|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:19 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| I'm all for gay marriages (these couples pay taxes, too, so they should have the same financial safety nets in case one of them dies). But, the third parent thing is a bit much. She's the step-mother, that's it. But, wouldn't it be possible for her to adopt the kids if they were American? Didn't Brad Pitt adopt Angelina Jolie's adopted son, who's dad would think is Billy Bob Thornton? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
riley
Joined: 08 Feb 2003
Location: where creditors can find me
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I don't understand is the legal phrase "legal parent", what is the difference between that and a guardian?
My only real problem with the issue is the idea of 3 parents, one of which is not the biological parent, is the step-parent. Practically speaking, either it's going to work because the child loves the step-parent or it won't work because the child won't love the step-parent. As far as I can see, gender doesn't seem to be that important towards how successful the family will be. The new "mom" is still the step-parent just like in any heterosexual divorced family.
Besides which, wouldn't this whole thing be moot because Canada allows gay marriage. Wouldn't that allow the spouse to become the guardian of the child?
Either way, it's none of my damn business, and frankly the issue smells like it is being politically manipulated by one side or the other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dulouz
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: Uranus
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The slippery slope argument applies. Its a wish list of bizarre desires from the self absorbed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan The Chainsawman
Joined: 05 May 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| So if you want to be a caregiver to a child and bring them up in a loving caring household you are now labeled self absorbed? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dulouz
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: Uranus
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It aint about raising a kid, its about victory over bigotry and oppression and Hitler while making it look like you care about a kid. it aint about the kid, its about the attention they get while doing so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kermo
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: Eating eggs, with a comb, out of a shoe.
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dulouz wrote: |
| It aint about raising a kid, its about victory over bigotry and oppression and Hitler while making it look like you care about a kid. it aint about the kid, its about the attention they get while doing so. |
I think the parental status can be worth more than just a political victory. Say for instance that the biological mother and father are killed in a car crash. Who gets custody? The child's grandparents or the mom's girlfriend? If the third caregiver were male, this wouldn't be an issue.
Additionally, suppose this woman spends 10 years caring for and raising this child, and she and the biological mother have a falling-out, leading to a "divorce" (legal or not.) Would this woman have visitation rights? I doubt it.
The law recognizes co-habiting male-female couples as "common-law" spouses even if they haven't made a formal, legal commitment to each other. How hypocritical to insist that this is more acceptable or better for society than two men or two women who want to spend their lives together and raise a family?
Even if you believe that there is something wrong with being gay, that it's a mental illness or a genetic flaw, none of us are perfect. We're all screwed up one way or another, and I've come to believe that we all deserve a chance when it comes to love and family.
Except for these people:
http://www.marryyourpet.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dulouz wrote: |
| It aint about raising a kid, its about victory over bigotry and oppression and Hitler while making it look like you care about a kid. it aint about the kid, its about the attention they get while doing so. |
You have absolutely zero way of knowing this, zero reason to even suspect it, and zero way of proving it. It`s pure supposition, and reveals your anti-gay bias. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atlhockey
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Jeonju City
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yu_Bum_suk wrote: |
| Don't lots of kids with step-parents already have three or four legal parents? |
As one, no. I have four "guardians" (or did, before I became my own guardian), in that any of them could sign my school papers. But legally, my biological mother and biological father were my legal parents. I lived 8 months out of the year with my mother and stepfather, and had she died, I would've been sent to my father, not left with my stepfather. In order for a stepparent to get custody rights, I think that the legal parent has to sign away their rights so the third parent can adopt. Third parent adoption is much more difficult.
And anybody who thinks gay parents are "bad" for kids certainly hasn't been reading any of the medical or psychological research on the subject. The major governing bodies of the fields agree that there is no evidence to support the idea that having same-sex parents harms kids in any way whatsoever. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| atlhockey wrote: |
And anybody who thinks gay parents are "bad" for kids certainly hasn't been reading any of the medical or psychological research on the subject. The major governing bodies of the fields agree that there is no evidence to support the idea that having same-sex parents harms kids in any way whatsoever. |
Don't get me wrong, I have no qualms with it whatsoever. But for your studies statement, the studies, like many "new age" studies, should be taken with a grain of salt. I don't trust current psychologists to be honest, and many studies nowadays are taken to heart without a lot of long term effect study. I don't think anything bad will be proven, but especially with these studies, I just don't think there has been enough long term research done on this subject. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| This is why many people don't go to the current events forum. This guy is typical of down there... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nobrand
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't see how this post isn't self absorbed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-X-
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Grimalkin wrote: |
| Quote: |
| a gay relationship is far from an ideal environment for raising kids |
There are a lot of heterosexual relationships that are far from ideal environments from raising children and a lot of gay relationships provide environments that are better than those heterosexual relationships.
Simply because a person has the physical ability to produce children that doesn't necessarily make them a fit parent. |
where did i say that all hetero relationships are ideal? of course there are tons of hetero couples out there who i hope never have children because their relationships are so unhealthy.
| Quote: |
I also believe that the more people that a child has in its life to love and care for it the better.
I think this is not an issue of gay rights but of the right of the child to have the best upbringing possible. |
my point is that the environment which provides the best chance of raising a completely well-adjusted human being is one which contains both a male and a female influence. i agree that the more people a child has in its life to love it, the better, but again my point is that an environment with even just a single man and woman to take care of and love a child is more ideal than 10 loving women or men taking care of it.
| kermo wrote: |
| -X- wrote: |
am i the only one who thinks having 2 parents of the same sex will stunt a child's mental development, especially if the child in question is male and the people raising him are exclusively female? kids need both a male AND female influence during the developmental stages to ensure they become a balanced, well-rounded person when they are older.
if you choose to enter into a permanent homosexual relationship, be it actual marriage, common-law, etc. then you should be accepting the fact that you will never be raising children of your own. period. |
Suppose a woman and a man get married. They have a couple of kids. The man takes off, or is arrested, or dies, and no longer sees the kids. Oh no! The kids no longer have a man raising them! This is certainly regretable. The woman has a number of choices:
a) she can give them up for adoption because according to your logic she must accept that she is now unfit (unless she's transgendered or hermaphroditic.)
b) she can introduce them to a series of boyfriends who float in and out of her life, providing valuable male role modelling but crushing rejection.
or
c) she can find some male role-models like her brother, father, friends, who can spend time with the children and build strong ties with them.
Of course, you'd choose option c), right? Well, why couldn't a lesbian couple do the same thing? |
in a scenario like that, yes, of course the woman should try and introduce a stable male influence into her children's lives, but surely you realize that already this situation is less than ideal. i think any male influence is better than none, and 2 parents, regardless of gender, are better than one, but i also think her brother/father/friends wouldnt have the same level of influence as a father would. their presence wouldnt be as permanent or as powerful as a loving father's would, mainly because they would have their own lives to live, their own families, etc. and inside they wouldnt view themselves as the childs stand-in father, but simply a loving relative which would lead them to approach certain aspects of parenthood differently. its a sublte difference, but a significant one. i think the only way one could argue that the level of influence on a developing child would be the same is if the woman found a relative/friend to basically act as a surrogate father and permenantly reside with her and her child.
| jaganath69 wrote: |
I wanna be adopted by lesbians.
Seriously though, if all parties consent and the child is not in danger, there should be no impediment to this. I have known plenty of people over the years raised by gay couples and they seem just as well adjusted as others I know who were raised in hetero families. -X-'s Rev. Lovejoy's wife-esque, 'won't somebody pleeease think of the children" merely underlies either a missunderstanding, dislike of gays or some statist intervention fetish. |
 um, i think you completely missed the boat on this one. after looking at everything ive posted in this thread, please show me where i imply any of those claims youve made. ive never said homosexuals would make intentionally bad parents. im simply trying to discuss this issue from a purely psychological perspective with regards to a child. i believe that there's a difference, however hard to discern on the outside, between a child being raised primarily by both a female and a male as opposed to 2 people of the same gender. other people disagree, which is fine.
unfortunately, there hasnt been enough study done to conclusively argue for either case (and yes, your anecdotal evidence amounts to precisely *beep*), although people like Dr. Kyle Pruett, clinical professor of psychiatry in the Yale Child Study Center and School of Nursing have said, "We're saying that the ideal environment is to have both a mother and father. Dads contribute something that moms don't and moms contribute something that dads don't." thats all im trying to say. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grimalkin
Joined: 22 May 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
a gay relationship is far from an ideal environment for raising kids |
There are a lot of heterosexual relationships that are far from ideal environments from raising children and a lot of gay relationships provide environments that are better than those heterosexual relationships.
Simply because a person has the physical ability to produce children that doesn't necessarily make them a fit parent. |
where did i say that all hetero relationships are ideal? of course there are tons of hetero couples out there who i hope never have children because their relationships are so unhealthy. |
...but if they did have children do you agree that there are gay couples who would make fit parents for those children?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
I also believe that the more people that a child has in its life to love and care for it the better.
I think this is not an issue of gay rights but of the right of the child to have the best upbringing possible. |
my point is that the environment which provides the best chance of raising a completely well-adjusted human being is one which contains both a male and a female influence. i agree that the more people a child has in its life to love it, the better, but again my point is that an environment with even just a single man and woman to take care of and love a child is more ideal than 10 loving women or men taking care of it. |
...relax already! I never suggested that in that case the children should be taken from their care and put into that of same sex couples. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-X-
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 11:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Grimalkin wrote: |
...but if they did have children do you agree that there are gay couples who would make fit parents for those children? |
well, yes im sure there are children out there which id much rather see being raised by anyone BUT their natural parents...but that still doesnt mean being raised by 2 parents of the same gender is ideal. all i was trying to say was that the best possible environment to raise a child is one in which both a male and female are playing a permanent role.
| Quote: |
...relax already! I never suggested that in that case the children should be taken from their care and put into that of same sex couples. |
sorry if i came across as too assertive there, or if i misunderstood you (im sure you know how easy it is to have your words misconstrued by someone else on an internet messageboard), but i love to debate and sometimes it becomes a rant. no worries  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atlhockey
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Jeonju City
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Don't get me wrong, I have no qualms with it whatsoever. But for your studies statement, the studies, like many "new age" studies, should be taken with a grain of salt. I don't trust current psychologists to be honest, and many studies nowadays are taken to heart without a lot of long term effect study. I don't think anything bad will be proven, but especially with these studies, I just don't think there has been enough long term research done on this subject. |
Just curious, but have you read them? Some actually are long-term studies, of kids that grew up with same-sex families and are now adults.
As for not trusting the research...um, if you aren't going to trust the peer-reviewed studies in reputable journals on topics like this, where is your reasoning coming from? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
