• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should SSM couples be permitted to adopt children?

Should SSM couples be permitted to adopt children?


  • Total voters
    79

JANFU

Land by the Gulf Stream
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
59,042
Reaction score
38,585
Location
Best Coast Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Should SSM couples be permitted to adopt children?
Yes - Why
No - Why
Not Sure - Why
 
Should SSM couples be permitted to adopt children?
Yes - Why
No - Why
Not Sure - Why

Only Russian children, but I enjoy irony.
 
Of course. I can't think of a reason why not.
 
Unless every abandoned child is adopted I fail to see the reason why we should turn orphan children away by two loving and kind parents regardless of their sexual orientation.
 
Should SSM couples be permitted to adopt children?
Yes - Why
No - Why
Not Sure - Why

Absolutely. Because they make good parents and despite what many fear they don't teach those children to be gay.
 
Should SSM couples be permitted to adopt children?
Yes - Why
No - Why
Not Sure - Why

No reason why not. Correction: no good reason why not. I'm sure there are countless really bad reasons why they shouldn't adopt children, as we will no doubt have recounted to us later in the thread.
 
Only the ones that are up for adoption
 
No reason why not. Correction: no good reason why not. I'm sure there are countless really bad reasons why they shouldn't adopt children, as we will no doubt have recounted to us later in the thread.

Oh yeah, sure it is coming fast.
They must have overslept as they were up late listening to Hillary’s speeches, they can be quite riveting.
 
Absolutely. Because they make good parents and despite what many fear they don't teach those children to be gay.

Minor correction/clarification: some make good parents, some make bad parents, some are just average. Shockingly, gay people are just like every one else.
 
Minor correction/clarification: some make good parents, some make bad parents, some are just average. Shockingly, gay people are just like every one else.

Yeah you're correct, thanks for the clarification.
 
Yes, oh yes. There's too much indifference for others within our society. I have same-sex couples as friends and they, for the most part, have an abundance of love to give to a child in need, especially since for a long while mainstream society looked down on this group, causing these folk much anxiety. The widespread yearning for love from others is acute, emanating from the unwanted, including children without parents, up for adoption, and adoption is almost the perfect cure in this category. The child will grow up in a home with unconditional love, a secure mental foundation grounded in love, and ready to contribute to our cultural community in a positive way.
 
There is no reason to hold same sex marriages to a different standard than traditional marriages, in any regard including adopting children. Again, this entire thing is about equality not special conditions.

We all agree there are plenty of terrible parents out there, but there is no real reason to look at sexual orientation as the method of assigning a positive or negative association with being a capable, loving, supportive, and strong parent.

The fact that this is even a question tells us we have much work to do in this regard.
 
I would have voted "other" in the poll, had that option been present.

Same-sex couples should be permitted to adopt .. but, they must conform to the same state-by-state regulations as any other couple.

Thus, if a state says the couple must be married, then either the state must change their statute to additionally say "or homarried" (or whatever word that state has employed to differentiate marriage (meaning "a man and a woman as husband and wife") from what obviously isn't "marriage" (like a man and a man or a woman and a woman or a non-romantic domestic partnership, or whatever)) or the couple must conform to existing state statutes or not adopt.

Regardless, however, a same-sex couple should be discouraged from adopting.

This is because that parental gender role modeling significantly teaches a child subliminally how to behave in a romantic relationship as an adult and the great majority of the time a same-sex couple will damage a child thusly.

In a marriage, the man and the woman as parents model how a man and a woman would behave in a romantic relationship, so if their children are either a boy or a girl, and if their children are straight (it is a roughly 94+ percent likelihood statistically that a child is straight, not homosexual, transsexual, or "bi"-sexual), then the children receive the proper and positive gender-appropriate role modeling.

But in a homarriage, two men as parents present negative and damaging gender romantic role modeling gender-wise alone to a straight child and especially to a female straight child, and two women as parents present a negative and damaging gender romantic role modeling gender-wise alone to a straight child and especially to a male straight child.

Two men in a same-sex romantic relationship are frequently physically rough with each other in a way that a man and a woman simply aren't, and thus a straight female child raised by these men would likely internalize that roughness as a "desirable" trait in her relationship .. and end up in a relationship with an abusive man where she could get severely injured or killed.

Both married and homarried couples are equally apt percentage-wise to bring a similar degree of dysfunction into their relationship which will harm their kids, so this is a wash comparing either type of couple.

But a homarried (same-sex) couple introduces an additional significant dysfunction inculcation into their children as I've just presented, which occurs the overwhelming vast majority of the time (the rare exception being a gay boy raised by two men partners and a lesbian girl raised by two women patners).

The severity of the damage done to such children cannot be rightly and intelligently overlooked and dismissed.

Though we know that homosexuality is an epigentic anomaly inculcated in a prenatal human during gestation, we as yet don't have a definitive lab test to determine if an infant, toddler, or young child is straight or gay or trans or the so-called "bi". If we did have such a test, we could direct gay boys to be adopted by male same-sex partners and lesbian girls to be adopted by female same-sex partners, as either of these adopted by either the opposite gender same-sex partners or a straight couple would be significantly harmed gender role-modeling-wise.

Arguably, going without a parent in foster care is worse than the harmful gender role modeling I've presented here .. and I do stress the word "arguably".

But there are many opposite-sex couples seeking to adopt .. and I would advise that until all qualifying opposite-sex couples adoptions have been satisfied, that qualifying same-sex couples be placed at the end of the line, for understandably good reasons I've presented here.

I'm not saying that same-sex couples not be permitted to adopt.

I'm simply saying that we need to be sensitive to the very real needs of the children being adopted first.

It's simply stupid to be compelled into doing known harm to children merely because one has been sucked into a victim mentality acting-out state regarding the current issues projected onto same-sex couples.
 
I would have voted "other" in the poll, had that option been present.

Same-sex couples should be permitted to adopt .. but, they must conform to the same state-by-state regulations as any other couple.

Thus, if a state says the couple must be married, then either the state must change their statute to additionally say "or homarried" (or whatever word that state has employed to differentiate marriage (meaning "a man and a woman as husband and wife") from what obviously isn't "marriage" (like a man and a man or a woman and a woman or a non-romantic domestic partnership, or whatever)) or the couple must conform to existing state statutes or not adopt.

Regardless, however, a same-sex couple should be discouraged from adopting.

This is because that parental gender role modeling significantly teaches a child subliminally how to behave in a romantic relationship as an adult and the great majority of the time a same-sex couple will damage a child thusly.

In a marriage, the man and the woman as parents model how a man and a woman would behave in a romantic relationship, so if their children are either a boy or a girl, and if their children are straight (it is a roughly 94+ percent likelihood statistically that a child is straight, not homosexual, transsexual, or "bi"-sexual), then the children receive the proper and positive gender-appropriate role modeling.

But in a homarriage, two men as parents present negative and damaging gender romantic role modeling gender-wise alone to a straight child and especially to a female straight child, and two women as parents present a negative and damaging gender romantic role modeling gender-wise alone to a straight child and especially to a male straight child.

Two men in a same-sex romantic relationship are frequently physically rough with each other in a way that a man and a woman simply aren't, and thus a straight female child raised by these men would likely internalize that roughness as a "desirable" trait in her relationship .. and end up in a relationship with an abusive man where she could get severely injured or killed.

Both married and homarried couples are equally apt percentage-wise to bring a similar degree of dysfunction into their relationship which will harm their kids, so this is a wash comparing either type of couple.

But a homarried (same-sex) couple introduces an additional significant dysfunction inculcation into their children as I've just presented, which occurs the overwhelming vast majority of the time (the rare exception being a gay boy raised by two men partners and a lesbian girl raised by two women patners).

The severity of the damage done to such children cannot be rightly and intelligently overlooked and dismissed.

Though we know that homosexuality is an epigentic anomaly inculcated in a prenatal human during gestation, we as yet don't have a definitive lab test to determine if an infant, toddler, or young child is straight or gay or trans or the so-called "bi". If we did have such a test, we could direct gay boys to be adopted by male same-sex partners and lesbian girls to be adopted by female same-sex partners, as either of these adopted by either the opposite gender same-sex partners or a straight couple would be significantly harmed gender role-modeling-wise.

Arguably, going without a parent in foster care is worse than the harmful gender role modeling I've presented here .. and I do stress the word "arguably".

But there are many opposite-sex couples seeking to adopt .. and I would advise that until all qualifying opposite-sex couples adoptions have been satisfied, that qualifying same-sex couples be placed at the end of the line, for understandably good reasons I've presented here.

I'm not saying that same-sex couples not be permitted to adopt.

I'm simply saying that we need to be sensitive to the very real needs of the children being adopted first.

It's simply stupid to be compelled into doing known harm to children merely because one has been sucked into a victim mentality acting-out state regarding the current issues projected onto same-sex couples.

I once had a friend who I would say "homarried," but I don't think you and I are talking about the same thing.
 
I would have voted "other" in the poll, had that option been present.

Same-sex couples should be permitted to adopt .. but, they must conform to the same state-by-state regulations as any other couple.

Thus, if a state says the couple must be married, then either the state must change their statute to additionally say "or homarried" (or whatever word that state has employed to differentiate marriage (meaning "a man and a woman as husband and wife") from what obviously isn't "marriage" (like a man and a man or a woman and a woman or a non-romantic domestic partnership, or whatever)) or the couple must conform to existing state statutes or not adopt.

Homarried is your own term, much like one members referring to Homosexuals - as gayness - right out there.

Regardless, however, a same-sex couple should be discouraged from adopting.

This is because that parental gender role modeling significantly teaches a child subliminally how to behave in a romantic relationship as an adult and the great majority of the time a same-sex couple will damage a child thusly.

And the science says???????????

In a marriage, the man and the woman as parents model how a man and a woman would behave in a romantic relationship, so if their children are either a boy or a girl, and if their children are straight (it is a roughly 94+ percent likelihood statistically that a child is straight, not homosexual, transsexual, or "bi"-sexual), then the children receive the proper and positive gender-appropriate role modeling.
Yep, me again with the science and studies say?


Two men in a same-sex romantic relationship are frequently physically rough with each other in a way that a man and a woman simply aren't, and thus a straight female child raised by these men would likely internalize that roughness as a "desirable" trait in her relationship .. and end up in a relationship with an abusive man where she could get severely injured or killed.
And you know this is fact? How so?


Though we know that homosexuality is an epigentic anomaly inculcated in a prenatal human during gestation, we as yet don't have a definitive lab test to determine if an infant, toddler, or young child is straight or gay or trans or the so-called "bi". If we did have such a test, we could direct gay boys to be adopted by male same-sex partners and lesbian girls to be adopted by female same-sex partners, as either of these adopted by either the opposite gender same-sex partners or a straight couple would be significantly harmed gender role-modeling-wise.
Nope- In the genes, and I ain't referring to blue jeans.

It's simply stupid to be compelled into doing known harm to children merely because one has been sucked into a victim mentality acting-out state regarding the current issues projected onto same-sex couples.
And studies state?

Gay Parents As Good As Straight Ones | BU Today | Boston University

Same-sex marriage and children's well-being: Research*roundup - Journalist's Resource Journalist's Resource

“Promoting the Well-Being of Children Whose Parents Are Gay or Lesbian”
2013 study from Tufts University, Boston Medical Center and the Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health published in Pediatrics.

Abstract: “Extensive data available from more than 30 years of research reveal that children raised by gay and lesbian parents have demonstrated resilience with regard to social, psychological, and sexual health despite economic and legal disparities and social stigma. Many studies have demonstrated that children’s well-being is affected much more by their relationships with their parents, their parents’ sense of competence and security, and the presence of social and economic support for the family than by the gender or the sexual orientation of their parents. Lack of opportunity for same-gender couples to marry adds to families’ stress, which affects the health and welfare of all household members.”
 
Yes, oh yes. There's too much indifference for others within our society. I have same-sex couples as friends and they, for the most part, have an abundance of love to give to a child in need, especially since for a long while mainstream society looked down on this group, causing these folk much anxiety. The widespread yearning for love from others is acute, emanating from the unwanted, including children without parents, up for adoption, and adoption is almost the perfect cure in this category. The child will grow up in a home with unconditional love, a secure mental foundation grounded in love, and ready to contribute to our cultural community in a positive way.

So that gives them the right to screw up some kids life?
 
So that gives them the right to screw up some kids life?

A "home with unconditional love, a secure mental foundation grounded in love and, ready to contribute to our cultural community in a positive way" is screwing up a kid's life?
 
Sure.

No idea what SSM has to do with it.
 
Sure.

No idea what SSM has to do with it.

Discrimination by some based upon sexual orientation.
Discrimination by some, based upon Religious beliefs.
Discrimination based upon those that believe it is unnatural.
And as Justice Roberts may rule in favor of SSM, discrimination based upon sex.
 
Should SSM couples be permitted to adopt children?
Yes - Why
No - Why
Not Sure - Why

Of course
"Sexual Orientation" straight, gay, Bi should never be a reason alone that impacts adoption, only an asshole would think it is.
 
Minor correction/clarification: some make good parents, some make bad parents, some are just average. Shockingly, gay people are just like every one else.

Some how there are many people who lack the intelligence to understand that.
 
I would have voted "other" in the poll, had that option been present.

Same-sex couples should be permitted to adopt .. but, they must conform to the same state-by-state regulations as any other couple.

Thus, if a state says the couple must be married, then either the state must change their statute to additionally say "or homarried" (or whatever word that state has employed to differentiate marriage (meaning "a man and a woman as husband and wife") from what obviously isn't "marriage" (like a man and a man or a woman and a woman or a non-romantic domestic partnership, or whatever)) or the couple must conform to existing state statutes or not adopt.

Regardless, however, a same-sex couple should be discouraged from adopting.

This is because that parental gender role modeling significantly teaches a child subliminally how to behave in a romantic relationship as an adult and the great majority of the time a same-sex couple will damage a child thusly.

In a marriage, the man and the woman as parents model how a man and a woman would behave in a romantic relationship, so if their children are either a boy or a girl, and if their children are straight (it is a roughly 94+ percent likelihood statistically that a child is straight, not homosexual, transsexual, or "bi"-sexual), then the children receive the proper and positive gender-appropriate role modeling.

But in a homarriage, two men as parents present negative and damaging gender romantic role modeling gender-wise alone to a straight child and especially to a female straight child, and two women as parents present a negative and damaging gender romantic role modeling gender-wise alone to a straight child and especially to a male straight child.

Two men in a same-sex romantic relationship are frequently physically rough with each other in a way that a man and a woman simply aren't, and thus a straight female child raised by these men would likely internalize that roughness as a "desirable" trait in her relationship .. and end up in a relationship with an abusive man where she could get severely injured or killed.

Both married and homarried couples are equally apt percentage-wise to bring a similar degree of dysfunction into their relationship which will harm their kids, so this is a wash comparing either type of couple.

But a homarried (same-sex) couple introduces an additional significant dysfunction inculcation into their children as I've just presented, which occurs the overwhelming vast majority of the time (the rare exception being a gay boy raised by two men partners and a lesbian girl raised by two women patners).

The severity of the damage done to such children cannot be rightly and intelligently overlooked and dismissed.

Though we know that homosexuality is an epigentic anomaly inculcated in a prenatal human during gestation, we as yet don't have a definitive lab test to determine if an infant, toddler, or young child is straight or gay or trans or the so-called "bi". If we did have such a test, we could direct gay boys to be adopted by male same-sex partners and lesbian girls to be adopted by female same-sex partners, as either of these adopted by either the opposite gender same-sex partners or a straight couple would be significantly harmed gender role-modeling-wise.

Arguably, going without a parent in foster care is worse than the harmful gender role modeling I've presented here .. and I do stress the word "arguably".

But there are many opposite-sex couples seeking to adopt .. and I would advise that until all qualifying opposite-sex couples adoptions have been satisfied, that qualifying same-sex couples be placed at the end of the line, for understandably good reasons I've presented here.

I'm not saying that same-sex couples not be permitted to adopt.

I'm simply saying that we need to be sensitive to the very real needs of the children being adopted first.

It's simply stupid to be compelled into doing known harm to children merely because one has been sucked into a victim mentality acting-out state regarding the current issues projected onto same-sex couples.

I stopped reading at about sentence three where I'm sure most people stopped. Just reading that far and I could feel myself almost getting dumber. My educated brain didn't allow me to read anymore in self preservation.


Maybe next time at least try to make it funny so it has entertainment value because that was just plain stupid.
 
Back
Top Bottom