Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should gay people be allowed to adopt?

Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
  • View Poll Results: Should gay/lesbian couples be allowed to adopt?
    Yes
    600
    78.02%
    No
    169
    21.98%

    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pyramidologist)
    The vast majority of people oppose it, myself included.

    Some will look at this poll and say in contrast the majority approve of gay adoption because of this little online internet poll. However the internet on these topics only really proportionally attracts a fringe of people who this topic for example is really important to. As you can see there are a lot of gays themselves on this thread, and a lot of liberal quacks. Such people might be the majority on the internet on places such as this, but in the real world they are the extreme minority. The mainstream public doesn't approve of homosexuality, let alone gay adoption. Virtually no one wants to see two gays kissing on the street.
    Actually, the vast majority of people approve.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonathanM)
    Research shows lmfao... Obviously they're human. If you have two dads and you go to school, it will be used against you. It is not safe for the child. Gay people are generally funny guiz uno
    The fact that you find the use of research in a debate funny shows how ignorant you are on this topic. Anything can be used against you at school, kids are cruel and will bully for anything.

    Well, we do all have a brilliant sense of humour, it's one of the requirements to be gay you see...

    (Original post by Princessofhistory)
    No. If they want to look after something that badly then they can get a puppy. Or a kitten.
    And how would you feel if I said the same thing to you. I don't think you should be able to adopt, but hey, if you're so desperate go get a pet to look after, because it's totally the same thing!

    (Original post by thescientist17)
    Feelings are important too.
    It's just my view.
    Yes, feelings are important, and you can have as many of them as you want, but you cannot expect your feelings to dictate somebody eles's life.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    "research shows", it can show anything given different circumstances.

    Gay people should be allowed to be classed as guardians but not two dads. I see it as a decent thing for them to look after a child but not to be the childs father(s).
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonathanM)
    "research shows", it can show anything given different circumstances.

    Gay people should be allowed to be classed as guardians but not two dads. I see it as a decent thing for them to look after a child but not to be the childs father(s).
    So a single mother, well, guardian is not a mother then. Same for a single father, well, guardian, is not a father then.
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonathanM)
    "research shows", it can show anything given different circumstances.
    Yes, if you manipulate the metholodogy with clear flaws and biases, you can make it show anything you want. However, in order to get it published in a peer reviewed journal it has to be as free from these flaws and biases as possible and then judged and reviewed by experts who have studied psychological research methods and the field in which the research has been conducted and over 90% of research pieces are rejected for not being good enough so you have to have a really really good study to get published - this is the research I'm referring to.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonathanM)
    "research shows", it can show anything given different circumstances.

    Gay people should be allowed to be classed as guardians but not two dads. I see it as a decent thing for them to look after a child but not to be the childs father(s).
    That sounded stupid to me. The father/mother is the one the child sees as their parent, no matter what you think. So you are just talking semantics.

    Why is it not a decent thing for a couple to adopt a child, in need of a family?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FusRohDah)
    THIS.

    Mainstream public are traditional families with their own daily problems.

    Why on earth should they be bothered about the sexual issues of a world minority with all the econo-politicial problems there are...

    This coming from someone who doesn't give a crap about homosexuality. To be honest, I couldn't give less of a **** if they want to get married/adopt (it doesn't affect me in any way if they do), what I don't want is daily news on this bull**** with everything that's going on around the globe at the moment.
    Exactly. Most people don't dwell on this topic, but if it does by some chance come up in a family household, overwelmingly the view will be against gay adoption. Internet polls only deal with a tiny segment of society who are usually fixated with these issues with agendas (the whole 'gay rights' thing) certainly not represntative of the normal family household.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonathanM)
    "research shows", it can show anything given different circumstances.
    Yes, if the research is manipulated or not conducted in a proper way, obviously, but that is not reason enough to dismiss all research.

    Gay people should be allowed to be classed as guardians but not two dads. I see it as a decent thing for them to look after a child but not to be the childs father(s).
    So are you as opposed to a lesbian couple adopting a child? Or a single mother? Or a single father?

    If the child sees them as parents, you can't really change that, can you, no matter how you want people to be classified.
    • 36 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    No. I disapprove of state sanctioned gay adoption because I believe that when it comes to business of raising children the traditional couple is more capable of handling the task than two men, or two women, or a man and a dog etc etc. This doesn't conflict with the idea of rights simply because nobody has a right to adopt a child, it's a privilege, one that can be withdrawn without explanation. It's not the state's job to furnish homosexuals with children because they're incapable of producing them themselves, sorry.
    • Thread Starter
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    No. I disapprove of state sanctioned gay adoption because I believe that when it comes to business of raising children the traditional couple is more capable of handling the task than two men, or two women, or a man and a dog etc etc. This doesn't conflict with the idea of rights simply because nobody has a right to adopt a child, it's a privilege, one that can be withdrawn without explanation. It's not the state's job to furnish homosexuals with children because they're incapable of producing them themselves, sorry.
    Note how you say "more capable" insinuating that homosexual people are capable of adoption and doing well. So, does your theory not show true that even if no one wants to adopt, the best option is gay adoption?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jester94)

    Yes, feelings are important, and you can have as many of them as you want, but you cannot expect your feelings to dictate somebody eles's life.
    Excuse me? I never said that I expect them to dictate somebody else's life. Like another person said when they argued with me that they didn't like bananas but that's not going to cause them to be banned or something along those lines. Exactly. You wouldn't have a go at me for expressing my dislike of bananas. It's just an opinion. So why are you saying I expect my feelings to dictate some else's life?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RandZul'Zorander)
    What do you mean people don't get bullied for intelligence? Yes they do. :confused: People get bullied for all kinds of things.
    Bullies hand out iq tests do they? People who say theywere bullied for intelligence were really bullied for being squares.

    You clearly don't know what bullying is.
    Not what id consider to be bullying. 1v1 = fight = sorted

    If that were true then children of homosexual parents wouldn't be any more subject to bullying than anyone because your parents are not part your personality. Way to go against your own argument.
    Yeah, unlike you im looking at things in an honest way and arguing what i believe to be true rather than picking a side and hurling everything i can find. I think the mentality youve shown here relieves you of any credibility you may still have had.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    No. I disapprove of state sanctioned gay adoption because I believe that when it comes to business of raising children the traditional couple is more capable of handling the task than two men, or two women, or a man and a dog etc etc. This doesn't conflict with the idea of rights simply because nobody has a right to adopt a child, it's a privilege, one that can be withdrawn without explanation. It's not the state's job to furnish homosexuals with children because they're incapable of producing them themselves, sorry.
    Homosexuality =/= infertility.
    Gay couples are not the same as mixed-species couples.

    Studies and research show that having two parents of the same sex does not adversely affect the development of a child in comparison to a child, compared to a heterosexual couple; both are equally capable of raising a child well. Though, seeing as you believe children are best raised by a traditional couple, presumably you are also opposed to single people adopting?

    If I suddenly withdrew your privilege to adopt, because of something you cannot change yet does not affect your ability to be a good parent, how would you feel?
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thescientist17)
    Excuse me? I never said that I expect them to dictate somebody else's life. Like another person said when they argued with me that they didn't like bananas but that's not going to cause them to be banned or something along those lines. Exactly. You wouldn't have a go at me for expressing my dislike of bananas. It's just an opinion. So why are you saying I expect my feelings to dictate some else's life?
    Mini's post actually makes the same point I did; that just because you don't like something, doesn't mean you can expect it to not happen.
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    No. I disapprove of state sanctioned gay adoption because I believe that when it comes to business of raising children the traditional couple is more capable of handling the task than two men, or two women, or a man and a dog etc etc. This doesn't conflict with the idea of rights simply because nobody has a right to adopt a child, it's a privilege, one that can be withdrawn without explanation. It's not the state's job to furnish homosexuals with children because they're incapable of producing them themselves, sorry.
    Gay people can have children (unless they are infertile, but that is nothing to do with their sexuality). And sexuality does not affect your ability to be a parent - or the research would not show that same-sex couples are as good at parenting as their opposite-sex counterparts.
    And while I agree that adopting a child is a priviledge, you wouldn't deny a straight couple the opportunity to adopt because of something outside their control that doesn't affect their ability to care for children (them both having blue eyes for example - has as much affect on your ability to raise children as being gay does). Fair enough if there is something about a particular gay couple that means that they wouldn't be good parents, they should be subject to the same checks as a straight couple - but that goes without saying.
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thescientist17)
    Excuse me? I never said that I expect them to dictate somebody else's life. Like another person said when they argued with me that they didn't like bananas but that's not going to cause them to be banned or something along those lines. Exactly. You wouldn't have a go at me for expressing my dislike of bananas. It's just an opinion. So why are you saying I expect my feelings to dictate some else's life?
    I was agreeing with Jester.
    If you enter a debate with an opinion based on nothing but your feelings and then when someone says 'but your feelings shouldn't dictate someone else's life' you say you never meant it that way, then what was the point of joining the debate if you have nothing to debate?
    I'm not attacking you, I just don't understand your point.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Awkward ,this world is coming to an end !
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    No. I disapprove of state sanctioned gay adoption because I believe that when it comes to business of raising children the traditional couple is more capable of handling the task than two men, or two women, or a man and a dog etc etc. This doesn't conflict with the idea of rights simply because nobody has a right to adopt a child, it's a privilege, one that can be withdrawn without explanation. It's not the state's job to furnish homosexuals with children because they're incapable of producing them themselves, sorry.
    Surely you should be focusing on what the children want and need, not what you believe, especially when what you believe is plainly false?
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by green.tea)
    Bullies hand out iq tests do they? People who say theywere bullied for intelligence were really bullied for being squares.
    What constitutes being square? Doing well in school is usually a part of that isn't it? Hm...sounds like intelligence is an attribute that leads to someone being bullied.

    Not what id consider to be bullying. 1v1 = fight = sorted
    As I said you clearly don't even understand what bullying is.

    Yeah, unlike you im looking at things in an honest way and arguing what i believe to be true rather than picking a side and hurling everything i can find. I think the mentality youve shown here relieves you of any credibility you may still have had.
    What mentality? And how have I 'picked a side' and 'hurled everything I can find'? I have only posted evidence that contradicts what you say. You know the sort of thing that is required when entering into an intellectual debate. You source evidence for your position. So far you have posted 1 or 2 things, of which neither supports your claims, and I have posted findings that support my position. So explain to me who has no credibility?
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pyramidologist)
    Exactly. Most people don't dwell on this topic, but if it does by some chance come up in a family household, overwelmingly the view will be against gay adoption. Internet polls only deal with a tiny segment of society who are usually fixated with these issues with agendas (the whole 'gay rights' thing) certainly not represntative of the normal family household.
    Still waiting for some evidence to support these claims.
Updated: May 14, 2012
New on TSR
Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.