Gay marriage thread

[MrGongGong]

Well, it's very simple. And it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with religion.

I just happen to think that, in the long-term, the most beneficial environment for a child to grow up in is a stable, heterosesexual family, which is the- here comes that word- natural state of affairs. That way the child matures with both male and female influences/role models during their formative years. This can only be beneficial for the emotional and psychological development of that child. Which is the most important thing. I assume we can at least agree on that...

So I guess that all the evidence that the sexuality of ones parents is irrelevant is also irrelevant ?

This is a bit of a "back to the 1950's" fantasy world ...... I'm reluctant to bring the bear into it but I'll let you into a secret if you like

This



is a work of fiction

Like a Clegg "pledge" or a Dicken's novel
it might be comforting but it's made up by people

[Mr Pee]

This



is a work of fiction

Like a Clegg "pledge" or a Dicken's novel
it might be comforting but it's made up by people

Thanks for the education. And there was I thinking it was a true story.....

[MrGongGong]

Thanks for the education. And there was I thinking it was a true story.....

I'd pay good money for a mint copy of
"Rupert and the Green Clarinet"

[amateur51]

Well, it's very simple. And it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with religion.

I just happen to think that, in the long-term, the most beneficial environment for a child to grow up in is a stable, heterosesexual family, which is the- here comes that word- natural state of affairs. That way the child matures with both male and female influences/role models during their formative years. This can only be beneficial for the emotional and psychological development of that child. Which is the most important thing. I assume we can at least agree on that...

I'm by no means an expert on adoption, Mr Pee and I guess that you are not either. However Jeanne Kaniuk is an adoption expert and she has recently written as follows:

"The Welsh secretary David Jones's comments that same-sex couples are unable to provide a safe environment for bringing up children represent a view which those who have experience of placing children with such couples and have been able to follow their development over a period of years cannot endorse.

The capacity to parent is not related to sexuality. Indeed there are children who were born into a family with parents who were married to each other and have suffered abuse and neglect in those families.

Coram has experience of placing children with gay and lesbian adopters over a period of 20 years. Our approach to adoption is child-centred in that we are looking for parents with the particular qualities needed in adopters – particularly adopters of children who have suffered neglect, abuse of other trauma and are likely to have additional needs throughout their childhood.

We therefore do not have a blueprint of the kind of family who might be suitable to adopt. Rather we start from the premise that we need parents who will be committed to the child they adopt for the long term, parents who can understand the emotional baggage that the children are likely to bring with them.

The children who need adoptive families often have experienced broken attachments and have had relationships with parents and other carers who were unreliable and often punitive.

They therefore have little trust in adults or expectation that they will be able to care for them. They need parents who can withstand rejection and provide opportunities for the child to enjoy positive experiences and gradually discover that it is safe to be a child and to depend on the adults.

Adopters also need to feel comfortable with the reality that their child has another set of biological parents and to be able to help their child make sense of his or her identity as s/he grows up.

Research has demonstrated that one of the most important qualities in an adoptive parent is empathy – the ability to see things from another person's point of view and try to understand where they are coming from.

This is not something linked to sexual orientation, but to people's life experience and how they have processed difficult experiences in their own lives.

Thus we are seeking adopters whose life experience has equipped them for this task, who have confidence in themselves and who help their child to feel that the world is a safe place.

Recent research by Susan Golombok of the University of Cambridge which was published last year compared the outcomes for children adopted by heterosexual, gay and lesbian couples.

This research confirmed the experience of adoption agencies such as Coram which have placed children with same-sex couples over a period of time, that these parents are capable of providing loving, secure homes in which children thrive.

Children in same-sex adoptive households face different challenges than those raised by heterosexual couples.

Many heterosexual couples come to adoption after an extended period of infertility treatment, and for them there may be a challenge to put aside their feelings of loss, and to enjoy parenting their adopted children without feelings of regret for the 'ideal' fantasy child.

On the other hand, children raised by same-sex couples may face homophobic comments and need additional support from their parents to deal with these. However, the key for all these children is that above all they need the experience of having parents who love them and can give them the experience of feeling valued for themselves – something that most children can take fore granted. If they are to develop the inner strength and resilience to cope with the ordinary challenges of life, they need the confidence that comes from being loved and feeling secure."

Jeanne Kaniuk OBE is head of adoption and permanent families service at the Coram adoption agency

[Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...e-sex-parents]

[Julien Sorel]

the emotional and psychological development of that child. Which is the most important thing. I assume we can at least agree on that...

Your assumption is correct .

I think your view of gender and gender relations is too uncomplicated (in fact inaccurate: I don't think that what seems obvious is an especially good guide when it comes to creatures as complicated as humans), and I think it's important to recognise that children don't only develop psychologically within the family (and that social development doesn't remain static).

But thanks for the answer, which is very clear and concise. Which was all I wanted .

[Ferretfancy]

Well observed, Flossie ... that must have been a really fascinating "watch".

Did you happen to notice many Yanks using a fork to cut up their food into little pieces and then a knife to convey it to their mouth ... ?

Eagle Eye Fleagle strikes again! Oh, and have you ever noticed that nobody on telly ever gets a full cup of tea ? Of course, gays notice things like that, we are so sensitive you see !

[Resurrection Man]

Not sure if this point has been addressed but should same-sex marriages adopt children of the opposite sex?

[amateur51]

Not sure if this point has been addressed but should same-sex marriages adopt children of the opposite sex?

And should lesbian and gay children be removed from heterosexual parents?

However, what if these children are being put up for adoption ...?

Who'd be a social worker?

[Flosshilde]

Not sure if this point has been addressed but should same-sex marriages adopt children of the opposite sex?

What was that you said somewhere about rational argument?

That's just silly. We both know that tigers are endangered species. Bit like rational argument in this thread.

[MrGongGong]

And should lesbian and gay children be removed from heterosexual parents?

No they should be told to "pull themselves together" and "stop being so silly" as it's only a "phase" they are going through......most "sensible" people realise that it's a bad "choice"

[amateur51]

No they should be told to "pull themselves together" and "stop being so silly" as it's only a "phase" they are going through......most "sensible" people realise that it's a bad "choice"

indeed

An interesting piece about a professional footballer aged 25 who has just come out as being gay and has given up football simultaneously. This is a sad indictment of perceived attitudes in the national sport (but former team-mates have tweeted their support) and what he says about how he felt growing up gay (he was born in 1988) speaks volumes about how much further we have to go to achieve true emancipation for people who are not heterosexual.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/343668

[scottycelt]

You introduced a set of statistics showing the number of civil partnerships dissolved in 2011. I provided two links: one to flesh out the statistics you had provided (in other words, I wasn't attempting anything by linking to them. They give a more detailed account of the statistics you introduced. They don't disprove them). The second set of statistics - from the Office of National Statistics (December 2012) - estimates that 42% of different sex marriages will end in divorce (or marriages, since as of now there are no same sex marriages only civil partnerships: so your remark that you only accept a woman and a man marrying as marriage is beside the point. The first set of figures - which you introduced - concern civil partnerships, the second - which I introduced - concern marriage as it currently exists), 34% of marriages will end in divorce by the 20th wedding anniversary.

Again, I wasn't attempting to prove anything. I was suggesting that the claim that different sex marriage is a uniquely secure basis from which to bring up children looks dubious in light of the fact that over 30% of marriages end in divorce during the years when you'd expect the children of those marriages to be ... well, children or adolescents.

You seem obsessed by the idea that people are trying to trap you or catch you out. I can't answer for other people, but I have no interest in trapping you whatsoever. I would like to know why you are - specifically - against same sex couples adopting children. Or, I'd like to know if you have any objection beyond the argument that it doesn't mirror the situation in reproductive biology so it isn't natural. Do you have any objection beyond that argument?

I'm also interested in Mr Pee's reasons for apparently objecting to same sex adoption.

In other words, I want to understand. Not to trap. What I wonder is, with all the talk of entrapment, whether you have reasons other than reference to what is natural for objecting to same sex couples adopting children. Specifically whether you think same sex relationships are unnatural and whether you think same sex couples constitute a potential risk to children (I didn't by that mean child abuse: I wondered whether you thought they might influence a child to herself / himself be lesbian / gay in later life. Though as you know the Church you belong to has attempted to categorise paedophilia as a consequence of what it calls homosexuality http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8618878.stm)

I ask these questions because I can see no reason why same sex couples should not adopt - I have no interest in the matter, since (a) I don't wish to adopt a child (b) I'm heterosexual. But I think these are important questions because I think the welfare of children is important.

At a tangent; I understand your refusal to accept same sex marriage as marriage is based on your religious beliefs. I find it odd that so much energy is expended by religious groups in trying to stop people doing things which harm no one (other than, given the ONS divorce stats possibly themselves), but there it is ... however: do you regard civil partnerships as presently constituted as acceptable? How would you feel about extending civil partnerships to different sex couples? (Or would you think of them as undermining the institution of marriage?) That's a question I'm interested in in several ways. Would you regard that as an attack on marriage? (My hunch - and it's only a hunch - is that there would be a surprisingly significant uptake of different sex civil partnerships.) You raised the subject: simple question - do you support same sex civil partnerships? [edit: and would you support extending civil partnerships to different sex couples?]

Well, again, it was actually yourself that first used the word 'trap'. Your posts are full of asking me why I oppose 'same-sex' marriage and adoption and you floated possible reasons such as religion, child-safety etc even though I had previously never mentioned any of them and had already provided my own reasons.

I explained that I wasn't introducing one of your own "reasons" into the debate (religion) as I felt that would be a useless excercise, and I strongly refuted the idea of child-safety as another of my reasons for opposition. I then repeated my argument here was on "natural" grounds but you seemed more concerned about my use of inverted commas! Now here again you seem determined that I bring religion into my own argument, so maybe any 'obsessions' are not wholly one-sided?

As for my use of the word 'natural' (which obviously bothers you somewhat) I mean simply that Nature's way of producing future generations is through heterosexual not homosexual partnerships, I would have thought that, especially in the modern scientific era, this might be generally accepted as "fact". Or is there something here that you may find slightly uncomfortable in acknowledging?

Now, you ask about Civil Partnerships (again, you are quite wrong, I didn't raise the subject!). I simply responded to Ferret's stated statistics on the number of 'dissolutions' and then I mentioned Mr Cameron's idea of 'equality' regarding the lack of availability to heterosexual couples. I was merely demonstrating the utter tosh of his 'equality' argument ... and Mr Miliband's and Mr Clegg's as well.

To answer another of your questions, no, I can't honestly claim to 'support' Civil Partnerships but I accept these as a fact of modern life and as a way of bringing homosexual relationships into the legal framework. As a separate but 'equal' institution to heterosexual marriage I consider the current arrangements to be perfectly adequate in protecting the rights of everybody and also give each institution it's own "space". Some homosexuals have expressed similar views and are against 'same sex marriage' though for many other and quite different reasons! This itself explodes the whole myth of 'equality' being the driving-force behind 'same-sex marriage', imv.

That's just the way I see and understand things, I'm afraid, Julien ...

[Resurrection Man]

And should lesbian and gay children be removed from heterosexual parents?

However, what if these children are being put up for adoption ...?

Who'd be a social worker?

Now you're just being silly.

I'll address your, flossies and GG's usual trivialisation of anyone's views that do not agree with your own.

As a growing teenager I would have been very uncomfortable having to be exposed to mental, social or physical issues of sexuality, menstruation etc with an adult member of the opposite sex. I doubt that I am unique in this.

It might fly in the face of your happy-clappy liberal views and for you it may well not be a problem. But just for once, think about what other people or children might be concerned about ....

[scottycelt]

Eagle Eye Fleagle strikes again! Oh, and have you ever noticed that nobody on telly ever gets a full cup of tea ? Of course, gays notice things like that, we are so sensitive you see !

As far as I'm concerned, "they" don't seem to get any tea at all, Ferret ... they all seem to be sipping fresh air.

[Flosshilde]

As a growing teenager I would have been very uncomfortable having to be exposed to mental, social or physical issues of sexuality, menstruation etc with an adult member of the opposite sex. I doubt that I am unique in this.

You might not be unique, but I doubt that your feelings are (or were) universal. How do you think single (through divorce or death, for example) mothers manage with their sons, or fathers with their daughters? If the parent or child finds it difficult there are usually other family members (grandparents, aunts or uncles) or friends who can be called on. You seem to think that lesbians & gay men grow up & exist in a bubble, with no family or friends around them.

I'll address your, flossies and GG's usual trivialisation of anyone's views that do not agree with your own.

In a future post, I assume, as you haven't done it here. & I think most of the trivialisation comes from you, notably, and SC.