Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Full rights for the LGBT community.

Options
1…5681011…63

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    Dr. Baltar wrote: »
    http://www.google.ie/#hl=en&source=hp&q=DYING+ROOMS+CHINA&meta=&aq=f&aqi=g1g-m1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=f3a2f2d0bf3c98c7

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B94trCVCrLo

    .

    Single parents are just as caring and loving to their children as two parents. Two parents is of course better, and this has been researched and proven. It has also been researched and proven that children of LGB parents do as good/better than children of straight parents.

    .

    I cant see how the numbers of LGB parents is high enough for a meaningful comparative study to be carried out !


  • Options
    #213
    Dr. Baltar
    Registered Users Posts: 1,252 ✭✭✭Dr. Baltar


    anymore wrote: »
    I cant see how the numbers of LGB parents is high enough for a meaningful comparative study to be carried out !

    The studies I have read range from ones done in Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands to California.
    There are literally thousands of LGB families around the world.


  • Options
    #214
    ardmacha
    Registered Users Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    Not necessarily true, there are thousands of children doing well who do not have a male and female role model in their family.

    No doubt, children do well despite disadvantages of all sorts. But we should not try to create these disadvantages if they can be avoided.


  • Options
    #215
    Dr. Baltar
    Registered Users Posts: 1,252 ✭✭✭Dr. Baltar


    ardmacha wrote: »
    No doubt, children do well despite disadvantages of all sorts. But we should not try to create these disadvantages if they can be avoided.

    I fail to see how a child being raised by two loving parents of the same sex gives them a disadvantage.


  • Options
    #216
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,980 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    ardmacha wrote: »
    No doubt, children do well despite disadvantages of all sorts. But we should not try to create these disadvantages if they can be avoided.
    What disadvantages?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    Dr. Baltar wrote: »
    The studies I have read range from ones done in Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands to California.
    There are literally thousands of LGB families around the world.
    Thousands in a world of 7 billion ?
    Point made I think !


  • Options
    #218
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    Johnnymcg wrote: »
    What disadvantages?
    Well the disadvantage of being brought up by persons of one sex only - you ' Men are from Mars and women from Venus - it is relevant.
    And the disadvantage of not being allowed to know one of a kid's natural parents, knowing that for one parent, you were simply a commodity to be given away.


  • Options
    #219
    Apogee
    Registered Users Posts: 3,778 ✭✭✭Apogee


    oppenheimer1 wrote: »
    Yes, but gay couples are not currently allowed to adopt. As for legislation, well would the government really take a deeply unpopular line and damage itself for a cause that it doesn't need to. There will have to be broad support across majority of the population before they will consider taking the step.

    Governments continually vote through unpopular legislation. Recent finance bills or the legislation establishing NAMA comes to mind. Again, you seem to want to single this particular legislation out for special treatment.
    oppenheimer1 wrote:
    80% of people support some form of civil partnership yet the government is dragging its heels as they feel it could be quite divisive.

    If 80% support it, how could it be divisive?

    Jakkass wrote: »
    Interesting point. I would agree that these people should be supported in the interim, but that the State should ensure that IVF resources, and adoptive services are used by those who can provide a child with both a mother and a father primarily.

    How do you propose that they should be "supported in the interim"? And into the future, given that no political party supports restricting adoption to married couples?


  • Options
    #220
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Apogee wrote: »
    How do you propose that they should be "supported in the interim"? And into the future, given that no political party supports restricting adoption to married couples?

    Good question. By in the interim, I mean giving legal redress in the event that one of the two partners in a LGBT relationship dies so that any dependants aren't left in a difficult situation.

    However, I do believe that the State should be ensuring that situations such as these do not arise as often. Or perhaps the State should be more open to the idea of giving the biological father a say in such a situation.

    As for political parties and the like, I don't personally subscribe to any. I'm merely pointing out what I would find to be preferable concerning marriage, relationships and family.


  • Options
    #221
    Dr. Baltar
    Registered Users Posts: 1,252 ✭✭✭Dr. Baltar


    anymore wrote: »
    Thousands in a world of 7 billion ?
    Point made I think !

    Those native American families must really be bad.
    I know this because there is such a limited amount of reasearch carried out on their families.

    However, Asian studies are always the most reliable because by comprising more than one sixth of the world's population, the research carried out on them must be better and more effective for all other people in society.

    Every Figure when considered in the context of the wor'ds total population is miniscule
    Well the disadvantage of being brought up by persons of one sex only - you ' Men are from Mars and women from Venus - it is relevant.

    Illustrate for me please, how being brought up by two members of the same sex who care deeply for their child leaves said child at a disadvantage to other children.

    And the disadvantage of not being allowed to know one of a kid's natural parents, knowing that for one parent, you were simply a commodity to be given away.

    We should make adoption illegal altogether in that case.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    Sandvich
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,251 ✭✭✭Sandvich


    I honestly can't think of a single intellectually honest reason against it, haven't seen one in this thread, and while many issues have many different and possibly equally valid viewpoints, this comes off as a fairly one sided one that people only oppose out of traditionalism rather than any real care for the wellbeing of those around them. There is no reason to oppose gay adoption if you don't oppose ginger adoption or single parents.


  • Options
    #223
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,084 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    Dr. Baltar wrote: »
    I fail to see how a child being raised by two loving parents of the same sex gives them a disadvantage.

    The disadvantage of not having both a male and female role model. Very necessary in a childs development, all too often we see the problems where this isn't the case.


  • Options
    #224
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Sandvich wrote: »
    There is no reason to oppose gay adoption if you don't oppose ginger adoption or single parents.

    I don't know what "ginger adoption" has to do with anything.

    But I do oppose single parents as a "choice".

    God forbid that would be viewed as a judgement on those who "end up" in that situation, doing their best (and in many cases a damn good job despite the circumstances).

    But it's not ideal, so my point is that it shouldn't be available as a choice for single people who simply "want" a child.


  • Options
    #225
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    By the by, is adoption a right to begin with? - The State has the duty to deny this opportunity to certain people so it could hardly be seen as a right.


  • Options
    #226
    Apogee
    Registered Users Posts: 3,778 ✭✭✭Apogee


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Good question. By in the interim, I mean giving legal redress in the event that one of the two partners in a LGBT relationship dies so that any dependants aren't left in a difficult situation.

    What do you mean by "legal redress"?
    Jakkass wrote:
    However, I do believe that the State should be ensuring that situations such as these do not arise as often.

    How do you propose the State do this?


  • Options
    #227
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,980 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Jakkass wrote: »
    By the by, is adoption a right to begin with? - The State has the duty to deny this opportunity to certain people so it could hardly be seen as a right.
    No, adoption is not a right, however being allowed to apply or be considered is in my view. The correct term that should be used is 'The right to apply to adopt'

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #228
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Johnnymcg wrote: »
    No, adoption is not a right, however being allowed to apply or be considered is in my view. The correct term that should be used is 'The right to apply to adopt'

    I'd disagree, the State has the right to hinder or screen any cases that wouldn't be preferable to the childs development if such a situation arises. Although, I would be open to the idea of allowing LGBT couples to apply for adoption, but for this to only take place in the absence of any suitable couple which comprises of both a mother and a father.


  • Options
    #229
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Jakkass wrote: »
    I'd disagree, the State has the right to hinder or screen any cases that wouldn't be preferable to the childs development if such a situation arises. Although, I would be open to the idea of allowing LGBT couples to apply for adoption, but for this to only take place in the absence of any suitable couple which comprises of both a mother and a father.

    Do you have research evidence that proves children are at a disadvantage being raised by a LGBT couple or that sexual orientation significantly affects parenting skills? Bullying is not a legitimate disadvantage because it's in no way specific to this issue


  • Options
    #230
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Laminations wrote: »
    Do you have research evidence that proves children are at a disadvantage being raised by a LGBT couple or that sexual orientation significantly affects parenting skills? Bullying is not a legitimate disadvantage because it's in no way specific to this issue

    There is plenty of research done into the difference that gender roles make in a childs life. If you wish to look into this, it is a google search away. I have posted these in threads before, but I have found that it becomes a situation of copying and pasting links rather than actually discussing. So I'll be refraining from it here.


  • Options
    #231
    Apogee
    Registered Users Posts: 3,778 ✭✭✭Apogee


    Jakkass wrote: »
    I'd disagree, the State has the right to hinder or screen any cases that wouldn't be preferable to the childs development if such a situation arises.

    The Adoption Board already screen applicants for suitability. They have ample experience in choosing what's in the best interest of the child.
    Jakkass wrote:
    Although, I would be open to the idea of allowing LGBT couples to apply for adoption, but for this to only take place in the absence of any suitable couple which comprises of both a mother and a father.

    Why is that stipulation required? Surely it would be better, for example, to give preference to a same-sex couple where one of the partners (e.g. uncle) has a blood relationship to the child, over an opposite-sex couple with no ties whatsoever to the child?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    oppenheimer1 wrote: »
    The disadvantage of not having both a male and female role model. Very necessary in a childs development, all too often we see the problems where this isn't the case.
    Surely the child would have other family members/teachers etc? They're not locked up in isolation with their parents for all their formative years


  • Options
    #233
    danman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 583 ✭✭✭danman


    bluewolf wrote: »
    Surely the child would have other family members/teachers etc? They're not locked up in isolation with their parents for all their formative years

    As a father of 2, I have to agree with this.

    There are many single parents who are not discriminated against for not having both sexes to be role models.
    Why should a same sex parent model be treated any different.

    Just my 2 cents.


  • Options
    #234
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    Apogee wrote: »
    The Adoption Board already screen applicants for suitability. They have ample experience in choosing what's in the best interest of the child.



    Why is that stipulation required? Surely it would be better, for example, to give preference to a same-sex couple where one of the partners (e.g. uncle) has a blood relationship to the child, over an opposite-sex couple with no ties whatsoever to the child?

    You are not really comparing like with like here.
    The appropriate comparision would be a two sex couple one of whom is blood related and a same sex couple with one of whom is blood related.
    then all other things being equal, it would be better to choose the two sex coupke for the simple reason that there are differences between men and women.


  • Options
    #235
    Apogee
    Registered Users Posts: 3,778 ✭✭✭Apogee


    anymore wrote: »
    You are not really comparing like with like here.

    I never said I was comparing like with like. I was pointing out the possible implications of a myopic, sweeping precondition.
    anymore wrote:
    The appropriate comparision would be a two sex couple one of whom is blood related and a same sex couple with one of whom is blood related.
    then all other things being equal, it would be better to choose the two sex coupke for the simple reason that there are differences between men and women.

    Why not just leave it to staff of the Adoption Board to assess each case on it own merits, rather than hamstringing them with ill-conceived regulations?

    Surely they have sufficient training, coupled with past experience and knowledge of current research, to enable them to make an informed decision in the best interests of the child?


  • Options
    #236
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    Apogee wrote: »
    I never said I was comparing like with like. I was pointing out the possible implications of a myopic, sweeping precondition.



    Why not just leave it to staff of the Adoption Board to assess each case on it own merits, rather than hamstringing them with ill-conceived regulations?

    Surely they have sufficient training, coupled with past experience and knowledge of current research, to enable them to make an informed decision in the best interests of the child?

    At this stage, the idea of relying on irish government agencies is almost funny !:D
    Irish bodies seem to be overly dependent on polticial Correctness.
    So I suggest a dose of common sense would be preferable. My experience as a parent tells me that the best is when there is the combination of the perspectives of male and female, all other things being equal.


  • Options
    #237
    Apogee
    Registered Users Posts: 3,778 ✭✭✭Apogee


    They will be under sufficient public scrutiny that they will invariably err on the side of caution in such cases.

    In the cases where all other things are not equal, they should be free to make their decisions in the best interests of the child - a similar dose of common sense - rather than being railroaded by blanket rules borne out of particular convictions or prejudices.


  • Options
    #238
    Pride Fighter
    Registered Users Posts: 5,729 ✭✭✭Pride Fighter


    Hope the mods do not mind me bumping this, but a huge milestone passed the Dail tonight

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0701/gay.html

    The civil partnerships bill is a big step on the road for full equal rights for all in the LGBT community.


  • Options
    #239
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    How did they pass a bill without a vote?


  • Options
    #240
    LookingFor
    Registered Users Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭LookingFor


    Jakkass wrote: »
    How did they pass a bill without a vote?

    I'd have liked to have seen a vote, but I presume where support for legislation is so strong, there's a mechanism to pass it without a vote. Someone here might be able to elaborate on that mechanism, I'd be curious too.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    LookingFor wrote: »
    I'd have liked to have seen a vote, but I presume where support for legislation is so strong, there's a mechanism to pass it without a vote. Someone here might be able to elaborate on that mechanism, I'd be curious too.

    I think it would have been much better if the Government had a vote, and showed a large consensus for the Civil Partnership Bill, it would have done more for their favour I think. Perhaps I'm just nitpicking though.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement