Quoting Post Archived Topic: It will not be bumped to the top of the forum. Topic Homosexual Adoption Membername   Not a member? Sign Up Free (takes 20 seconds) Password   Forgotten your password? Post Font: Verdana Arial Black Georgia Comic Sans Impact   Size: Tiny Normal Big Huge   Color: Default Dark Red Red Orange Brown Green Olive Cyan Blue Dark Blue Indigo Black [ Check Spelling ] [ Post Preview ] [ LiveTags ] Quote: from [m]aejae[/m] at 3:40 pm on July 6, 2009[quote]all for it[/quote] FAQ Keyword Search: Post Options Favorites Manager Notify me of new replies to this topic by email Notify me of new replies to this topic by private message Original Post asdfghjkl1234 Posted at 3:39 pm on July 6, 2009 How many of you are for or against homosexual adoption?

Replies XxRedneckBitchxX Posted at 6:25 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Baron Samedi at 3:52 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from XxRedneckBitchxX at 4:47 pm on July 6, 2009 But they will question if they are normal. If they are striaght they may feel as though they are disapointing the family. If they are gay they will be made fun of more. It would be the exact same situation for a gay kid in a straight family. And no, fat kids eat the food. That their parents gladly purchase for them.   And wtf do clothes have to dow thi shit If you're against gay adoption because you're worried about the kid getting teased, you'd better be against poor people having children since kids get teased for that too... Didn't say I was against it. One of my best friends was raied by two mothers. I'm just saying there are pros and cons Stormblazer Posted at 6:07 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from TheClassic at 4:59 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from richteabiscuits at 3:50 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from bawx II at 3:40 pm on July 6, 2009 New account because..? And I'm against it... the kid will go through a life of hell.   Not necessarily. Just because two people are of the same sex doesn't mean they are not capable of bringing up a child well.   And with a society that is becoming more acceptable to same-sex couples, the child might not be scrutinised for it. The reason why society is becoming more accepting of it is because of the economy. People become more flexible when they are pushed into a corner. But even with our economy the way it is, why do you think Prop 8 passed in liberal California? Because people still can't say that marriage's definition can be changed to include a homosexual union. If you want a child, reproduce like a human. If you can't because of infertility, then you can still adopt. That's what I believe. Prop 8 passed due to confusing wording and a ton of outside money. For the latter - I happen to give a damn about the child, not some outdated notion of procreational purity. There are tons of children who go unadopted, and IMO any parents capable of providing love and support towards raising a child deserves the opportunity. You've given NO valid reason against homosexual adoption. Raising a child and procreating are two different things, and we have far too many people "reproducing like a human" as it is. TheClassic Posted at 4:15 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from richteabiscuits at 4:06 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from TheClassic at 3:59 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from richteabiscuits at 3:50 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from bawx II at 3:40 pm on July 6, 2009 New account because..?      And I'm against it... the kid will go through a life of hell.    Not necessarily. Just because two people are of the same sex doesn't mean they are not capable of bringing up a child well.    And with a society that is becoming more acceptable to same-sex couples, the child might not be scrutinised for it.    The reason why society is becoming more accepting of it is because of the economy.  People become more flexible when they are pushed into a corner.  But even with our economy the way it is, why do you think Prop 8 passed in liberal California?  Because people still can't say that marriage's definition can be changed to include a homosexual union.      If you want a child, reproduce like a human.  If you can't because of infertility, then you can still adopt.  That's what I believe. That's because the law is based on religion, and religion is against homosexuals. We may have once just been animals who were here to reproduce, but clearly human beings have evolved into much more sophisticated beings, so saying "reproduce like a human" isn't as simple as it may seem? If you know what I mean... I'm agnostic, I hate the idea of religion, and I still voted yes on prop 8.  And yes, it is that simple.  Until humans evolve to where guys can reproduce with guys and girls can reproduce with girls, there is no reason for a child to grow up with a homosexual couple. richteabiscuits Posted at 4:06 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from TheClassic at 3:59 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from richteabiscuits at 3:50 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from bawx II at 3:40 pm on July 6, 2009 New account because..? And I'm against it... the kid will go through a life of hell.   Not necessarily. Just because two people are of the same sex doesn't mean they are not capable of bringing up a child well.   And with a society that is becoming more acceptable to same-sex couples, the child might not be scrutinised for it. The reason why society is becoming more accepting of it is because of the economy. People become more flexible when they are pushed into a corner. But even with our economy the way it is, why do you think Prop 8 passed in liberal California? Because people still can't say that marriage's definition can be changed to include a homosexual union. If you want a child, reproduce like a human. If you can't because of infertility, then you can still adopt. That's what I believe. That's because the law is based on religion, and religion is against homosexuals. We may have once just been animals who were here to reproduce, but clearly human beings have evolved into much more sophisticated beings, so saying "reproduce like a human" isn't as simple as it may seem? If you know what I mean...   dm13 Posted at 4:06 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Dazzles at 4:00 pm on July 6, 2009 Id almost ather give my kid to a gay/lesbian couple than a straight one. It really doesnt madder. Heterosexual couples are so dis functional these days, I would def consider. If you were raised by a straight couple, then I don't think straight people should be allowed to adopt.  'madder'? Really? dm13 Posted at 4:03 pm on July 6, 2009 Some of the arguments so far in this topic are just LAME. First, I believe that it should be policy that a kid has a mother figure and a father figure. Assuming they're decent people, that is easily the best situation for a kid to be raised in. That takes out single individuals, they shouldn't be allowed to adopt. And to answer someone else's question, no poor people should not be allowed to adopt. The whole idea of throwing a child into poverty has no logic behind it. yssuPevoLI Posted at 4:02 pm on July 6, 2009 I would never adopt a homosexual Dazzles Posted at 4:00 pm on July 6, 2009 Id almost ather give my kid to a gay/lesbian couple than a straight one. It really doesnt madder. Heterosexual couples are so dis functional these days, I would def consider. TheClassic Posted at 3:59 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from richteabiscuits at 3:50 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from bawx II at 3:40 pm on July 6, 2009 New account because..?   And I'm against it... the kid will go through a life of hell. Not necessarily. Just because two people are of the same sex doesn't mean they are not capable of bringing up a child well. And with a society that is becoming more acceptable to same-sex couples, the child might not be scrutinised for it. The reason why society is becoming more accepting of it is because of the economy.  People become more flexible when they are pushed into a corner.  But even with our economy the way it is, why do you think Prop 8 passed in liberal California?  Because people still can't say that marriage's definition can be changed to include a homosexual union.   If you want a child, reproduce like a human.  If you can't because of infertility, then you can still adopt.  That's what I believe. BeautifulxLiar Posted at 3:58 pm on July 6, 2009 all for it theres nothing wrong with 2 people of the same gender loving so why would there be a problem with them raising a kid? Chasey Posted at 3:56 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Mikoto at 11:55 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Chasey at 11:41 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Check Unavailability at 11:41 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Chasey at 3:40 pm on July 6, 2009 i'm against homosexual adoption and i'm a homosexual Why    what bawx said - the kid'll go through hell A kid would have a much better life with loving gay parents than straight parents that didn't love them. it'd have much better life with straight parents that love them though. sure, the gay parents could be amazing etc, but the abuse they'd receive from the public would be horrendous and corrupt their childhood. Mikoto Posted at 3:55 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Chasey at 11:41 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Check Unavailability at 11:41 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Chasey at 3:40 pm on July 6, 2009 i'm against homosexual adoption and i'm a homosexual Why what bawx said - the kid'll go through hell A kid would have a much better life with loving gay parents than straight parents that didn't love them. Chasey Posted at 3:55 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from TheClassic at 11:54 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Chasey at 3:44 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from TheClassic at 11:42 pm on July 6, 2009 I'm against it. If a guy&guy or girl&girl are together it's an understanding that they will not have a child in their lives - it's nature, there's nothing else to it.    what about infertile people ? would you say the same for them ? While that is a valid argument, no I would not. Heterosexual reproduction is of our species, not homosexual reproduction, regardless. but does it matter ? a family is a family blackbandaid Posted at 3:55 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from TheClassic at 10:54 am on July 7, 2009 Quote: from Chasey at 3:44 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from TheClassic at 11:42 pm on July 6, 2009 I'm against it. If a guy&guy or girl&girl are together it's an understanding that they will not have a child in their lives - it's nature, there's nothing else to it.    what about infertile people ? would you say the same for them ? While that is a valid argument, no I would not. Heterosexual reproduction is of our species, not homosexual reproduction, regardless. They're not reproducing...they're adopting. TheClassic Posted at 3:54 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from Chasey at 3:44 pm on July 6, 2009 Quote: from TheClassic at 11:42 pm on July 6, 2009 I'm against it.  If a guy&guy or girl&girl are together it's an understanding that they will not have a child in their lives - it's nature, there's nothing else to it. what about infertile people ? would you say the same for them ? While that is a valid argument, no I would not. Heterosexual reproduction is of our species, not homosexual reproduction, regardless. Most recent 15 of 45 previous replies displayed.