Is Homosexual Adoption Right? (ENDS 24/7/11)

[FunXiaomilitary]

No. Some people kill themselves because of bullying, or self-harm, if not any of them they're most probably gonna be badly scarred in their adult life, purely because of this reason I'd disagree with homosexuals adopting children. +don't be like 'THEYRE GONNA BE BULLIED SOMETIME IN THEIR LIFE PROBS ANYWAY!!!' because being bullied because of your family enviroment and upbringing is obviously going to scar alot worse than being bullied for whatever - a monobrow, bad hair or whatever, which you can fix.
Just saying lol, I mean, if a kid goes into school and everyone finds out theyre mums/dads are gay, obviously people are gonna be calling him/her a ******/lesbian/gay because of their parents, that's just the way some people are at school nowadays.

I agree with this cause its like awarkard ... And students in school nowadays like to make fun of people ...

[Tom]

Well its interesting you'd say that, I believe everytime gay marriage for example has been put to a public vote (even in 'liberal' states in the United States such as California) it's been rejected by the people. I very much doubt that gay adoption would be voted through here in Britain, let alone the liberal states in the United States. My own personal view is that i'm unsure - to me it changes (my libertarian views) when it involves others such as with abortion because libertarianism is individual freedom and not the freedom to decide for others/harm others. The traditional family has been damaged to such an extent and being conservative I loathe it and i'm not sure whether or not gay adoption does anything else but weaken it as the prospect of gay marriage does.

I'd put moral issues like this up for a referendum as they involve others but i'd probably vote no as i'm simply not comfortable with it. In terms of gay marriage which is another similar issue, i'd simply get government out of marriage and make it a private contract between two individuals and people can call it what they want - but still in my own eyes i'd only ever view hetrosexual marriages held in religious places as 'marriage' - but that same solution can't be said with gay adoption. So;

Gay adoption; personally against, however would put to a referendum as the liberty vs democracy issue is blurred.
Gay marriage; would get the government out of marriage (so de facto legalise), but would only *personally* view hetrosexual marriages as 'marriage'.

I agree with this cause its like awarkard ... And students in school nowadays like to make fun of people ...

You said you believe in freedom - don't homosexual people deserve freedom? We're not different people from different worlds. So why can't we have equal rights? If a homosexual person wants a child he should be able to get it, as he would feel love towards it and not abuse it, like some parents do to their children.

Bringing religion into this is a different matter. Again, as I've said before now, if "God" created the world and everyone in it, he created homosexual people? Obviously you will stand by your opinions and I accept that, but you just have to realise that homosexual people ARE human beings and DO deserve equal rights and even a chance at bringing up a family as it may even be a long term goal? But they can't achieve it because they're gay?

[-:Undertaker:-]

You said you believe in freedom - don't homosexual people deserve freedom? We're not different people from different worlds. So why can't we have equal rights? If a homosexual person wants a child he should be able to get it, as he would feel love towards it and not abuse it, like some parents do to their children.

Well hang on a minute, i've just said that although gay marriage for instance may be against my taste and I do not consider it equal to normal marriage that I would not ban it, rather that I would simply get government out of marriage so that government did not define marriage. Therefore under that system, you could in theory be married to a table, an aunt or your grandad and call it marriage - but obviously in my eyes and the eyes of others we wouldn't consider it marriage just as many do not consider gay marriage equal to hetrosexual marriage (as I stated, even liberal states have knocked it back everytime its been put to a public vote).

My issue with the gay adoption is simple, that although I want to maximize freedom and liberty, liberty is not an end all when it directly affects another human being which I believe gay adoption does so just as abortion does. The same applies to murder, whilst i'm a libertarian I know that we need basic rules on what can/cannot affect others directly (usually physically). I'm not sure whether I like the general idea of it which I am not all comfortable with but then on the other hand I can see the slight liberty argument to it - hence why I would rather something like this go to a public referendum rather than gay marriage which should simply have government taken out of marriage.

I'm not comfortable with it and thats more or less it, the traditional family in my view is by far the best and most superior form of relationship for children to grow up around and I think more support should be placed upon that rather than the idea of gay adoption. The point with marriage is that although I disapprove I can allow it to happen without worrying that it would affect others directly, with gay adoption or abortion on the other hand that same principle cannot be applied which is why I find myself at a crossroads with it.

Bringing religion into this is a different matter. Again, as I've said before now, if "God" created the world and everyone in it, he created homosexual people? Obviously you will stand by your opinions and I accept that, but you just have to realise that homosexual people ARE human beings and DO deserve equal rights and even a chance at bringing up a family as it may even be a long term goal? But they can't achieve it because they're gay?

I'm not sure whether this is aimed at me or not or whether its a general point, but either way I haven't myself brought religion into this debate. But what i've always asked myself on this 'equal rights' agenda, is why doesn't this apply to incest couples for instance from your side of the argument? you probably find it revolting as others find homosexuality revolting yet why can't a incest couple marry and adopt but a homosexual couple can in the name of equal rights? personally as I said earlier, i'd make marriage a remit outside of government control thus allowing marriegs which are incest, gay or anything else - but my issue with adoption is that is directly affects the children involved as is with abortion.

And from my point of view, i'm not sure its best for the child or something i'm comfortable with.

[FunXiaomilitary]

Its not good for a child and I am not bais or something

[Inseriousity.]

How does gay marriage/adoption ruin the 'traditional family unit'. If a gay man's in the closet cos society says he needs to have a family, needs to settle down and have kids... how is that healthy for anyone in that family unit. Perhaps the makeup/structure of the traditional family unit has changed but as long as the values of a family unit (love, support, stability) remains then it doesn't matter if it's single-parent, same-sex parent etc.

[Muct]

You said you believe in freedom - don't homosexual people deserve freedom?

Yes, but when it gets to the point that their adoptive children get bullied in school so much that they could kill themself/self-harm, it has to be cut down a little. By the way, I'm not homophobic, I'm bi lol.

[Tom]

Yes, but when it gets to the point that their adoptive children get bullied in school so much that they could kill themself/self-harm, it has to be cut down a little. By the way, I'm not homophobic, I'm bi lol.

Yes, I see where you're coming from. But that's why they need parents - someone they can tell their problems too. If the parents care they'd do something about it and make sure it stops! It's what I would do!

How does gay marriage/adoption ruin the 'traditional family unit'. If a gay man's in the closet cos society says he needs to have a family, needs to settle down and have kids... how is that healthy for anyone in that family unit. Perhaps the makeup/structure of the traditional family unit has changed but as long as the values of a family unit (love, support, stability) remains then it doesn't matter if it's single-parent, same-sex parent etc.

I totally agree with this. As long as the child is loved, supported and IS in a stable father-son relationship it's fine. The child wouldn't object as long as he's happy and if I'm honest, being with a more caring home is better than being in a "mistake" home, where you weren't meant to be born and you're treated like dirt if that makes sense. At least if they adopted the baby IS wanted.

[FlyingJesus]

My issue with the gay adoption is simple, that although I want to maximize freedom and liberty, liberty is not an end all when it directly affects another human being which I believe gay adoption does so just as abortion does.

Suggesting that gay adoption can be argued against on the basis of liberty suggests that all conception ought to be banned in case the resulting life is not 100% perfect. There's nothing proven to say that two men or two women cannot effectively bring up a child, and to attempt to police influence on a child's upbringing would, I'm sure you'd agree, be a far greater attack on liberty than the possibility of them suffering socially at school - something which is a result of other peoples' actions outside the family, and only indirectly because of the situation at home. Do you also believe that single persons should not be allowed to adopt or give birth? Should disabled folk and those without the financial means to give a child the best life have forced hysterectomies and vasectomies?

I'm not comfortable with it and thats more or less it, the traditional family in my view is by far the best and most superior form of relationship for children to grow up around and I think more support should be placed upon that rather than the idea of gay adoption.

Again, should only 100% healthy heterosexual couples be allowed children? I believe that support ought to be placed on family life, but not necessarily the typical 2.4 children model as it simply isn't always the best way for a family to run. Divorce happens, and that can often be far better for the family than attempting to keep a loveless couple together and give the children a warped view of how families work. If it's lack of an opposing gender influence that worries you, consider that humans are generally somewhat social creatures and it's extremely rare for a child to grow up without a lot of input from family friends, and regardless of that "gender" a whole is in a species as advanced as ours something that's really only necessary as a sexual thing rather than social or mental.

[Richie]

I'm just going to be blunt, no it isn't right.

Children deserve to have both a female and a male role model in their life, preferably their parents. I'm not homophobic, if people want to pick those flowers or tickle them pickles let them.. I just don't think it should involve children unless it's their own child from a past relationship then it's 100% up to them if they want to bring a child up like that.

[FlyingJesus]

I'm just going to be blunt, no it isn't right.

Children deserve to have both a female and a male role model in their life, preferably their parents. I'm not homophobic, if people want to pick those flowers or tickle them pickles let them.. I just don't think it should involve children unless it's their own child from a past relationship then it's 100% up to them if they want to bring a child up like that.

If it's lack of an opposing gender influence that worries you, consider that humans are generally somewhat social creatures and it's extremely rare for a child to grow up without a lot of input from family friends, and regardless of that "gender" a whole is in a species as advanced as ours something that's really only necessary as a sexual thing rather than social or mental.

Hi there