Welcome Guest! ( Login | Register )
gay couples and children
sinnin
10/9/2006   
 
Member do you know of any gay couples that have children?
what procedures did they follow?

if you are part of a gay couple,do you have or hope to have children with your partner?
why?
and what methods?


if you're not part of a gay couple,
what are your thoughts on gay couples raising a child? why do you feel this way?

Post #15734 Back to top ▲
10/9/2006
 
sinnin
Member
do you know of any gay couples that have children?
what procedures did they follow?

if you are part of a gay couple,do you have or hope to have children with your partner?
why?
and what methods?


if you're not part of a gay couple,
what are your thoughts on gay couples raising a child? why do you feel this way?

Post #15734
sinnin
10/9/2006   
 
Member -laughs-
just by the way...
no plans of kids here YET
-laughs-

i needa learn to stop being a kid first before i can even consider it. was asking in general...

and i know...
when the time comes for me to think about kids,
i know they couldnt find better parents than my girlfriend and i. cos no matter what - she's gonna make a GREAT mom. and me... i'll learn.
-smiles-
and i'll have the best teacher

Post #778378 Back to top ▲
10/9/2006
 
sinnin
Member
-laughs-
just by the way...
no plans of kids here YET
-laughs-

i needa learn to stop being a kid first before i can even consider it. was asking in general...

and i know...
when the time comes for me to think about kids,
i know they couldnt find better parents than my girlfriend and i. cos no matter what - she's gonna make a GREAT mom. and me... i'll learn.
-smiles-
and i'll have the best teacher

Post #778378
ShadowWolf
10/9/2006   
 
Member I do want kids at some point yes.....and I hope in time the girl does too.....no rush at this point.....but I think she will make an incredible mother.....she is a good person with a lot to give though she doesn't always see that herself.....we tend to balance each other out in many ways so I think we would make excellent parents if that is what we choose.......and we would use a sperm bank most liekly.....


and I raised an ex's daughter for 5 years and she was a happy well adjusted kid who adored Me....and I know many couples with kids....honestly I don't think it matters who or what the parent or parents are only that there is love and guidance and stability.......and it takes a hell of a lot more then blood to make you a parent......

SW~bron

Post #778379 Back to top ▲
10/9/2006
 
ShadowWolf
Member
I do want kids at some point yes.....and I hope in time the girl does too.....no rush at this point.....but I think she will make an incredible mother.....she is a good person with a lot to give though she doesn't always see that herself.....we tend to balance each other out in many ways so I think we would make excellent parents if that is what we choose.......and we would use a sperm bank most liekly.....


and I raised an ex's daughter for 5 years and she was a happy well adjusted kid who adored Me....and I know many couples with kids....honestly I don't think it matters who or what the parent or parents are only that there is love and guidance and stability.......and it takes a hell of a lot more then blood to make you a parent......

SW~bron

Post #778379
sinnin
10/17/2006   
 
Member i found this article on the web... a debate between 2 people on gay couples and children. theres the pro arguement and then the counter. what do you think? on what side of the line do you stand? and why?

PRO

- There should not be a separate litmus test for gays and lesbians. -

Karen Doering



Gay-adoption bans hurt children. In 1977, caught up in the rhetoric of Anita Bryant, the Florida legislature rushed to be the first state in the union to band all adoptions by gays and lesbians. Irrational fears, stereotype and prejudice ruled the day. But this ban on gay adoption has never been about the children. A Senate sponser who helped push the law through the legislature argued when it was first introduced, "The problem in Florida has been that homosexuals are surfacing to such an extent that they're beginning to aggravate the ordinary folk. We're trying to send them a message telling them we're really tired of you; you should go back in the closet."Today there are half a million children in foster care nationwide and more than 100,000 of them sit waiting for adoptive homes. In Florida there are 3,400 and at least 1,600 of those children are not yet in potential adoptive homes. It’s time to put the focus back on the children, not the fear, prejudice and antiquated stereotypes that have kept kids languishing in foster care for far too long while loving, qualified homes are categorically eliminated from consideration. No reputable study has ever found that kids are harmed in any way by being raised by gay or lesbian parents. There was recently a synopsis done of the 22 leading studies. And what they found, across the board, is that emotionally, socially and cognitively the children who are brought up in those homes are exactly the same as what you would find in homes where they were raised by heterosexual parents. And that’s why the mainstream organizations that deal with children all the time, like the American Psychological Association, the National Council for Adoptable Children, the Child Welfare League of America, the American Academy of Pediatrics, among many more, all say that this ban on gay and lesbian adoption is bad.The lifestyle comments and statistics that Rep. Ball cited do not address gay and lesbian parents. Those are generic statistics generated by mostly right wing, conservative think tanks. I find Rep. Ball’s comments insulting and degrading. There are plenty of gays and lesbians out there who live happy, healthy, stable lives. There are plenty of gay and lesbian parents who are already raising their children from either previous marriages, through artificial inseminations, through all kinds of various means.I’ll be the first to admit there are some gay and lesbian folks who would not make very good parents right now, just like there are a whole lot of heterosexual folks out there who would not make very good parents.What makes sense is that you do an individual case-by-case analysis of the parents to se if they’re qualified. If they’re qualified and if it’s an appropriate fit for that child and that parent, they should be put together.That’s it. There should not be a separate litmus test for gays and lesbians that does not apply to heterosexual couples. Sadly, those with an anti-gay political agenda are using children as pawns. Let’s not lower our standards in order to resolve the horrendous backlog that has been created in Florida’s foster care system. Let’s open it up.


CONS

- The gay lifestyle is a dangerous lifestyle for a child. -

Rep. Randy Ball



There are three reasons I believe the Florida law banning gay adoption should remain on the books.



No. 1 is a religious reason. I think any honest debate on this issue has to take into consideration the influence that religion has on the public. Throughout our society is the deeply rooted Judeo-Christian ethic that holds that homosexuality is immoral and that we should not put children into that environment. It’s what I believe in and it’s what I think most of my colleagues in the legislature believe in.Do I have a right to mix religion and politics? Absolutely. Legislators reflect their constituency. A legislator who believes in, or who has a constituency that believes in the Judeo-Christian ethic should come forward and uphold those principles. That’s not wrong. In fact, it would be hypocritical to abandon my religious values when I go into office.Second, the Constitution supports the right of states to ban gay adoption. I believe that the law would withstand scrutiny because the overwhelmingly, compelling constitutional interest is not a perceived right for a gay person to adopt, but it is the right of the child to be in a wholesome environment.The constitutional issue is simply this: That is in the best interest of that child? You can talk about degrading attitudes and naked prejudice all you want. But I can tell you that the 160 Florida state representatives and senators are interested chiefly in the well being of the child. That is the constitutionally prevailing issue.Third, there is an overwhelming weight of scientific evidence that homosexual lifestyle is unwholesome. The gay lifestyle is a dangerous lifestyle for a child. The International Journal of Epidemiology has found significantly higher incidences of suicide, depression, disease, domestic violence and multiple partners in homosexual relationships as compared with heterosexual counterparts. It’s a long-standing principle that if a bedroom has a revolving door, it’s disruptive to the kids.A Canadian study found that the average 20-yaer-old homosexual man could expect to live eight to 20 years less than his heterosexual counterpart. The gay-oriented New York Blade newspaper says that gay men occupy the highest risk factors for all sexually transmitted diseases and it’s getting worse because their lifestyles are getting riskier. No where is this more tragically illustrated than in New Jersey, where the state first approved a case of gay adoption. A young boy was adopted as an infant. As he got to be age 5, he got to watch both of his fathers grow sick with AIDS and die within three months of each other in 1992. The paramount interest here is the safety and the well-being – physically, emotionally and psychologically – of the child. Children are our greatest treasures. They need to be jealously protected against the tide of political correctness that sees a child only as a potential trophy in a fight to change the American traditional model of the family. The Florida law should stand.


Post #778382 Back to top ▲
10/17/2006
 
sinnin
Member
i found this article on the web... a debate between 2 people on gay couples and children. theres the pro arguement and then the counter. what do you think? on what side of the line do you stand? and why?

PRO

- There should not be a separate litmus test for gays and lesbians. -

Karen Doering



Gay-adoption bans hurt children. In 1977, caught up in the rhetoric of Anita Bryant, the Florida legislature rushed to be the first state in the union to band all adoptions by gays and lesbians. Irrational fears, stereotype and prejudice ruled the day. But this ban on gay adoption has never been about the children. A Senate sponser who helped push the law through the legislature argued when it was first introduced, "The problem in Florida has been that homosexuals are surfacing to such an extent that they're beginning to aggravate the ordinary folk. We're trying to send them a message telling them we're really tired of you; you should go back in the closet."Today there are half a million children in foster care nationwide and more than 100,000 of them sit waiting for adoptive homes. In Florida there are 3,400 and at least 1,600 of those children are not yet in potential adoptive homes. It’s time to put the focus back on the children, not the fear, prejudice and antiquated stereotypes that have kept kids languishing in foster care for far too long while loving, qualified homes are categorically eliminated from consideration. No reputable study has ever found that kids are harmed in any way by being raised by gay or lesbian parents. There was recently a synopsis done of the 22 leading studies. And what they found, across the board, is that emotionally, socially and cognitively the children who are brought up in those homes are exactly the same as what you would find in homes where they were raised by heterosexual parents. And that’s why the mainstream organizations that deal with children all the time, like the American Psychological Association, the National Council for Adoptable Children, the Child Welfare League of America, the American Academy of Pediatrics, among many more, all say that this ban on gay and lesbian adoption is bad.The lifestyle comments and statistics that Rep. Ball cited do not address gay and lesbian parents. Those are generic statistics generated by mostly right wing, conservative think tanks. I find Rep. Ball’s comments insulting and degrading. There are plenty of gays and lesbians out there who live happy, healthy, stable lives. There are plenty of gay and lesbian parents who are already raising their children from either previous marriages, through artificial inseminations, through all kinds of various means.I’ll be the first to admit there are some gay and lesbian folks who would not make very good parents right now, just like there are a whole lot of heterosexual folks out there who would not make very good parents.What makes sense is that you do an individual case-by-case analysis of the parents to se if they’re qualified. If they’re qualified and if it’s an appropriate fit for that child and that parent, they should be put together.That’s it. There should not be a separate litmus test for gays and lesbians that does not apply to heterosexual couples. Sadly, those with an anti-gay political agenda are using children as pawns. Let’s not lower our standards in order to resolve the horrendous backlog that has been created in Florida’s foster care system. Let’s open it up.


CONS

- The gay lifestyle is a dangerous lifestyle for a child. -

Rep. Randy Ball



There are three reasons I believe the Florida law banning gay adoption should remain on the books.



No. 1 is a religious reason. I think any honest debate on this issue has to take into consideration the influence that religion has on the public. Throughout our society is the deeply rooted Judeo-Christian ethic that holds that homosexuality is immoral and that we should not put children into that environment. It’s what I believe in and it’s what I think most of my colleagues in the legislature believe in.Do I have a right to mix religion and politics? Absolutely. Legislators reflect their constituency. A legislator who believes in, or who has a constituency that believes in the Judeo-Christian ethic should come forward and uphold those principles. That’s not wrong. In fact, it would be hypocritical to abandon my religious values when I go into office.Second, the Constitution supports the right of states to ban gay adoption. I believe that the law would withstand scrutiny because the overwhelmingly, compelling constitutional interest is not a perceived right for a gay person to adopt, but it is the right of the child to be in a wholesome environment.The constitutional issue is simply this: That is in the best interest of that child? You can talk about degrading attitudes and naked prejudice all you want. But I can tell you that the 160 Florida state representatives and senators are interested chiefly in the well being of the child. That is the constitutionally prevailing issue.Third, there is an overwhelming weight of scientific evidence that homosexual lifestyle is unwholesome. The gay lifestyle is a dangerous lifestyle for a child. The International Journal of Epidemiology has found significantly higher incidences of suicide, depression, disease, domestic violence and multiple partners in homosexual relationships as compared with heterosexual counterparts. It’s a long-standing principle that if a bedroom has a revolving door, it’s disruptive to the kids.A Canadian study found that the average 20-yaer-old homosexual man could expect to live eight to 20 years less than his heterosexual counterpart. The gay-oriented New York Blade newspaper says that gay men occupy the highest risk factors for all sexually transmitted diseases and it’s getting worse because their lifestyles are getting riskier. No where is this more tragically illustrated than in New Jersey, where the state first approved a case of gay adoption. A young boy was adopted as an infant. As he got to be age 5, he got to watch both of his fathers grow sick with AIDS and die within three months of each other in 1992. The paramount interest here is the safety and the well-being – physically, emotionally and psychologically – of the child. Children are our greatest treasures. They need to be jealously protected against the tide of political correctness that sees a child only as a potential trophy in a fight to change the American traditional model of the family. The Florida law should stand.


Post #778382
Christopher
10/17/2006   
 
Member

if you're not part of a gay couple,what are your thoughts on gay couples raising a child? why do you feel this way?


We're pretty damned happy. Giddy at times. I think we're pretty carefree and gay. [Grins and sets aside his linguistic legerdemain]

I have no inherent objection to any couple, of any orientation, adopting a child who are serious about being parents and whom are willing to learn how to be parents before adopting.

I do, however, have a problem with a small side issue and that is using "donors" for artificial insemination. As most state laws currently stand, said donor still stands as a parent in absentia and is still legally responsible for that child's welfare. I'd like to see that said "donors" are absolved from all responsibility since the forthcoming child is created by medical artifice and not human interaction. It is also my belief that in being absolved of all responsibility they are also absolved of any "rights" either specifically stated or otherwise implied.

-Side note:
By "donors", I am not referring to sperm bank donations. Those are covered under completely different laws.

This message was edited by Christopher on 10-17-06 @ 6:38 PM


.
Post #778383 Back to top ▲
10/17/2006
 
Christopher
Member

if you're not part of a gay couple,what are your thoughts on gay couples raising a child? why do you feel this way?


We're pretty damned happy. Giddy at times. I think we're pretty carefree and gay. [Grins and sets aside his linguistic legerdemain]

I have no inherent objection to any couple, of any orientation, adopting a child who are serious about being parents and whom are willing to learn how to be parents before adopting.

I do, however, have a problem with a small side issue and that is using "donors" for artificial insemination. As most state laws currently stand, said donor still stands as a parent in absentia and is still legally responsible for that child's welfare. I'd like to see that said "donors" are absolved from all responsibility since the forthcoming child is created by medical artifice and not human interaction. It is also my belief that in being absolved of all responsibility they are also absolved of any "rights" either specifically stated or otherwise implied.

-Side note:
By "donors", I am not referring to sperm bank donations. Those are covered under completely different laws.

This message was edited by Christopher on 10-17-06 @ 6:38 PM


.
Post #778383
Topic Info
Forum Moderators: Cradz, MistressTrinna