nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Same Sex Adoption

starbelgrade

Please note that the explanation of the poll options are listed below the quoted paragraph.

Under the current adoption legislation in Ireland, a child may be adopted by married couples, a mother or father of the child, a relative of the child, a widow or a widower. In specific cases, the Adoption Board (the independent body that regulates adoption in Ireland) may decide that it is desirable that some other person can adopt a child.

There is currently no facility for couples, other than married couples, to adopt a child. A joint adoption by a couple is only possible where that couple is married and living together. This rule prevents a same-sex couple from jointly adopting a child, even where one of the parties is the biological or legal parent of the child.

From http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/birth-family-relationships/same-sex-couples/adoption_and_same_sex_couples

So what are your views & opinions on same sex couples adopting? How would you vote in a Referendum to change the current legislation, or would you prefer to leave things as they are?

POLL OPTIONS

Option 1 : Same sex couples should be allowed to adopt in the same way married couples are allowed.

Option 2 : Same sex couples should be allowed to adopt, but only if one of them is the biological or legal parent of the child.

Option 3 : Same sex couples should not be allowed to adopt - ie., the current law regarding same sex couples adopting should not be changed.

Option 4 : I am unsure / undecided.

Option 5 : What's a same sex couple? :eek:

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Piriz

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Wow...currently 25.00% of voters are homophobic. I thought Ireland had moved on a little bit more than that.

Edit: Came across this a while ago when looking for Dutch clips on Youtube (to help me learn the language). Just remembered it and dug it up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qf0puHJ-KM

Shame we still don't have as tolerant a society...

its got nothing to do with homophobia!!!!!!! f*ck sake!!:mad:

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

starbelgrade wrote: »

That is quite possibly one of the most ridiculous posts that I have ever read in my 4 odd years of posting on Boards.

And believe me, I have read some stupid sh*t in my time.

That it's possible a childs sexual habbits may be influenced by his parents? I said it was possible, not definite. Maybe you should take the time to read the post before jumping to conclusions

Also, learn a bit about psychology and all that lark, good lad

CrazyRabbit

Warren Unkempt Papier-mache wrote: »

Wow, what an ignorant post... How the fcuk did you come to that conclusion? People are against same sex adoption and that makes them homophobic? You talk some amount of shíte, really.

Did you even read the fcuking thread? Of course you didn't...

Read the OP...understood the voting options...voted and seen the percentages. Don't need to read the other posts to make an opinion on the voting results.

If someone can't give 2 gay people the exact same rights as 2 straight people, then they are homophobic. Simple as that.

And dude, calm down! This is the internet. Don't want you to have a heart attack over a post on a forum.

Oh and FYI...attack the post, not the poster.

bluecatmorgana

Warren Unkempt Papier-mache wrote: »

They sure could be, but how common is same sex couples being completely sexless in a relationship? Even kissing, cuddling, holding hands...?

Is there something wrong with same sex couples kissing, cuddling etc

Warren Unkempt Papier-mache wrote: »

Are you two saying that you are not influenced by the sexual activities of your parents? In any way shape or form?

well my parents dont sleep in the same room... so I wasnt influenced by the (lack ) of sexual activities of my parents, I took my cues from what I learned from the world. I was however influenced by their sense of decency, fairness, kindness and strength, things that anyone regardless of gender can show you.

Morlar

Dudess wrote: »

If children raised by a same-sex couple run the risk of catching the ghey, how come many children who are raised by hetero couples also succumb to the ghey?

I blame jedward.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Read the OP...understood the voting options...voted and seen the percentages. Don't need to read the other posts to make an opinion on the voting results.

If someone can't give 2 gay people the exact same rights as 2 straight people, then they are homophobic. Simple as that.

And dude, calm down! This is the internet. Don't want you to have a heart attack over a post on a forum.

Oh and FYI...attack the post, not the poster.

Lol, exactly.... an excelent dissplay of ignorance. You didn't read the thread and therefore didn't bother read the reasons why people voted. Well done on making a pathetic assumption...

starbelgrade

Piriz wrote: »

its got nothing to do with homophobia!!!!!!! f*ck sake!!:mad:

I don't believe it is homophobia either. However, it is a form of discrimination which is based purely on sexual orientation.

Knarr

Warren Unkempt Papier-mache wrote: »

That's unfortunate, but many factors may play a role, at least both people have the reproductive organs, they just don't work. Tight pants on men, diets, etc etc.

What has reproduction to do with anything.

I would class it as an abormality. Reproducing offspring is one of the things is a priority for most creatures, in order for that species to exist and continue existing. Homosexuals cannot reproduce.

How many ants get to reproduce in a colony? - and bees?

Extremely few. The species evolved roles and outcomes which serve the process of reproduction of the species. Similarly, homosexuals may serve an evolutionary role in serving human reproduction.

"The authors of a 2008 study stated that "there is considerable evidence that human sexual orientation is genetically influenced, so it is not known how homosexuality, which tends to lower reproductive success, is maintained in the population at a relatively high frequency". They hypothesized that "while genes predisposing to homosexuality reduce homosexuals' reproductive success, they may confer some advantage in heterosexuals who carry them". Their results suggested that "genes predisposing to homosexuality may confer a mating advantage in heterosexuals, which could help explain the evolution and maintenance of homosexuality in the population".[75] A 2009 study also suggested a significant increase in fecundity in the females related to the homosexual people from the maternal line (but not in those related from the paternal one).[76"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality

Suicide is similar. Despite people killing themselves and therefore being unable to reproduce, there appears to be an evolutionary reason why it exists.

You can theorise that homosexuality is a defence mechagnism for our species to slow down reproduction, but... that's a whole can of worms there.

No I didnt theorise that.

Racial imbalance, eye colour imbalance etc etc is not a problem, it does not effect your psychological development to the extent of having two same sex parents. It is quite normal for different races to reproduce, because they can

It is not having homosexual parents which create negative psychological development, it is social pressure and existing norms which may damage a child. These are being redefined.

Also, can you name any animal that reproduces same sex? .

I can name an animal which requires the overwhelming majority of its members to be asexual for the greater benefit of the species. Ants. Bees. Termites etc

CrazyRabbit

Piriz wrote: »

its got nothing to do with homophobia!!!!!!! f*ck sake!!:mad:

So same sex couples are equal in your eyes and have exactly the same rights? You don't discriminate them in any way? (except adoption obviously)

Equality or discrimination..there's no in-between. Homophobia is just another word for discrimination.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

bluecatmorgana wrote: »

Is there something wrong with same sex couples kissing, cuddling etc

Did I say there was? Find a strawman elsewhere to burn...

well my parents dont sleep in the same room... so I wasnt influenced by the (lack ) of sexual activities of my parents, I took my cues from what I learned from the world. I was however influenced by their sense of decency, fairness, kindness and strength, things that anyone regardless of gender can show you.

Not everybody is going to be effected in the same way.

[Deleted User]

Warren Unkempt Papier-mache wrote: »

Lol, exactly.... an excelent dissplay of ignorance. You didn't read the thread and therefore didn't bother read the reasons why people voted. Well done on making a pathetic assumption...

I've read the reasons. None of them seem based on any kind of empirical evidence.

jiltloop

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Read the OP...understood the voting options...voted and seen the percentages. Don't need to read the other posts to make an opinion on the voting results.

If someone can't give 2 gay people the exact same rights as 2 straight people, then they are homophobic. Simple as that.

And dude, calm down! This is the internet. Don't want you to have a heart attack over a post on a forum.

Oh and FYI...attack the post, not the poster.

Where do gay people's rights come into this?? Should it not be the child's rights. Very easy to just read the OP and the voting results and not bother to read people's reasoning behind them, then just pull out the homophobia card. Well done sir!

CrazyRabbit

Warren Unkempt Papier-mache wrote: »

Lol, exactly.... an excelent dissplay of ignorance. You didn't read the thread and therefore didn't bother read the reasons why people voted. Well done on making a pathetic assumption...

Reasoning doesn't make it any less discriminatory/homophobic. Humans are very good at validating their prejudices.

If people want to post reasons as to why they see gay couples as less than equal then that's their business. Whatever makes them sleep better at night.

ScumLord

Deleted User wrote: »

Of course, there are many mammy's girls and boys who like to play a bit of football with their dad, it's just because we have names for those two. There's no actual point there, just a linguistic observation...

It came out of an actual observation though. It is true that in general boys bond more with their mother while girls bond more with their fathers.

[Deleted User]

jiltloop wrote: »

Where do gay people's rights come into this?? Should it not be the child's rights. Very easy to just read the OP and the voting results and not bother to read people's reasoning behind them, then just pull out the homophobia card. Well done sir!

And what children's rights are being violated by this? Leaving a child with a family with a very low income would arguably have a terrible effect on the child, in comparison with any effect same-sex parents could have on it. Are we to ban low-income couples adopting?

[Deleted User]

ScumLord wrote: »

It came out of an actual observation though. It is true that in general boys bond more with their mother while girls bond more with their fathers.

It is not true. In that case anyway, you could allow lesbian couples to adopt boys and vice-versa.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

starbelgrade wrote: »

I don't believe it is homophobia either. However, it is a form of discrimination which is based purely on sexual orientation.

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

So same sex couples are equal in your eyes and have exactly the same rights? You don't discriminate them in any way? (except adoption obviously)

Equality of discrimination..there's no in-between. Homophobia is just another word for discrimination.

Unbefcukingleivable...

Discriminate - treat differently on the basis of sex or race or religion etc etc

Homophobia - (from Greek homós: one and the same; phóbos: fear, phobia) is defined as an "irrational fear of homosexuality or homosexuals"

How in the fcuk do you equate the two? They are completely different.

jiltloop

starbelgrade wrote: »

I don't believe it is homophobia either. However, it is a form of discrimination which is based purely on sexual orientation.

I didn't base my decision on sexual orientation,and I don't think many of the other option3 voters did either, (although some probably are homophobic) so you're completely wrong in your assumption. I'm purely thinking about the effects it would have on the children.

CrazyRabbit

jiltloop wrote: »

Where do gay people's rights come into this??

From the OP:

"So what are your views & opinions on same sex couples adopting?"

The OP specifically asked about the rights of same sex couples.

Perhaps you should read the OP more carefully.

bluecatmorgana

Warren Unkempt Papier-mache wrote: »

Did I say there was? Find a strawman elsewhere to burn...

I didnt say you did , Im asking you a question?

Warren Unkempt Papier-mache wrote: »

Not everybody is going to be effected in the same way.

Precisely. Not everyody is going to be affected in the same way, and so when same sex couples adopt like other hetrosexual couples do , every child will be affected differently, just like children adopted by hetrosexual couples. It how were affected thats important and I believe that same sex couples can affect children in a loving, positive manner.

starbelgrade

Warren Unkempt Papier-mache wrote: »

Unbefcukingleivable...

Discriminate - treat differently on the basis of sex or race or religion etc etc

Homophobia - (from Greek homós: one and the same; phóbos: fear, phobia) is defined as an "irrational fear of homosexuality or homosexuals"

How in the fcuk do you equate the two? They are completely different.

I did not equate the two, but your definition of discrimination is far from complete.

Discrimination is a sociological term referring to the treatment taken toward or against a person of a certain group in consideration based solely on class or category. Discrimination is the actual behavior towards another group. It involves excluding or restricting members of one group from opportunities that are available to other groups.

Therefor, to restrict same sex couples from having the same rights to adopt as single sex couples, is a form of discrimination.

CrazyRabbit

jiltloop wrote: »

I didn't base my decision on sexual orientation,and I don't think many of the other option3 voters did either, (although some probably are homophobic) so you're completely wrong in your assumption. I'm purely thinking about the effects it would have on the children.

Oh yeah..the horrible effects....like thinking it's ok for 2 men or 2 women to love each other. Or they might even end up thinking that it's OK to be different. God help them!!!

jiltloop

Deleted User wrote: »

And what children's rights are being violated by this? Leaving a child with a family with a very low income would arguably have a terrible effect on the child, in comparison with any effect same-sex parents could have on it. Are we to ban low-income couples adopting?

The right to be brought up in a traditional family unit. I've read a fair bit on child psychology and about the parents seperate roles in developing the child, how male children will be more attached to the mother up to the age of 11/12 and then gravitate toward the father (for masculine development) and vice versa for female children. This is a natural development that has evolved through thousands of years which is why I think we should be a bit tentative about catering for gay rights.

strobe

I'd say of course homosexuals should be allowed adopt. But if a kid is up for adoption and the potential parents come down to two couples, one gay and one straight and there isn't really anything to chose between them then the straight couple should get the child.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

bluecatmorgana wrote: »

I didnt say you did , Im asking you a question?

Couldn't give a damn who does what to be quite honest. No there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or hetrosexuals "bonding" sexually...

Don't try to make me out to be a homophobe

Precisely. Not everyody is going to be affected in the same way, and so when same sex couples adopt like other hetrosexual couples do , every child will be affected differently, just like children adopted by hetrosexual couples. It how were affected thats important and I believe that same sex couples can affect children in a loving, positive manner.

Not denying that, if you read my posts you would understand that too.

I am talking about the basics. Human design dictates that we are produced by parents of the opposite sex. Normally these parents raise us until we are of age. Gay parenting is not normal in our species. However, activists may change that law, although it will take a very very long time for nature to allow this.

jiltloop

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Oh yeah..the horrible effects....like thinking it's ok for 2 men or 2 women to love each other. Or they might even end up thinking that it's OK to be different. God help them!!!

Maybe you should think a little more deeply about the psychologcal effects, its not all sexual you know.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

starbelgrade wrote: »

I did not equate the two, but your definition of discrimination is far from complete.

Discrimination is a sociological term referring to the treatment taken toward or against a person of a certain group in consideration based solely on class or category. Discrimination is the actual behavior towards another group. It involves excluding or restricting members of one group from opportunities that are available to other groups.

Therefor, to restrict same sex couples from having the same rights to adopt as single sex couples, is a form of discrimination.

It doesn't make you a homophobe. Simply put.

Also, I was talking to crazyrabbit about equating the two.

jiltloop

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

From the OP:

"So what are your views & opinions on same sex couples adopting?"

The OP specifically asked about the rights of same sex couples.

Perhaps you should read the OP more carefully.

Perhaps I'm saying that the OP's considerations are fundamentally in the wrong place.

[Deleted User]

jiltloop wrote: »

The right to be brought up in a traditional family unit. I've read a fair bit on child psychology and about the parents seperate roles in developing the child, how male children will be more attached to the mother up to the age of 11/12 and then gravitate toward the father (for masculine development) and vice versa for female children. This is a natural development that has evolved through thousands of years which is why I think we should be a bit tentative about catering for gay rights.

Can't argue with empirical research. Well done there.

The thing is, these studies show the benefits of different-sex parenting, but don't show that same-sex couples cannot have the same advantages, or even different advantages.
Until it is proven that it is not the case that same-sex parenting is beneficial towards the child then gay rights should be respected.

There is also the case where same-sex couples take on separate roles. One acts mainly as father figure, one acts mainly as a mother figure.

bluecatmorgana

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qf0puHJ-KM

Thats really interesting. My nieces mother (my sister) died 10 years ago and she is now raised by my mother (and effectively my father) as opposed to her own father. However she does have a relationship with her father and calls him dad. But she also calls my parents mom and dad, so to help her cope we would tell her that she had a mom up in heaven, a mom here and two dads. So effectively she is raised by three people.