RSJ
Well-Known Member
So you know a lot of kids who've been brought up by two same sex parents?Fair enough Bellatrix, well in my case it wasn't a platitude - it was a statement based on experience that I've really thought through.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So you know a lot of kids who've been brought up by two same sex parents?Fair enough Bellatrix, well in my case it wasn't a platitude - it was a statement based on experience that I've really thought through.
And there are quite a few women who look like Tom Selleck.
Homer: “Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol is working like a charm!”
Lisa: “That’s specious reasoning, dad. By your logic, I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.”
Homer: “Hmm; how does it work?”
Lisa: “It doesn’t work; it’s just a stupid rock!”
Homer: “Uh-huh.”
Lisa: “... but I don’t see any tigers around, do you?”
Homer: “Lisa, I want to buy your rock...”
So you know a lot of kids who've been brought up by two same sex parents?
Pft. Gays dont do that. God/ Bhudda / Gaia/ help your kids.
how does 'yes' sound?But really, do I really need a sociological or scientific study to prove the importance of maternal nurturing?
how does 'yes' sound?
I'd like to think people have an innate understanding of some things that I consider fundamental
Bellatrix, I'm not saying "that's nature, I don't make the rules" so much as I'm saying that I shouldn't need science to explain what I thought was a widely accepted truth. As another example, the statement "discrimination is bad" is another widely accepted truth. Do I need a scientific/sociological study to prove that? (that's a rhetorical question) And Billy, I agree with most of what you said there. I think we just disagree on the basic argument, which I've already dissected.
Bellatrix, I'm not saying "that's nature, I don't make the rules" so much as I'm saying that I shouldn't need science to explain what I thought was a widely accepted truth.
And Billy, I agree with most of what you said there. I think we just disagree on the basic argument, which I've already dissected.
so do you think it's not discrimination to give precedence to heterosexual couples adopting over homosexual couples - just because.. well mothers are great with the kids?
I accept that this could be regarded as an inequality, yes. Discrimination? Yes, of a kind - of course it's only theoretical. But as Billy pointed out, there are all kinds of other factors which would be more pressing and more important. So, in theory, it probably wouldn't matter. However, saying "just because mothers are good with kids" is just a reduction of what I was saying to a soundbite, and I don't accept that.
Bellatrix, if you don't think a mother is hugely important to a baby, and really require scientific evidence for it, and want to talk about racism etc, instead of sticking to the point, well, be my guest. Personally I think it's a fundamental thing, and I've provided my own reasons for thinking it. Have you reasons for thinking otherwise?
Billy, I think you make some very good points there actually. And I accept absolutely that in the example you provide I would indeed send the child to the brother. In those situations, yes I would agree the catholic adoption agencies providing a blaket denial to gay couples would be a "very bad thing". But as you say, these things are teased out on a case-by-case basis.
Upgrade your account now to disable all ads...
Upgrade nowWe use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.