Gay Marriage and Raising Children: The Elephant in the Room

Originally posted by DaesDaemar
reply to post by FranciPants1228

 

Just my opinion

The way I see it is that if that woman is in a heterosexual relationship, then yes, the technology should be available to them as they are in a relationship that lends itself to procreation, homosexuals are not. That is fact however you want to spin it.

If it is about everyone having the right to children, and I know this is a bad analogy but it makes the point, then what about child molesters? They are also born that way if we are to believe science, should they also be allowed to have children? Once we become tolerant to one thing, we open ourselves to ever increasing levels of tolerance. Just a thought...

We do not have to tolerate child molesters...that is a proven psychological illness. Being gay is not an illness.

reply to post by DaesDaemar


You're going to claim that you don't have a problem with homosexuals and then compare them to pedophiles? Really? There is no victim in a homosexual relationship. It is a loving bond between two consenting adults. Just like a heterosexual relationship. Pedophilia is about power. It is about taking advantage of someone who is weaker. Not to mention a child cannot consent to sexual activity. If homosexuality and pedophilia are so similar answer this question. How is it that there are so many stable, healthy, people in homosexual relationships while at the same time there are tons of victims of pedophilia that require long term therapy?

Originally posted by Abrihetx

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
reply to post by FailedProphet

 

I will also mention another case, where I personally knew the people. All-female couple, and the daughter of one of them, that told me, when she was older, that she never felt she had a choice to be other than they were, because of how she was raised. She was very unhappy about it, but didn't know what to do.

Let's talk about my case. Raised in a heterosexual household and I also felt like I had no choice to be anythig other than heterosexual. I was also very unhappy about it and didn't know what to do. And other gays when they were younger were very unhappy about it and don't know what to do because their parents were straight also.

Do you see where I am going with this? Let's discuss the effect of gay kids being raised by straight parents. I'm certain that topic won't take off. Besides, the key is to have loving and caring parents that will let you be who you are. I have a friend that was raised by gay parents and she is happy and well-adjusted and has a successful relationship with her male fiance. A child should know that they are loved and they are encouraged to be themselves.

While I don't want to discount your personal experience, I have real issues with ANY child, unless exposed to the wrong things too young, having thoughts about who they are attracted to sexually. Young children should not even be thinking about sexual matters. The person I referenced was, in fact, exposed to a lot of conversations and things she should not have been, and that was part of the problem. The other case I mentioned, we have to figure those women were doing something to make that little boy unhappy with who he is.

I know when I was a kid, I didn't think about sexual matters until my teens, at the normal stage when hormones kick in, and such things become of interest. As a mother, I know that my own kids (five of them) have never shown any interest in sexual matters as younger children, either.

In another thread, someone was talking about how conversations with some homosexual friends were full of talk about sex, and from people I have known, that is not uncommon. Children raised in such an environment are certainly going to have that become an issue long before it should.

In your case, if you don't mind talking about it, do you remember if such matters were openly discussed? Was there a lot of exposure to that topic on television? Children typically tend to play with the same gender more, as a rule, till older, but that isn't a sexual thing. Do you recall at what age you became interested in sexual matters (not counting curiosity about where babies come from)?

With me, such things were not discussed around children at all, and when I was a kid, we didn't have all of the sexual content on television. Heck, I remember when Cher's navel showing was considered "shocking". Among classmates, discussions on sex weren't around till into Jr. High ages.

I guess what I am wondering is, where is the influence on such things coming from for kids these days. Is it more from the media, and the increase in sexual content, from exposure in schools, with younger and younger children receiving sex ed, from parents with more lax standards, or some combination of these factors?

Regardless of the preferences of parents, this particular issue is of interest, and if some parents are more likely, for whatever reason, to make such content available at a younger age, that could have a real effect on the children. Children in all households these days are involved in sexual activities at younger ages, and teen pregnancies are at ridiculous levels compared to when I was young. Plus, some media and advertisers seem willing to sexualize children for various purposes. All of this is disturbing, regardless of gender preferences.

Thoughts?

reply to post by FranciPants1228


A psychological illness yes, but they are born that way. Does this mean that anyone born with a difference in brain chemistry has a psychological illness? You can see where I'm going with this right?

I find your post of excellent quality. Also, picking a liberal source and an article that was written by a woman was a very clever tactic. Your introduction was similarly clever, eliminating the usual name calling and such. Props. I've often had similar beliefs but whenever I stated my views, I would be attacked. Thanks for the motivation!

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by DaesDaemar

 

You're going to claim that you don't have a problem with homosexuals and then compare them to pedophiles? Really? There is no victim in a homosexual relationship. It is a loving bond between two consenting adults. Just like a heterosexual relationship. Pedophilia is about power. It is about taking advantage of someone who is weaker. Not to mention a child cannot consent to sexual activity. If homosexuality and pedophilia are so similar answer this question. How is it that there are so many stable, healthy, people in homosexual relationships while at the same time there are tons of victims of pedophilia that require long term therapy?

Stating that someone doesn't have a problem with homosexuals doesn't mean that he can't reference an article that, in a way, might refer to homosexuals as pedophiles. That's similar to saying that you don't have a problem with liberals, yet, they remind you of this type of person or that type of person that others may have a problem with.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


I did say it was a bad analogy, but where does that say I hate homosexuals? If not pedophiles, then how about incestuos couple, should they not be allowed children too? Where is the victim here?

Originally posted by FailedProphet

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
This is just the atypical circle jerking Nature vs. Nurture thread. Not even worth discussing because the only people who are going to see eye to eye are those who already agree with eachother. So that being said. I find no sufficient reason to grace this thread with my presence other than to say. Not taking the

bait.

And yet here you are...

This question is of crucial import for many children and deserves to be asked. It's not flame bait at all. On the contrary, flames are what I desperately want to avoid. Nuance is what I'm reaching for. Nuance and answers, not name-calling and hysteria.

Name-calling and hatred is often the only responses that are ever brought about in threads like these. Even in real life, it's hard to have an honest, peaceful conversation on the topic.

Originally posted by DaesDaemar
reply to post by Xcalibur254

 

I did say it was a bad analogy, but where does that say I hate homosexuals? If not pedophiles, then how about incestuos couple, should they not be allowed children too? Where is the victim here?

There certainly is a point here. Where is the line to be drawn?

reply to post by calebdaniels


Exactly the point I'm trying to make. I don't hate homosexuals, I disagree with their way of life though, as I also disagree with many people's ways of life.

reply to post by DaesDaemar


The potential victim is the child. The reason incest is taboo nowadays is because we know a lot more about genetics. Specifically, we have learned that there are both dominant and recessive traits. If your parents are biological siblings that means they're working with the same genetic material. As a result any deleterious mutations that may be in the family, regardless of it being a dominant or recessive trait, has a much greater likelihood of presenting. This is why incest has a much higher chance of producing birth defects. You have severely limited the gene pool and as a result, sooner or later, all traits contained in your family's genetic code are going to manifest regardless of whether they are good, bad, or neutral.

Originally posted by DaesDaemar
reply to post by FranciPants1228

 

A psychological illness yes, but they are born that way. Does this mean that anyone born with a difference in brain chemistry has a psychological illness? You can see where I'm going with this right?

You can't compare pedophiles to gays. Its ridiculous. One is about about being violated againt your will and one is consentual.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes

 

The OP simply stated that, as we didn't know what would happen in single parent homes, we don't know the long term effect of gay parent homes, either, and we should, for the sake of the children.

We do. You don't. You have a very different fundamental view of gay people. When you understand completely that they are simply people. The 'long term effects' are indeed predictable. Some will be great parents and some won't. For all the same reasons..all the same co-factors as heterosexual parents. That's it, it's that simple.

And again I have 2 close friends that were raised by same-sex and they are in their upper 20s. I am way more involved with that then the negative accounts you related. Does this knowledge impact you at all or do you only fish out negative cases to support a made-up mind?? I myself expect to hear both positive and negative cases. When you view LGBT as equal you will expect it too.

As a society, we don't know for certain. In the case you discuss, sounds like well-adjusted people, and that is a very good thing. Yes, there are people that are better or worse as parents, based on many factors, and certainly sexual preference is only one factor among those many. I don't think of homosexuals as something other than people, either. Just people with some confusion over certain issues. Parenting is complex. There are many outstanding single parents out there, that raise successful children, but even those can have issues due to the single parent factor. We have decades of cases to look at on such families, and we don't yet have that for families with two same sex parents. While single parents are not "bad" for being in that situation (very often not by choice), neither would homosexual parents be bad, even if there are negative factors, simply because of that. Not everything that happens that can negatively affect our children is always under our control.

And, no, I don't avoid the good cases. Have not heard of many (and none I have personally seen), but any reputable study of the issue should include ALL the cases, not just all-positive, or all-negative ones. Unbiased research, and clear results, with nothing altered or downplayed, is vital for any research project. My hope would be that any loving family would be good for a child, but that isn't always true. I was a single mom for awhile, and even though I sacrificed a ton of personal time, and gave up a lot, to be there for my oldest, get her everything she needed, and make sure she knew she was THE priority in my life, she was still affected by her biological father leaving as he did.

And, yes, the ridiculous divorce rate among traditional couples IS a huge issue, and I don't like it a bit. It wasn't something I planned to be a part of (he abandoned up with no notice), and I know firsthand the problems that can cause with a child. Reports on homosexual couples seem mixed, and at this stage I don't think we have enough data to know if divorce rates will be similar for such couples, so the question is whether other factors will affect the children. How much will individual personality matter, as opposed to issues caused by the child missing a parent of one gender?

I don't see it as "anti-gay" to want to study the matter, as the OP suggested, and see what the long-term data shows, as we now have for single parent homes.

Originally posted by OneisOne

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
That isn't saying who should and should not be a parent, but any parent should wan to know if something about their situation will have an adverse effect on their children.

"any parent should wan to know if something about their situation will have an adverse effect on their children"

This leaves me shaking my head. It has been known for a very long time that divorce has a negative effect on children and yet hetro couples continue to get divorced (and at a growing rate!).

I'm sorry but saying that "we don't know the effects of gay parenting, but it could be bad" is no kind of argument. We know the effects of divorced parenting and it's not really something man/woman couples are concerned about.

Yes, that has been known, and yes, a lot of couples rush to divorce even knowing it's bad for the kids. I personally know people that PUSHED for a divorce, even with a non-abusive spouse, and several children involved. One of those was actually flirting with guys online, and basically flushed her family. Yes, sickening. Not all divorces are like that one, and I understand that some are unavoidable, but it is a real problem, and people that don't even try to make things work, knowing a divorce is bad for their kids, are really not the best of parents. They can no longer say they didn't know it would be harmful.

By the same token, a same sex couple household is different from the historical standard, and we don't yet have enough data to know the long term effects, if any, on children. Just as we didn't know the effects of single parent homes until they had become more commonplace. I would think that homosexual couples wanting, or having, children would want to know of any potential issues.

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes

 

No we don't have evidence that children do better (whatever that means) in homes with a father and a mother.

In fact, even religiously we don't have a popular example of that.

We don't have anything on the inherent goodness of life-long heterosexual monogamy historically (marriage was often parentally pressured and romantic love was outside rather inside marriage), we don't have good examples Biblically, and the only place we have it is from 1940s-1950s US propaganda sitcoms like Ozzie and Harriet.

Even so, if heterosexual monogamy is so good then the OP should address its failure, rather than making a straight problem a gay problem.

How can straight people hate gay people so much that they project their failures onto gay people?

Too bad the OP didn't title the thread: "Single Moms and Raising Children: The Elephant in the Room".

Oh but anything goes when it comes to gay bashing.

Of course he's gay bashing!
Are you blind?

edit on 9-8-2012 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

Am I blind? YO udeny the existence of many years of studies on the traditional family, and on single parenting, and you ask me if I am blind? Wow.....

The OP DID address the issues and problems of single parenting, as an example, and a reason that homosexual couple parents should likewise be studied. No, it isn't "bashing" to question a situation, and if you think itis, you need to get that chip off your shoulder.

reply to post by RealSpoke


It appears to be saying that. And more.

I think maybe you are missing the point that these studies have been done.

www.time.com...

this is a link to one such article reporting its findings.

reply to post by DaesDaemar

If it is about everyone having the right to children

then what about child molesters?

I wouldn't want everyone to have that right.

You truly feel that's what we all want? Those of us that support LGBT having the right to legal marriage and parenting? That it's our way of weaseling in pedophiles and zombies and giraffes? When this question is turned back on YOU does it sound as ridiculous as it does to us!?....

..and to all the other ATS members that say similar things.

then what about child molesters? They are also born that way

Lets try a better analogy.

But first let's pretend something. Pretend interracial marriage was still illegal.

Now instead you ask THIS question to us

If it is about everyone having the right to children. then what about different races? They were born that way. Should they be allowed to marry eachother?

That would be a good analogy. It's a good analogy because there is nothing intrinsically wrong with them.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by borntowatch

It is a concern, the kids will be emotionally brutalised in social circles in most cases.

And why would they be emotional brutalized in society? Where does that come from according to your view?

Where does it come from
Well I dont know, though I am sure you will tell me your view

It exists, thats my point, nothing else
Bullying is a common occurrence in most schools. According to the American Psychological Association, approximately "40% to 80% of school-age children experience bullying at some point during their school careers".[16] Regardless of the grade level, socioeconomic environment, gender, religion, or sexual orientation, bullying can happen to anyone. However, various studies point out that students from lower socio-economic backgrounds are more bullied than students from higher socio-economic backgrounds.[17] Most children experience bullying at some point in their academic careers. The following is a list of statistics that illustrate the severity of bullying within classrooms:[16]
20-40% of bullying victims actually report being bullied
70% of middle school and high school students experience bullying in school
7-12% of bullies are habitual and pose a serious threat
23% of 9th graders have carried a weapon to school recently[18]
5-15% of students are constantly bullied
27% of students are bullied because of their refusal to engage in common sexual practices
25% of students encourage bullying if not given proper education and support in anti-bullying techniques[15]
Due to the low numbers of students who actually report incidents of bullying, teachers need to have a certain level of awareness that will thwart any potential problems. This awareness starts with understanding bullying.
wikepedia

reply to post by borntowatch

Where does it come from
Well I dont know, though I am sure you will tell me your view

Already in opposition to the idea of a discussion?

It exists, thats my point, nothing else

One can get a good feel for the origin of the discriminatory beliefs if one applies a discerning mind.

Just to be clear here your response was to kids getting bullied for having gay parents. My response is also to that.

You just posted stats on bullying itself. That would be a concern for any child born in general wouldn't it?