Total Posts:96|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Gay Parents

Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 7:20:07 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I've been discussing this with Philosophical (...or however he improperly spells it) about this, and I am literally at my wits end due to his asinine "arguments" about why gays should not be allowed to adopt or be parents at all. According to him, a child needs 1 mother and 1 father (lol) and that a child should have the CHOICE about whether or not they want to be raised by a gay parent (even more lol). Basically, his arguments are riddled with fallacies - ie. appeal to tradition, appeal to law, appeal to probability (because gays 'tend to be violent' they shouldn't be entrusted with kids), naturalistic fallacy, base rate fallacy (he ignores the HUGE plethora of evidence that kids with gay parents are just as happy, successful and adjusted as kids with straight parents), etc.

Most frustratingly of all, he believes he is entitled to his wrong opinion - and I agree. However, I disagree with the idea of having an opinion that's rooted in ignorance, bigotry and lies. If you want to have an opinion that orange juice is better than apple juice then fine. But to have an opinion that gays shouldn't be parents because of BS reasons isn't fine, because it affects others (with things like legislation). Is there really a good argument as to why gays should not be able to adopt? He seems to ignore all of my points that smash his and he says I'm not being logical (LOL!).

- If you believe gays shouldn't be able to have kids, why?
- If you believe they shouldn't, why?
President of DDO
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 7:43:05 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
its not complicated. no idea what philo's problem is. theres no evidence i am aware of that the gender of the primary caregiver (or caregivers) has any negative effect on the children, nor is there evidence that homosexuals are somehow inherently different from heterosexuals other than their sexuality itself, certainly not in a dramatic enough way to disqualify them from parenthood. in fact, studies have shown that gay/lesbian parents are not a disadvantage to their children at all- except in the cases of bigotry and discrimination they are subject to because of it :P

http://www.apa.org...

2 seconds of research and philo could have saved himself quite a bit of embarrassment
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 8:07:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Thanks for the response, belle. I agree with you entirely. I've provided all of the research and more proving the same things, but he refuses to accept the reality that one's sexuality has NOTHING to do with their ability to parent. Also, I'm not trying to make this an attack against Philo -- I am putting this out there to everyone who believes that gays shouldn't be parents. My frustration is immense because the arguments are SO terrible. I just don't understand how one can put it out there with a straight face!

Again, his only concern is the "child's choice" because they shouldn't have to be put in a situation that's 'different.' As I told him, he should watch one of those Barney episodes about how families come in all shapes and sizes. Besides, if the concern is about being picked on in school, then perhaps we shouldn't let fat people have kids either or ugly parents or whatever else it is that kids get teased for (which obviously is a looong list; kids will always find an excuse to pick on another). I find it kind of disheartening and pathetic that he'd rather protect the kid from being teased rather than work on changing the attitudes of the kids (and others) in schools about hate, bigotry and ignorance.
President of DDO
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 8:35:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/30/2010 7:20:07 AM, theLwerd wrote:
and that a child should have the CHOICE about whether or not they want to be raised by a gay parent (even more lol).

Why is that funny?
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 8:45:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/30/2010 8:35:53 AM, Reasoning wrote:
At 3/30/2010 7:20:07 AM, theLwerd wrote:
and that a child should have the CHOICE about whether or not they want to be raised by a gay parent (even more lol).

Why is that funny?

because its quite literally impossible for a child to choose their parent :P

the only way that would make any sense is if we were talking about an adoption taking place at a time when the child is considered old enough to make their own decisions. granted i think the age is probably less than the current (18); however, if they are mature enough to make their own decisions they don't really need a parent any longer. if they are not then why should their decision in the choice of parent be honored?
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
collegekitchen8
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 11:42:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I have no problem with homosexual adoption. I have heard that adopted children of homosexuals have a higher chance of sexual experimentation, though whether these claims are fact or fiction I have yet to see.
: At 3/30/2010 12:57:51 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
: The universe is simple, It all makes sense given laws like gravity and stuff.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 2:05:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/30/2010 11:42:22 AM, collegekitchen8 wrote:
I think sexual experimentation is wrong.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 2:13:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I don't have a problem with homosexual adoption. I do think that there might be a problem when it comes time to give "the talk" - much like heterosexual parents (even when not prejudiced) have trouble giving advice to a homosexual child (since the parents haven't had experience as homosexuals), homosexual parents may have some difficulty advising a heterosexual child (though a lot of homosexuals have experience as pseudo-heteros by virtue of basically being forced to deny their identities). It shouldn't stop them from adopting, but it's an interesting question nevertheless. I haven't done much research into it, so the answer is probably very simple, requiring a basic knowledge of romantic relationships.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 2:15:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Sociology/Anthropology fans here?:

Think of Child Socialization and the irregularity of same sex parents. Also note of Freudal/Jung, Psycho-Sexuality; Anthropology of Relationships(flirting), Psychology/Natural characteristics associated with each gender. I dunno… but from traditional social thinking, that kid is at a disadvantage. Still, I'm speculating I don't have a very strong memory on the subject. I'll read it over tonight.

I'm too tried to wall studies... but I hope Belle or Lwerd will get the basic drift... There are a lot of arguments for this.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 3:16:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/30/2010 2:15:14 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
Sociology/Anthropology fans here?:

Think of Child Socialization and the irregularity of same sex parents. Also note of Freudal/Jung, Psycho-Sexuality; Anthropology of Relationships(flirting), Psychology/Natural characteristics associated with each gender. I dunno… but from traditional social thinking, that kid is at a disadvantage. Still, I'm speculating I don't have a very strong memory on the subject. I'll read it over tonight.

I'm too tried to wall studies... but I hope Belle or Lwerd will get the basic drift... There are a lot of arguments for this.

except if you look at the studies i linked, they found that the kids of homosexual parents had no gender or sexual identity issues :P

also i am not sure why you would be so rash as to take jung or freud seriously since their method was basically just talking to people and then making stuff up that they thought made sense.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 3:22:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Wouldn't accepting Freud make homosexual parents a benefit? Freud was all about kids wanting to **** their parents brains out. Homosexual parents means on the off chance the parent returns the sentiment at least there won't be any reproduction occurring from the matter.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 3:25:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/30/2010 3:22:12 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Wouldn't accepting Freud make homosexual parents a benefit? Freud was all about kids wanting to **** their parents brains out. Homosexual parents means on the off chance the parent returns the sentiment at least there won't be any reproduction occurring from the matter.

boys want to screw their mothers, but are afraid their fathers will castrate them for it. girls are just depressed because they think they've already been castrated.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 3:32:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/30/2010 3:25:42 PM, belle wrote:
At 3/30/2010 3:22:12 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Wouldn't accepting Freud make homosexual parents a benefit? Freud was all about kids wanting to **** their parents brains out. Homosexual parents means on the off chance the parent returns the sentiment at least there won't be any reproduction occurring from the matter.

boys want to screw their mothers, but are afraid their fathers will castrate them for it.
Well, give them two moms, you have a childhood with no fear and twice the hope!

Two dads, and nothing to be castrated for, so also no fear!

girls are just depressed because they think they've already been castrated.
Okay, doesn't work for them then ^_^.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 5:00:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/30/2010 2:15:14 PM, Zetsubou wrote:

I'm too tried to wall studies... but I hope Belle or Lwerd will get the basic drift... There are a lot of arguments for this.

Yeah, a lot of bad ones.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 5:02:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/30/2010 3:25:42 PM, belle wrote:
At 3/30/2010 3:22:12 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Wouldn't accepting Freud make homosexual parents a benefit? Freud was all about kids wanting to **** their parents brains out. Homosexual parents means on the off chance the parent returns the sentiment at least there won't be any reproduction occurring from the matter.

boys want to screw their mothers, but are afraid their fathers will castrate them for it. girls are just depressed because they think they've already been castrated.

Lol and that's why Freud is usually discredited regarding the majority of his ideas and seen as a screwed up, coked up joke by the psychology world (despite still being regarded as the Father).
President of DDO
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2010 5:13:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
lol @ Jung.

So what is his issue if it's not those things supported by the research? Single parents should have stayed married till the kid decides they get to divorce? The child determines what the parent does?
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2010 1:24:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
What Freud said kinda makes sense, though... No Incest.(Don't even think it)

Yeah... I'm I's school today. At home I's is gonna be working on a mini Essay post to get you liberal social scientists worked up. Keep an eye on this thread.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 8:30:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/31/2010 1:24:22 AM, Zetsubou wrote:
What Freud said kinda makes sense, though... No Incest.(Don't even think it)

*raises eyebrow*

... Clearly you haven't read much Freud.

Yeah... I'm I's school today. At home I's is gonna be working on a mini Essay post to get you liberal social scientists worked up. Keep an eye on this thread.

We'll see.
President of DDO
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 8:38:54 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I do not have a personal problem with it, but I must add that kids that do have gay parents get picked on a lot through out school, more than normal.

Society needs to change for this to be successful.

As it stands, it is on the turn from being an abomination to socially acceptable=moral, but as of today it will not work.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 9:02:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/1/2010 8:38:54 AM, comoncents wrote:
I do not have a personal problem with it, but I must add that kids that do have gay parents get picked on a lot through out school, more than normal.

Where's the proof? Kids get picked on all the time for any and every reason under the sun. Either they're too fat, too ugly, their parents are far, their parents are ugly, they're too poor, too tall, too short, too dumb, too smart (nerdy), etc. My aunt is a lesbian and dated sooo many women with kids. I became friends with those kids, and none of them got picked on any more than any other kid. Granted I lived in New York though where people are generally more socially aware.

Society needs to change for this to be successful.

Yes, and how do you expect society to change (or kids to learn) without exposure? The only thing that breeds tolerance is exposure and understanding. Did the blacks just sit around and "wait" for society to accept them? Or did they march, take to the street, boycott, get the media involved, and work their a-sses off in order to get the respect they deserved?

As it stands, it is on the turn from being an abomination to socially acceptable=moral, but as of today it will not work.

The American Medical Association, The American Psychiatric Association, The American Psychological Association, The American Psychoanalytic Association, The American Academy of Pediatrics, etc. have all stated that homosexuality should not be treated as a mental disorder. Further, there are tons of studies that prove homosexuality is genetic, or its causes are rooted in nature moreso than nurture. So, anyone who ignores these scientific facts are IGNORANT... and yet instead of being horrified by this ignorance that's used to oppress people, you're saying we should just "wait for people to change" instead of realizing that hate and intolerance is passed on from generation to generation.

For anyone not to socially accept it makes them a BIGOT; a homophobe just as one can be a racist. Saying that "today it will not work" is rooted in your opinion that we should just accept injustice instead of fighting for change... which makes you a big hypocrite, since you always claim to stand for otherwise. That's like me saying Cubans shouldn't be allowed to have kids because society's not ready for it. Would you accept that bullsh-t? Didn't think so.
President of DDO
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 9:24:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/1/2010 9:02:08 AM, theLwerd wrote:
At 4/1/2010 8:38:54 AM, comoncents wrote:
I do not have a personal problem with it, but I must add that kids that do have gay parents get picked on a lot through out school, more than normal.

Where's the proof? Kids get picked on all the time for any and every reason under the sun. Either they're too fat, too ugly, their parents are far, their parents are ugly, they're too poor, too tall, too short, too dumb, too smart (nerdy), etc. My aunt is a lesbian and dated sooo many women with kids. I became friends with those kids, and none of them got picked on any more than any other kid. Granted I lived in New York though where people are generally more socially aware.


I had a kid I went to school with that almost killed himself b/c of it. In virginia, kids of my old boss had to move b/c he left his wife for a man.
The kids were on him b/c one of his parents were gay.
I am just sayin.

Society needs to change for this to be successful.

Yes, and how do you expect society to change (or kids to learn) without exposure? The only thing that breeds tolerance is exposure and understanding. Did the blacks just sit around and "wait" for society to accept them? Or did they march, take to the street, boycott, get the media involved, and work their a-sses off in order to get the respect they deserved?


Time.

As it stands, it is on the turn from being an abomination to socially acceptable=moral, but as of today it will not work.

The American Medical Association, The American Psychiatric Association, The American Psychological Association, The American Psychoanalytic Association, The American Academy of Pediatrics, etc. have all stated that homosexuality should not be treated as a mental disorder. Further, there are tons of studies that prove homosexuality is genetic, or its causes are rooted in nature moreso than nurture. So, anyone who ignores these scientific facts are IGNORANT... and yet instead of being horrified by this ignorance that's used to oppress people, you're saying we should just "wait for people to change" instead of realizing that hate and intolerance is passed on from generation to generation.


That is a personal decision that you have to make.
You only have the option to speak your message and hope to recruit.
But non the less it does not minimize that it will take time. And you will have to "wait for people to change" It is inevitable to have to wait and unrealistic to think that you will not.

For anyone not to socially accept it makes them a BIGOT;

No. I can personally accept it but do not socially accept it b/c it is fact that it is not socially acceptable.
I can wish for it to be socially acceptable, it does not mean it will happen.
A better way to stte it is, "For anyone not to" personally "accept it makes them a BIGOT"

a homophobe just as one can be a racist. Saying that "today it will not work" is rooted in your opinion that we should just accept injustice instead of fighting for change...

No it is rooted in fact.
Not the fact that the act of letting parents adopt will not work.
But that it will not work to pass it without a huge uproar, it is not socially acceptable.
It would throw a huge imbalance in a system built on checks and balances.

which makes you a big hypocrite, since you always claim to stand for otherwise.

I never said I stood for otherwise.
I said I do not care who adopts who, but that it will not happen until society is educated in a gay world.

That's like me saying Cubans shouldn't be allowed to have kids because society's not ready for it.

I did not say that I will not support it. I am just saying that it is not the time for it. Not b/c I dub it "not the time for it", but b/c the american people have.

I would say the same if you said, "Cubans shouldn't be allowed to have kids because society's not ready for it. "

I would not support it but I would not be blind to the fact that as it stood, it will not happen b/c of the time.

Would you accept that bullsh-t? Didn't think so.

You are making a mistake of keeping a level head.
You are not reading what I am writing with a sound mind. You are reading it with the want to pick a fight.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 9:36:06 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/1/2010 9:24:45 AM, comoncents wrote:
You are making a mistake of *NOT* keeping a level head.
You are not reading what I am writing with a sound mind. You are reading it with the want to pick a fight.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 9:36:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/1/2010 9:24:45 AM, comoncents wrote:

I had a kid I went to school with that almost killed himself b/c of it. In virginia, kids of my old boss had to move b/c he left his wife for a man.
The kids were on him b/c one of his parents were gay.
I am just sayin.

That's sad. Unfortunately, that sad story cannot be the basis of oppression and intolerance. Just as that kid wanted to almost kill himself because he had gay parents, TONS have already killed themselves because they themselves were gay and thought there was something wrong with it... or chose to live miserable lives in pretending to not be "different." Besides, none of that negates the point that kids get picked on for almost anything. We can't make laws revolving around school yard teasing.

Yes, and how do you expect society to change (or kids to learn) without exposure? The only thing that breeds tolerance is exposure and understanding. Did the blacks just sit around and "wait" for society to accept them? Or did they march, take to the street, boycott, get the media involved, and work their a-sses off in order to get the respect they deserved?


Time.

Obviously, you ignored my question (and the entire point). I specifically argued against the idea of "time" lol.

As it stands, it is on the turn from being an abomination to socially acceptable=moral, but as of today it will not work.

The American Medical Association, The American Psychiatric Association, The American Psychological Association, The American Psychoanalytic Association, The American Academy of Pediatrics, etc. have all stated that homosexuality should not be treated as a mental disorder. Further, there are tons of studies that prove homosexuality is genetic, or its causes are rooted in nature moreso than nurture. So, anyone who ignores these scientific facts are IGNORANT... and yet instead of being horrified by this ignorance that's used to oppress people, you're saying we should just "wait for people to change" instead of realizing that hate and intolerance is passed on from generation to generation.


That is a personal decision that you have to make.

What?! I just listed tons of psychiatric (esteemed) societies that say there's nothing wrong with being gay, and you're saying people still have the choice to not believe it?! Yeah, they have the choice to be a BIGOT just as one has the choice to be a racist or a rapist or a nationalist, etc.

You only have the option to speak your message and hope to recruit.
But non the less it does not minimize that it will take time. And you will have to "wait for people to change" It is inevitable to have to wait and unrealistic to think that you will not.

You're ignoring the point. Obviously anything will take "time" because time is what goes on while you're trying to spread the message: KNOWLEDGE over IGNORANCE.

For anyone not to socially accept it makes them a BIGOT;

No. I can personally accept it but do not socially accept it b/c it is fact that it is not socially acceptable.

This statement makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Plus, if everyone thought like that, then it would never be acceptable.

I can wish for it to be socially acceptable, it does not mean it will happen.
A better way to stte it is, "For anyone not to" personally "accept it makes them a BIGOT"

a homophobe just as one can be a racist. Saying that "today it will not work" is rooted in your opinion that we should just accept injustice instead of fighting for change...

No it is rooted in fact.

LoL what facts have you provided? Zip zero.

Not the fact that the act of letting parents adopt will not work.
But that it will not work to pass it without a huge uproar, it is not socially acceptable.
It would throw a huge imbalance in a system built on checks and balances.

Wtf are you talking about?

which makes you a big hypocrite, since you always claim to stand for otherwise.

I never said I stood for otherwise.
I said I do not care who adopts who, but that it will not happen until society is educated in a gay world.

You supposedly care about people's rights and the constitution. The constitution never says that gays shouldn't have kids or adopt, therefore you're specifically speaking against people's right to the pursuit of happiness and other personal freedoms.

That's like me saying Cubans shouldn't be allowed to have kids because society's not ready for it.

I did not say that I will not support it. I am just saying that it is not the time for it. Not b/c I dub it "not the time for it", but b/c the american people have.

I would say the same if you said, "Cubans shouldn't be allowed to have kids because society's not ready for it. "

I would not support it but I would not be blind to the fact that as it stood, it will not happen b/c of the time.

Once again, you will never understand because you ignored my entire point where I said that you can't just "wait." You have to educate, you have to teach, and you have to assimilate. Obviously this takes time... DUH. But time itself won't do anything at all. Time itself doesn't do any of those things.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 9:40:25 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Ps. I'm not trying to pick a fight. Why would I be trying to pick a fight with you? Everything I'm saying is rational, reasonable and factual. The only thing you're saying is that "Gay parents are acceptable, just not now because society's not ready to accept it." This so-called argument sucks, because you're ignoring the fact that time itself will not change the attitude of society. It WILL take time, because time is what passes while you fight for change. I'm saying you have to fight for the change, including forced exposure and assimilation. This is quite obvious, and we even have historical precedent as recent as the Civil Rights Movement. Once again, Martin Lither King's message wasn't "Give it time" so much as it was "The time is now."
President of DDO
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 9:47:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/1/2010 8:30:22 AM, theLwerd wrote:
At 3/31/2010 1:24:22 AM, Zetsubou wrote:
What Freud said kinda makes sense, though... No Incest.(Don't even think it)

*raises eyebrow*

... Clearly you haven't read much Freud.

I own Freud and it's all thanks to Private Education!

Yeah... I'm I's school today. At home I's is gonna be working on a mini Essay post to get you liberal social scientists worked up. Keep an eye on this thread.

We'll see.

--->

At 4/1/2010 9:05:14 AM, theLwerd wrote:
If you can spare less than 5 minutes of your day...



(Courtesy of Cody Franklin)

That was the most dumb arse, **** *******, stupid **** I have heard. I'll tell you why in my debate vs Panda, soon. If it's not in it I'll post it here.

Genetic? ADHA, autism and Bi-polar disorder are all genetic. Still a mental disorder, negatively.
I know Lwerd will get pi**ed with my lack of reasoning, but I can assure you I'll justify all in due time. ATM I'm ranting.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 9:49:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/1/2010 9:40:25 AM, theLwerd wrote:
Ps. I'm not trying to pick a fight. Why would I be trying to pick a fight with you? Everything I'm saying is rational, reasonable and factual. The only thing you're saying is that "Gay parents are acceptable, just "it will not happen now" because society's not ready to accept it."

That is what I am saying.

This so-called argument sucks, because you're ignoring the fact that time itself will not change the attitude of society.

It is not an argument, it is an observation.
I am not standing on the foundation that gays should not adopt.
I am just making the observation that it will not happen right now b/c of society.

It WILL take time, because time is what passes while you fight for change. I'm saying you have to fight for the change, including forced exposure and assimilation.

Yes, you have to take time to fight it. People fight the hardest for what benefits them the most. If it is brought up than I speak my mind.

This is quite obvious, and we even have historical precedent as recent as the Civil Rights Movement. Once again, Martin Lither King's message wasn't "Give it time" so much as it was "The time is now."

King was a orator. It was his job to say that.
He new that no matter how much he said that that it would not happen over night.
But you and I agree on this, "time" thing so no need to go further.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 11:28:03 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/1/2010 9:49:08 AM, comoncents wrote:
King was a orator. It was his job to say that.
He new that no matter how much he said that that it would not happen over night.
But you and I agree on this, "time" thing so no need to go further.

lol you're saying that gay couples shouldn't adopt because the time isn't yet "ripe". she's saying that people should not wait for the time to be ripe, but rather seize the day, because thats the only way to get the orientation more readily accepted and decrease the negative consequences of having gay parents. you really don't agree at all.

how do you think change occurs anyways? o.O
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2010 4:30:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/1/2010 11:28:03 AM, belle wrote:
At 4/1/2010 9:49:08 AM, comoncents wrote:
King was a orator. It was his job to say that.
He new that no matter how much he said that that it would not happen over night.
But you and I agree on this, "time" thing so no need to go further.

lol you're saying that gay couples shouldn't adopt because the time isn't yet "ripe". she's saying that people should not wait for the time to be ripe, but rather seize the day, because thats the only way to get the orientation more readily accepted and decrease the negative consequences of having gay parents. you really don't agree at all.

how do you think change occurs anyways? o.O

No. You would have to read it again.