Should gay people be allowed to adopt?

Original post by RandZul'Zorander

Except that plenty of studies have been done and you have been sourced to them before, so we do and are able to figure how it will and does affect children. :rolleyes:

Well that a good example isnt it. Research done on same sex couples showing no need for same sex role models while other research does clearly shows that there are things at play here that we don't fully understand.

Reply 722

userFN-2187

10

Original post by green.tea

An argument I can think of is that we dont fully understand the beautiful intricacy of nature. Therefore going against its wisdom is unwise and could have unforeseen consequences. So the "its un natural" argument is really the "should you really be messing with that supercomputer? Arent you just the handyman?" argument.

If we don't fully understand the beautiful intricacy of nature then how can we know that we are going against it by allowing gay adoption?

I think the 'not natural' argument is often used instead of saying 'not normal.' Very often when we say things are not natural it is because it is not the social norm. Normal and nature are not the same thing.

Reply 723

Original post by Earl Nuce

If we don't fully understand the beautiful intricacy of nature then how can we know that we are going against it by allowing gay adoption?

I think the 'not natural' argument is often used instead of saying 'not normal.' Very often when we say things are not natural it is because it is not the social norm. Normal and nature are not the same thing.

Releasing foxes on an island of endangered ground nesting birds becomes natural when we do it follows the same logic.

Reply 724

Original post by green.tea

Well that a good example isnt it. Research done on same sex couples showing no need for same sex role models while other research does clearly shows that there are things at play here that we don't fully understand.

What research shows that things are at play that we don't understand? We understand that in homosexual relations there doesn't seem to be a lack of role models as studies have not shown there to be. You really need to start actually reading what research we post for you. Because all the evidence supports that same sex parents are just as good as opposite sex ones.

Reply 725

Original post by green.tea

Releasing foxes on an island of endangered ground nesting birds becomes natural when we do it follows the same logic.

Gay birds have been known to adopt and raise young lol. Actually there are plenty of cases of 'adoption' happening in nature by both homo and heterosexual parents.

EDIT: Present!! http://www.stopthereligiousright.org/gayanimals.htm

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 726

I keep expecting to be out thought and all i get is "i dont understand what you mean".

Im very disappointed. Although quite pleased at the same time I guess.

Reply 727

userFN-2187

10

Original post by green.tea

Releasing foxes on an island of endangered ground nesting birds becomes natural when we do it follows the same logic.

I'm sorry but I'm struggling to see the same logic used here. Please can you expand your example to include an explanation? Thanks.

Reply 728

Original post by green.tea

I keep expecting to be out thought and all i get is "i dont understand what you mean".

Im very disappointed. Although quite pleased at the same time I guess.

I understand completely and have provided examples of how you are incorrect :smile:

Reply 729

Original post by Earl Nuce

I'm sorry but I'm struggling to see the same logic used here. Please can you expand your example to include an explanation? Thanks.

Yeah, that was actually the response to the thing i was expecting you to say.

If we don't fully understand the beautiful intricacy of nature then how can we know that we are going against it by allowing gay adoption?

Because nature doesnt enable two men to have children.

Reply 730

userFN-2187

10

Original post by green.tea

Yeah, that was actually the response to the thing i was expecting you to say.

Oh, you.

Original post by green.tea

Because nature doesnt enable two men to have children.

Nature does not allow two men to conceive a child. Totally true.

However, why should this then extend to not allowing two men to raise a child?
There is a big gap in your reasoning here.

Reply 731

Original post by RandZul'Zorander

I understand completely and have provided examples of how you are incorrect :smile:

Ok.

Theres no reason to believe we understand, know about or can test every aspect of an individuals well being.

Theres no fully understood reason that two mothers can provide male role models when one mother cannot.

Reply 732

Original post by green.tea

Because nature doesnt enable two men to have children.

This is still a naturalistic fallacies. Not to mention having a children has nothing to do with raising a child. See many primates who raise young communally, and many other species. And don't forget how gay animals raise young too! Wow! So gay adoption is even natural! LOL

Also I don't see you protesting infertile couples from adopting. In nature they can't have children either :rolleyes:

But again this is irrelevant because in modern society...THEY CAN! YAYYY!!!! :biggrin:

Reply 733

Original post by green.tea

Ok.

Theres no reason to believe we understand, know about or can test every aspect of an individuals well being.

Theres no fully understood reason that two mothers can provide male role models when one mother cannot.

You are the only person who says that a mother can't fulfill a male role model. Even studies don't back you on that. And I have provided resources to back up that they can. I am still waiting for you to back up your claims. 'Common sense' does not suffice :rolleyes:

especially seeing as common sense is many times wrong. :biggrin:

Reply 734

Pyramidologist

I would say no. I know for a fact there are studies that show a high proportion of homosexuals have paedophilic tendencies. I have other objections as well, but i mainly don't believe homosexuals are safe to be around children.

Reply 735

Original post by Pyramidologist

I would say no. I know for a fact there are studies that show a high proportion of homosexuals have paedophilic tendencies. I have other objections as well, but i mainly don't believe homosexuals are safe to be around children.

What studies are this? Because I'm pretty sure its no higher than those of heterosexuals.

So far I have found that there is more abuse for male children than female children, and that most offenders are male, however research also says that most offenders are not homosexual :smile:

Child sexual abuse has many components and like rape a major factor seems to be power play not actual attraction to that sex.

Just a quick reference. http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_chil.htm

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 736

Original post by Earl Nuce

Oh, you.

Nature does not allow two men to conceive a child. Totally true.

However, why should this then extend to not allowing two men to raise a child?
There is a big gap in your reasoning here.

Just saying that an argument I can see is that if somethings intricacy is beyond our understanding tampering with it may have unforeseen consequences.

For example. I lacked a male role model growing up. I latched onto the character of william brown. A troublesome and articulate young boy often able to befuddle adults with logic that they found to be unanswerable. If more people did that just imagine all the pesky me's arguing about things like this and driving people like you to wanting to "bang your head on the desk till your brains pour out" or whatever it is one of you said. That would be one hell of an unforeseen consequence. :wink:

Food for thought.

Laters.

Reply 737

Original post by green.tea

Just saying that an argument I can see is that if somethings intricacy is beyond our understanding tampering with it may have unforeseen consequences.

But...we do understand how family and children work. There has been extensive research done on the subjects...

For example. I lacked a male role model growing up. I latched onto the character of william brown. A troublesome and articulate young boy often able to befuddle adults with logic that they found to be unanswerable. If more people did that just imagine all the pesky me's arguing about things like this and driving people like you to wanting to "bang your head on the desk till your brains pour out" or whatever it is one of you said. That would be one hell of an unforeseen consequence. :wink:

Food for thought.

So because you picked a bad role model...children can't go to loving families because you are afraid they will end up like you? Even though the majority of cases have been shown that this is not an issue? You are being completely irrational. We have already dealt with this whole 'role-model argument', extensively. Please find a better one :smile:

Reply 738

Original post by RandZul'Zorander

But...we do understand how family and children work. There has been extensive research done on the subjects...

Thats really a very arrogant and silly thing to say you know.

Chaerephon, a friend of Socrates asked Pythia, The Oracle of Delphi : "Is anyone wiser than Socrates?". The answer was: "No human is wiser". Socrates tried to find someone who is wiser than himself, since he denied any knowledge, among politicians, poets, and craftsmen. It appeared that politicians claimed wisdom without knowledge; poets could touch people with their words, but did not know their meaning; and craftsmen could claim knowledge only in specific and narrow fields. The interpretation of Oracle's answer might be Socrates' awareness of his own ignorance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothing

Hitting something with psychologies magic research stick = total understanding. :rolleyes:

So because you picked a bad role model...children can't go to loving families because you are afraid they will end up like you? Even though the majority of cases have been shown that this is not an issue? You are being completely irrational. We have already dealt with this whole 'role-model argument', extensively. Please find a better one :smile:

I wouldnt say bad. Unconventional.

Theres no logical reason to think two mums can provide a male role model when one cant. Youve seen the princes trust research that shows that one cant.

Reply 739