just something that happens in the states, but there are many foster families who are not fit for raising children but do so anyways.

You think a child will have more issues if he or she is bounced around and neglected by heterosexual couples than if he or she has to take a bit of flak from his or her schoolmates? You really believe that?

quote:

Originally posted by UWM Should a man or woman be disallowed the right to raise children because of their sexual predisposition?

Not taking a side here, but...

That's not the issue that they're debating. They're debating whether two members of the same sex can provide for a child an appropriate living environment. They're saying that, even with a healthy, loving relationship between the parents, it would not be a healthy arrangement for any child. It's not a discriminatory issue--it's one about what is best for the child.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing--just clarifying.

quote:

Originally posted by UWM I never said that there weren't couples who were unable to conceive, and subsequently would be willing and fitting matches for adoption. What I did say was that, in my opinion, a child who is adopted by a loving, supportive gay couple is better off that a child who is sent to foster care under a family who couldn't care less about that child's welfare. Should a man or woman be disallowed the right to raise children because of their sexual predisposition?

I agree with the point your making about Foster homes and I'm sure there is gay couples who'd raise children very well.

I just think it's unfair on the child. They'd get it ripped out of them at school and given a really s*itty time.

quote:

Originally posted by Inconspicuous Not taking a side here, but... That's not the issue that they're debating. They're debating whether two members of the same sex can provide for a child an appropriate living environment. They're saying that, even with a healthy, loving relationship between the parents, it would not be a healthy arrangement for any child. It's not a discriminatory issue--it's one about what is best for the child. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing--just clarifying.

Well then I guess my quote in my previous post:

quote:

You think a child will have more issues if he or she is bounced around and neglected by heterosexual couples than if he or she has to take a bit of flak from his or her schoolmates? You really believe that?

is more relevant to the topic.

quote:

Originally posted by UWM Well then I guess my quote in my previous post: is more relevant to the topic.

subsequent?

Indeed. It would be. It's also not to say it's strictly either-or, though. There are good foster homes and bad same-sex relationships, as well. The point remains, though. Carry on.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.