Homosexual Marriage and Adoption
- Thread starter Satya
- Start date
Yeah, I figured I missed something there.
And apparently what I missed was about the size of the Atlantic Ocean...
I'll resume lurkiness now....
*creeps away*
IDK, there are some books out there on the subject that should be thrown away and I feel for anyone who may have picked one up and now believes that interpetation of what we do!
See this is exactly why I said it so that no one would turn against me. Satya is well like the most scholar person on here and also has 11 superstar points and I have one. Also I haven't been here that long either.
To sum up our conclusion:
Excellent.
I'm sure they do.
Man, this brought back memories
But yeah. I just want to make a reminder that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and that as long as you're not forcing your viewpoints on others or discriminating on them, then there's really nothing too wrong with believing what you do.
Just throwing that out there.
Trust me. The rep doesn't mean anything.
My conclusions is that a male figure is not necessarily needed as a parent. At least not in the case of homosexual couples. Now it isn't fair to take ponts out of context Pristine.
Not objections to the Bible per se, just objections to certain translations and interpretations of the Bible. We have already gone over this, and you had your chance to take issue with homosexuality from a Christian perspective but you chose to opt out because as you stated, "feelings are neither right nor wrong".
Last edited:
Okaay , but I think it is to see that I take on a reductionist approach whereas you look upon it with a gestalt approach.
I have officially accept and respect your belief though.
Live and let live?
(hope you don't hate me Satya :/ )
What do therapy styles have to do with anything? Your going to have to explain this in a little more detail for me.
I have officially accept and respect your belief though.
Live and let live?
Happy to hear it. I accept and respect that you have your own belief as well.
Well I'm the type of person who will use my knowledge in a wide range of fields as they intertwine and go together. They are not only therapy styles, actually the reductionist approach refers to 'understanding something by looking at the smaller parts by which it is made of' and the gestalt refers to 'looking at the whole'.
AAAW lucky me, great for my conscience. I'm glad to hear ^^
Hm...interesting perspective, and I think I can see where you are coming from. Your primary argument has been that a male and female are needed to reproduce and so a male and female are needed to raise a well adjusted child. My argument has been that a male and female are needed to reproduce but a male and female aren't necessarily necessary to raise a child. You have based much of your arguments on your personal experiences and studies that indicate the importance of having a male figure around in a child's life, whereas I've based my arguments on studies of same sex couples who have raised just as well adjusted children as their heterosexual counterparts.
However, that disagreement poses an interesting question. Since it is evident that an involved male figure is important to a child's development, how is it that lesbian couples are so capable of raising children to be well adjusted? To me, the answer is that a male figure isn't needed as a parent. A child who already has a father, will look to that father automatically as their male figure regardless of whether or not that father is involved in the child's life. A child who has no father is free to look to other male figures outside of their immediate family for guidance. So while a lesbian couple may not be ideal since it doesn't have a handy male figure available, a child will still likely find a male figure for guidance and end up well adjusted.
I would say this gender role argument isn't really a strong argument against forbidding gay couples from adopting since the ending outcome is still desirable, but it is a strong argument for having mentorship in the life of a child adopted by gay parents.
You got what I meant
Exactly they will have a male attained from some other source if not directly from the familly. This is what I have been saying all along.
This is adorable, I AM SOOO HAPPY. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING, SATYA. That a lesbian child may be well adjusted because of an extraneous variable - a male figure from outside of the familly.
Honestly haha, it has not been clear to me that we were discussing whether it should be forbidden. Only if it should be allowed in terms of like ethics. Although the arguments sustain and I agree ^^
- We have finally reached an agreement and this debate comes towards its end. I think of you higher now that I have argumented with you haha. You should become a lawyer!!
Last edited:
I'm not sure I understand the difference between "it should be forbidden" and "if it should be allowed in terms of like ethics". But ok. As long as we can agree that gay couples should be allowed to adopt children, I'm happy.
Ug. Those of us who have souls don't make great lawyers. I'm a social worker to the core.
I believe my feelings were hurt for but a moment. Are we talking feelings, then, as the cornerstone of hs? Just curious. I think it unfair to quote scriptures here anyway; it's not as if everyone came to a tent revival or something. I can still see out of one eye.
Yes, this would not be the best thread to quote scriptures.
However, if you would like to take part in my God is a sexist, homophobic, proslavery, sadistic, murderer thread, then I think we could have a fun discussion about the scriptures.
This thread is a discussion about homosexual adoption and marriage.
Last edited:
very small tip, satya: you can rove the "highlight=..." from the url, and then the reader wouldn't be annoyed at all the highlighting.