It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'Gayby boom': Children of gay couples speak out

page: 5
22
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by StevenDye
I just want to take this chance to say not all religious people are anti-gay.

I am Christian and entirely pro-gay, any one who uses religion to 'prove' gay people are wrong is damaging their religion.

Love thy neighbor people, even if hes gay. Theres is not one little thing wrong with it.
Kudos to you for bringing a little bit of balance to a topic. A heated topic at that. Especially from the corner you're fighting from : )

I can understand why people want family values to remain in kids lives, and in an ideal situation, that IS the best thing for children. But unfortunatly, many, many kids are not in this ideal situation, where unconditional love from a hetero couple is available. There are way too many kids in care, because there hetero parents couldn't, for what ever reason, look after them. Is it best for them to stay in care, or to find a loving home who will try and sort their lives out?

Gay parents do not equal gay kids. They might equal kids open to same sex relationships in a way that hasn't happened before. But that can only be a good thing. Just aslong as the kids are safe, and in a loving home. That's the ONLY issue here. The kids. F*** your prejudices (not the dude I've quoted, to homophobes) and think about the kids for once, and not your homophobic views. It's the kids that have NO home, the kids that, for what ever reason, have NO family, that matter here. Not the moral fabric of society. That hasn't been affected at all. If anything, denying these poor children a loving home, is affecting the moral fabric of society, because the very second you discriminate against someone with no grounds to do so, then you've struck a blow to what is right. To what is godly. And that's a big issue.




posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Im not going to comment on whether I feel this is right or wrong as its not for me to judge.

One thing that I wonder is how a female would cope with being brought up with two males. I do think that there are certain qualities that one sex has that another lacks in certain areas and I say that as my own father struggles to understand my younger sister emotionally etc. My mother buggered off to indulge herself in her own ignorance many years ago and has nothing to do with her family due to her new boyfriend Smirnoff (Vodka)


I can see how this would work with two females but what about the opposite?

Any thoughts or experiences?

[edit on 29-6-2009 by XXXN3O]



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by XXXN3O
 


That's a very good point.

As a man, I would be very uncomfortable with the idea of a young boy being raised by two women alone.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by The Last Man on Earth
 


I dont know if you missed my point there.

I was meaning two fathers with one daughter. I think that might have problems when it comes to teenage years, emotions etc

Hope that makes more sense of it.

When it comes to the scenario of two females I do think that mothers offer more emotional support that a kid might need but might lack the support and confidence a father can give if that makes sense.



[edit on 29-6-2009 by XXXN3O]



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by XXXN3O
reply to post by The Last Man on Earth
 


I dont know if you missed my point there.

I was meaning two fathers with one daughter. I think that might have problems when it comes to teenage years, emotions etc

Hope that makes more sense of it.

Give me a straight couple who's prepared for their teenage daughters, and you can go straight to the front of the queue to claim your 500 pounds



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Acidtastic

Originally posted by XXXN3O
reply to post by The Last Man on Earth
 


I dont know if you missed my point there.

I was meaning two fathers with one daughter. I think that might have problems when it comes to teenage years, emotions etc

Hope that makes more sense of it.

Give me a straight couple who's prepared for their teenage daughters, and you can go straight to the front of the queue to claim your 500 pounds


Well you have an excellent point there.


Id rather just take the 500 pounds to be honest





posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
I think you guys missed my point.

I wasn't thinking paedophilia, or anything like that, I was thinking just the masculinity of the child. He is a young boy, he should be acting like a young boy, IMO. This is hard to do if you have no positive male influence in your life (aka your dad taking you out to play football).

I imagine the same goes exactly the way with two men and a young girl; how is she supposed to adjust herself to her pre-defined sexual role?

And before you all jump in going "hey! She can be whatever she wants to be!" etc, I say sure, she certainly can, however anything outside of normal is, again IMO, not good and as a parent is not what I would be striving for.

I think by introducing these kind of strange situations you are forcing the children to deal with issues that they shouldn't have to deal with. It is literally the gay couple forcing their own selfish issues upon the child (wanting a kid) who did not wish for them and doesn't deserve them. If you have a boy raised by two women, who then becomes particularly effeminate because of it, that is going to hinder his ability to get a girlfriend.

You might think "psshhh, bull-honkey man!" but I have plenty of female friends and ex-girlfriends who have all been very fond of the macho-masculine-type (which is, I assume, why they dated me in the first place!). In fact, I don't actually know any women who, when you ask them who their fantasy man is, choose Julian Clary over Vin Diesel. You'd think, in this day and age, that it would not be a problem, that we would have moved beyond it, but the fact still remains that women are genetically pre-programmed to want a big, strong man! This is why I have friends who are smaller and more effeminate than myself's girlfriend's hitting on me at the very same party their boyfriends are at! I'm good friends with these guys, and their girls are also good people but they are somehow compelled to make sexual overtures towards me.

Now, if we know that women are, by and large, attracted to men who are actually men, and you have raised a boy who is quite un-manly, he is therefore going to be struggling to figure out just where it is he fits into the grand scheme of social interaction. Especially during the teenage years, where everything seems up-in-the-air anyway, and the girls are trying to figure out what they like too.

He's not going to be considered 'one of the guys' because he isn't. He isn't a girl, but he's closer to them than the boys, so he has to join them, so suddenly he is forced to talk about what boy everyone likes, etc. How is this going to affect him, because remember folks, we are all a product of our environment.

So you may well end up creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of a gay, submissive man purely because he lacked a father figure growing up. I'm not saying he can't be happy, I'm not saying he wants to change, but doesn't a part of you feel just a little bit guilty for denying him a normal life?



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
I wasn't aware there was a rule that dictated that ALL homosexual couples breed homosexual or messed up children?


My good man, I wasn't aware that homosexuals could breed anything at all. Homosexuals can't have babies unless they visit an orphanage in China.

Shouldn't this topic be labeled, "Adopted children of homosexuals speak out" or "Children of bi-sexual couples speak out"? Anyone out of elementary school knows that two men or two women can't have babies. Let them marry and retire to their bedroom to make all the babies they want. I wonder if anyone markets a pregnancy test to homosexuals? Probably not. Dang blast it! More discrimination.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Gay, straight, Bi, swingers... whatever... As long as they look after the children properly, that's all that counts.

I'm not a huge fan of artificial means to 'create' babies in test-tubes for heteros. I know that's going to offend a few people - sorry. Therefore the only thing that I object to is gay people wanting artifical insemination to have a baby, especially when they're otherwise healthy and more than capable of doing the deed.

There's something about creating life in a test-tube that doesn't sit right with me. I haven't quite worked it out yet, either. No I am not religious. If I was not able to naturally father children, then I would not use artificial means.

If you want a baby, do the deed or adopt. In that respect, I would say gays have to do the deed with a willing opposite sex 'friend' if they want their baby to have some of their genetic material, or adopt.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
Gay or straight.....alien or earthling, none of it matters in the scheme of things.

To those that have issues with this, then it's an issue that you chose to embrace. Let go and live life, as you would have others.

It's so much easier, and just so much more enjoyable.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   
As the straight child of a gay parent and a parent myself, I've come to the conclusion that a parent's sexuality is less likely to have a positive or negative impact than the quality of parenting itself.

The ignorant gay bashers are idiots with issues themselves..



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by brokenheadphonez
As the straight child of a gay parent and a parent myself, I've come to the conclusion that a parent's sexuality is less likely to have a positive or negative impact than the quality of parenting itself.

The ignorant gay bashers are idiots with issues themselves..


Agreed, but I don't think we have seen any ignorant gay bashers, have we? I don't recall someone just having a go about people being gay...



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Last Man on Earth

Originally posted by brokenheadphonez
As the straight child of a gay parent and a parent myself, I've come to the conclusion that a parent's sexuality is less likely to have a positive or negative impact than the quality of parenting itself.

The ignorant gay bashers are idiots with issues themselves..


Agreed, but I don't think we have seen any ignorant gay bashers, have we? I don't recall someone just having a go about people being gay...


I didn't read the whole thread, just trying to give a succinct summary of my opinions of the matter...

Show me one teenager who has grown up without sexual identity questions or some degree of social rejection and I'll think that being a gay/straight/trans parent is a more important issue than being a good parent. All of this gay discussion really takes up attention and energy that should be going into teaching, nuturing, caring, and most of all - FUN! That's what kids need.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


I have a better one and it was a bumper sticker that used to be on my

car... STUPID people Shouldn't breed! I bet if all these gay haters had to

take an IQ test to have kids then they wouldn't be talking so negatively

toward gay marriage. I'd like to guarantee that most the people who are

against gay marriage wouldn't be allowed to breed if they took an IQ test.

The gay penguins proved it all.



Also this isn't aimed toward anyone specific in the thread but more the bias

presence we get from one side of the media.

[edit on 29-6-2009 by NoJoker13]



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by NoJoker13
 


Oh, heavens no! Wouldn't want to take away anyone's rights no, would we?



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by peacejet
 


What about those of us who were raised by one parent? I was raised by my mom who worked lot's of hours. Did that damage me somehow? No. Would my life have been better if I was raised by two parents? I don't know. But there are no set in stone requirements needed to raise a child. I did ok being raised by a woman, there is no emotional defects or anything like that. I have my problems, but who doesn't? Gays get unfairly treated in this regard. If a gay couple with kids end up like a typical heteros, then it's because they are gay, not because there are problems just like in any other relationship. Along with gays, single parents are often targets too. They are thought to be unfit to be good parents, but they are wrong. To me, anyone who things gays are not ideal parents or single parents (regardless of their sexual preference) obviously has no experience from being raised by either.

Let me use a different example; I don't know what it's like to be born with one arm, but does that mean I know for a fact what it's like to use only one arm? No. The fact of the matter is, is that there is no such thing as "perfect parents". There's no such thing as "perfect kids". There's no such thing as the "perfect family". Humans are faulty, it's just how it is. I've seen kids raised by what would be conisered great parents, end up turning to crime and drugs, but all that kid gets is pity. But if a kid turned out like that from being raised by gay parents or a single parent then it was because of that. But if a kid turns out great from the gay couple or single parent, then no one believes it is true so they think that there is still something wrong with them somewhere.

I've already seen this from posts on here. "Well, those kids that turned out ok are exceptions, but deep down they are scared from this because they had to put up with a lot growing up." What about kids whose parents are interacial? Decades ago, that was just not right. Those poor kids were doomed. It's better now, but lot's of people still believe that. So should a couple of different races not have children because they are potentially causing ridicule, harm or racial confusion to that child? Can't wait until this is not an issue anymore.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 




Now what do those who are against same-sex marriage have to say? This guy is a proof that upbringing by same-sex parents doesn't ruin children.

Remember the threads on gay animals? The debate is quickly becoming non-existing.


I would say I am still against same sex marriage and this is just proof that it didnt ruin this particular child. I still say same sex parents is not the optimal parental configuration for a child.

I remember the gay animals and I dont really think they support your cause either. Just because two animals of the same sex hang out together doesnt make them gay.

Plus, just the fact that you guys have to keep brining this crap up over and over again to try to convine us that you are right is just so gay.

But I will say I am for Civil Unions, just not gay marriage.

[edit on 29-6-2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   
The question is not should gays marry.

The question is where does it stop.

If you open interpretation that wide,
bothers and sisters
parent child
adult child
polygomy

This is just one more thing to tear apart the family and the country. Most of the conservative gays i have spoken with told me that they could care less about marriage on the grounds mentioned above.

They also told me that most of these "vocal" gays are the same ones are in it just to be non-conformists. They are the ones that are defined by their orientation and not there self and have a tendency toward narcissism.

just my two cents

edit due to fat finger

[edit on 29-6-2009 by felonius]



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi

Separation of church and state, people. Get this concept through your brainwashed minds.



Actually the seperation of church and state was to keep the state out of the church not the church out of the state.

I think the issue of same sex marriage is a dumb one but how it is being brought in in Canada is a bad idea. I think it was rushed so quickly that they made major errors in not fixing laws to make it work.

Canada has "common law" marriages, where two people living together for 6 months are considered married as far as getting spousal benefits from an employer and seperation of assets if they break up. The precident has been that if you want to fight the status during a break up you have to prove that the relationship was non sexual, not that the other partner has to prove it was. Once same sex marriage came in there appeared a couple of law suites where roommates had a fight and one moved out then one sued the other for support payments. The one I'm thinking about the one roomate had to spend thousands of $$ proving he wasn't gay and that his ex-roomie was just a roommate not a lover.

So I think common law marraige should have been tossed before same sex marraige was brought in.

I also have a problem with the way the Supreme Court decided that the Constitution was unconstitutional and should have allowed same sex marraiges. If they wanted to allow it they should have had a vote in the House of Commons, not broken the constitution by having the courts write a law. The ends do not justify the means.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by exile1981
 


Just another example to support my idea that the Canadian justice/legal system is irreparably damaged.

It's like we took a dam from the Brits, threw it in somewhere in Canada (that didn't fit), forced the round peg in the square hole, and have a team of ten thousands of people who's sole contribution to this wonderful system is ... plugging holes in a dam that's quite obviously suffering from serious structural damage..

Ah well, there's good money in that.




top topics



 
22
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join