Homosexuals and Bisexuals

[FlamingFemme]

Most people would not choose to express it as "not family", but there is a distinction between biological family that is necessary to make for legal purposes. Otherwise, you could never be adopted. Something has to be done specifically about the rights and responsibilities of the biological parents before adoption ever takes place.

This becomes more and more difficult to do the harder people try to pretend that things have "changed" that have never changed. There is still a need for marriage, for accountability, and for specific duties and obligations between men and women regarding children that are not ever applicable to gays.

Can you clarify this, please? As a 'gay' with a child, who is married to someone of the same sex, what 'specific duties and obligations' apply to opposite-sex couples that do not apply (or, in your words would never apply) to me/us?

 

[Shane Roach]

Can you clarify this, please? As a 'gay' with a child, who is married to someone of the same sex, what 'specific duties and obligations' apply to opposite-sex couples that do not apply (or, in your words would never apply) to me/us?

Come on... I am so tired of this. Stop pretending it doesn't matter where children come from. Obviously it is a huge big deal. In order to prevent kids from needing adoption in the first place, it is best if parents get married, have their kids and raise them. Marriage is supposed to encourage this. To do so, it has to remain about heterosexuals. It's exceedingly simple.

I'm sorry if this would have resulted in you not having a child, buy I am more concerned with what we are putting our kids through in the name of "equality". I've lived through the mess the last liberal push made of marriage, and I have seen the evidence that it has harmed a lot more people than just me.

Excuses do not get people's lives back for them. This nation owes it to the next generation to start backtracking on the sexual revolution.

 

[beechy]

I'm sorry if this would have resulted in you not having a child, buy I am more concerned with what we are putting our kids through in the name of "equality". I've lived through the mess the last liberal push made of marriage, and I have seen the evidence that it has harmed a lot more people than just me.

Banning gay marriage won't stop gay people from having children. It will just stop them from having children while married. Unless you also want to gay people from adopting, and from conceiving children through artificial insemination and surrogacy.

 

[beechy]

To FlamingFemme
Everything. When its says ‘our’ daughter the fundamental difference is the daughter isn’t biologically the product of the mother and the other women. It also means that if the woman’s wife is a woman then a woman is a husband and father.

Why should the law treat families with adopted children differently than it treats families with biological children?

Its not really, it’s a totally dysfunctional one without a man. Should you be offended by that view please know that my motive is not to offend.

Why do you believe same sex couples are totally dysfunctional parents?

 

[Shane Roach]

Banning gay marriage won't stop gay people from having children. It will just stop them from having children while married. Unless you also want to ban adoption by gay people.

Legalizing gay marriage won't stop people from having children out of wedlock either. Punishing people for having children out of wedlock might, but before we do that we have to keep marriage about heterosexuals.

I'm thinking a lifelong requirement not to move more than x amount of distance from one's child if one divorces. And maintaining rights for the parent who does not have custody to continue to have some say where the other moves.

I'm not sure what I even think about gay adoption anymore. Clearly though, if people are just going to argue forever about whether or not the issue of child birth and rearing needs any regulation, and pretend adoption is the same thing when obviously the child birth has to happen in an already busted relationship for that to even be an option, they do not care about the child. What they care about is attacking marriage.

 

[Shane Roach]

Why should the law treat families with adopted children differently than it treats families with biological children?

Where are the adopted children coming from. From families with biological children. The law has to treat them differently or you can't have adoption.

Why do you believe same sex couples are totally dysfunctional parents?

Because I cannot find one supporter of this proposed change that can make a rational argument for it. It frightens me. I cannot imagine why people would argue we do not need specific laws for marriage regarding heterosexuals.

I'm done trying.

 

[beechy]

Where are the adopted children coming from. From families with biological children. The law has to treat them differently or you can't have adoption.

Adopted children are coming from families with biological children? My cousin was adopted. I'm pretty sure his bio-mom got pregnant by her random at the time boyfriend who wasn't around by the time she gave birth. The only married people in that picture were my aunt and uncle who scooped him up and brought him home.

Because I cannot find one supporter of this proposed change that can make a rational argument for it.

That can make a rational argument for what? For the proposition that same-sex parents are not dysfunctional?

It frightens me. I cannot imagine why people would argue we do not need specific laws for marriage regarding heterosexuals.

You don't have to imagine it, you've been engaged in extensive, real life forum discussions about it.

I'm done trying.

I don't believe you.

 

[beechy]

Legalizing gay marriage won't stop people from having children out of wedlock either.

Nope, it won't. But your argument that the purpose of marriage is to "regulate" procreation doesn't make sense since marriage regulations don't apply to everyone who procreates. People are free to procreate within and outside of marriage.

Punishing people for having children out of wedlock might, but before we do that we have to keep marriage about heterosexuals.

That's a great idea. Let's punish kids who are born out of wedlock.

I'm thinking a lifelong requirement not to move more than x amount of distance from one's child if one divorces. And maintaining rights for the parent who does not have custody to continue to have some say where the other moves.

But if you have kids outside of marriage and then you break up you can move wherever you want?

I'm not sure what I even think about gay adoption anymore. Clearly though, if people are just going to argue forever about whether or not the issue of child birth and rearing needs any regulation, and pretend adoption is the same thing when obviously the child birth has to happen in an already busted relationship for that to even be an option, they do not care about the child. What they care about is attacking marriage.

There are lots of laws around child birth and rearing. I just don't understand what any of them have to do with whether gay couples should be allowed to marry.

 

[FlamingFemme]

Come on... I am so tired of this. Stop pretending it doesn't matter where children come from. Obviously it is a huge big deal. In order to prevent kids from needing adoption in the first place, it is best if parents get married, have their kids and raise them. Marriage is supposed to encourage this. To do so, it has to remain about heterosexuals. It's exceedingly simple.

I'm sorry if this would have resulted in you not having a child, buy I am more concerned with what we are putting our kids through in the name of "equality". I've lived through the mess the last liberal push made of marriage, and I have seen the evidence that it has harmed a lot more people than just me.

Excuses do not get people's lives back for them. This nation owes it to the next generation to start backtracking on the sexual revolution.

None of this answers my question, at all. So, I'll re-post:

Originally Posted by FlamingFemme

Can you clarify this, please? As a 'gay' with a child, who is married to someone of the same sex, what 'specific duties and obligations' apply to opposite-sex couples that do not apply (or, in your words would never apply) to me/us?

Keep in mind, that I am already part of a same-sex married couple, and we already have a child, and are raising her together.
​

 

[Shane Roach]

Adopted children are coming from families with biological children? My cousin was adopted. I'm pretty sure his bio-mom got pregnant by her random at the time boyfriend who wasn't around by the time she gave birth. The only married people in that picture were my aunt and uncle who scooped him up and brought him home.

My point exactly. We've just given up on trying to get people to be responsible. Now we're going to pretend the entire concept never existed in the first place.

Fine. Do it. Just don't expect me to believe it was done for any noble purpose. I know what it does to families because I had one.

And no, I don't want your sympathy. I'm telling you I know the score no matter which way you choose to peel this onion.

 

[Shane Roach]

None of this answers my question, at all. So, I'll re-post:

Originally Posted by FlamingFemme

Can you clarify this, please? As a 'gay' with a child, who is married to someone of the same sex, what 'specific duties and obligations' apply to opposite-sex couples that do not apply (or, in your words would never apply) to me/us?

Keep in mind, that I am already part of a same-sex married couple, and we already have a child, and are raising her together.
​

The answers are in the post. You ignored them. Typical.

 

[Shane Roach]

None of anything you people say answers my questions. Let me repost.


Again


and aagin


and again...


and agaian,,,,,,mfzd
nhpo

 

[FlamingFemme]

The answers are in the post. You ignored them. Typical.

You talked a lot about how marriage needs to remain exclusively a heterosexual matter, but you didn't tell me WHY. I asked a very specific question, that could/should have been answered in list form. I want/ed specific examples of what/which duties/obligations apply to heterosexual unions, but NEVER (your words) apply to homosexual unions. I still would like those examples, and you did NOT give them to me, as much as you'd like to believe you did. I have suspicions that maybe your 'specific duties and obligations that exclusively apply to heterosexual couples and NEVER to homosexual couples' simply do not exist.

Regulations about children? Gay couples have and are raising children.

If that's all you got, than you got nothin'.

I refuse to stand idly by while you tell everyone on this forum that my family is not an actual FAMILY, and then can't tell anyone exactly WHY my family doesn't deserve the same protections as yours.
I'm sorry that you come from a broken family. I don't. And my daughter doesn't, either. I'm sorry that you, personally, have been harmed by no-fault divorce laws. But our daughter belongs to the two of us, and no-one else. She has grown up with two parents who love and dote on her, and she has a stable family household in which to grow into the amazing human being that I know she is.
So, whatever damages you have sustained from no-fault divorce laws, doesn't apply to two committed, loving people of the same sex who want to spend the rest of their lives together and raise a family. It just doesn't. Why don't you try and turn your pain toward something constructive, instead of working to ensure that more children go without the protections they deserve, as well as parents who are legally able to be married.

 

[beechy]

My point exactly. We've just given up on trying to get people to be responsible. Now we're going to pretend the entire concept never existed in the first place.

First of all, my cuz was adopted from another country (my uncle's home country). So there's that. Second of all, are you suggesting that his birth mother should have been forced to marry his deadbeat bio-dad (assuming she was in the US and subject to our laws, which she wasn't)? Tell that to Bristol Palin.

As for my aunt and uncle, they never did conceive any biological children of their own. Do you think it would have been better for them to have raised my cousin as an unmarried couple? Or do you think they should never have adopted him in the first place? Are they a "real" family?

Fine. Do it. Just don't expect me to believe it was done for any noble purpose. I know what it does to families because I had one.

What do you mean? Do what? In my aunt and uncle's case, they wanted a kid and my cousin needed some parents. So they adopted him. Who said anything about noble? It is what it is, and it worked out just fine, thanks.

And no, I don't want your sympathy. I'm telling you I know the score no matter which way you choose to peel this onion.

Ok, no sympathy here.

 

[BigBadWlf]

Come on... I am so tired of this. Stop pretending it doesn't matter where children come from. Obviously it is a huge big deal.

According to the family law you are always going on about it does not matter who an adopted child’s biological parents are or were. The child is legally understood to be the adoptive parent’s child…period. That means the same “specific duties and obligations” that apply to opposite gendered couples already apply to same gendered couples.

In order to prevent kids from needing adoption in the first place, it is best if parents get married, have their kids and raise them. Marriage is supposed to encourage this. To do so, it has to remain about heterosexuals. It's exceedingly simple.

In the United States there are, at this time between 132,000 and 310,000 (depending on what definition one uses) children awaiting adoption

I'm sorry if this would have resulted in you not having a child, buy I am more concerned with what we are putting our kids through in the name of "equality". I've lived through the mess the last liberal push made of marriage, and I have seen the evidence that it has harmed a lot more people than just me.

And just how has marriage equality hurt anybody?
Concrete observable examples please

Excuses do not get people's lives back for them. This nation owes it to the next generation to start backtracking on the sexual revolution.

So can you explain how preventing these 135,000 to 310,000 children awaiting adoption from being adopted gets their lives back for them?

 

[BigBadWlf]

To Andreusz and David Brider.

As I said if for homosexual the same sex attraction is not sex, why the same sex attraction? You are claiming the attraction is not sexual but limiting it to on sex, so it is sexual.
I am merely pointing out the definition of the word is, If anyone wants to have sex with another person its of no interest to me, but as it isn’t don’t suggest it is.

Are you saying that heterosexuality is ONLY about sex?

Or are you saying that gays and lesbians are incapable of romance, love, family bonds and the like?

 

[BigBadWlf]

To FlamingFemme
Everything. When its says ‘our’ daughter the fundamental difference is the daughter isn’t biologically the product of the mother and the other women. It also means that if the woman’s wife is a woman then a woman is a husband and father.
Its not really, it’s a totally dysfunctional one without a man. Should you be offended by that view please know that my motive is not to offend.

Are you saying that children who are adopted are not REALLY members of their own family?

 

[Shane Roach]

Everyone has been saying the exact same thing for weeks, and every time they do you folks simply twist in and ask the same questions.

No one is anti-adoption. I am simply against tearing down the institution meant to prevent that need in the first place.

 

[Shane Roach]

Are you saying that children who are adopted are not REALLY members of their own family?

Are you saying they weren't really born to a heterosexual couple? Are you saying that historically people were not required to marry first? How many times has it been explained that the point is to prevent unwanted children by requiring the commitment to be made beforehand?

It's all self explanatory. Gay activists hate Christianity. That is the heart and soul of this movement.

 

[suzybeezy]

ADMIN HAT ON

Please stay on topic to the thread!!!!

This is the second staff notification in this thread, next will result in a thread closure.

ADMIN HAT OFF