[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by green.tea)
Fry wouldve taken my bike off me and not taken me to flamborough head anymore.

Oh wow, he'd have stopped you from breaking the law and kept you safe. Such a terrible parent.

[green.tea]

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
Oh wow, he'd have stopped you from breaking the law and kept you safe. Such a terrible parent.

yeah. my mates wouldve thought id gone soft. wouldve ruined my image.

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by green.tea)
yeah. my mates wouldve thought id gone soft. wouldve ruined my image.

This still isn't about contrasting Stephen Fry directly with the McCanns, it's about straight people not necessarily being good parents, and the probability that gay people can be good parents.

[green.tea]

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
This still isn't about contrasting Stephen Fry directly with the McCanns, it's about straight people not necessarily being good parents, and the probability that gay people can be good parents.

Then fry and te mccans are bad examples. good parents dont ruin their kids image.

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by green.tea)
Then fry and te mccans are bad examples. good parents dont ruin their kids image.

They weren't my examples, but they do somewhat illustrate the point.
If you think a good parent allows their children to do illegal and dangerous things so they can 'fit in' and have a good 'image' with other people who also do illegal and dangerous things, you clearly have no idea what a good parent is.

[aliphatic]

I'd love to say yes, unequivocally.

I would have to put myself in the shoes of the child being adopted by a gay couple, though. Until society changes its views (which may be a while...), then I can imagine in the wrong types of schools etc. that child is going to be ridiculed and whatnot. It's about weighing up potential bullying versus a lifetime in a carehome and about which is more valuable.

I'd go for having gay parents and a loving home every time, but there's no escaping the stigma which is currently unfortunately still attached to the concept of gay parents.

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by aliphatic)
I'd love to say yes, unequivocally.

I would have to put myself in the shoes of the child being adopted by a gay couple, though. Until society changes its views (which may be a while...), then I can imagine in the wrong types of schools etc. that child is going to be ridiculed and whatnot. It's about weighing up potential bullying versus a lifetime in a carehome and about which is more valuable.

I'd go for having gay parents and a loving home every time, but there's no escaping the stigma which is currently unfortunately still attached to the concept of gay parents.

I would say that children from care homes would also be bullied a high proportion of the time.
And yes, it is probably slightly more likely that a child will get bullied for having gay parents, but it is not guaranteed, and I would argue that we should deal with bullying by trying to change the attitudes of bullies rather than removing the attribute of the victim that they are being bullied for - unless anyone thinks its a good idea for us all to be carbon copies of each other.

I know you're agreeing with the pro-gay adoption lot, but I just thought I'd add to your point

[aliphatic]

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
I would say that children from care homes would also be bullied a high proportion of the time.
And yes, it is probably slightly more likely that a child will get bullied for having gay parents, but it is not guaranteed, and I would argue that we should deal with bullying by trying to change the attitudes of bullies rather than removing the attribute of the victim that they are being bullied for - unless anyone thinks its a good idea for us all to be carbon copies of each other.

I know you're agreeing with the pro-gay adoption lot, but I just thought I'd add to your point

In my experience, the only two people I know from care homes were the bullies rather than the bully-ees (I'm aware that's not a word!!), which is sad. They were from an environment where they felt that sorted of attitude was necessary, though. However, Tracy Beaker made care homes seem fun....

I agree with you though. The only way to target commonly held attitudes are by creating scenarios that challenge people's pre-conceptions. Sure, there might be a few victims along the way in the beginning, but the idea of gay adoption being normal and therefore not worth bullying over is only going to happen by actually pushing it forward so it does become common.

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by aliphatic)
In my experience, the only two people I know from care homes were the bullies rather than the bully-ees (I'm aware that's not a word!!), which is sad. They were from an environment where they felt that sorted of attitude was necessary, though. However, Tracy Beaker made care homes seem fun....

I agree with you though. The only way to target commonly held attitudes are by creating scenarios that challenge people's pre-conceptions. Sure, there might be a few victims along the way in the beginning, but the idea of gay adoption being normal and therefore not worth bullying over is only going to happen by actually pushing it forward so it does become common.

True, those from care homes can be bullies, but I've also seen them be bullied too. And the two can be related - i.e. they are bullied so they bully someone else.
But yes, we need to challenge people's views. And research (posted by NYU2012 somewhere) shows that even if children from same-sex families are bullied, that bullying has no more impact on them than any other form of bullying they might experience if they don't have gay parents. I would even argued that if you are bullied because of who your parents are that isn't as bad as being bullied for who you are - because you can't change your parents but if people don't like you then you get more upset because you feel like you're the problem. But that last sentence is just my own speculation based on my personal experience of being bullied because my parents were fat and my brother was autistic as well as being bullied for being intelligent and bad at sports.

[green.tea]

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
True, those from care homes can be bullies, but I've also seen them be bullied too. And the two can be related - i.e. they are bullied so they bully someone else.
But yes, we need to challenge people's views. And research (posted by NYU2012 somewhere) shows that even if children from same-sex families are bullied, that bullying has no more impact on them than any other form of bullying they might experience if they don't have gay parents. I would even argued that if you are bullied because of who your parents are that isn't as bad as being bullied for who you are - because you can't change your parents but if people don't like you then you get more upset because you feel like you're the problem. But that last sentence is just my own speculation based on my personal experience of being bullied because my parents were fat and my brother was autistic as well as being bullied for being intelligent and bad at sports.

I was intelligent and hated football, although i was the best swimmer. Nobody ever picked on me because I was cool.

[pshewitt1]

(Original post by green.tea)
Then fry and te mccans are bad examples. good parents dont ruin their kids image.

Fry himself has taken drugs...he's also very libertarian, so no, he would not have ruined your 'image' in fact every child in a 100mile radius would want to know you, and you would have respect for the sheer amazingness of the man, and let's not even get onto having gandalf as a father..

[Venomilys]

Gay adoption or no gay adoption? I can't believe people actually consider this to be a question. I for one do not mind gay marriage, they aren't hurting anyone. But gay adoption?! A gay couple should not be allowed to adopt, think of the children, they will be bullied to no end. Most will commit suicide in mid teens.

(Original post by Kiss)
If the child is fine with it then so am I.

Not sure if serious. The child probably doesn't even know what puberty is and you want his opinion.

[green.tea]

(Original post by pshewitt1)
Fry himself has taken drugs...he's also very libertarian, so no, he would not have ruined your 'image' in fact every child in a 100mile radius would want to know you, and you would have respect for the sheer amazingness of the man, and let's not even get onto having gandalf as a father..

Ooh taken druuuugs. Nowt compared to getting a chase from a dangerous lunatic.

****ing hippies.

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by Ilyas)
Gay adoption or no gay adoption? I can't believe people actually consider this to be a question. I for one do not mind gay marriage, they aren't hurting anyone. But gay adoption?! A gay couple should not be allowed to adopt, think of the children, they will be bullied to no end. Most will commit suicide in mid teens.

Yet studies show that same-sex parents are as good as opposite-sex parents and those who are bullied for having same-sex parents get over it as well as if it was any other kind of bullying.
There also isn't a guarentee that the child will be bullied.

[Rossagle]

I don't believe in point 3 either. What about single parents? Or households dominated by only one sex?

I think that many children from heterosexual parents can end up f*****d up because they have bad parents.
At the end of the day all a child needs is love and support.

[Venomilys]

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
Yet studies show that same-sex parents are as good as opposite-sex parents and those who are bullied for having same-sex parents get over it as well as if it was any other kind of bullying.

What are you trying to get at? you can't just shrug gay parentage bullying as 'any other kind of bullying'. Bullying isn't natural, in fact it shouldn't exist in any form. All these other sources of bullying are just as bad as the bullying recieved due to same sex parents.

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by Ilyas)
What are you trying to get at? you can't just shrug gay parentage bullying as 'any other kind of bullying'. Bullying isn't natural, in fact it shouldn't exist in any form. All these other sources of bullying are just as bad as the bullying recieved due to same sex parents.

The point I was getting at was that you said they'd all kill themselves by mid teens.
And yes, bullying is bad, I was bullied relentlessly for years. But when someone is bullied for being ginger, we don't tell them to dye their hair do we? When someone is bullied for being intelligent, we don't tell them to be stupid so people will stop bullying them. People are bullied for having fat parents, or having parents who are 'nerdy' or have rubbish jobs, but these people aren't stopped from adopting.
We should be dealing with bullying by targeting the attitudes of the bullies, not by removing attributes of the victims so they won't be bullied for them anymore.

Edit: What green.tea is saying below me has no relevance to bullying.

[green.tea]

(Original post by Ilyas)
What are you trying to get at? you can't just shrug gay parentage bullying as 'any other kind of bullying'. Bullying isn't natural, in fact it shouldn't exist in any form. All these other sources of bullying are just as bad as the bullying recieved due to same sex parents.

Theres research showing that lack of male role models is harmful and no logical reason it shouldn't apply here. The research people refer to here is done by academics in vry left leaning fields like sociology. Its discussed at length if you read back.

edit: it has relevance to the post of yours he quoted

[green.tea]

In all my time at school i never saw one kid bullied for being fat, ginger, intelligent or bad at sports. I saw people bullied for being teachers pets and snitching. Mine was a pretty tough school. Lots of fighting and stuff.

[Oli-Ol]

(Original post by green.tea)
Theres research showing that lack of male role models is harmful and no logical reason it shouldn't apply here. The research people refer to here is done by academics in vry left leaning fields like sociology. Its discussed at length if you read back.

edit: it has relevance to the post of yours he quoted

I can't actually understand anything you're saying, so I can't reply directly to you, but you seem to be going round in circles without ever producing anything coherent and properly backed up.