The Instigator
Henry_cp
Pro (for)
Winning
13 Points
The Contender
George_H_Taylor
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should Same-Sex couples be allowed to adopt?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Henry_cp
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/28/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,106 times Debate No: 58307
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (3)

 

Henry_cp

Pro

Same sex couples should be allowed to adopt children.
It is fair that they should have the same rights as straight couples.
George_H_Taylor

Con

It is absolutely not fair to the children being adopted that gay couples be allowed to adopt. Not only has it been shown in history, but also in scientific studies, that children are better off raised by one mother and one father. We can not compromise the future of children in the name of "fairness" or "equality"
Debate Round No. 1
Henry_cp

Pro

It is unfair on same sex couples if they cannot adopt or have children.
There are many children out there who need loving parents, it doesn't matter what gender their parents are.
There have also been studies that show no effect on the children because of gay parents. It's not the gender of a person that effects their child. It's the way they act, it's their personality the way they choose to raise their child.
Parents all have different ways of living.
George_H_Taylor

Con

First of all, you need to drop this whole "fairness" nonsense. As much as it sucks to hear it, fairness is not the absolute most important thing in the world, I'm sure many people would agree with me that the future of America; our children, are more important than offering "fairness" to gay couples.

Throughout history homosexuality has always been practiced, but never have homosexual parents raised children until recently. It defies the laws of God, or if your don't believe in that; the laws of nature. Advocates of gay rights like to claim that homosexuality occurs in nature among animals, but they never seem to mention that baby animals, when raised by two parents are raised by two parents of opposite genders.

Contrary to what you want to believe, it is the gender of the parents that matters. You've been raised to believe men and women are absolutely equal. and I'm sorry to break it to you but that's nonsense. There is a reason men and women are different biologically, and each of the qualities that men and women possess work hand in hand to properly raise children.

Allowing same-sex couples to adopt would be disastrous, it would spit in the face of nature, biology, and God. It would negatively affect the future of the children, all in the name of "equality", and we can not let it happen.
Debate Round No. 2
Henry_cp

Pro

Children absolutely don't get effected in a bad way by having two parents of the same gender.
There are so many different types of families our days. Children can be looked after by grandparents, aunties, uncles, they can have only one parent or they could even have two sets of parents.
All these different family types are allowed to raise children, there are no negative effects on the children because of gay parents.

You didn't list any of the negative effects on the children.
Like I said before there are many orphans out there who are in need of having loving parents.
Some children never find parents, they are raised in an orphanage by many different people. Wouldn't this have a negative effect on children?
George_H_Taylor

Con

While you are right that there are different types of families, due to unavoidable situations, that doesn't mean its ideal. Surely some kids are raised by single mothers but you cant possibly argue that its equal to or better than being raised by a mother and a father. While these situations do occur naturally, we shouldn't increasing how often they happen by throwing children into these situations.

Here is a study that was conducted about kids with homosexual parents vs. kids with heterosexual parents, scroll down to the section titled "what the study found"

While you are right that kids may not be best off in orphanages, you're wrong if you assume they are in orphanages because nobody wants them. There are still an unbelievable amount of straight couples who want to adopt, but cant because of how strict adoption is. Allowing gay couples to adopt wont get any more kids adopted, if you want more kids out of orphanages the answer is to loosen adoption laws.
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Yongjie 2 years ago
Yongjie
fair points. In particular the opposition's argument about negative effects on the children being adopted is valid and will be a concern. I think the proposition did well enough to counter in his third argument that children are allowed to be raised in such families. Both of you touched a little on the question of equality, but I think that the welfare of the child is still of the utmost importance. That we should not be exposing the child to necessary stresses induced by the nature of the parents. there is also the important question of whether the environment the child is raised in the orphanage or the gay family would be better. I think the proposition was more convincing that in the orphanage the children will still be raised in an environment where the negative effects might be worse, however the opposition's argument that adoption laws should be less strigent i feel is out of the discussion as these laws are put in place to ensure the welfare of the child. Congrats to Henry.
Posted by schachdame 2 years ago
schachdame
http://scholar.google.de... - Would have been a good idea.
Posted by AdamKG 2 years ago
AdamKG
@George_H_Taylor

The FRC is not a credible source. They are a far right conservative group that is not an accredited research institution. If you want a credible source use one from an accredited college or university. The current conclusion in mainstream science is that there is no real detriment to children being raised by same-sex parents.

I noticed on your profile that you claim to be Libertarian, yet you do not approve of equality toward homosexuals. I think you are confused of your ideology. Libertarians generally believe in extensive gay rights including parenting.
Posted by Henry_cp 2 years ago
Henry_cp
I don't think that website isn't very reliable, that organisation is an American Christian right wing lobbying group, I read through some of the articles and I don't think the information is very reliable.
Posted by George_H_Taylor 2 years ago
George_H_Taylor
Forgot to post my source for the third round

http://www.frc.org...
Posted by Liv7 2 years ago
Liv7
Society changes. It becomes more accepting, if you can't accept the fact gays can, or will, be able to adopt one day, than I feel sorry for you, and one day I hope you can realise EVERYONE has the right to be a parent, through adoption or whatever, no matter the sexuality.
Posted by Liv7 2 years ago
Liv7
I was trying to say,It is against God" or "Against nature" is ridiculous. There's no proof that anything Is against nature, or God. Unless you've actually heard God say "Being gay is wrong, or adopting while you are gay is wrong" Then religion should have nothing to do with a debate like this, and by my previous comment (which summarises every argument on the planet that relies on religious argument)
Posted by George_H_Taylor 2 years ago
George_H_Taylor
If you actually read my argument you would see it didnt rely on God.
Posted by Liv7 2 years ago
Liv7
I'm sorry, but I don't see how using God in your argument can be considered valid. I respect your beliefs, but we need to talk about facts here, and last time I checked, "The Word of God" was not a fact. There is no proof God is real, therefore using him in a debate like this should be out of the question. Come back with some scientific studies and research, also throw in some reliable sources, cause the bible is not a reliable source.
Posted by Marx 2 years ago
Marx
If a nigga has another nigga of da same gender, why da hell cant dat nigga have a kid, it aint gay rights, its basic human rights
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Henry_cpGeorge_H_TaylorTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Both debaters seemed rather new and inexperienced at debate and not very knowledgeable on the topic. Con came off as rather rude and even a little arrogant in his statements using some unnecessary language. Pro had more stable argument making seemingly logical statements that was more easy to support without sources. Con made many statements that may be true but failed to list sources to back them up so I was not convinced. Con used an unnecessary number of commas making comma splices. Neither side used sources.
Vote Placed by AdamKG 2 years ago
AdamKG
Henry_cpGeorge_H_TaylorTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Both debaters seemed rather new and inexperienced at debate and not very knowledgeable on the topic. Con came off as rather rude and even a little arrogant in his statements using some unnecessary language. Pro had more stable argument making seemingly logical statements that was more easy to support without sources. Con made many statements that may be true but failed to list sources to back them up so I was not convinced. Con used an unnecessary number of commas making comma splices. Neither side used sources.
Vote Placed by Phoenix61397 2 years ago
Phoenix61397
Henry_cpGeorge_H_TaylorTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: In round 1, con said "its not fair to the children" and later discredited fairness, debunking his entire argument.