TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- +1 for Florida
Pages (2): [1] 2 »


Posted by tubularbills on Nov-26-2008 11:41:

+1 for Florida

quote:
MIAMI - A judge on Tuesday ruled that a strict Florida law that blocks gay people from adopting children is unconstitutional, declaring there was no legal or scientific reason for sexual orientation alone to prohibit anyone from adopting.


source -- > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27915111/

florida > california ?


Posted by Acton on Nov-26-2008 11:47:

Over here the gays have been allowed to adopt for a few years now. It will happen everywhere eventually.


Posted by winston on Nov-26-2008 13:41:

In my opinion, a kid needs both a paternal & maternal figure, it is all good ...


Posted by Sunsnail on Nov-26-2008 14:09:

quote:
Originally posted by diggerz
In my opinion, a kid needs both a paternal & maternal figure, it is all good ...


So should single parents or widowed parents have their kids taken away?


Posted by Frenchie on Nov-26-2008 14:18:

quote:
Originally posted by diggerz
In my opinion, a kid needs both a paternal & maternal figure, it is all good ...
....in some cases having just one out of two is better.


Posted by ChemEnhanced on Nov-26-2008 14:50:

In Florida gay babies adopt parents


Posted by Acton on Nov-26-2008 15:10:

quote:
Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
In Florida gay babies adopt parents


I thought that was in Mother Russia?


Posted by Project-K on Nov-26-2008 15:38:

Didn't see that one coming.


Go old people!


Posted by tubularbills on Nov-26-2008 16:23:

quote:
Originally posted by Project-K
Didn't see that one coming.


Go old people!


not just old people, but old Gay people at that! haha

quote:
Originally posted by Frenchie
....in some cases having just one out of two is better.


i think that single people, who are in good standing financially, emotionally, and legally, should have just as good of a chance adopting as couples.


Posted by PETRAN on Nov-26-2008 16:35:

quote:
Originally posted by tubularbills


i think that single people, who are in good standing financially, emotionally, and legally, should have just as good of a chance adopting as couples.







It sounds rightful but i don't know if it would work/works in practice. I mean imagine the enormous social and emotional pressures on the child who had no choice in the first place.


Posted by tubularbills on Nov-26-2008 16:38:

quote:
Originally posted by PETRAN
It sounds rightful but i don't know if it would work/works in practice. I mean imagine the enormous social and emotional pressures on the child who had no choice in the first place.


have never been in that position, i don't know for sure....but i would think the child would rather have at least ONE parent (a STABLE one); than living in an orphanage all their life.


Posted by PETRAN on Nov-26-2008 16:41:

quote:
Originally posted by tubularbills
have never been in that position, i don't know for sure....but i would think the child would rather have at least ONE parent (a STABLE one); than living in an orphanage all their life.




Yeah but aren't we talking about gay couples here? One stable parent is different in comparison to a gay couple IMO.


Posted by Sunsnail on Nov-26-2008 16:42:


Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Nov-26-2008 16:43:

quote:
Originally posted by PETRAN
It sounds rightful but i don't know if it would work/works in practice. I mean imagine the enormous social and emotional pressures on the child who had no choice in the first place.


Children go through enormous social and emotional pressures no matter how many parents they have. There is no way to stop that and, as a society, it should not be our place to try so - that is the parents job, to protect and to provide for children, as well as impart onto them sensible values for survival.

To deny children the home of a loving and stable couple is wrong. Plain and simple.

To disallow someone from contributing positive charity or to deny people's personal happiness merely due to illogical hang-ups on sexuality is wrong.

People who think that gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt merely due to the fact that they're not normal truly do not deserve an opinion in the matter.


Posted by tubularbills on Nov-26-2008 16:47:

quote:
Originally posted by PETRAN
Yeah but aren't we talking about gay couples here? One stable parent is different in comparison to a gay couple IMO.


oh, you quoted my post about talking about single parents...so that's what i thought you were referencing.

so what, you think the kid's going to go thru emotional hardship for the rest of their life because they were adopted by a gay couple? really?

(i'm talking about full on emotional scarring...not just being teased at school....kids get teased at school for anything; so that really does not count in my books)


Posted by tubularbills on Nov-26-2008 16:48:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Children go through enormous social and emotional pressures no matter how many parents they have. There is no way to stop that and, as a society, it should not be our place to try so - that is the parents job, to protect and to provide for children, as well as impart onto them sensible values for survival.

To deny children the home of a loving and stable couple is wrong. Plain and simple.

To disallow someone from contributing positive charity or to deny people's personal happiness merely due to illogical hang-ups on sexuality is wrong.

People who think that gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt merely due to the fact that they're not normal truly do not deserve an opinion in the matter.


+1 for you too.


Posted by PETRAN on Nov-26-2008 17:28:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Children go through enormous social and emotional pressures no matter how many parents they have. There is no way to stop that and, as a society, it should not be our place to try so - that is the parents job, to protect and to provide for children, as well as impart onto them sensible values for survival.

To deny children the home of a loving and stable couple is wrong. Plain and simple.

To disallow someone from contributing positive charity or to deny people's personal happiness merely due to illogical hang-ups on sexuality is wrong.

People who think that gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt merely due to the fact that they're not normal truly do not deserve an opinion in the matter.




What kind of emotionally-charged post is that lol "This is Wrong!", "this is wrong!" what are you the taliban champion of gay rights?


Chill-out we are trying to have a civilised conversation here.


All i say is that this child would probably be enormously bullied and harashed at school and the argument that goes like "everyone gets teased in school you can't help it" is as stupid as hell. This child would not going to be simply teased, this child would probably get labeled as the "son/daughter of the fags", a social situation which vastly deviates from the norms. This can lead to some severe social exclusion and this is a situation which can be avoided. The child was not born with some disability, it was brought in that situation.

And what would the reactions of this specific child be when he/she begins to understand the situation? What is he going to think, how is he going to feel when he understands that "normal" parents are male-female couples and not homosexual ones. How is he/she going to feel when he/she understands that he/she is adopted by some kind of "behavioural outlaws".

And what is the influence of the homosexual parents on the child's sexual orientation? Homosexuality is considered to have a strong genetic component but what is the actual influence of the environment? I have seen some studies whcih support the "parent-sexual-orientation-model" hypothesis. Doesn't this raise further ethical questions?

Are there any longitudinal studies about all these very important aspects? If there are, i think that they should be taken into account before blindly accepting such laws simply on the basis of what is "rightful".


Society is not comprised by high-level sophisticates, but by people, who are in most of the times incapable of overriding their instincts, false beliefs and stereotypes. Even the actions of educated people could deviate from their thoughts.Within the context of this society, such upbringings may (and i say here "may" not "are") have a higher probability to fail (in comparison to the upbringings guided by heterosexual parents, which again always have a chance to end bad but maybe a lower chance IMO). Unfortunately we don't live in some sort of utopia were "equality" actually occurs. Far from that.


Posted by tubularbills on Nov-26-2008 17:37:

quote:
Originally posted by PETRAN
And what is the influence of the homosexual parents on the child's sexual orientation? Homosexuality is considered to have a strong genetic component but what is the actual influence of the environment? I have seen some studies whcih support the "parent-sexual-orientation-model" hypothesis. Doesn't this raise further ethical questions?


this should not be an issue. if we all want society to be accepting and more progressive (which is is compared to even as little as some 20+ years ago, i think); then it shouldn't matter what the kid's sexual orientation is.

if the kid grows up to be homosexual, then who the fuck cares? kid's grow up to be homosexual from all kinds of backgrounds - but who the fuck cares? if the kid had a loving family that praised what he did good; disciplined when he did bad; and taught him/her right from wrong; then who the fuck cares about who raised him/her, and what their orientation was as a result of their upbringing?

just my few cents.


Posted by nchs09 on Nov-26-2008 17:41:

quote:
Originally posted by PETRAN
What kind of emotionally-charged post is that lol "This is Wrong!", "this is wrong!" what are you the taliban champion of gay rights?


Chill-out we are trying to have a civilised conversation here.


All i say is that this child would probably be enormously bullied and harashed at school and the argument that goes like "everyone gets teased in school you can't help it" is as stupid as hell. This child would not going to be simply teased, this child would probably get labeled as the "son/daughter of the fags", a social situation which vastly deviates from the norms. This can lead to some severe social exclusion and this is a situation which can be avoided. The child was not born with some disability, it was brought in that situation.

And what would the reactions of this specific child be when he/she begins to understand the situation? What is he going to think, how is he going to feel when he understands that "normal" parents are male-female couples and not homosexual ones. How is he/she going to feel when he/she understands that he/she is adopted by some kind of "behavioural outlaws".

And what is the influence of the homosexual parents on the child's sexual orientation? Homosexuality is considered to have a strong genetic component but what is the actual influence of the environment? I have seen some studies whcih support the "parent-sexual-orientation-model" hypothesis. Doesn't this raise further ethical questions?

Are there any longitudinal studies about all these very important aspects? If there are, i think that they should be taken into account before blindly accepting such laws simply on the basis of what is "rightful".


Society is not comprised by high-level sophisticates, but by people, who are in most of the times incapable of overriding their instincts, false beliefs and stereotypes. Even the actions of educated people could deviate from their thoughts.Within the context of this society, such upbringings may (and i say here "may" not "are") have a higher probability to fail (in comparison to the upbringings guided by heterosexual parents, which again always have a chance to end bad but maybe a lower chance IMO). Unfortunately we don't live in some sort of utopia were "equality" actually occurs. Far from that.
You are a afraid the kids will turn out gay? Who cares...


Posted by Sunsnail on Nov-26-2008 17:45:

You need to ask yourself why you view homosexuality as a negative thing


Posted by Slylee on Nov-26-2008 17:47:

i saw the thread title and thought, "oh great what did we do now" lol


Posted by tubularbills on Nov-26-2008 17:49:

quote:
Originally posted by Slylee
i saw the thread title and thought, "oh great what did we do now" lol


lol, i was trying to think of something witty like (finally florida doesn't suck) or something to that nature, but it just didn't come out right. figured the +1 would suffice


Posted by josh rising on Nov-26-2008 17:50:

i heard about this! thank you for posting, mr. bills. florida FTW and gays FTW!

= josh rising FTW!


Posted by tubularbills on Nov-26-2008 17:51:

quote:
Originally posted by josh rising
i heard about this! thank you for posting, mr. bills. florida FTW and gays FTW!

= josh rising FTW!


but i thought you were in baaahston?


Posted by josh rising on Nov-26-2008 17:52:

yes i live in massachusetts. but my hometown is near tampa.


Pages (2): [1] 2 »

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