• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

Homosexual adoption/ART

I got a little bit of a surprise when I broached this topic with my boyfriend the other night.

Seeing as we think similarly about most things, I would have thought he'd have the same opinions on gay marriage/child-rearing as I have, but apparently not. I just want to repeat the conversation we had to show you perhaps how many people innocently come to the wrong conclusion.

Me: "I think they should be allowed to get married, the government should just butt the fuck out".
Him: "Well, yeah..."
Me: "what? don't you agree?"
Him: "Kind of, I don't know"
Me: "What do you mean?"
Him: "Well that would mean they were allowed to have kids"
Me: "So?"
Him: "Well, if they adopt, why should they be allowed to adopt before a normal hetrosexual couple?"
Me: "But baby.... you're making the assumption that being gay is a choice . It's not a choice. You're born with it!"
Him: "Oh" ( he really hadn't considered that) "Yeah, I guess so."
Me: "So it's not like they're purposefully depriving some straight couple of first right to adoption through some selfish lifestyle choice... it's just the way their genetics are, they can't help it. Therefore why shouldn't they have just as many rights to kids? It's like saying disabled people shouldn't be given parking spaces, because all the 'normal' people then miss out on good parking. Well not really but you know what I'm saying?"
Him: "Yeah"

The point is I think many people still have in their minds that being gay is some kind of choice; like you wake up in the morning and go "Hey! I'd like to sleep with men, live in St. Kilda and wear tank tops!" and off you go. Then you go around crashing the straight party and wanting the same rights.

It isn't a choice, it's genetics. Therefore gay people should not be denied any rights straight people have... including the natural, human right to have a family.
 
Originally posted by doofqueen
Just because i am one of the ones that can have children naturally does not mean that my opinion on the matter does not matter. No one is asking you to agree with me. It's just MY opinion.


of course not, but it was just being pointed out that it must be make a judgement -such as one that it's "fair" for a person who can't bear children naturally to not be ever given that opportunity- from the side of actually being able to do so than from the other.

and i wonder how fair that really is anyway? i can see how this argument could be "justified" (in the loosest sense of the word) from a religious context - that anything that god has not "naturally" given us should not be used in the creation of life, but how can this possibly be argued outside of that?
 
I forgot to add that my mother, who is a born again Christian, is also in favour of gay couples being able to adopt/ have children of their own even though she is vehemently against their lifestyle. If my opinionated old crank of a mother can see that a child will not be disadvantaged by growing up with gay parents I don't see why anyone else would be opposed. ;)
 
up all night: can you elaborate on what your mother feels is the "lifestyle" of cay couples, as i think that you have touched on the primary issue.
should society allow children to be brought up in that "lifestyle"

i won't comment yet. still formulating response to this issue.
 
EDITTED by Raz: for bigotry and inflammatory comments. You can debate this issue with a bit of maturity like everyone else so far has done.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No one is asking you to agree with me. It's just MY opinion.

Sure, but if you put it in a post on a public forum how can you expect people not to discuss it? That's kind of the point of this thread, isnt it?
i think if you can't have a child naturally then maybe your not supposed to

I just still don't understand, thats all... Why? If someone is with some genetic anormality that means they have no legs, could you refuse them some new technology in the form of bionic legs on the basis that 'perhaps they are just not supposed to walk?' It just doesn't seem to make sense.
 
This is not about new limbs. Its about children. My belief is that if the "universe" says you can't have them then there is a reason for it. I'm sorry if thats too simple to understand.
 
De Spook,
What do ya mean by "that lifestyle"? When people start talking bout "lifestyle" and "gays" then there are usually negative connotations of wild, irresponsible, promiscious people enganging in wild orgies. I dont believe that there is any great diference between a "gay lifestyle" and "straight lifestyle". Its not as if a gay lifestyle neccessarily involves hawaiin shirts, flamboyant mannerisms and Celine Dion. I'd say the only difference in the "lifestyles" is the sexual orientation. I know a few gay guys who feel right at home in the flanny shirt, tracky dacks and blunnies sinking beers on the couch watching footy. Same as there are straight dudes who wear tight shirts, are quite animated, hate sport and speak with a lisp. My point here is that i think it is dangerous ground to speak about lifestyles of particular groups as it involves sweeping generalisations and assumptions. Ya can't say its not appropriate to bring a kid up in a gay home because of the lifestyle because you don't know what the lifestyle is. Whether someone should be able to adopt children should have nothing to do with sexuality but should be assessed case by case. If a gay couple is not equipped to bring up a kid due to housing arangements, abilty to support financially etc then dont let them adopt, same as for straight couples.
Simply equality.

Beech out
 
Homosexual couples should not be denied any rights straight people have.
They should be allowed to adopt children and/or have access to Assisted Reproductive Therapy.
It is important for a child to grow up in a 'good home' - I trust we all have very similar ideas as to what a 'good home environment' is. That is not to say that being brought up in a home with parents of the same-sex ultimately guarantees that the child will be subject to a structured and organised home-life in which they are given every opportunity to explore and manipulate their world whilst given the freedom to develop their own thoughts and feelings.

If a couple are committed and desire to bring up a child (they would have obviously thought long and hard about this) then the option should be available to such couples. A loving family is important, a family is a family and just because it does not happen to fit the conventional family structure does not mean the child will be at a disadvantage.

Role models are readily accessible in our community and our society, sure - parents are a massive influence in terms of the role-model aspect though a child can determine a role-model from anywhere, and being pro-active can help in this respect if one deems it an issue.

If a couple firmly believes that they will do the best possible job in raising a child then they should have the right to do so.
 
Goddamn, some ppl are very sensitive. I wasn't being a bigot and nothing I said really was inflamatory. It was rather light hearted imo. Sheesh I aint even against gay ppl adopting. Raz, put some concrete in your coffee so u can toughen up you sensitive bastard. Well I been proven right, interest groups are a fucken myopic agenda driven gestapo collective. And fuck the political correctness that some of u piss weak dipshits seem to hold so dear. I aint a homophobe or nuttin. But I aint gonna treat any minority differently. I aint gonna be sensitive to anyone. This is how I am towards everyone. You can call it equal opportunity dickheadism. And sorry to say Raz, u are a dickhead, not coz ur homosexual, but because of the content of your character that you have displayed so far. Anyhoo, this post will get deleted, I'll get a warning, life goes on. Seriously, get over it you whingin little bitches!!!
 
Dirty Deeds

If it was about political correctness then we would all agree that gays shouldn't have kids because that is what the law is and the law is made by a body representative of the community/society which elected it. Therefore politcal correctness would call for us to agree with little johnny. What it is about is equal rights for everyone. Its kinda what that little Constitution thing that we have based our society on talks about somewhere. I really hope that the mods dont delete your post because it really shows how thick you are. I guess it just shows that your one of these dumbfucks that lives under a rock in a dark cave all week only to come out on the weekend to destroy some brain cells. Try picking up a newspaper or better still read some journal articles some day, maybe even watch the news and become an informed member of society on an issue. Doesn't have to be this issue, can be any issue, but dont go thru your whole life being a pooly informed ignorant drone.
I'm not a politcally correct person myself, I make gay, blonde, black, sexist jokes just like most people do, say innapropriate things sometimes but even i'm switched on enough to be able to tell the difference between people just being politically correct and people recognising an injustice.

Beech out

Edited out personal attacks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Political correctness, politically correct, and P.C. are terms that commonly refer, sometimes mockingly, to a social movement which was characterized by its supporters' efforts to redress, primarily by the use of language, real or alleged discrimination on the basis of race, gender, or other criteria. The purpose behind this is to prevent the exclusion of people from greater society based merely upon perceived differences or a handicap that can be overcome. Through repeated use of politically correct terms, its advocates hope to change people's thought processes from containing biases to being more accepting of differences. The new terms are often clumsy substitutes for the original stark language concerning race or ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and disability status (physical or mental). It is also used by some to refer to those who support for such political policies as affirmative action and multi-lingual education; extremist support of environmentalism and opposition to capitalism are often regarded as politically correct as well. "

Look, anyone who is has the criteria to be a suitable parent should be able to adopt a child. That's my opinion, and I made this quite clear in my post. But due to my sense of humour, I get fuckin shit coz I aint really the one to step on eggshells.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Look politics isn't about who is currently holding power in government. That definition made it clear the Political Correctness is a social movement. A body of government can be deemed politically incorrect by certain groups. So your argument is quite dubious. Governments are not arbitrators of social definitions. Of course they have an effect on these definitions but still...your argument like I said is dubious.

"If it was about political correctness then we would all agree that gays shouldn't have kids because that is what the law is and the law is made by a body representative of the community/society which elected it. Therefore politcal correctness would call for us to agree with little johnny"

There are a lot who deem johnny howard as politically incorrect. So just coz he holds power and has deemed homosexual adoption against the law, it doesn't mean it's defined a politically correct stance.

Edited out personal attacks, again.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Edit: off topic
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I do not wish to get into a heated debate over this one, but I would like to leave my thoughts.

I knew several homosexual couples who would be brilliant parents that would raise their children in a civilised, warm and loving home... but I also know a few homosexuals whose relationships rarely last and who still carry on with the kind of lifestyle in which the majority of society would agree would not be a suitable lifestyle in which to raise a child.

You may ask "who the hell is society to decide what is and is not a suitable lifestyle" .... simple, they are the people who are giving up their children, for whatever reason, because they can not raise the children themselves and it is in the authorities best interests to ensure these children are going into suitable homes otherwise people will stop putting their children up for adoption and will resort to other means (abortion? murder? abandonment?) simply because they do not have the trust in the system that their children are going to be adequately cared for.

I do not think it is appropriate for the government to pool every homosexual couple together and slam the word "inappropriate" on them as parents... I really think that this is something that needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis. I would need to think harder as to how one would implement that and on what merits the decision would be made, but those are my general sentiments.

- FK.
 
I think far too many people are interpreting this as a personal attack on homosexual people's capability as parents, which I really don't think it is. Their ability as parents is completely irrelevant... They might make the best parenting couple in the world...

... But they are not biologically able to produce children. And it's not because of an infertility defect at birth or botched abortion, which are perfectly good reasons to give male/female couples children when they find they're unable to produce them due to infertility or whatnot. Nor is it comparable to someone who loses their legs, Thoth. Becuase that person was born with legs, they deserve legs and they're meant to have legs. So we do our best to replace them when they're lost in an accident. A male/female couple get together, and having been born male/female, they should be able to have children. It turns out through some complication the woman is infertile, but seeing as the couple were biologically meant to be able to have children, society says well, you were meant to be able to have children; so adopt one. A homosexual couple were not born with the ability to produce children, thus they were not meant to have children. The guy who lost his legs and the infertile male/female are different scenarios.

Badly expressed as I'm in a hurry, but I'm sure I've made my point. Scientifically, it does not make sense...
 
Personally,I think there is nothing wrong with gay couples adopting children.Just as long as *they are loving and caring parents to the child/children(But,I think this goes for any couple).

If you really want to judge who should and shouldn't be parents,where do you draw the line? eg: Why should a straight couple who can't have children(Or can have children for that matter), be aloud to be parents if they teach there children to hate,such as racism.
 
Interesting... but just a thought....

apollo said:
A homosexual couple were not born with the ability to produce children, thus they were not meant to have children.
Click to expand...

Heterosexual men were not born with the ability to produce children (on their own), yet because of their biological sexual impetus, they are blessed with the choice to become fathers.

Paternal instinct is a big topic of debate - but I believe it exists, and it most likely exists independantly of sexual orientation.

So if the argument is simply that if you are biologically unable to have children you can't be a parent, shouldn't that apply to heterosexual males as well?
 
It's an interesting and complex issue with any one side of the argument bound to offend the other. IMHO this beuatiful planet already has far too many stupid human beings consuming up every last resource that the planet has left to give spreading across the globe like some kind of cross between a virus and cancer. The planet needs less people not more and i don't think we should hasten it's destruction by putting more people on it's surface who biologically were never meant to be. So im against artifical insemination for both gay and straight couples..... i know harsh but i'd rather people adopt, they still get to nuture and love a child- insemination just seems to me like people are trying to reproduce little world-eating copies of themselves. As far as adoption goes i couldn't care less if the parents were gay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top