*HighFlyah* From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 184 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 959 times:
I thought it was wonderful - both Diane and Rosie. Rosie spoke fairly and firmly about her feelings about being gay and gay adoption, an issue that is quite the hot topic lately. I am gay personally and would some day love to be able to be parenting a child who needs my love.
I am most impressed and relieved that Rosie did not come across as someone who was so much supporting gay rights that she was arrogant and implying that gay people are better than straight people, which indeed would be insulting to a straight audience who is trying to understand this concept of non-standard family.
Jsf119 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 196 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 918 times:
if someone is gay it doesnt bother me but what does bother me a little is gay adoption.i dont think it is fai to the child there are some things a mother can provide and some things a father can provide. every child needs a mother and father. in my opinion its a little selfish to do to a child. i dont want what i said to be twisted around so i will stop there. i hope i dont offend anyone because i know its a touchy subject but its just my opinion.
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 896 times:
every child needs a mother and father
Like Russell & Andrea Yates?
I appreciate the respect with which you comment, jsf, but I adamantly disagree. To suggest only traditional husbands and wives are capable of the love, nuture and discipline neccessary to raise a kid is IMO wrong.
I WILL agree with anyone who says a child being raised by a gay couple will inevitably face ostracism and contempt. So? Should we run the rest of society based on what our least enlightened citizens will do or say? Should successful, devoted, intelligent people be denied the chance to raise a kid for the sole reason that some asshole might insult that kid down the road?
Every child needs love, nuture, support and discipline. We shouldn't narrow the parameters as to who is capable of giving those.
Lufthansausa From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 188 posts, RR: 3 Reply 6, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 882 times:
Heavymetal-assuming you were raised by 'traditional' parents, I don't know how you could claim that the only drawback to gay parenting is ostracism. I know people being raised by lesbians, and it gives them a very rough time, but surprisingly, no one makes fun of them. However, they themselves don't feel at ease with the situation, and they are clearly lacking (just as children of divorced parents do) the influence of a father. It is scientifically proven that there are gender specific abilities required by both parents to influence a child into healthy development. It is ludicrous to claim that gay parents "have the right" to raise children. Quite simply, they don't-because they don't have the family structure necessary to raise a well developed child. Often it seems that people, not just those who are gay, want children as a prize, rather than out of a sacrificial love. Finally, calling those who still understand the nature of a family and parenting "least enlightened" is very narrow minded on your part, for it shows an unwillingness to scientifically examine the facts about child raising.
DC3Cowboy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 875 times:
Well put. Two men claiming one of them can replace a real mother, or two women claiming one of them can replace a real father is the ultimate in arrogance. The reason there are so many children waiting to be adopted is government red tape (designed to protect government behinds). The average family simply cannot afford it, and what children really need is an average family. They deserve better than social experimentation.
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 874 times:
First of all, you COMPLETELY missed the "least enlightened" comment. If you'll read it again, I was referring to the person or persons who would inflict ostracism on the child of a gay household, not on someone holding an opinion that it was wrong. I doubt very much you're defending bullies and jerks who would give s*it to a kid, so I'll just assumed you misread what I was saying.
Now, on to your points:
I know people being raised by lesbians, and it gives them a very rough time, but surprisingly, no one makes fun of them.
Why is that a surprise?
However, they themselves don't feel at ease with the situation, and they are clearly lacking (just as children of divorced parents do) the influence of a father.
What exactly is a clear symptom of "lacking a father"?
It is scientifically proven that there are gender specific abilities required by both parents to influence a child into healthy development.
Ergo all children from husband-wife environments are developed healthy, and all who aren't....aren't? Sorry, the math just doesn't add up. And I heap doubt on the phrase "scientifically proven". At one time science proved the Earth was Flat.
It is ludicrous to claim that gay parents "have the right" to raise children.
Actually, I didn't make that claim...but I will. Why is it ludicrous? I'll take a stab at the idea that your comment is less about "rights" and more about your disgust with the people who remind you they do, in fact, have them.
the family structure necessary to raise a well developed child.
I see. Who does? Straight people? Is there a book somewhere or a manual called 'How to raise the perfect kid?' Who wrote it? Does it work?
Often it seems that people, not just those who are gay, want children as a prize, rather than out of a sacrificial love
Here's where I agree with you. How many married couples have had babies in an effort to salvage a bad marraige, hoping the kid will redirect focus? I know of several in my life. Do they work? More often than not, no.
But let's revert to the original topic. Rosie O'Donnell , who has a talk show popular enough that any production company would renew tommorow, has said it's over. Why? The kids. If that isn't sacrifice, tell me something that is.
I agree that a screening process is needed to determine if someone is adopting a child to satisfy an interest in conflict with that child's needs. But being gay shouldn't automatically be on the list of negatives.
Luft, you're dealing in strongly held beliefs rooted in a system that, statistically, isn't that strong. And you're demanding respect of family scenarios that just don't happen with the finality you imply....happy, healthy well developed kids DO come out of upbringings that aren't traditional. And...screwed up kids DO come out of smile-a-day Brady Bunch homes.
I wouldn't suggest revising many of your opinions in the benefits of traditional family mores and principles. I would suggest giving thought to who is capable of implementing those values.
DC3Cowboy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 863 times:
Again, you are right. Please note that the liberal left always resorts to long-winded, fuzzy explanations of their positions. The truth is short and to the point: Children need a mother and a father. Not two fathers; not two mothers.
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 860 times:
So I'm the 'liberal left' now huh? (hehehehe as opposed to the conservative left?)
The 'long winded' explanation was in response to a respectfully posted opinion. I wouldn't have thought it would come across as 'fuzzy' to anyone short of a recently lobotomized car-train accident victim dosed heavily on Robitussin with codeine. Clearly it did.
NormalSpeed From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (11 years 9 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 858 times:
No, I didn't watch. Why? Because I could frankly care less about what Rosie says, does, and feels. All she seems to do is try to alter moral standards to conform to her views, and then get's upset when it doesn't happen. And the opinions of biased windbags like her are best disregarded.
Skyway1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (11 years 9 months 23 hours ago) and read 807 times:
I always found it amusing that Rosie was such a gun control advocate, but at the same time was a spokesperson for KMart. Practically all you had to have was a drivers license to buy a firearm at KMart. I'm sure the rules have changed now though.
Jsf119 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 196 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (11 years 9 months 21 hours ago) and read 792 times:
i dont always agree with what you say however i would like to acknowledge the grace and dignity you always present yourself with when you post. its easier to have a "civilized chat" when someone behaves and posts like you do. however i must agree with luft some things in this world are meant for a man and a woman to do. andrea and russel yates are the exception to the rule. i think allowing gay adoption will eventually set a course which could allow the breakdown in some areas of society. if people want to be gay thats fine but if the want kids in my opinion they should spend more time with neices and nephews or kids of friends.
*HighFlyah* From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 184 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (11 years 9 months 20 hours ago) and read 785 times:
I don't think what she said about President Bush and family was disrespectful at all. She phrased her disagreement with their views very respectfully but firmly and offered sincerely to have them visit their household. Perhaps the only disrespect that is felt is that she simply disagreed? That's not disrespect. It's a differing opinion from people who are obviously on two sides of an issue.