Arkansas Pass Gay Adoption Ban

reply to post by optimus primal


You're quite correct we are living in a democracy, but that's the beauty of it. Since we are living in this democracy we have to right to complain about this and protest it. If you wanted an instant solution to your troubles you could run..... but then it isn't a democracy is it? How long can we keep running? We would just be conforming to what other voters had voted for. I would advise for people to fight this, gain support amongst the heterosexuals and homosexuals and turn this legislation around.

-Ign0RanT

Originally posted by Wolf321

I agree with the ban. I will state my opinion first. I consider homosexuality abnormal. I don't think it is something that should be encouraged, or considered normal to hetero relationships anymore than other sexual preference abnormalities should be. I think that to allow children into homosexual homes voluntarily promotes acceptance and normalizes that lifestyle and behavior for the next generation.

Note:
This is not directly written to the above poster - its just a general thought about this whole issue at hand here.

Intro:
The main issue here, and with most anything in life when you actually break it down and think about it, is this - We have an affinity with making and identifying with labels.

"I am a ____" -
"No, you got it all wrong...Im a ____"

Better put we identify with our actions and take it as who we are.
We turn these into little idols - "thou shalt not have any false gods before me", and here we are with a truck load crammed up in the closet, with the door not being able to be shut. (Someone opens that closet, they will be crushed by the load of egoic entities they have created.)

Whether it be on one side of the polarity or the other, it does not matter.
We make it our life effort to 'be someone' based on thoughts... (happening in the only moment we have...'the present moment')...the past and future which never exist within any real structural frame outside the 'present' moment becomes the story of 'who we are'.

And worse yet, we are taught this as not only acceptable, but we are taught this as if it were the very core foundation of truth. When the constant err of our humanistic ways throughout the centuries show otherwise.
- We just have to stop and take a look.

So some facts: (And these 'facts' are pointers...remember the finger pointing the moon is not the moon. So it is with words, if you think you know what something means, you have constrained it and made a form out of it...no longer can it breathe and flow and show to where it was pointing to. (And people wonder why we as a human race cant communicate...we have 'ears' but dont want to 'hear'.

- People would benefit to realize that marriage is nothing more than a contractual agreement to help benefit both said parties financially, etc. (within the wheel and framework of society.)

Does this need to be proven? Just look at all those who believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman and look at the wild cards lurking there - from domestic abuse, to infidelity, etc. - but its all o.k. because 'God' sanctioned it.
(Divorce wasnt even included, but throw it in as well.)

So its really a business contract.
The point, which most coming from an evangelical background would point out, is the 'Love'. (Which is lacking from the evangelical background...but they are only to blame in as much as they have given their power and thoughts over to some guy in a suit who tells them how to believe and to understand what is infront of their faces.
(Its as if Gutenberg never invented the printing press...why should he? People want to do what they did back then, cast their burdens and cares on someone else and let the buck stop 'there' and not 'here'...

...and people wonder why they are always in a mess, wondering around the 'desert', as it were, for '40' years. (A bunch of Adults who have yet to grow up.)

- I will say, all this fear is unwarranted.
Why should any one group have the power to force their beliefs on another?
Is it not enough that you 'work out your own salvation with fear and trembling?"
Are you going to "force the kingdom of God" on the unwitting victims? Who wants to be dragged to heaven that way - and if its not for concern for them, then is your God not big enough to protect you? Or can you not teach your own children between 'right' and 'wrong' - or is it that you too want to cast off your responsibilities to someone else, just to complain when it does not line up with what you intended?

Such is life, we as humans do this quite a bit...in all areas of our lives.

"There is no fear in love".
If you are right about what you believe in, then there is no need to convince the world of it - truth does not need a defense. Only a weak egoic story, which we all have and have had throughout time. (Since the garden, or whatever scenario floats your boat...but it all boils down to the same thing in the end.)

So, lets recognize marriage as a business contract - and those that disagree, thats fine. Best to just live your own life out how you believe and live by example and not words forced upon others. (Reminds me of the Austrian politician who recently died and was far right, and they came out and it appears he was 'gay'.)

Seems a lot of people are actually afraid that somehow they are weak and something might rub off on them if they are not pushy enough. I dont know.
But again, this is not just about 'gay' or 'not gay' - this is basic human err about anything in life.

Everyone, take a deep breathe...relax.
and if your an evangelical, go look at the night sky and remember who this God is you say you believe in...sit back and show the faith that he actually exist and let him do some of the work, etc. I dont think he is as stressed as half the people are.

Infact Jesus ate with the prostitute, and not once had a thought of, "Oh she will change now that she has met me...so therefore I accept her."

The key was that he "accepted her" - He did not accept a story 'about' her.
This is what gives us all the freedom to move on...Dropping identification with actions and labels...

Until next time, take care.

peace

dAlen

Originally posted by dAlen

Why should any one group have the power to force their beliefs on another?
Is it not enough that you 'work out your own salvation with fear and trembling?"
Are you going to "force the kingdom of God" on the unwitting victims? Who wants to be dragged to heaven that way - and if its not for concern for them, then is your God not big enough to protect you? Or can you not teach your own children between 'right' and 'wrong' - or is it that you too want to cast off your responsibilities to someone else, just to complain when it does not line up with what you intended?

Such is life, we as humans do this quite a bit...in all areas of our lives.

"There is no fear in love".
If you are right about what you believe in, then there is no need to convince the world of it - truth does not need a defense. Only a weak egoic story, which we all have and have had throughout time. (Since the garden, or whatever scenario floats your boat...but it all boils down to the same thing in the end.)

So, lets recognize marriage as a business contract - and those that disagree, thats fine. Best to just live your own life out how you believe and live by example and not words forced upon others. (Reminds me of the Austrian politician who recently died and was far right, and they came out and it appears he was 'gay'.)

Seems a lot of people are actually afraid that somehow they are weak and something might rub off on them if they are not pushy enough. I dont know.
But again, this is not just about 'gay' or 'not gay' - this is basic human err about anything in life.

Excellent post sir, it sums up the feelings of the oppositions to this ridiculous legislation that was passed.

Starred.

-Ign0RanT

reply to post by Wolf321


this is the type of argument you are using, and the majority of people who think this way.. lump homosexuals in with other things like theives and murderers, and the like. its just plain ingnorance on you'r part.. and very hyporcrictical as well

reply to post by scorand


Could you please then explain the hypocrisy I am exhibiting and of what I am ignorant?

It seems the gay community is taking a kicking today, with this and the marriage bill.

I dont really think this law is right. If a kid needs a home they need a home. They should set a minumum age limit and then let the child decide.
After all they would be the ones living with them.

Id say that gay families can not adopt a child under 10. Then there would be a number of meetings between the child and the proposed family. The child should be educated on what they might face off the other children and society for living with a gay family (bullying, the difference between a gay family and hetrosexual family). So they dont hear all the good points and no bad.

Then id let the child stop over at weekends, while assessing them with a psycologist on there return. Just to see how the new arrangement would affect them.

After all initial screenings, if it was what all parties wanted. The child would go to live with there new family. The child would have contact with the adoption agency and there psycologist on a slowly dissoving basis until there 18th birthday.

That way everyone is happy.

Originally posted by TheRedneck . . .
As most people who have shared a similar thread with me know, I am a straight male, and a Christian. I find the very thought of homosexual activity, in a word, 'disgusting'. . . .

Ten year olds mostly think that sex is the ickiest, disgustingest thing anyone could do. Adults get over it. Sadly some people never grow up. They want to force their inhibitions, their fears and their belief that an old, self contradictory book of the actual word of their god, onto the rest of the population. Well get real. The "god" of your book was, in those times, a demonic tyrant who routinely ordered the extermination of whole populations and the rape of their women.

Should we take our disobediant children to the gates of the city and stone them to death too? And burn all "witches"? The fact is, people cherry pick to suit their own hatreds. The Bible is not the source of homophobia, it is people's hate-filled little minds driving them to find excuses to repress anyone different to them.

No minority is going to achieve a social victory as long as they continually attempt to force their morality on the majority. . . .

Oh the hypocrisy! A Christian trying to prevent gays marrying, lying in order to smear their reputation as a group, telling gays to stop forcing their morality on the majority.

It's Christians, not gays, who believe they have a moral obligation to "witness" to the world and to force their twisted beliefs onto everybody.

We tried that once, with slavery. It resulted in the bloodiest episode in the country's history, and racism still exists in small pockets even today. More Americans died in a single battle in the Civil War than have died total in the Iraqi/Afghani wars. Nothing of significance was accomplished, other than honoring of war criminals, horrendous treatment of the freed slaves, and bitter hatred for generations between two halves of this country. . . .

So you believe freeing the slaves was bad and that allowing gays to marry would be equally bad. - Nuff said.

Should time show that homosexual couples are just as capable of honoring the traditions of marriage, public opinion will sway to allow such, and the fight will be won. Should homosexual couples show they are as capable of rearing a child as anyone else, the public will also accept that. . . .

Time has already shown that.
You may have had your head in a dark place from which you couldn't see what was going on.
But despite them having proved that, you now want to prevent gays getting the opportunity to honor the traditions of marriage and rear a child ever again.

If the homosexuals in the USA will simply stop with the shock therapy, stop parading down Main Street in cross-dress underwear,

When I was younger, every Friday night there would be another gay guy drowned off the St. Kilda pier. Often no-one ever new these guys were gay except for the men who "caught them at it," and dragged them off to get drowned. The Police couldn't be turned to, because they were involved.

These gay guys were not forcing their view on anyone. They were trying to keep it secret, as society demanded that of them, and naturally that made it hard to find partners. So they learned about safe places to meet, and then the safe places would be raided and another killed, to teach them a lesson.

So many gentle people were brutally, but quietly murdered, with no-one caring who had done it because it was only another gay guy.

They could have fought back with violence. But instead of riots and reprisal murders, they chose to march in silly outfits. They made it clear to the world that they are a powerful group, who are going to demand their rights, albeit in a peaceful manner. They are using democracy and will continue to use it. And they will win, because more and more people are learning to ask questions, and think for themselves.

Even your children will grow up thinking for themselves.

These days, gays are not murdered off St Kilda Pier any more.

stop trying to scare little kids, stop trying to force kindergarten children to support your cause,

Stop using hyped-up, intentionally misreported and misunderstood news items to force your fears onto the rest of us.

stop those who have this one trait in common with you from showing what scum they (and by loose association, you) are by being a pedo,

There is no more relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia than there is between heterosexuality and pedophilia. It is not even an exclusively male phenomenon.

[edit on 6/11/08 by Kailassa]

Originally posted by Ign0rant
Wow ! That's a heartbreak for the homosexual population. With this and Prop 8 being passed in California we really are starting off on the wrong foot. With the staggering amount of orphans in America these days why would you restrict the people from adopting? How does it make any sense for two people too love each other, but cannot get married or adopt children. Sorry America today we may have triumphed over racism, but we have discriminated against another minority.

-Ign0RanT

www2.arkansasonline.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

2005 Casa Study on Adoption/Foster Home Abuse

2004 Census Study on Number of Orphans and Adopted Children in the Us

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Ign0rant]

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Ign0rant]

I dont think the US triumphed over racism when 97% of black voters voted for a black candidate, something tells me the law of averages means that that figure is too high to discount race being the dominant factor......

Originally posted by Kailassa

It's Christians, not gays, who believe they have a moral obligation to "witness" to the world and to force their twisted beliefs onto everybody.


[edit on 6/11/08 by Kailassa]

oh really, well how about those horrific "gay pride" parades where gays dress up in all manner of sexually deviant dresses/poses to show onlookers who may just happen to be shopping with kids- that is a pretty twisted morality and they seem intent on "forcing" their beliefs onto everybody.....

Give me some ould lad on the corner quoting the bible anyday

reply to post by blueorder
With all the hype about the once a year Gay Pride parade, you'd have to be pretty uninformed to "just happen to be there."

That's way different to "Christians" telling other people they can't marry, can't adopt, can't have abortions, and turning up on my doorstep waking me up every weekend until I borrowed a vicious looking Rottweiler and told them I feed it a Christian each week.

The poor, lunging animal was so disappointed to see them running away instead of giving him the huge cuddles he'd grown to expect.

Originally posted by Kailassa

With all the hype about the once a year Gay Pride parade, you'd have to be pretty uninformed to "just happen to be there."

yeah, so in a major city, a city which involves people from other parts of the globe, country etc we all should be clued up just because some exhibitionist freak wants to wear a cod piece and announce that he likes another man's penis, yeah, slide on

That's way different to "Christians" telling other people they can't marry, can't adopt, can't have abortions, and turning up on my doorstep waking me up every weekend until I borrowed a vicious looking Rottweiler and told them I feed it a Christian each week.

you mean, PEOPLE, Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Sikh, Non RELIGIOUS, excercising their right to vote on how they see matters?!?

The poor, lunging animal was so disappointed to see them running away instead of giving him the huge cuddles he'd grown to expect.

how cool, I must bring a rotweiller to a "gay pride" parade..........

Originally posted by ou_sooners_19
I wish this society would understand that homosexuals are not bad people. They just live a different lifestyle than straight people. That's it!
[edit on 11/5/2008 by ou_sooners_19]

That's Exactly why! Gay’s live a lifestyle that is not as a wife and a Husband (although some act as they do) I do not think Children who do not have a say should be forced into a lifestyle (growing up thinking that this life style is normal) they did not choose themselves.. If you can find an 18yr old individual who can make their own decisions and wants to be pampered in diapers and hugged by two men or two women than so be it but you should never subject a child into forced love. Especially when society as a whole condemns gay individuals.. Gay’s may deserve all the rights and tax breaks we straight individuals enjoy but in my opinion (mind you opinions are like belly buttons, everyone has one) they should not be able to get married (marriage is between a man and women) or adopt a child... Now, if you can have a male or female presence from a complete 360 maternal perspective involved in the child’s up bringing than so be it but I whole heartily believe that you need a male and a female in the equation when conceiving or raising a child from birth to adulthood.

reply to post by Kailassa

Ten year olds mostly think that sex is the ickiest, disgustingest thing anyone could do. Adults get over it. Sadly some people never grow up.

I believe you miss the point I was attempting to get across. Adulthood is not synonymous with blanket acceptance. There are certain things that certain people will always find disgusting, regardless of their age or maturity. I can think of a couple of sexual practices I think the vast majority of people, whether straight or gay, would find disgusting. Decorum prohibits me from specifically identifying them here; just use your imagination. It seems to work pretty well.

The "god" of your book was, in those times, a demonic tyrant who routinely ordered the extermination of whole populations and the rape of their women.

Aside from a quick background identification, I have not mentioned anything religious about this subject. You did. Religion is not a necessary tool to understand why this is happening, as I believe my post shows. Get over the religion thing. You're going to need a new excuse to justify your hatred.

It's interesting you left out the quotes about how I feel a person's choices in their bedroom are none of my business...

Oh the hypocrisy! A Christian trying to prevent gays marrying, lying in order to smear their reputation as a group, telling gays to stop forcing their morality on the majority.

Perhaps you would care to point out some of my 'lies' on this subject?

It's Christians, not gays, who believe they have a moral obligation to "witness" to the world and to force their twisted beliefs onto everybody.

Apparently it is both. But thank you, you bring up a great example to further my argument.

In one word amid a post composed of a few hundred words, I mentioned the word 'Christian'. I used quite a few words to explain that I have no concern either way for a person's leanings in this matter. Yet, you have focused on that one single word and apparently ignored the few hundred that are specifically appropriate to this discussion. Why? Because, to put it bluntly, you hate Christians. It doesn't matter what someone who calls themselves a 'Christian' believes, or whether or not they might actually agree with you on a point, your hatred will not allow you to accept their ability to believe what they have chosen to believe.

No doubt you have been overly exposed to the sect(s) of organized churches who preach vehemently against homosexual activity. I am well aware they exist, many operating in a rabid fashion, as can simply be shown by going to any of a handful of hateful so-called Christian websites (links on request, but I am sure you know of them). Because of this, you have lumped all Christians into a single mindset and you cannot see how anyone who chooses to carry that label can possibly not be hateful to you.

This is a typically human response. We tend to use prior experiences to anticipate future results. In many cases, this is a very effective survival instinct. If one is burned by a small fire, for instance, they will typically believe that all fires are able to burn them, and should be treated with caution. But this same tendency means that should someone be beaten by a black man, they will probably be afraid of black men in the future. If a woman is accosted by someone wearing a blue-and-red headband, no doubt she will always be worried every time she sees someone wearing a blue-and-red headband.

To apply this to the discussion at hand, every time someone who is not gay sees a 'gay parade' or hears about the latest arrest of a person who is gay and a pedophile, that experience is tied to the gay activity in their mind, just as the one label of 'Christian' is, in your mind, forever inextricably linked to oppression. The intelligent response would be, IMHO, to cast those stereotypes aside and fight against them, since none of these examples are obviously helpful in any way (and many are unhelpful to your cause). Apparently, you have a different response. Now, exactly why would you expect others to have a more logical response than you?

So you believe freeing the slaves was bad and that allowing gays to marry would be equally bad. - Nuff said.

Oh, I see you are very good at missing points! Are you a professional?

Exactly where did I say that slavery was a morally acceptable situation? I don't believe I did. What I did say was that during that episode in American history, force of law rather than reason and education were used to accomplish the freeing of the slaves. This force led directly to war, and to a backlash of opinion towards both the aggressors during this conflict and the ex-slaves (as well as anyone who looked like an ex-slave). Lives were lost in wholesale fashion, others were destroyed, women were raped, children were tortured in front of their parents, and we still have shreds of that hatred evident after over a century. I am saying there was a better way to accomplish the goal, not that the goal itself should not have been accomplished.

I know it's boring, but you really should brush up on something called 'comprehension'. It starts with the same letter as the word you hate so much, but it isn't connected... trust me.

Time has already shown that.

Apparently not. You can claim a car is fixed, but if it isn't able to get you from point A to point B, it really isn't. The test of whether or not gay activity is being socially accepted is whether or not the public will accept it. I would say that this bill and Prop 8 have shown without a doubt that gay activity, while tolerated, is still not accepted.

I'm talking about public acceptance of your position, not what you believe the public should accept. The former is critical to your successful implementation of your agenda; the latter is irrelevant to anyone except you.

When I was younger, every Friday night there would be another gay guy drowned off the St. Kilda pier.

A tragedy, and an abomination of law, order, and civilization. It is a horrible fact of human nature that such atrocities have, do, and will exist. It is my fervent hope (although sadly not my expectation) that such animals as these somehow reap the rewards they deserve.

But there is more than one response to such actions. we can either demand vengeance, which will probably not come in any case, or move beyond and above such actions. You said such happened 'when you were younger'. I assume it does not happen now? That, my friend, is progress. We can either embrace such progress and build on it by pointing out lesser problems, or resort to brow-beating the public endlessly over a historical event that is not in anyone's power to fully correct. Nothing you can do, nothing I can do, nothing President-Elect Obama can do, nothing anyone can do will bring those poor souls back. All that can be accomplished by trying to is to turn public opinion back against your cause and remove that progress in the process.

They could have fought back with violence. But instead of riots and reprisal murders, they chose to march in silly outfits. They made it clear to the world that they are a powerful group, who are going to demand their rights, albeit in a peaceful manner. They are using democracy and will continue to use it. And they will win, because more and more people are learning to ask questions, and think for themselves.

At that time, perhaps their response was the most appropriate one. But progress has been made, and as progress is realized, tactics that once may have been effective become counter-productive.

These days, gays are not murdered off St Kilda Pier any more.

I am glad to hear that!

Even your children will grow up thinking for themselves.

They already do, thank you. As they should. And the last time we saw news coverage of a gay parade, they were disgusted by it, too. Oh, well, maybe you should tell them how to think?

Stop using hyped-up, intentionally misreported and misunderstood news items to force your fears onto the rest of us.

I have no fears. I threw those out years ago. If you have some, you got them from another source. Look inside yourself, grasshopper...

I don't think 'intentionally misrepresented' is accurate here. You can find a thread on one such inappropriate situation here. You can also find, if you take time to sort through that thread, that several posters see 'recruitment'. Whether or not there is recruitment happening is irrelevant to my position. The appearance of recruitment is enough to provide a problem for anyone wishing to make homosexuality more acceptable to public opinion.

If you want public acceptance of homosexuality, you must separate, in the public eye, such instances form the 'gay agenda'. every time such a story hits the media, anything less than a public outcry against the actions involved by the vast majority of homosexuals will be seen as a blanket acceptance by the same, and will degrade your cause in the public eye. Any time the will of the people is dismissed out of hand, whether for cause or not, the public at large will rebel against your cause. Any time someone cross-dresses in public in an outrageous fashion and shakes their booty at the little kids around, you lose respect in the public eye.

It is not my house to clean up. It is yours, and you seem to be doing a very poor job at that cleaning. Perhaps you might listen to someone telling you what is going wrong? Nahhh... you know best.

-continued on next post-

reply to post by Kailassa
- continued from previous post -

There is no more relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia than there is between heterosexuality and pedophilia. It is not even an exclusively male phenomenon.

My statements, which you apparently missed the meaning of yet again (by Jove, you're good at this! ), were not intended to equate the two in actuality, but to show how they can be equated in the public eye. It seems to me that every time I come across a report of a homosexual accused of pedophilia, the primary response from other homosexuals is less of 'how terrible' and more of 'gays are not pedos'. Now while that last statement should indeed be presented, and I am sure it is accurate, would it not foster more public faith in the inherent morality of gays to decry the actions than to seemingly dismiss them in favor of furthering an agenda? That is what I see happening, and I am sure others are seeing it the same way.

If you want people to accept you, you must make yourself acceptable. It's not a question of right or wrong, but one of appearance and reality. Just as it would be foolish to show up for a job interview for a CEO position in tattered blue jeans and a t-shirt, it is also foolish for a guy to appear before the public professing no difference in morality while wearing slinky women's underwear.

Hopefully this will be easier to comprehend.

TheRedneck

Why is it not ok for the majority of the people to actually go and vote to decide the laws? That's what happened, that's the way it is, and that's that.

reply to post by rocksarerocks


Because it is not right for the majority to take rights away from the minority or to deny them rights just because they don't agree with them.

It is about equality under the law.

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by rocksarerocks

 

Because it is not right for the majority to take rights away from the minority or to deny them rights just because they don't agree with them.

It is about equality under the law.

It may not be right because it is left! but then again it isn't fair but who said life is fair - if You place yourself in the minority you only have yourself to blame. Especially when it was a choice that was made.

I find it interesting what this debate has become. A discussion about homosexuality.

But my question is simple, what does that have to do with any of this?

This "ban" is a prime example of a third uninvolved party stopping a willing interaction between others.

This reason something like this disturbs me, is because it effects children. The same people who are against abortion are now limiting the people who are able to take care of these children? Is that not #ed up?

Please, the fact that you think homos are gross, that is your own opinion. But we are talking about CHILDREN that WANT homes. The older children usually have a say about who they can be adopted by and the younger ones are not even able to understand this concept.

This law is literally preventing LOVE. Children want direct attention from concerned individuals. The couples want children to take care of.

You opinion on the state of homosexuality doesn't matter.

I think creationism is funny, do I think we should ban ALL creationist from adopting children because they are stupid? NO.

I mean honestly, these people want to take care of the children that the rest of society has forgotten about. And we make both them and children suffer because of personal prejudice.

--

Originally posted by hdchop
You place yourself in the minority you only have yourself to blame. Especially when it was a choice that was made.

news.softpedia.com...

www.bidstrup.com...

sujaiblog.blogspot.com...

www.skeptictank.org...

news.bbc.co.uk...

"It does not really matter whether it is nature or nurture.
The important thing is getting equality for homosexual people."

[edit on 6-11-2008 by Jezus]

reply to post by skeptic1


So if the minority of the people are murderers we cannot take away their right to murder because we don't agree with it?

Originally posted by rocksarerocks
reply to post by skeptic1

 

So if the minority of the people are murderers we cannot take away their right to murder because we don't agree with it?

Please stay on topic this thread is not about murders and their rights. But to entertain you murder is a crime. You cannot compare a murderer to homosexuals trying to adopt kids. A murderer make a decision that is detrimental; to others and society by choosing to kill someone. A homosexual like the article I posted above isn't degrading society instead help it grow by giving children who normally wouldn't have a chance to excel and be loved.

-Ign0RanT