SkyDekker 1,155
You said that looking at my outdated opinions for a certain "distance"... perhaps you should get a little closer...
Heaven, no! Perhaps it's contagious
Coming back to a point of your post: Of course, I'd loved to turn back times 10 yrs ago and have him back - normal. So what? We suddenly were no family any longer? THAT was my question, Micro
Rest assured, we were a family. And still are. Even the constellation of *man/wife/child* broke down. We found other, nonetheless same fine ways to live on. As a family
dudeist skydiver # 3105
Micro, everything you say about the family may well be true.
It does not necessarily follow that we need GOVERNMENT COERCION to make it happen. That's my issue with all of this.
Most Liberals and most Conservatives are good people with good goals.
Unfortunately the Democrats and the Republicans have so monopolized the political world that we've been led to believe that if something needs to get done, then we should turn to the government to achieve it. THAT"S where I disagree, not with the ideal of building strong families.
The Democrats & Republicans have been overwhelming all political offices since before our grandparents were born. As a result we've come to the false conclusion that if something isn't under Government control, then it's out of control. That's an assumption that some of us would like to challenge.
It does not necessarily follow that we need GOVERNMENT COERCION to make it happen. That's my issue with all of this.
Most Liberals and most Conservatives are good people with good goals.
Unfortunately the Democrats and the Republicans have so monopolized the political world that we've been led to believe that if something needs to get done, then we should turn to the government to achieve it. THAT"S where I disagree, not with the ideal of building strong families.
The Democrats & Republicans have been overwhelming all political offices since before our grandparents were born. As a result we've come to the false conclusion that if something isn't under Government control, then it's out of control. That's an assumption that some of us would like to challenge.
Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
micro 0
QuoteQuoteWhere does a child thrive most? Where will a child truly reach it's full human potential? Is it in a home w/ just a mother? Just a father? Or when there are both in the home, married, getting along, fully committed to each other and living harmoniously?
I would think that being successful and good parents has to do with attitude and effort, not with whether you are a man or a woman.
it's both/and, not either/or.
I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...
billvon 2,477
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>No child should be "unwanted."
Agreed. And denying a child to two parents who want him very much, just because they are the wrong sex, is a bad thing (IMO.)
>And THEN, you stoop to kallend's level and ascribe emotions . . .
You are ordinarily a reasonable guy, and I suspect you wouldn't have called me a fool under ordinary circumstances. So I think something has you worked up.
I also think a lot of this is just people getting mad on all sides. I think that if you got to know Marc and Ray, or Emily and Michelle, you would not consider them substandard parents.
Agreed. And denying a child to two parents who want him very much, just because they are the wrong sex, is a bad thing (IMO.)
>And THEN, you stoop to kallend's level and ascribe emotions . . .
You are ordinarily a reasonable guy, and I suspect you wouldn't have called me a fool under ordinary circumstances. So I think something has you worked up.
I also think a lot of this is just people getting mad on all sides. I think that if you got to know Marc and Ray, or Emily and Michelle, you would not consider them substandard parents.
micro 0
Quote
You said that looking at my outdated opinions for a certain "distance"... perhaps you should get a little closer...
Heaven, no! Perhaps it's contagious
Coming back to a point of your post: Of course, I'd loved to turn back times 10 yrs ago and have him back - normal. So what? We suddenly were no family any longer? THAT was my question, Micro
Rest assured, we were a family. And still are. Even the constellation of *man/wife/child* broke down. We found other, nonetheless same fine ways to live on. As a family
I'm sorry if I implied you were no longer a family after his death. You still were, albeit then an incomplete one.
I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...
SkyDekker 1,155
Quoteit's both/and, not either/or.
You have something to back this up, other than the bible or "cause I said so"?
micro 0
QuoteMicro, everything you say about the family may well be true.
It does not necessarily follow that we need GOVERNMENT COERCION to make it happen. That's my issue with all of this.
Most Liberals and most Conservatives are good people with good goals.
Unfortunately the Democrats and the Republicans have so monopolized the political world that we've been led to believe that if something needs to get done, then we should turn to the government to achieve it. THAT"S where I disagree, not with the ideal of building strong families.
The Democrats & Republicans have been overwhelming all political offices since before our grandparents were born. As a result we've come to the false conclusion that if something isn't under Government control, then it's out of control. That's an assumption that some of us would like to challenge.
I agree and not once have I stated that I agree that we should have gov't "coercion" regarding this situation. However, when "special interest groups" try to "reinvent" the family and redifine it as any abbaration they see fit -by using rogue judges who legislate from the bench! THAT is when the govt. should step in and put a stop to such sillinness.
I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...
I agree, special interest groups shouldn't be allowed to define or re-define marriage either. It would be better if the government would get out of the marriage business altogether.
Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
billvon 2,477
>It would be better if the government would get out of the marriage
>business altogether.
I definitely agree there, although I fear this would be described as "the government wants to remove marriage." Let PEOPLE marry other people, in whatever religion or way they want, and let the government set up the civil union that is associated with any wedding.
>business altogether.
I definitely agree there, although I fear this would be described as "the government wants to remove marriage." Let PEOPLE marry other people, in whatever religion or way they want, and let the government set up the civil union that is associated with any wedding.
micro 0
QuoteQuoteit's both/and, not either/or.
You have something to back this up, other than the bible or "cause I said so"?
there are tons of things that back this up. however, I am not at a library where I can reference studies and sources. i'm in my home office, trying in vain to get some reports done for work. however, you don't have to look to far to reach the conclusions that I have. all too often in debates like these, the party on the other side, like the post you just made, throws down the gauntlet and says "show me your hand," meaning show me your sources... well, what should I do? cite all the books in my library? i hardly find that beneficial, since two of them cited already, which are chaulked full of valuable info that is germaine (sp?) to this topic was poo-poo'ed in a most scholarly (sarcasm alert!) fashion by our beloved professor kallend. wouldn't it be better for someone to actually go out with the question in mind and do the research themselves? I certainly have. I haven't always been so staunchly catholic. I haven't always been pro-life and pro-traditional family. I don't just blindly swallow what comes flowing from the Tiber River, contrary to the myths propogated from the secular non-believing public. I critically question and read and read some more. And I read dissenting opinions. But I also am not such a cynic who is unwilling to suspend my disbelief about things regarding belief and faith like so much of the secular public who, on the other hand, who suspends their disbelief at the drop of a ten dollar bill at hollywoods latest inane blockbuster.
So there it is...
I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...
Michele 1
Quote> I'm not quite sure I understand why you don't accept - or at least
>understand - positions other than yours.
I understand his position; he's stated it often enough. I just disagree. And I suppose I take it a bit personally because he's calling some friends of mine "substandard."
I'm sorry you think he called your friends substandard. I think he explained in a post further along that he thinks the situation is substandard, not your friends. At least, that's how I read things. Knowing you, you didn't understand that part, or you wouldn't have taken things personally. Knowing him, he isn't saying your gay friends are less, just that the situation isn't the optimum one (his opinion).
QuoteI think anyone should be able to think whatever they want is the "ideal" family. Always heterosexual, always gay, mixed-religion, same religion, whatever. It's when groups try to _legislate_ that that I get annoyed.
Agreed.
QuoteLet's reverse it. I am very much in favor of solar power. I generate my own power, I help other people install their solar power systems, I installed one at our drop zone so they have power (they're far from any utilities.) I suspect no one would have a problem with this.
Now, if I were to become an activist and start agitating for solar incentives, I might get some utility people annoyed with me, as well as some people who, on general principles, don't like such things. Also fine.
But if I started pushing for a law that required non-environmentalists be disconnected from utility service until they installed solar power - I'd expect to get a lot of grief. Because that would be me trying to impose my opinions on others. I suspect this would annoy you as well.
Yes, it would. Can I get you to install a power source for me when I get a house? I'd love to get off grid.
>So why can't it just be accepted that reasonable people might have
>different views, and hold different opinions . . .
It can be.
>and not bring ancillary issues (i.e. race, bible proscriptions . . .
Because this same sort of proposition (that there is one "correct" sort of marriage, that what God wants has something to do with it) has been used in the past to legislate morality, just as is being done now.
Agreed. Here, in California, you can have a registered domestic partnership. It counts just like a "regular" marriage does, including divorce rules and issues of financial consideration in ability to pay (i.e. medical debts, schools, and so forth). Some churchs perform "marriage" ceremonies, as well...so it's not quite the issue others seem to believe it is.
QuoteClaiming that's an ancillary issue is like claiming you should never bring 9/11 into any discussion of terrorism because "that's completely different."
If that's the impression I've left, then I wrote poorly. I mean, and thought I had made clear, that the discussion about marriage and raising a family, compared to a racial identity and/or biblical proscriptions against a certain thing should be left out of the discussion, at least as far as it's been articulated here. That is a valid discussion, too...but I don't necessarily think it's part of this discussion (unless used solely to demonstrate former laws which have been overturned...and not necessarily the "right-ness" or "wrong-ness" of a law and the thought process from which they initiated. That's all I'm trying to do; clearly bifurcate the two or three topics...and leave out the catholic bashing I'm seeing on this thread. It's unnecessary, and serves only to inflame.)
Ciels-
Michele
~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~
I saw this "Disapearing civil rights" coffee mug in a local shop that has the Bill of Rights printed on it. When you put hot liquid in the cup, the Bill of Rights disappears before your eyes!
on the box it says, "Brought to you by the Patriot Act!"
on the box it says, "Brought to you by the Patriot Act!"
Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
billvon 2,477
>Knowing him, he isn't saying your gay friends are less, just that the
>situation isn't the optimum one (his opinion).
He is pretty clearly saying that they would be substandard parents - i.e. their families are not ideal and never can be. And it's his right to say that. But as I mentioned, I don't think he would think that if he met them.
>Can I get you to install a power source for me when I get a house?
Absolutely. (Just don't get one under a tree!)
>situation isn't the optimum one (his opinion).
He is pretty clearly saying that they would be substandard parents - i.e. their families are not ideal and never can be. And it's his right to say that. But as I mentioned, I don't think he would think that if he met them.
>Can I get you to install a power source for me when I get a house?
Absolutely. (Just don't get one under a tree!)
micro 0
Quote>No child should be "unwanted."
Agreed. And denying a child to two parents who want him very much, just because they are the wrong sex, is a bad thing (IMO.)
>And THEN, you stoop to kallend's level and ascribe emotions . . .
You are ordinarily a reasonable guy, and I suspect you wouldn't have called me a fool under ordinary circumstances. So I think something has you worked up.
I also think a lot of this is just people getting mad on all sides. I think that if you got to know Marc and Ray, or Emily and Michelle, you would not consider them substandard parents.
Well, thanks for calling me reasonable, at least ordinarily so, although I fear now you have many other people calling you a fool!
And sorry for calling you a fool, but it just doesn't make sense to me how this doesn't make sense to more "enlightened" people! I mean, not to insult the intelligence of farmers, but even they get this! This is not rocket science!
Look at your statement here... "And denying a child to two parents (sic) who want him very much, just because they are the wrong sex..."
You are saying, in effect that people have a RIGHT to a CHILD! NO ONE has a right to another human being, no matter HOW BADLY they may want one!
I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...
SkyDekker 1,155
Quotethere are tons of things that back this up. however, I am not at a library where I can reference studies and sources.
Maybe you had a link to a scientific study/report with such a finding. Sounds like you don't have that, though you do have a rather longwinded way of saying that.
SkyDekker 1,155
QuoteNO ONE has a right to another human being, no matter HOW BADLY they may want one!
But once they are pregnant they should have no other right than to keep it, even if they really badly don't want a child?
micro 0
QuoteQuotethere are tons of things that back this up. however, I am not at a library where I can reference studies and sources.
Maybe you had a link to a scientific study/report with such a finding. Sounds like you don't have that, though you do have a rather longwinded way of saying that.
don't read too good do ya.
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...
billvon 2,477
> but it just doesn't make sense to me how this doesn't make
>sense to more "enlightened" people!
I understand what you believe. I just disagree - and I base that on families I have actually met.
>You are saying, in effect that people have a RIGHT to a CHILD!
They have the rights that nature (or God, depending on how you see things) gave them. And until someone tries to take that right away, they have the right to have a child. Heterosexual couples and gay women can do that on their own; gay men have to adopt or use a surrogate.
Of course, the child has rights too - and so if the family is abusive or very neglectful the child gets taken away for its own protection.
>NO ONE has a right to another human being, no matter HOW
>BADLY they may want one!
If you and your wife had wanted a child, and the government said "you don't have the right - we think you might be poor parents" I think you would object. Heck, I think you might have one anyway and prove them wrong!
>sense to more "enlightened" people!
I understand what you believe. I just disagree - and I base that on families I have actually met.
>You are saying, in effect that people have a RIGHT to a CHILD!
They have the rights that nature (or God, depending on how you see things) gave them. And until someone tries to take that right away, they have the right to have a child. Heterosexual couples and gay women can do that on their own; gay men have to adopt or use a surrogate.
Of course, the child has rights too - and so if the family is abusive or very neglectful the child gets taken away for its own protection.
>NO ONE has a right to another human being, no matter HOW
>BADLY they may want one!
If you and your wife had wanted a child, and the government said "you don't have the right - we think you might be poor parents" I think you would object. Heck, I think you might have one anyway and prove them wrong!
SkyDekker 1,155
I am more than happy to wait for you to finish your reports. Judging from your posting habits, things like that haven't stopped you in the past though.
If you have a bookcase full of required reading, great, let me know which ones. But please select a couple written by a somewhat neutral party and a scientific background. I am not asking for opinion pieces. Or you could just say that your original assertian was just your opinion and could be wrong, since I think that is quite a bit closer to the actual truth.
If you have a bookcase full of required reading, great, let me know which ones. But please select a couple written by a somewhat neutral party and a scientific background. I am not asking for opinion pieces. Or you could just say that your original assertian was just your opinion and could be wrong, since I think that is quite a bit closer to the actual truth.
micro 0
QuoteQuoteNO ONE has a right to another human being, no matter HOW BADLY they may want one!
But once they are pregnant they should have no other right than to keep it, even if they really badly don't want a child?
ever heard of the word "adoption?" hmmm... so there really IS another option other than killing the unborn? oh, and how about this one... decide to change your life and be selfless and KEEP it, and dedicate your life to becoming a GOOD PARENT! WOW!!
If they didn't want [the possibility of] a child, I guess they shouldn't have been having sex. Wow, what a concept! You just might get pregnant by
Oy
I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...
SkyDekker 1,155
QuoteIf they didn't want [the possibility of] a child, I guess they shouldn't have been having sex. Wow, what a concept! You just might get pregnant by
having sex even when *contracepting!* Isn't that just amazing? Oh, but don't worry, you can always trot on down to your local abortion clinic and have your messy little mistake, your "contraceptive failure" cleaned up for a measly few hundred dollars.
Or some women get raped, but I guess that is God's will. But you're right, when a 13 year old girl gets raped and gets pregnant, she is just being selfish when she doens't want to keep it.
Oy is right.
billvon 2,477
>there are tons of things that back this up.
Here's what I found:
-------------------------------------------
From WebMD, a medical-resources website:
Study: Same-Sex Parents Raise Well-Adjusted Kids
Researchers Say Children Who Grow Up in Households With Gay Parents Have Normal Self-Esteem
By Linda Little
Reviewed By Louise Chang, MD
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Oct.12, 2005 (Washington) -- Children growing up in same-sex parental households do not necessarily have differences in self-esteem, gender identity, or emotional problems from children growing up in heterosexual parent homes.
"There are a lot of children with at least one gay or lesbian parent," says Ellen C. Perrin, MD, professor of pediatrics at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston. She revealed the findings at the American Academy of Pediatrics Conference and Exhibition.
Between 1 million and 6 million children in the U.S. are being reared by committed lesbian or gay couples, she says. Children being raised by same-sex parents were either born to a heterosexual couple, adopted, or conceived through artificial insemination.
"The vast consensus of all the studies shows that children of same-sex parents do as well as children whose parents are heterosexual in every way," she tells WebMD. "In some ways children of same-sex parents actually may have advantages over other family structures."
--------------------------------
From the American Psychological Association:
D. Conclusion
In summary, there is no evidence to suggest that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of gay men or lesbians is compromised in any respect relative to that among offspring of heterosexual parents. Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents. Indeed, the evidence to date suggests that home environments provided by gay and lesbian parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable children's psychosocial growth.
---------------------------------------
From About.com:
Teenagers of Same-Sex Parents Developing Normally
Nov 19 2004
The debate over Gay marriage often hinges on the welfare of children. A recent study has found that teenagers of same-sex female parents are developing as well as the children of opposite-sex parents. The study found that good quality family relationships are more important contributors to successful development than family type. Adolescents raised by same-sex couples have similar dating and romantic relationship behaviors as children of opposite-sex couples.
Charlotte Patterson, co-author of the study is quoted in a University of Virginia press release as stating that "the best predictor of teens' adjustment is the quality of their relationship with parents. If parents are supportive and maintain close relationships with them, teenagers are more likely to be successful and happy at home and at school."
--------------------------------
From the AAP:
American Academy of Pediatrics Announces Support of Adoption by Same-Sex Parents
February 7, 2002
The American of Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) announced this week its support of adoption by same-sex parents. The organization not only supports the right of gay couples to adopt a child together, but also calls for legal recognition of the second parent in same-sex relationships where one parent is biological.
In a policy statement, the AAP said that all children deserve the financial, psychological, and legal security that comes from having both parents recognized. The organization also cited research suggesting that "sexual orientation is not a variable that, in itself, predicts the ability to provide a home environment that supports children's development."
. . .
The AAP presented several studies assessing the attitudes and behaviors of gay parents and the development of a child's gender identity, sexual orientation, social adjustment, self-esteem, peer relationships, and emotional health. Although the studies were admittedly small, they all found that there were more similarities than differences in the parenting styles of homosexuals and heterosexuals in stable, established relationships, and that children in both situations developed typically. Likewise, children from distressed or dysfunctional families were found to have more behavior problems than those from homes with strong, positive family relationships - regardless of whether the parents were same-sex or not.
---------------------------------
Here's what I found:
-------------------------------------------
From WebMD, a medical-resources website:
Study: Same-Sex Parents Raise Well-Adjusted Kids
Researchers Say Children Who Grow Up in Households With Gay Parents Have Normal Self-Esteem
By Linda Little
Reviewed By Louise Chang, MD
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Oct.12, 2005 (Washington) -- Children growing up in same-sex parental households do not necessarily have differences in self-esteem, gender identity, or emotional problems from children growing up in heterosexual parent homes.
"There are a lot of children with at least one gay or lesbian parent," says Ellen C. Perrin, MD, professor of pediatrics at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston. She revealed the findings at the American Academy of Pediatrics Conference and Exhibition.
Between 1 million and 6 million children in the U.S. are being reared by committed lesbian or gay couples, she says. Children being raised by same-sex parents were either born to a heterosexual couple, adopted, or conceived through artificial insemination.
"The vast consensus of all the studies shows that children of same-sex parents do as well as children whose parents are heterosexual in every way," she tells WebMD. "In some ways children of same-sex parents actually may have advantages over other family structures."
--------------------------------
From the American Psychological Association:
D. Conclusion
In summary, there is no evidence to suggest that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of gay men or lesbians is compromised in any respect relative to that among offspring of heterosexual parents. Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents. Indeed, the evidence to date suggests that home environments provided by gay and lesbian parents are as likely as those provided by heterosexual parents to support and enable children's psychosocial growth.
---------------------------------------
From About.com:
Teenagers of Same-Sex Parents Developing Normally
Nov 19 2004
The debate over Gay marriage often hinges on the welfare of children. A recent study has found that teenagers of same-sex female parents are developing as well as the children of opposite-sex parents. The study found that good quality family relationships are more important contributors to successful development than family type. Adolescents raised by same-sex couples have similar dating and romantic relationship behaviors as children of opposite-sex couples.
Charlotte Patterson, co-author of the study is quoted in a University of Virginia press release as stating that "the best predictor of teens' adjustment is the quality of their relationship with parents. If parents are supportive and maintain close relationships with them, teenagers are more likely to be successful and happy at home and at school."
--------------------------------
From the AAP:
American Academy of Pediatrics Announces Support of Adoption by Same-Sex Parents
February 7, 2002
The American of Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) announced this week its support of adoption by same-sex parents. The organization not only supports the right of gay couples to adopt a child together, but also calls for legal recognition of the second parent in same-sex relationships where one parent is biological.
In a policy statement, the AAP said that all children deserve the financial, psychological, and legal security that comes from having both parents recognized. The organization also cited research suggesting that "sexual orientation is not a variable that, in itself, predicts the ability to provide a home environment that supports children's development."
. . .
The AAP presented several studies assessing the attitudes and behaviors of gay parents and the development of a child's gender identity, sexual orientation, social adjustment, self-esteem, peer relationships, and emotional health. Although the studies were admittedly small, they all found that there were more similarities than differences in the parenting styles of homosexuals and heterosexuals in stable, established relationships, and that children in both situations developed typically. Likewise, children from distressed or dysfunctional families were found to have more behavior problems than those from homes with strong, positive family relationships - regardless of whether the parents were same-sex or not.
---------------------------------
SkyDekker 1,155
I know all that, that is why I was asking micro for a link to a scientific study that said differently. Hopefully one performed by a "neutral" organization or individual.
So far he has pointed me to his bookcase, saying he is too busy for anything else.
So far he has pointed me to his bookcase, saying he is too busy for anything else.
I would think that being successful and good parents has to do with attitude and effort, not with whether you are a man or a woman.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites