This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- I am the end of my family.
- Confused about my looks
- Im gay but a christian
- Aussie police uninvited from Mardi Gras after double homicide
- Queer Muslim female
- I don't think I can ever repair things with my dad. Help?
- Being black (Somali), gay and Muslim
- Should XL bully dogs be banned?
- gay/bi muslims
- Core ideology essay
- Guys whose parents didn't show intimacy or affection
- people think I am gay
- Your Perfect Country
- Thoughts on Abortion?
- can you put in your own earring straight after it has been pierced
- Friend doesn't support the teaching of Igbta people in primary schools!!
- I'm not gay but sometimes I get off to gay porn?
- Why dont women do it??
- AQA Politics- Cultural Theory????
- Have a gf but not sure if I’m gay or not
Should gay people be allowed to adopt?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by MrCarmady
Nitpicking, but bad example, since he has a licence to kill, etc.
Alright, fair enough on that one. But he does drink a lot as well, and while that's not illegal it isn't good for you...
I'll change my wording anyway.
Original post by Pyramidologist
There are peer-reviewed papers linking homosexuality to paedophilia. This is clearly a concern in regards to to idea of gays being allowed to adopt, most pro-gay adoption supporters in this thread though have failed to point this out.
You've said this twice. Cite some of these papers.
Original post by green.tea
You cant fully measure the effect of something on something you dont understand.
You can fully observe something though can't you
no negative or unique effects have been observed, and homosexuals have been raising children for almost 40 years. Your fears are unfounded, and not based on reality. Not to mention I already showed that your argument about not understand and messing with it is useless. Even if we continue to follow that argument logically then nobody should be able to adopt or have children as we don't understand everything about families. Original post by green.tea
Theres no logical reason to think that research an lack of male role model doesnt apply any more than there is to think that research done on tall kids, or kids with hamsters or research done last year doesnt. Other than your cant apply b to c nonsense.
What are you talking about now? Research on lack of a male role model has shown that a role model (gender unspecified) is important to have, not necessarily a male one.
People dont see the opposite gender as role models. Your argument is nonsense.
I already showed this otherwise. You are just being a moron now.
[video="dailymotion;xctlgt"]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xctlgt_hot-chip-over-and-over_musi[/video]
I'm glad you can recognize what you are doing.
Princes trust.
Show me where the princes trust says you need a parent role model. Quote from them. Not somebody talking about them lol
Did. Everyone can have film star role models if that worked thered be no problem.
Not everyone wants film role models though. You don't seem to understand that a lot people use actual people in their lives as role models. You can't force a person to have a specific role model.
Proven that research done by leftist academics is unreliable
....right. you clearly don't seem to understand the implications of anything. or of what you are proposing. if all peer-reviewed research is in-credible, then your research which is non-peer reviewed has more of a bias because nobody has to check its facts.
Original post by minimarshmallow
I see my dad and my granddad as role models. And Ali Carter. And Jenson Button. And Richard Branson.
My brother has our mum, me and Elissa Steamer.
You know sod all.
My brother has our mum, me and Elissa Steamer.
You know sod all.
Well im afraid that just isnt the way most people are. No amount of harriet harman is going to change what people can clearly observe to be true.
Find me a direct quote from the Princes Trust (not anyone reporting on the Princes Trust like the Daily Mail, but from their findings themselves) that says the role model has to be a parent.
More than half of the teenagers (55%) cited friends and peers as role models and almost a quarter (22%) said young people are looking for role models in gangs.
Martina Milburn, chief executive of The Prince's Trust, says the research suggests that young people are creating their own "youth communities" and gangs, in search of the influences that could once have been found in traditional communities.
"All the threads that hold a community together - a common identity, role models, a sense of safety - were given by young people as motivations to join gangs," Ms Milburn said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7547630.stm
Clearly lesbian role models for boys will make this problem loooaads better. You really are a disgrace.
It's possible to have bad role models you know. If you look up to the villain you'll turn out worse than if you look up to the hero. Or the hero might be doing things that regular people shouldn't do (James Bond being the prime example here).
Which is why its important to ensure positive roe models are attractive to boys. If you think lesbians fit that bill your crackers.
No, you've proven that one study is unreliable.
I'm a budding academic looking at the font specific reading skills of dyslexics, will you ignore my research because of a criticism of another piece of research?
I'm a budding academic looking at the font specific reading skills of dyslexics, will you ignore my research because of a criticism of another piece of research?
(edited 11 years ago)
Young men without positive male role models are three times more likely than their
peers with male role models to lack a sense of belonging. They are also significantly
less likely to feel happy and confident than those with male role models. They are three
times more likely to feel down or depressed all of the time and significantly more
likely to admit they can’t remember the last time they felt proud. More than one in
three (36 per cent) say they lack a sense of identity
kOne in five (20 per cent) of young women with a female role model in their lives feel
anxious “all” or “most” of the time compared with 34 per cent of female peers without
female role models in their lives. Almost one in four (23 per cent)
http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf
These people still have teachers and alternative role models that you say are adequate substitution.
peers with male role models to lack a sense of belonging. They are also significantly
less likely to feel happy and confident than those with male role models. They are three
times more likely to feel down or depressed all of the time and significantly more
likely to admit they can’t remember the last time they felt proud. More than one in
three (36 per cent) say they lack a sense of identity
kOne in five (20 per cent) of young women with a female role model in their lives feel
anxious “all” or “most” of the time compared with 34 per cent of female peers without
female role models in their lives. Almost one in four (23 per cent)
http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf
These people still have teachers and alternative role models that you say are adequate substitution.
Original post by Guy Secretan
Of course. They already are used to tantrums and know how to put talcum powder on a sore bottom.
Wow, aren't you just such a comedian.
Original post by green.tea
Well im afraid that just isnt the way most people are. No amount of harriet harman is going to change what people can clearly observe to be true.
You might observe it once or twice, doesn't make it true.
The research has observed the opposite a lot more than you have.
More than half of the teenagers (55%) cited friends and peers as role models and almost a quarter (22%) said young people are looking for role models in gangs.
Martina Milburn, chief executive of The Prince's Trust, says the research suggests that young people are creating their own "youth communities" and gangs, in search of the influences that could once have been found in traditional communities.
"All the threads that hold a community together - a common identity, role models, a sense of safety - were given by young people as motivations to join gangs," Ms Milburn said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7547630.stm
Clearly lesbian role models for boys will make this problem loooaads better. You really are a disgrace.
Martina Milburn, chief executive of The Prince's Trust, says the research suggests that young people are creating their own "youth communities" and gangs, in search of the influences that could once have been found in traditional communities.
"All the threads that hold a community together - a common identity, role models, a sense of safety - were given by young people as motivations to join gangs," Ms Milburn said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7547630.stm
Clearly lesbian role models for boys will make this problem loooaads better. You really are a disgrace.
None of this is relevant to needing parental role models. It says 'traditional communities', not 'traditional families'. So once again, single parent research doesn't have any relevance to same-sex parenting.
And can we drop the name calling please?
Which is why its important to ensure positive roe models are attractive to boys. If you think lesbians fit that bill your crackers.
Well my friend who has the two lesbian mothers, one of his mothers was also a role model for my brother when he was interested in being a lifeguard (which she does for a job). She also kickboxed, which was something he was also interested in, and taught him some basics; but sure, whatever you say.
That's not an answer.
Original post by RandZul'Zorander
You can fully observe something though can't you no negative or unique effects have been observed, and homosexuals have been raising children for almost 40 years. Your fears are unfounded, and not based on reality. Not to mention I already showed that your argument about not understand and messing with it is useless. Even if we continue to follow that argument logically then nobody should be able to adopt or have children as we don't understand everything about families.
no negative or unique effects have been observed, and homosexuals have been raising children for almost 40 years. Your fears are unfounded, and not based on reality. Not to mention I already showed that your argument about not understand and messing with it is useless. Even if we continue to follow that argument logically then nobody should be able to adopt or have children as we don't understand everything about families. There are many example of know it alls like you going against nature and causing problems that were unforeseeable and unobservable in the short term.
Lets face it. Your obvious bias on this issue means your going to argue in favour no matter what. Like the climate change lot you and your leftist peers are only interested in publishing research that supports a position decided upon because of politics rather than desire to ascertain the truth. Your obvious lack of impartiality means your views are intellectually dishonest and hold little value in this debate.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by thomaskurian89
No.
Mother nature has decided that gay people will not have kids because she doesn't want them to raise kids.
Mother nature has decided that gay people will not have kids because she doesn't want them to raise kids.
Homosexuality =/= infertility.
Your argument = naturalistic fallacy (I believe NYU has already linked you the page)
Original post by green.tea
People dont see the opposite gender as role models. Your argument is nonsense.
And your argument is non-existent.
People can and do have role models who are of the opposite sex, for it is the way someone behaves/the things they work for/their views which lead people to consider them a role model, not their sex. Being a man does not preclude someone from being one of my role models; I'm not going to think 'Well, he does all this amazing work for charity, holds very respectable views and is generally and awesome human being, but he can't be one of my role models because he has a penis', because that is stupid.
Original post by Jester94
Homosexuality =/= infertility.
Really? Can men have kids?
Original post by green.tea
There are many example of know it alls like you going against nature and causing problems that were unforeseeable and unobservable in the short term.
Lets face it. Your obvious bias on this issue means your going to argue in favour no matter what. Like the climate change lot you and your leftist peers are only interested in publishing research that supports a position decided upon because of politics rather than desire to ascertain the truth. Your obvious lack of impartiality means your views are intellectually dishonest and hold little value in this debate.
Lets face it. Your obvious bias on this issue means your going to argue in favour no matter what. Like the climate change lot you and your leftist peers are only interested in publishing research that supports a position decided upon because of politics rather than desire to ascertain the truth. Your obvious lack of impartiality means your views are intellectually dishonest and hold little value in this debate.
I'd just like to butt in here because you are really irritating me.
My brothers and I grew up in a heterosexual household. One of my brothers is not heterosexual. We all had both a father and a mother, yet we identified with completely different people. My brother identified with my mum, and views her as a role model. He didn't identify with my dad, but he found other male role models to look up to. My other brother identified with both my parents and viewed them both as role models. Personally, I struggled to view either of my parents as role models and ended up strongly identifying with several of my teachers, who in my eyes became substitutes for my parents. Children will find their own role models.
Also, re: the quote from the Prince's Trust about role models:
Young men without positive male role models are three times more likely than their
peers with male role models to lack a sense of belonging. They are also significantly
less likely to feel happy and confident than those with male role models. They are three
times more likely to feel down or depressed all of the time and significantly more
likely to admit they can’t remember the last time they felt proud. More than one in
three (36 per cent) say they lack a sense of identity
kOne in five (20 per cent) of young women with a female role model in their lives feel
anxious “all” or “most” of the time compared with 34 per cent of female peers without
female role models in their lives. Almost one in four (23 per cent)
peers with male role models to lack a sense of belonging. They are also significantly
less likely to feel happy and confident than those with male role models. They are three
times more likely to feel down or depressed all of the time and significantly more
likely to admit they can’t remember the last time they felt proud. More than one in
three (36 per cent) say they lack a sense of identity
kOne in five (20 per cent) of young women with a female role model in their lives feel
anxious “all” or “most” of the time compared with 34 per cent of female peers without
female role models in their lives. Almost one in four (23 per cent)
Nowhere in there does it say that parents have to be role models. Neither of my parents have been role models for me. But I do have female and male role models in my life. Therefore the argument that two lesbians shouldn't adopt a boy, or whatever nonsense you're trying to argue, is not supported by this evidence (hint: because it's not true).
Also can I just point out that you're arguing from a very safe position. You're defending something which has been the status quo for hundreds of years, it doesn't affect you personally, and when you get bored you can switch off your computer and forget that this ever happened. But the people you are debating with on here are real people, real teenagers, who face daily real struggles with their sexuality and with people telling them that they're not good enough to marry/adopt etc. You're sitting in the safe anonymity of your room telling someone you have never met they they aren't good enough and shouldn't be allowed to do things that you take completely for granted, like marrying and having children, simply because of the person they've fallen in love with. I'm in full support of debating these issues, because they're important. But there's no need for rudeness or name-calling.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Zalachenko
Really? Can men have kids?
No, but women can
Heard of IVF? Or surrogacy?
and please don't say that these aren't natural ways of reproducing, otherwise I will have to assume that you believe that infertile couples should also be denied the right to adopt.
Original post by Zalachenko
Really? Can men have kids?
Your post makes it out as if gay people cannot have kids, which of course is not true. Yes, gay couples cannot have children that are biologically related to both parents, but there are various ways that mean gay couples can have children these days: IVF, surrogacy etc
Original post by Oli-Ol
I'd just like to butt in here because you are really irritating me.
My brothers and I grew up in a heterosexual household. One of my brothers is not heterosexual. We all had both a father and a mother, yet we identified with completely different people. My brother identified with my mum, and views her as a role model. He didn't identify with my dad, but he found other male role models to look up to. My other brother identified with both my parents and viewed them both as role models. Personally, I struggled to view either of my parents as role models and ended up strongly identifying with several of my teachers, who in my eyes became substitutes for my parents. Children will find their own role models.
Also, re: the quote from the Prince's Trust about role models:
Nowhere in there does it say that parents have to be role models. Neither of my parents have been role models for me. But I do have female and male role models in my life. Therefore the argument that two lesbians shouldn't adopt a boy, or whatever nonsense you're trying to argue, is not supported by this evidence (hint: because it's not true).
Also can I just point out that you're arguing from a very safe position. You're defending something which has been the status quo for hundreds of years, it doesn't affect you personally, and when you get bored you can switch off your computer and forget that this ever happened. But the people you are debating with on here are real people, real teenagers, who face daily real struggles with their sexuality and with people telling them that they're not good enough to marry/adopt etc. You're sitting in the safe anonymity of your room telling someone you have never met they they aren't good enough and shouldn't be allowed to do things that you take completely for granted, like marrying and having children, simply because of the person they've fallen in love with. I'm in full support of debating these issues, because they're important. But there's no need for rudeness or name-calling.
My brothers and I grew up in a heterosexual household. One of my brothers is not heterosexual. We all had both a father and a mother, yet we identified with completely different people. My brother identified with my mum, and views her as a role model. He didn't identify with my dad, but he found other male role models to look up to. My other brother identified with both my parents and viewed them both as role models. Personally, I struggled to view either of my parents as role models and ended up strongly identifying with several of my teachers, who in my eyes became substitutes for my parents. Children will find their own role models.
Also, re: the quote from the Prince's Trust about role models:
Nowhere in there does it say that parents have to be role models. Neither of my parents have been role models for me. But I do have female and male role models in my life. Therefore the argument that two lesbians shouldn't adopt a boy, or whatever nonsense you're trying to argue, is not supported by this evidence (hint: because it's not true).
Also can I just point out that you're arguing from a very safe position. You're defending something which has been the status quo for hundreds of years, it doesn't affect you personally, and when you get bored you can switch off your computer and forget that this ever happened. But the people you are debating with on here are real people, real teenagers, who face daily real struggles with their sexuality and with people telling them that they're not good enough to marry/adopt etc. You're sitting in the safe anonymity of your room telling someone you have never met they they aren't good enough and shouldn't be allowed to do things that you take completely for granted, like marrying and having children, simply because of the person they've fallen in love with. I'm in full support of debating these issues, because they're important. But there's no need for rudeness or name-calling.
A-f***ing-men
Original post by minimarshmallow
You might observe it once or twice, doesn't make it true.
The research has observed the opposite a lot more than you have.
The research has observed the opposite a lot more than you have.
Wheres the research specifically showing lesbians to be popular role models for men?
None of this is relevant to needing parental role models. It says 'traditional communities', not 'traditional families'. So once again, single parent research doesn't have any relevance to same-sex parenting.
Traditional communities have traditional families.
And can we drop the name calling please?
Are you joking? You lot mustve called me an ignorant moron about 100 times. One of you managed to call me ignorant 3 times in one short sentance.
Well my friend who has the two lesbian mothers, one of his mothers was also a role model for my brother when he was interested in being a lifeguard (which she does for a job). She also kickboxed, which was something he was also interested in, and taught him some basics; but sure, whatever you say.
Learning kickboxing moves from someone doesnt make them a role model. Nor does liking the look of someones job.
Original post by green.tea
Wheres the research specifically showing lesbians to be popular role models for men?
The research says that someone doesn't have to have a penis to have male traits - and that women can fill traditional 'male' roles as well. Because sex =/= gender, and gender role models refer to gender, not sex.
The research also shows that same sex parents are good parents.
Traditional communities have traditional families.
I'm sure this is true.
Are you joking? You lot mustve called me an ignorant moron about 100 times. One of you managed to call me ignorant 3 times in one short sentance.
'Ignorant' isn't an insult, it's a fact. It means that you are ill-informed. It has negative connotations; but so does 'overweight' and if your doctor stated that you were overweight you wouldn't insult him because he's insulting you would you?
'Moron' is an insult, but I use insults very very sparingly, so please stop insulting me.
Learning kickboxing moves from someone doesnt make them a role model. Nor does liking the look of someones job.
Looking up to her and spending time with her because he likes her hobbies and her job means she isn't a role model? Are we redefining role models now?
One of my role models is my dissertation tutor, because I want to have the same job and status as her in the future. She is where I want to be. She is a role model.
no....
Related discussions
- I am the end of my family.
- Confused about my looks
- Im gay but a christian
- Aussie police uninvited from Mardi Gras after double homicide
- Queer Muslim female
- I don't think I can ever repair things with my dad. Help?
- Being black (Somali), gay and Muslim
- Should XL bully dogs be banned?
- gay/bi muslims
- Core ideology essay
- Guys whose parents didn't show intimacy or affection
- people think I am gay
- Your Perfect Country
- Thoughts on Abortion?
- can you put in your own earring straight after it has been pierced
- Friend doesn't support the teaching of Igbta people in primary schools!!
- I'm not gay but sometimes I get off to gay porn?
- Why dont women do it??
- AQA Politics- Cultural Theory????
- Have a gf but not sure if I’m gay or not
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
