Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | ... | 41
2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 792908 4-Apr-2013 08:46
Send private message

freitasm:
Klipspringer: 
freitasm:
"which family structure is best for the upbringing of the child" is whichever family structure shows this child love. It could be a mother and father, two fathers or two mothers.


As per above. My question is about both environments (one gay and one with Mom and Dad). Everything else healthy.

Which one is better for the child?


Until you provide scientific evidence that one is better than the other I'd say both can get the same results.


Funny you say that.
From what I have read about children who are now adults and having been brought up by gay couples most of them all have very simular stories. There are a lot of articles out there on this.

How many kids hated growing up in a hetrosexual family and are saying that it would have been better being raised under a gay family? Never heard of any!

Do we need scientific evidence for everything? How about asking the children?

Here a child is speaking out of his upbringing by gay parents.

From the article:
Quite simply, growing up with gay parents was very difficult, and not because of prejudice from neighbors. People in our community didn’t really know what was going on in the house. To most outside observers, I was a well-raised, high-achieving child, finishing high school with straight A’s.Inside, however, I was confused. When your home life is so drastically different from everyone around you, in a fundamental way striking at basic physical relations, you grow up weird. I have no mental health disorders or biological conditions. I just grew up in a house so unusual that I was destined to exist as a social outcast.


My peers learned all the unwritten rules of decorum and body language in their homes; they understood what was appropriate to say in certain settings and what wasn’t; they learned both traditionally masculine and traditionally feminine social mechanisms.

Even if my peers’ parents were divorced, and many of them were, they still grew up seeing male and female social models. They learned, typically, how to be bold and unflinching from male figures and how to write thank-you cards and be sensitive from female figures.


I had no male figure at all to follow, and my mother and her partner were both unlike traditional fathers or traditional mothers. As a result, I had very few recognizable social cues to offer potential male or female friends, since I was neither confident nor sensitive to others. Thus I befriended people rarely and alienated others easily.


Gay people who grew up in straight parents’ households may have struggled with their sexual orientation; but when it came to the vast social universe of adaptations not dealing with sexuality—how to act, how to speak, how to behave—they had the advantage of learning at home. Many gays don’t realize what a blessing it was to be reared in a traditional home.


In terms of sexuality, gays who grew up in traditional households benefited from at least seeing some kind of functional courtship rituals around them. I had no clue how to make myself attractive to girls


Forty-one years I’d lived, and nobody—least of all gay activists—had wanted me to speak honestly about the complicated gay threads of my life.


freitasm:
Klipspringer: As per above. My question is about both environments (one gay and one with Mom and Dad). Everything else healthy.

Which one is better for the child?


Do you have the answer to this question? Is it based in scientific evidence or custom passed from generation to generation?



ANother interesting point.

Gay Marriage will always deny a Child Either a Father or a Mother.

So yes I have an answer to that, No need for scientific evidence for everything. Ask a child. If gay marriage is going to always deny a child either a father or a mother then its a bad thing.

kyhwana2: Guess what? It's people like you that mean a child of a gay couple is different. It's YOUR fault. How about less of an bigot (almost used another word there) and oh look your first point is suddenly invalid.


Please explain to me what you mean by this.

As per the example above.
Forty-one years I’d lived, and nobody—least of all gay activists—had wanted me to speak honestly about the complicated gay threads of my life.


This guy was raised by two lesbian women. In fact hetrosexual couples had absolutely nothing to do with his upbringing at all. It still seems this child turned out very different. Are you going to blame "people like me" for this too?




3032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 466

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 792939 4-Apr-2013 09:30
One person supports this post
Send private message

Klipspringer:
ANother interesting point.

Gay Marriage will always deny a Child Either a Father or a Mother.

So yes I have an answer to that, No need for scientific evidence for everything. Ask a child. If gay marriage is going to always deny a child either a father or a mother then its a bad thing.


Single parents also deny a child either a mother or father.  So you're saying the government needs to step in and stop that right now too?  No father around?  Baby gets taken at birth and stuck into CYFS custody.  Not having both parents is a bad thing.

You seriously need to stop talking right now.  Your assertion is offensive not just to gay couples but also to any single parent who struggled to raise children correctly without having one of these balancing influences you claim are absolutely essential to proper upbringing.

I had no father growing up, and I don't feel like a social outcast at all.

It's been said before so many times, and I'll say it again - a relationship between two people where you are neither of the participants doesn't affect you, therefore you need to get over it because frankly it's none of your business whether they marry or not.  Even if your offensive assertion is correct (and it's not) it doesn't matter, since they can already enter into relationships which have the same effect without the marriage.

There, I said it.  A lot blunter than I would have were I not so angry at your ridiculous tripe, but nonetheless it's said.

And to make an important point doubly clear - I find your ideas patently offensive, I have no animosity towards you individually.

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 792943 4-Apr-2013 09:41
Send private message

Kyanar:
Klipspringer:
ANother interesting point.

Gay Marriage will always deny a Child Either a Father or a Mother.

So yes I have an answer to that, No need for scientific evidence for everything. Ask a child. If gay marriage is going to always deny a child either a father or a mother then its a bad thing.


Single parents also deny a child either a mother or father.  So you're saying the government needs to step in and stop that right now too?  No father around?  Baby gets taken at birth and stuck into CYFS custody.  Not having both parents is a bad thing.


You are talking here about split up families. They happen.

Gay marriage will always deny a child either a father or a mother.

The same cannot be said about traditional marriages.

Kyanar:
It's been said before so many times, and I'll say it again - a relationship between two people where you are neither of the participants doesn't affect you, therefore you need to get over it because frankly it's none of your business whether they marry or not. 


And that relationship you are talking about can involve children, hence why the government is involved in this. This debate we are having here will be the same debate happening in parliament very soon.

I believe that the children’s rights come first.

83 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 18


  Reply # 792962 4-Apr-2013 09:59
Send private message

Klipspringer:
Kyanar:
Klipspringer:
ANother interesting point.

Gay Marriage will always deny a Child Either a Father or a Mother.

So yes I have an answer to that, No need for scientific evidence for everything. Ask a child. If gay marriage is going to always deny a child either a father or a mother then its a bad thing.


Single parents also deny a child either a mother or father.  So you're saying the government needs to step in and stop that right now too?  No father around?  Baby gets taken at birth and stuck into CYFS custody.  Not having both parents is a bad thing.


You are talking here about split up families. They happen.

Gay marriage will always deny a child either a father or a mother.

The same cannot be said about traditional marriages.

Kyanar:
It's been said before so many times, and I'll say it again - a relationship between two people where you are neither of the participants doesn't affect you, therefore you need to get over it because frankly it's none of your business whether they marry or not. 


And that relationship you are talking about can involve children, hence why the government is involved in this. This debate we are having here will be the same debate happening in parliament very soon.

I believe that the children’s rights come first.


Gay couples are already raising children.  That's not going to change with this law.  All it's going to do is supply the same legal framework for these families as existing marriages have.

3032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 466

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 792971 4-Apr-2013 10:12
One person supports this post
Send private message

Klipspringer:
Kyanar:
Klipspringer:
ANother interesting point.

Gay Marriage will always deny a Child Either a Father or a Mother.

So yes I have an answer to that, No need for scientific evidence for everything. Ask a child. If gay marriage is going to always deny a child either a father or a mother then its a bad thing.


Single parents also deny a child either a mother or father.  So you're saying the government needs to step in and stop that right now too?  No father around?  Baby gets taken at birth and stuck into CYFS custody.  Not having both parents is a bad thing.


You are talking here about split up families. They happen.

Gay marriage will always deny a child either a father or a mother.

The same cannot be said about traditional marriages.


Split up families will always deny a child either a father or a mother.  Yet you don't seem to believe the government needs to step in and confiscate the children in those cases.  This makes you a hypocrite, and your reasoning for opposing gay marriage suspect.

Klipspringer:
Kyanar:
It's been said before so many times, and I'll say it again - a relationship between two people where you are neither of the participants doesn't affect you, therefore you need to get over it because frankly it's none of your business whether they marry or not. 


And that relationship you are talking about can involve children, hence why the government is involved in this. This debate we are having here will be the same debate happening in parliament very soon.

I believe that the children’s rights come first.


And if you'd read the entire remainder of the paragraph which you conveniently left out, you'd realise how silly that argument sounds.  Gay couples can already have children.  Them marrying does not change this.  Frankly, letting them marry creates a stronger bond which would potentially be better for the children.

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 792973 4-Apr-2013 10:17
Send private message

onebytemike:
Gay couples are already raising children.  That's not going to change with this law.  All it's going to do is supply the same legal framework for these families as existing marriages have.


I'm glad you used the term "raising children". I have no issues with that at all and just believe that the best scenario for the child would be a traditional marriage with a mother and a father.

Gay couples that are raising children are doing exactly that. Raising children.

Currently gay couples cannot legally adopt children and in so doing deny a child from having both a mother and a father.

Allowing SSM will open that door. Is that not part of the push from the gay community?







2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 792982 4-Apr-2013 10:27
Send private message

Kyanar:
Split up families will always deny a child either a father or a mother.  Yet you don't seem to believe the government needs to step in and confiscate the children in those cases.  This makes you a hypocrite, and your reasoning for opposing gay marriage suspect.


I think the only other thing that would deny a child both a father and a mother is the death of a parent.

Just because some parents have split up you are assuming that both parents are no longer parents.

Who has the more rights to a kid in a gay relationship? the new partner who came into the relationship or the "real" Dad from outside the gay relationship?

Government never has to step in until the Childs rights are at risk.

As per my above example. 2 Lesbians living together, raising the kids. One is the real Mom.

Dad moved on and marries again into a traditional marriage.

Who has more rights to those kids? I would say the dad. Why? Because those kids have the right to both a father and a mother figure in their lives.




3032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 466

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 792983 4-Apr-2013 10:30
One person supports this post
Send private message

Klipspringer:
onebytemike:
Gay couples are already raising children.  That's not going to change with this law.  All it's going to do is supply the same legal framework for these families as existing marriages have.


I'm glad you used the term "raising children". I have no issues with that at all and just believe that the best scenario for the child would be a traditional marriage with a mother and a father.

Gay couples that are raising children are doing exactly that. Raising children.

Currently gay couples cannot legally adopt children and in so doing deny a child from having both a mother and a father.

Allowing SSM will open that door. Is that not part of the push from the gay community?


Oh come off it.  Single parents can adopt, and in so doing deny a child from having both a mother and a father.

You seriously need to stop with this stupid argument - it's been firmly debunked every time you bring it up.  Allowing gay marriage changes nothing.

3032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 466

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 792985 4-Apr-2013 10:31
2 people support this post
Send private message

Klipspringer:
Kyanar:
Split up families will always deny a child either a father or a mother.  Yet you don't seem to believe the government needs to step in and confiscate the children in those cases.  This makes you a hypocrite, and your reasoning for opposing gay marriage suspect.


I think the only other thing that would deny a child both a father and a mother is the death of a parent.

Just because some parents have split up you are assuming that both parents are no longer parents.

Who has the more rights to a kid in a gay relationship? the new partner who came into the relationship or the "real" Dad from outside the gay relationship?

Government never has to step in until the Childs rights are at risk.

As per my above example. 2 Lesbians living together, raising the kids. One is the real Mom.

Dad moved on and marries again into a traditional marriage.

Who has more rights to those kids? I would say the dad. Why? Because those kids have the right to both a father and a mother figure in their lives.


I see.  So if a family splits and the father re-marries but the mother doesn't then CYFS needs to step in and confiscate all the children from the mother because the father has a wife so clearly he's more fit to raise children.

Your argument is patently wrong.  Just stop.

83 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 18


  Reply # 792990 4-Apr-2013 10:37
Send private message

Klipspringer:
onebytemike:
Gay couples are already raising children.  That's not going to change with this law.  All it's going to do is supply the same legal framework for these families as existing marriages have.


I'm glad you used the term "raising children". I have no issues with that at all and just believe that the best scenario for the child would be a traditional marriage with a mother and a father.

Gay couples that are raising children are doing exactly that. Raising children.

Currently gay couples cannot legally adopt children and in so doing deny a child from having both a mother and a father.

Allowing SSM will open that door. Is that not part of the push from the gay community?



1.  Closed adoptions are very uncommon.
2.  There's nothing to suggest that children are worse off being raised in a SSM.

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 793004 4-Apr-2013 10:54
Send private message

Kyanar:
Single parents can adopt, and in so doing deny a child from having both a mother and a father.


Really?
Im not sure about that but I will presume then that you are right. A couple will always be the best setup. I have never heard of a single parent adopting but I could be wrong.

Kyanar:
I see. So if a family splits and the father re-marries but the mother doesn't then CYFS needs to step in and confiscate all the children from the mother because the father has a wife so clearly he's more fit to raise children.

Your argument is patently wrong. Just stop.


Why are you talking about the CYFS stepping in and taking the children? You jumping to conclusions about my posts.

The New Zealand family court will always rule in favour of what’s best for the kids. Always.
So taking that into account (best for the kids) yes the father with his new wife could be more suited to raise the kids. But thats not for us to decide is it.

My previous comments were about traditional marriages with a mother and father figure being the best case scenario (IMO). That’s why I asked the question!

Is a traditional marriage with a mother and father the best way to bring up a child or not?

Once we can answer that one we can move on. I have my opinion about it which I have shared. Maybe someone can provide evidence then that children being raised by a gay couple is best.

BDFL - Memuneh
61301 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12043

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 793018 4-Apr-2013 11:11
One person supports this post
Send private message

I would have no problems with children being raised by gay couples (as I said before I have first hand knowledge of one girl being raised by two dads).

On the other hand I have problems with this kind of straight scumbag people raising and having access to kids.

That's her father. The girl is only eight years old:


Eden said the man went to the bedroom and grabbed the girl and dragged her to the lounge.

The girl was holding her pyjamas in her hand and he threw them on the floor and sexually assaulted her.

After he had finished he told her not to tell anyone.

The girl got into her pyjamas and her father put his hand down her pants and grabbed her buttocks.

She ran into her bedroom and started crying.








2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 793027 4-Apr-2013 11:17
Send private message

freitasm: I would have no problems with children being raised by gay couples (as I said before I have first hand knowledge of one girl being raised by two dads).

On the other hand I have problems with this kind of straight scumbag people raising and having access to kids.


Agreed. Unfortunately this is human nature. Some people are sick

Just like this gay paedophile scumbag

Aaron Ellmers, 41, appeared in Hastings District Court this morning and pleaded guilty to a raft of child sex offences, including one in which involved Ellmers travelling to Christchurch and offering a man $500 for "sexual gratification" with the man's 18-month-old boy.

1332 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152
Inactive user


  Reply # 793043 4-Apr-2013 11:31
Send private message

Klipspringer:
1080p:
I think the family which shows their child love is the best place to raise that child.


I agree. In this case both families are showing the child love. Which environment is the better one?


That is a matter yet to be decided. I think the family a child has is the most important and therefore the best environment.

Even if you're correct (there is no evidence I have seen to support this yet) and an environment with a biological mother and father is the best environment for a child to be raised in. Why does it matter?

Once again, how will this amendment affect those bringing up children in heterosexual marriages?

The answer which you've refused to supply a half dozen times already is that it will not. At all.


So, if it will not affect any of the current heterosexual relationships which raise children and will serve to provide a loving, secure environment for the tiny percentage of children who may have ended up as wards of the state or raised by single parents or any number of other worse situations; why is this amendment a bad idea again?

3032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 466

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 793053 4-Apr-2013 11:47
Send private message

Klipspringer:
Kyanar:
Single parents can adopt, and in so doing deny a child from having both a mother and a father.


Really?
Im not sure about that but I will presume then that you are right. A couple will always be the best setup. I have never heard of a single parent adopting but I could be wrong.


Indeed.  Not only that, but gay couples can adopt by having one partner adopt and the other getting guardianship appointed by the court.  So again, nothing changes but semantics.

1 | ... | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | ... | 41
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.