jasJis Posted August 6, 2003 Author Share Posted August 6, 2003 I think strawberry ice cream and chocolate ice cream are equally tasty, but they are not the same. Because equal does not always mean same, and in this context it obviously doesn't. In this case, equal means one group not being unneccessarily denied rights, obligations and opportunities afforded the other. In this case, the most important rights are those of the children involved, who must not be denied a loving, caring family when one is available for them. _bc, The three assumptions you've made are: 1.) that a homosexual relationship as heads of a family is equal to or just as valid in the social context (remember, society is meant by God to be a reflection of nautral law). This judgement has to be made through the lens of Christian morality. 2.) that harm is being done to the larger group of children by denying or legitimizing same sex couples to adopt. 3.) that same sex couples are the best way to help the kids needing homes. I'm godfather to an adopted child. I have a number of family members who have adopted as well as alot of childhood friends. Hyper has brought up a very valid point that is being ignored quite well. The need for adoptive parents is not the result of homosexual immorality. Kids are being created and tossed aside by heterosexual immorality. Is homosexual morality is the cure or the solution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_bc Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 (edited) The three assumptions you've made are: 1.) that a homosexual relationship as heads of a family is equal to or just as valid in the social context (remember, society is meant by God to be a reflection of nautral law). This judgement has to be made through the lens of Christian morality. 2.) that harm is being done to the larger group of children by denying or legitimizing same sex couples to adopt. 3.) that same sex couples are the best way to help the kids needing homes. Yes, and I believe them to be true, even though I think assumption no 1 doesn't need to be this strong. As far as I can see, it's a sufficiently strong assumption that a homosexual relationship is no greater cause for disqualification as a parent than a number of other possible causes that are not being considered. To make sure there is no misunderstanding: Of course I would never argue that only same sex couples should be allowed to adopt. I think that they should have to jump through the same hoops as heterosexuals, no more, no less. But are we really just talking about adoption here? It appears to me that this debate, as well as Cardinal Ratzingers recent publication, could just as well be about debating whether homosexuals are unclean children of God and should basically stay out of sight. Most arguments in that publication could just as well have been used to argue that point. Hyper has brought up a very valid point that is being ignored quite well. The need for adoptive parents is not the result of homosexual immorality. Kids are being created and tossed aside by heterosexual immorality. Is homosexual morality is the cure or the solution? Neither cure, cause nor solution. I'm not trying to ignore his point, I just don't have anything to add to it. Edited August 6, 2003 by _bc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted August 6, 2003 Author Share Posted August 6, 2003 Yes, and I believe them to be true, even though I think assumption no 1 doesn't need to be this strong. As far as I can see, it's a sufficiently strong assumption that a homosexual relationship is no greater cause for disqualification as a parent than a number of other possible causes that are not being considered. _bc, If I understand you correctly, you are saying that active homosexuality (it's assumed a given for the vast majoiryt of a "same-sex couple") is not desireable but is not a grave undesireable? What are the other possible causes for disqualification that are not being considered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Huether Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 And if active homosexuality isn't grave - than what's the scoop on Sodom and Gamorrah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 If you agree with how Jas restated your premises: I disagree with the first one. What is your proof for the second and third one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeSoul Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 An excerpt from COLAGE (Children Of Lesbians And Gays Everywhere) "I grew up in the gay community and it was never kept from me. I always was around gay and straight couples. It never seemed strange to me. It was my life. My mom's sexuality of same-sex attraction has not been imposed upon me. I have been brought up as an individual, not a follower. My mother is a lesbian and I'm proud of her for not being afraid to show it. She's been a great mother for the last fourteen years, and she's always been there when I needed her. She has kept us both alive and well as the only source of money. She is my best friend. I don't know exactly what I think about being the son of a lesbian, but I know I'm beaver dam lucky to have a mom like mine." - Joshua in Our Stories "However, hundreds of kids with gay parents have been run through the social science mill, poked, prodded, filled out endless questionnaires and interviewed at length. When all the studies published to date are taken individually or as a whole, the results are uniform: There are no significant differences between kids with gay parents and kids with straight parents on a variety of psychological measures, including gender-roles, self-esteem, and more. Kids with gay parents are no more likely than kids with straight parents to be gay themselves. Although in our opinion this begs the question, "so what if we were?" Similarly, when all the studies of lesbian moms and gay dads are analyzed, there are few quantitative differences from their straight counterparts. Research that has looked at the qualitative experiences of gay parents and their kids is scarce…although there are now a few books and a number of articles and shows that deal anecdotally with the experiences of gay parents and their kids." I'd rather listen to the children, and imo I haven't heard any horror stories of children being scarred for life by having gay parents. I'm sure these stories aren't the most objective, but children don't lie if they're unhappy...just being at the children's pavillion at pride day in Toronto is a pretty good sign.....it's totally family and when I was little they used to have people from the polka dot door come and sing (and for you canadians out there....you should know....practically every male host on that show was gay). So I honestly don't get it...I hear about the theoretical violence posed by LGBT parents....but i've never seen it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good Friday Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 There are no significant differences between kids with gay parents and kids with straight parents on a variety of psychological measures, including gender-roles, self-esteem, and more. Kids with gay parents are no more likely than kids with straight parents to be gay themselves. Although in our opinion this begs the question, "so what if we were?" I experience same-sex attractions in part because my mom is a lesbian. So now you've seen it, and you cannot honestly say ever again that you've never seen it (though I doubt that you can honestly say that now). So what if we were? That's appalling, and shows the clear bias toward homosexuality in what you've posted. I think that making light of the possibility that same-sex parents make same-sex children shows that what you've posted cannot be viewed as objective in any way. Let me tell you, my Catholic Faith would be a lot easier to follow if my screwed up family hadn't inflicted same-sex attractions upon me. Of course, anything that erodes the Catholic Faith is great to liberals, which is no doubt why they ask: So what if we were? Unless you're going to post something intelligent, please don't post at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeSoul Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 So what if we were? That's appalling, and shows the clear bias toward homosexuality in what you've posted. Yes, I have a clear bias.....why would I apologize for it? I said it when I posted that it's obviously not objective....so what? Are any of the arguments on this site bogus just because people here are biased in it's favour? "Unless you're going to post something intelligent, please don't post at all." I knew this morning that this would fit in with my day...and funny how my hunch worked out...I'll just post this from my daily newsletter on 'graciousnes/etiquette' Thomas Huxley: "There is no greater mistake than the hasty conclusion that opinions are worthless because they are badly argued. Let me tell you, my Catholic Faith would be a lot easier to follow if my screwed up family hadn't inflicted same-sex attractions upon me. Of course, anything that erodes the Catholic Faith is great to liberals, which is no doubt why they ask: So what if we were? So just because YOUR faith is eroded because you have questions and problems, doesn't mean everyone's will be.....my faith has always been strengthened by my need to know and my trials in life because I know that God makes great things from them.....so don't assume my life is the same is yours. It's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 I know people who were raised by alcoholics, pedophiles, SSA, drug addicts, prostitutes, thieves etc. Several of them have no clue who their real parents are. They were ALL in some ways damaged by the sins of the fathers and mothers. Some have no outward sign but have very skewed morals " anything goes unless you are caught" and " as long as no but really gets hurt" or the famous "whatever" rules their lives. Only one or two of them are in any way happy. Some of them have found a measure of peace in their lives thru prayer, God and lots of therapy. But many of them abuse drugs and alcohol on a regular basis, have multiple partners or are totally afraid to committ to a relationship at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good Friday Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 Your faith is not Catholic, and thus is untrue; therefore, I honestly couldn't care one way or another how this issue does or does not affect your faith. What I do care is how this issue affects the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Faith handed down by the Holy Catholic Church over the past 2,000 years or so. The Holy Catholic Faith has stated for 2,000 years that homosexuality is wrong, wrong, wrong, and if you disagree, then your faith is not Catholic. Mine, however, is Catholic. And the recent push for homosexuality in our society absolutely sickens me, because of my Faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeSoul Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 Your faith is not Catholic, and thus is untrue; Sometimes, I just have to laugh. CMOM, maybe those people you knew were just BAD PARENTS. My grandfather had a serious gambling addiction and everyone of his children grew up to be successful and happy....because he had a good spouse and went to mass and received the sacraments, and while he has issues, he and my grandmother dealt with them honestly and frankly. So I have to wonder.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 THey were bad parents because they were not capable of modaling healthy role modals for their children. SSA parents have the same problem. THey are starting from a basis of sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeSoul Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 WHO ISNT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 I certainly didn't start my marriage in a basis of sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeSoul Posted August 6, 2003 Share Posted August 6, 2003 I certainly didn't start my marriage in a basis of sin. I don't know you....but I know that everybody sins. And just because you're a parent...doesn't mean you're going to spread your sins onto your children....and that's my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts