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

Marriage redefinition and Childrens rights

1…457910…34

Comments

  • #182
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    It appears only the children cared by gay people should have a mother and father. Much like the marriage is for procreation argument it only applies to you if you are a homosexual which is convenient.

    Well, that's good to know. You can deny a child their right to a father or mother as long as they're raised by a heterosexual. Because everyone knows that being raised by two women/men is much worse than being raised by one woman/man.


  • #183
    S.O
    Closed Accounts Posts: 397 ✭✭S.O


    I noticed that no one so far addressed the points raised in a previous post of mine of cases regarding grown adults who are now totally against same sex marriage/same sex parenting.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95058554&postcount=159

    An 11 year old girl Grace gave her view at this hearing on the whole issue of SSM/SSA towards the end she asked a good question.
    Which parent does a child not need a mom or a dad ?





    Anyone who supports same sex adoption rights, how do you answer Graces question ?


  • #184
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    S.O wrote: »
    I noticed that no one so far addressed the points raised in a previous post of mine of cases regarding grown adults who are now totally against same sex marriage/same sex parenting.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95058554&postcount=159

    An 11 year old girl Grace gave her view at this hearing on the whole issue of SSM/SSA towards the end she asked a good question.







    Anyone who supports same sex adoption rights, how do you answer Graces question ?

    Neither. All a child needs is someone to love and care for them, that can be a mother, father, aunt, uncle, brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, family friend.

    Now how about you answer mine
    But is having a mother and a father not important?
    If it is then we need to make sure children have both regardless of the sexual orientation of the parents.


  • #185
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Dear Grace,

    I grew up without my dad for the most part. I'm fine. You adapt. You don't know any different and you learn everything from other people.

    There's a difference between not needing a parent, and growing up with both parents and getting rid of one. Also Grace, what's your eleven year old opinion on parents who split up? Who do you choose then? Because then, Grace, you choose who you need the most. With gay adoption, you don't need to make that decision.


    Stupid post, is stupid


  • #186
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,249 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    S.O wrote: »
    I noticed that no one so far addressed the points raised in a previous post of mine of cases regarding grown adults who are now totally against same sex marriage/same sex parenting.

    What about the happy adults who've been raised by same sex parents? Some children just have bad parents. You don't bar an entire category of people from being parents because of some bad cases.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    S.O
    Closed Accounts Posts: 397 ✭✭S.O


    kylith wrote: »
    I'm not talking about losing a parent I'm talking about the fact that I can decide I'm sick of looking for a man and walk out the door, have sex, get pregnant, and decide to raise the child myself (or indeed a single woman can get pregnant by accident). Would you have me forced to marry the father (if known), or have the child taken away?

    I wouldn,t argue for the child to be taken away or for someone being forced to marry, if someone gets pregnant after a 1 night stand , the father can have access/visitation rights to the child, that way the child still has a father figure in its life growing up, I know a guy who became a father following a 1 night stand, he still sees his kid during the week meaning the kid has a father figure.


  • #188
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    S.O wrote: »
    I wouldn,t argue for the child to be taken away or for someone being forced to marry, if someone gets pregnant after a 1 night stand , the father can have access/visitation rights to the child, that way the child still has a father figure in its life growing up, I know a guy who became a father following a 1 night stand, he still sees his kid during the week meaning the kid has a father figure.

    But yet you'd take away a child from its father or mother just because they happen to be gay....mixed up thinking there.


  • #189
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    S.O wrote: »
    I wouldn,t argue for the child to be taken away or for someone being forced to marry, if someone gets pregnant after a 1 night stand , the father can have access/visitation rights to the child, that way the child still has a father figure in its life growing up, I know a guy who became a father following a 1 night stand, he still sees his kid during the week meaning the kid has a father figure.

    And what if they never see the father again?


  • #190
    fran17
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭fran17


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Can the people who think children have a right to a mother and father explain what will we do with single parents? Take the children away?

    What about children already being taken care of by a same sex couple?

    Either we take them away so they can have their right or that right isnt that important.

    There is a simple answer to this fallacy and to be honest I'm frankly fed up answering it.
    Of course there is families which do not contain a father and mother figure permanently in there lives,and this is unfortunate.However these situations are not created or enacted through legislation.Voting yes in this up coming referendum will categorically guarantee under the constitution that a child's right to a mother and father in there lives is off balanced by the right of a same sex couple to deny them that most basic human right.As a citizen of this country I could,and would,never promote this.


  • #191
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    S.O wrote: »
    I wouldn,t argue for the child to be taken away or for someone being forced to marry, if someone gets pregnant after a 1 night stand , the father can have access/visitation rights to the child, that way the child still has a father figure in its life growing up, I know a guy who became a father following a 1 night stand, he still sees his kid during the week meaning the kid has a father figure.

    And I know someone who got pregnant from a ONS and had no idea who the father was. What about in that situation? What about if I just don't want a man in my life and go to a sperm bank?

    Here's a question. Why do you assume that, say, a lesbian couple wouldn't be able to supply a male figure in their child's life? Why do you assume that there are no grandparents, brothers, or male friends?


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    S.O
    Closed Accounts Posts: 397 ✭✭S.O


    sup_dude wrote: »
    Dear Grace,

    I grew up without my dad for the most part. I'm fine. You adapt. You don't know any different and you learn everything from other people.

    There's a difference between not needing a parent, and growing up with both parents and getting rid of one. Also Grace, what's your eleven year old opinion on parents who split up? Who do you choose then? Because then, Grace, you choose who you need the most. With gay adoption, you don't need to make that decision.


    Stupid post, is stupid

    Once again I would argue there is a key distinction between a kid missing out on a mom or a dad if one of the parents passes away, or if the parents break up vs the creation of same sex households where a child misses out on a mother or father by deliberate design because of adoption rights for same sex couples.


  • #193
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    fran17 wrote: »
    There is a simple answer to this fallacy and to be honest I'm frankly fed up answering it.
    Of course there is families which do not contain a father and mother figure permanently in there lives,and this is unfortunate.However these situations are not created or enacted through legislation.Voting yes in this up coming referendum will categorically guarantee under the constitution that a child's right to a mother and father in there lives is off balanced by the right of a same sex couple to deny them that most basic human right.As a citizen of this country I could,and would,never promote this.

    Why not? There is nothing wrong with it! Zero, zlitch, zada. Growing up with a single gender as a parent is perfectly okay for the child, whether that is legislated or not.


  • #194
    fran17
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭fran17


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    Iona commissioned the survey. The wording and subsequent options were contrived to give the required result. That much should be obvious to even you.

    Links? Or is it hearsay by any chance...


  • #195
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    S.O wrote: »
    Once again I would argue there is a key distinction between a kid missing out on a mom or a dad if one of the parents passes away, or if the parents break up vs the creation of same sex households where a child misses out on a mother or father by deliberate design because of adoption rights for same sex couples.

    And yet you've failed to say what that key distinction is....


  • #196
    Stinicker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,102 ✭✭✭Stinicker


    I'm voting No because I believe Marriage is something which should be between a man and a woman, I am also against same-sex couples adopting. I am not afraid to say this and I am not afraid of the liberal bullies who would try and enforce their wrong beliefs upon the people. I expect the Referendum to be defeated by around 53% to 47% in a very small turn out.


  • #197
    fran17
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭fran17


    sup_dude wrote: »
    Why not? There is nothing wrong with it! Zero, zlitch, zada. Growing up with a single gender as a parent is perfectly okay for the child, whether that is legislated or not.

    Your very much in the 9% then.Which is your right to be of course.


  • #198
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    fran17 wrote: »
    There is a simple answer to this fallacy and to be honest I'm frankly fed up answering it.
    Of course there is families which do not contain a father and mother figure permanently in there lives,and this is unfortunate.However these situations are not created or enacted through legislation.Voting yes in this up coming referendum will categorically guarantee under the constitution that a child's right to a mother and father in there lives is off balanced by the right of a same sex couple to deny them that most basic human right.As a citizen of this country I could,and would,never promote this.

    Gay couples will be able to be legal guardians of a child together if you vote no. I dont know why people continue to spread this lie that a yes vote will alter this.

    You say children have a right to a mother and father just after saying it is ok if they dont have both, either they have this right or they dont. Where is this a human right anyway? How are single people allowed to adopt?


  • #199
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    fran17 wrote: »
    Your very much in the 9% then.Which is your right to be of course.

    9% of what? Of people who have experienced what it's like to grow up without a father figure? Of people who know that a mother and a father isn't necessary for a happy, healthy child?


  • #200
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    fran17 wrote: »
    There is a simple answer to this fallacy and to be honest I'm frankly fed up answering it.
    Of course there is families which do not contain a father and mother figure permanently in there lives,and this is unfortunate.However these situations are not created or enacted through legislation.Voting yes in this up coming referendum will categorically guarantee under the constitution that a child's right to a mother and father in there lives is off balanced by the right of a same sex couple to deny them that most basic human right.As a citizen of this country I could,and would,never promote this.

    If this passes, they're not going to be cheerfully wrenching children from the hands of their straight parents and throwing them at the nearest available lesbian. If it does not pass, it is not going to magically change the sexual orientation of gay parents and give their children a mother and a father. If it doesn't pass, all it does is deny very real children and families the right to a legally recognised relationship that is equal to the one enjoyed by straight families.

    Who are these children whose right to a mother and a father is going to be changed by this referendum? There will still be gay families, there will still be single parents, all a No vote would do is deny existing children rights on a point of principle about the rights of hypothetical children.


  • #201
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    fran17 wrote: »
    There is a simple answer to this fallacy and to be honest I'm frankly fed up answering it.
    Of course there is families which do not contain a father and mother figure permanently in there lives,and this is unfortunate.However these situations are not created or enacted through legislation.Voting yes in this up coming referendum will categorically guarantee under the constitution that a child's right to a mother and father in there lives is off balanced by the right of a same sex couple to deny them that most basic human right.As a citizen of this country I could,and would,never promote this.

    This legislation won't enact anything either. You'd swear gay couples getting married were going to be given a free child or something. The law around children already exists and there is no law that can stop people making their own arrangements to have a child. All you're doing is giving people the right to marry independent of children being part of that marriage.


  • Advertisement
  • #202
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Stinicker wrote: »
    I'm voting No because I believe Marriage is something which should be between a man and a woman, I am also against same-sex couples adopting. I am not afraid to say this and I am not afraid of the liberal bullies who would try and enforce their wrong beliefs upon the people. I expect the Referendum to be defeated by around 53% to 47% in a very small turn out.

    Liberal bullies... And what exactly is wrong with believing a man and a man can be in love, or a woman and a woman? What's wrong with believing that that love should be legally recognised? The referendum has nothing to do with children, not matter how many times people say it.


  • #203
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Stinicker wrote: »
    I'm voting No because I believe Marriage is something which should be between a man and a woman, I am also against same-sex couples adopting. I am not afraid to say this and I am not afraid of the liberal bullies who would try and enforce their wrong beliefs upon the people. I expect the Referendum to be defeated by around 53% to 47% in a very small turn out.

    Why do you believe that?


  • #204
    Stinicker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,102 ✭✭✭Stinicker


    Ismael Incalculable Feet wrote: »
    Why do you believe that?

    Because Marriage is something between Heterosexual couples and has been since the dawn of time and we have no right to try and change this now.
    sup_dude wrote: »
    Liberal bullies... And what exactly is wrong with believing a man and a man can be in love, or a woman and a woman? What's wrong with believing that that love should be legally recognised? The referendum has nothing to do with children, not matter how many times people say it.

    Homosexual partnerships are already legally recognised and re: Gay adoption every child deserves to have the best start in life, having two mothers and especially two fathers is not natural. Single mothers and grand parents do a great job of raising children also, however ideally the core of the family is a loving mother and father in a healthy balanced relationship.


  • #205
    fran17
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭fran17


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Gay couples will be able to be legal guardians of a child together if you vote no. I dont know why people continue to spread this lie that a yes vote will alter this.

    You say children have a right to a mother and father just after saying it is ok if they dont have both, either they have this right or they dont. Where is this a human right anyway? How are single people allowed to adopt?

    Another red herring.Yes by law a single person can make an application for adoption but do you honestly think that this application would be successful in relation to a married couple applying in parallel?
    No,a married couple will always,and rightly so,get preference over a single application.
    I honestly cant believe your using as your argument the question of whether a male and female parent is a human right.There is no research or academic on this planet that will conclude that a child being raised by two men is preferable to a mother and father.Please stop with this lunacy.


  • #206
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Stinicker wrote: »
    Because Marriage is something between Heterosexual couples and has been since the dawn of time and we have no right to try and change this now.



    Homosexual partnerships are already legally recognised and re: Gay adoption every child deserves to have the best start in life, having two mothers and especially two fathers is not natural. Single mothers and grand parents do a great job of raising children also, however ideally the core of the family is a loving mother and father in a healthy balanced relationship.

    Is marriage natural?


  • #207
    kevin12345
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,171 ✭✭✭kevin12345


    I think the people saying it won't pass are underestimating the amount of students going to vote in this referendum for the first time. There is actually a hype around colleges about voting. I've come across a lot of (straight) college students who are extremely passionate about this referendum and actually registered this year just so they can vote. It will be a huge boost for the Yes side I believe. Should hopefully counteract act the votes from David Quinn and his cronies.


  • #208
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Stinicker wrote: »
    Because Marriage is something between Heterosexual couples and has been since the dawn of time and we have no right to try and change this now.



    Homosexual partnerships are already legally recognised and re: Gay adoption every child deserves to have the best start in life, having two mothers and especially two fathers is not natural. Single mothers and grand parents do a great job of raising children also, however ideally the core of the family is a loving mother and father in a healthy balanced relationship.

    But we have fundamentally redefined marriage many times, with increasing speed over the past three centuries or so. Nobody seems to shed a tear over those changes, so they're obviously not as seismic as the one being suggested here. Is the gender of the couple involved such a huge change that you believe a straight marriage now has more in common with a marriage from several centuries ago which was pre-arranged, exclusively between people of the same race, involved the wife essentially being sold by her father to her husband and may have occured between people who'd barely met let alone cohabited than it does with a contemporary, committed co-habiting gay relationship?


  • #209
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Here’s Juliet Capulet being spoken to by her father when she resists his efforts to marry her off

    “An you be mine, I’ll give you to my friend.
    An you be not, hang, beg, starve, die in the streets,
    For, by my soul, I’ll ne'er acknowledge thee,
    Nor what is mine shall never do thee good.
    Trust to ’t, bethink you. I’ll not be forsworn.”

    That’s what marriage was for most of human civilisation. That’s what the balance of rights between children and parent was like. But seeing as that was the model for a really long time it’s obviously the best model, let’s just go back to that.


  • #210
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    fran17 wrote: »
    Another red herring.Yes by law a single person can make an application for adoption but do you honestly think that this application would be successful in relation to a married couple applying in parallel?
    No,a married couple will always,and rightly so,get preference over a single application.

    If that was true then two drug addicts would get priority of a single person. Please stop with the lies. It just wastes time. The suitability of the potential parent(s) would be taken into account. If the single person was a relative of the child do you think they will decide to hand the child to strangers instead just because they are married?
    fran17 wrote: »
    I honestly cant believe your using as your argument the question of whether a male and female parent is a human right.There is no research or academic on this planet that will conclude that a child being raised by two men is preferable to a mother and father.Please stop with this lunacy.

    I honestly can't believe you make **** up like you do every time you come into one of these thread.
    http://www.apa.org/about/policy/parenting.aspx

    A common opinion among people who know far more about this than you and me have done studies and say that same sex couples raise children to the same standards and that the child having legal ties to both parents would be a good thing.

    I await your next baseless claims.


  • Advertisement
  • #211
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Ismael Incalculable Feet wrote: »
    If this passes, they're not going to be cheerfully wrenching children from the hands of their straight parents and throwing them at the nearest available lesbian. If it does not pass, it is not going to magically change the sexual orientation of gay parents and give their children a mother and a father. If it doesn't pass, all it does is deny very real children and families the right to a legally recognised relationship that is equal to the one enjoyed by straight families.

    Who are these children whose right to a mother and a father is going to be changed by this referendum? There will still be gay families, there will still be single parents, all a No vote would do is deny existing children rights on a point of principle about the rights of hypothetical children.
    In fact the only effect that this will have on the children of gay couples is that if their biological parent dies the surviving partner will have a right to the child, and the child won't have the upheaval of losing both of their parents in one traumatic go - something which is detrimental to a child.
    Ismael Incalculable Feet wrote: »
    But we have fundamentally redefined marriage many times, with increasing speed over the past three centuries or so. Nobody seems to shed a tear over those changes, so they're obviously not as seismic as the one being suggested here. Is the gender of the couple involved such a huge change that you believe a straight marriage now has more in common with a marriage from several centuries ago which was pre-arranged, exclusively between people of the same race, involved the wife essentially being sold by her father to her husband and may have occured between people who'd barely met let alone cohabited than it does with a contemporary, committed co-habiting gay relationship?
    I think it bears pointing out that this SSM referendum is actually doing nothing but setting one aspect of marriage back the way it was. Historically, traditionally if you will, the Christian church did perform same sex marriage between men. There was a special service and everything.


Advertisement