correct. the fact they are able to give the love required already makes them good candidates for parenthood.
HOWEVER, to the group which is dealing with this issue, take note.
There is a larger issue here.
Once, we allow them to adopt, we are telling the society that homosexuality is accepted and that a homosexual couple is accepted. Is that what we want? And I think many societies are still saying NO.
I agree with Ms Chang on this issue.The issue here deals with more than just the homosexual couple involved.One might argue that love between 2 persons, whether homosexual or heterosexual, is a very personal thing and so is their desire to bring a child into the family to complete it.Therefore,it should be their personal decision to adopt a child.However when homosexual parents are involved,it is inevitable if their decision to do so is blown out of proportion.This is because homosexuality is not widely accepted yet.The child may then be discriminated against because he has homosexual parents.Nature has made it in such a way that man and woman are very different.Thus,if the child lacks either maternal or paternal love it might have an adverse effect on how he might grow up to be like.
Whew. that's long. i din noe i was typing so much.i shall shut up now. =X
Yes. One huge concern is if the child would suffer from social pressure.
Cheng Hong
Human rights is a big issue, especially in Western countries.
Every country has a different view on how much "right" to confer to people. Remember, every "right" could also potentially cause discomfort to others.
A simple example is nudist beaches. While some countries allow people to sunbathe without clothes, some countries has made it illegal. Why? because it affects others in uncomfortable/negative way.
Some "rights" are limited. For example, smoking. Though people are allowed to smoke, they have to do it at specific locations. Why? Because second-hand smoke affects others.
Same principle applies to your issue. Once homosexual parents are allowed to adopt, some segments of society will be offended.
homosexual parents should not be allowed to adopt.
for one thing, personally i am very sure i wouldn't want to have parents of the same gender. true, they are able to provide love, home, and warmth. but will these suffice to protect me in future when i go out into the society? i will grow up with taunting and teasing of friends. and what should i call my mother, who is a male, when the dictionary defines it as a female parent?!
lets say i performed badly in my exams in school. teacher requests to see my mummy and daddy. i bring 2females/2males to her. what will she think? did i perform badly because my parents are "abnormal"? or was it because i was plain stupid? or probably homosexuals are not good enough to be parents, thus leading to my bad results?
accepting homosexuals already raises alot of controversies. adopting a child means bringing a third party into this "abnormal" and "unhealthy" relationship.
even if homosexuals are allowed to adopt, the child in question would have to have a say, whether or not he/she wants to follow 2 homosexual parents home.
interesting.. would i have homosexual parents or stay in a orphanage. i guess i would still choose the orphanage. at least i still have a chance wait for normal parents or stay there with all orphan friends until i grow older. then i'd go out into the society more independently than others.
of course it's not up to me to say because i'm not an orphan and cannot understand how they feel. but how is it like for the child to feel when he sees his/her parents-to-be are of the same gender? the child might NOT want them! it's not like every orphan is desperate for some parent love and would jump at any chance of it, even though it's given by homosexuals who are capable of providing love.
for example, for a 5 yr old orphan, he/she might be delighted at the chance of someone adopting her and bringing her away from the orphanage. but when he/she get older, will he/she regret that decision? she was so small at that time when she agreed, not being able to analyse the problems she'll face in the future.
one more thing. FAMILY means (Father And Mother I Love You). what does the kid call the female of the males? mother? it's totally spoils the image of a family. cause there is no image of a mother to speak of in the first place.
what does the kid writes in a composition titled "my family" or "my mother"? he/her friends would be able to visualise clearly in their mind their mummy at home, wth her bosom and rounded hip, wearing a flowered apron and baking some cookies. would the child of the homosexuals be able to do the same? or would the female of the male even bake cookies for the child?
cuiling you said : Just because if the family has parents of the same sex, it spoils the image?
truthfully, yes. it totally spoils the image. i know the world is advancing and changing, views and opinions are also on-the-go. but somethings, despite the changes, still has to remain traditional, and that is parents will have to be 1 male, 1 female.
i think it is very important to insist on this. if not, the world would be able to do anything isn't it? thinkings, beliefs will have to be changed. pictures, illustrations of mother will have to display both male and females.
growing up without any parental love is sad, but growing up with 2 men/2women is questionable. woman can never match up to a role of a father no matter how much we try to be and act like one, and for man, vice versa.
also, IF the child they adopt is a girl, wouldn't she be worried when she reaches puberty, when she wants to ask her "parents" about menstral cycles, bras and so on? would the parent even be able to answer her?
On a personal note, homosexual parents should be allowed to adopt. They should be looked upon by the society with open-ness. They deserve the rights and ability to adopt children like straight couples?
When the society decreeded that alcoholics, people under psychological treatment, old people, etc. cannot adopt, I had no objections. But I don't see why homosexual parents are not allowed to adopt. There had been, and are still existing, countless loving families that do not have the "normal" mother and father, yet the children still turn out quite well. They may even have a higher tolerance level and understanding of the society we live in.
I wonder which part of this society dictates on who gets to have a family, and how it should be raised, and under what structure.
Everyone have feelings. But because of the society's judgement, many homosexual couples have to surpress all their feelings just because they are a minority. It's time that the society open up towards homosexual couples and their rights for adoption.
Adoption is a privilege, not a right. Most Americans instinctively understand that the age-old natural family is best for nurturing kids, and that it’s wrong to create intentionally fatherless or motherless homes. Even studies by ardently pro-gay researchers (see American Sociological Review, April 2001) show that children in homosexual-led households are more likely to experiment sexually, break gender norms, and identify as homosexual or bisexual than kids raised in more traditional homes.
Garry sets up a straw man by saying the choice is between having homosexual parents and no parents at all. Truth is, there are hundreds of thousands of husband-and-wife couples waiting desperately to adopt children. Now gay activists are fighting to ensure that those married couples do not receive the favored status they deserve in adoption and custody proceedings. They want two homosexual men to have the same chance at adopting a baby or becoming foster parents as married mom-and-dad couples. This radical social experiment, if successful, will only put more kids in unstable homes — and expose innocent children to homosexual behavior — when they could have had both a mom and a dad.
i said somethings, despite the changes, still has to remain traditional. evidently, pre-marital sex has not remained as it is so common everywhere now. however, it is still strongly discouraged in society. my point is, relationship between a woman and a man is natural, whereas having homosexual relationships are not meant to be.
i believe it is taboo and punishable by capital punishment in some less developed countries. in more developed countries, they have already accepted their abnormality into the society. homosexuals should already thank god for that. why do they have to push it and adopt a child into their unhealthy relationship?
Hmm. im not from this class (im from DTRM 01! ^^) but its an interesting topic. im doing on whether gay marriages should be allowed, and i find that there's some link in between (:
I agree with the topic. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the lowest level, physiological need, should be attained before one can move up to the other level. This includes basic things like food, water and shelter. The next level would then be safety need, and so on.
Let's take a step back and look at the world with all the orphans (or children) suffering, especially in developing countries. They suffer from malnutrition and many other diseases. They do not have the proper education. Is it not a good thing if they are adopted, even if it is homosexuals who raise them? Is it not fortunate that they have a warm home and proper education? Does this all not benefit the children?
In short, adoption is for the benefit for the children and as mentioned by Cui Ling, it is not at all proven that a child that is adopted by homosexuals are 'disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents'.
1) What harm/good are we doing to/for the homosexual couple? 2) What harm/good are we doing to/for the adopted children? 3) What harm/good are we doing to/for the society?
If you think Kids should have a male and a female influence in their lives and agree with this argument then you also agree that every child of a single parent should be removed from the home. If kids of single parents can grow up fine without an influence from the opposite gender, then so can kids of homosexual parents.
Kids of homosexual parents won't develop normally. There is absolutely no proof for this statement. Kids need love, support, attention, nurturing, etc. Homosexual parents are just as capable of this as heterosexual parents. Homosexual parents can teach their children manners, morals, etc just as competently as heterosexual parents.
Homosexual parents are more likely to abuse their children. This is based on the stereotype that being gay (for an example) equals being perverted. Not true! In fact the most likely people for abusing children are adult males abusing young females. It seems wholly illogical for this to fit gay men.
Finally, homosexuals are not creating the problem of unwanted pregnancies or children. They are not creating children they can't handle. Heterosexuals are. We should be thanking the homosexual for picking up the heterosexual slack. Therefore I think that homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt
17 Comments:
Hi Cheng Hong
Think you have provided very good reasons why homosexual parents SHOULD NOT ADOPT. :)
1. Societal acceptance
2. Absence of male/female role
3. Presuure for the child
So, why do you still say that they should be allowed to adopt??? :)
wei cong
correct. the fact they are able to give the love required already makes them good candidates for parenthood.
HOWEVER, to the group which is dealing with this issue, take note.
There is a larger issue here.
Once, we allow them to adopt, we are telling the society that homosexuality is accepted and that a homosexual couple is accepted. Is that what we want? And I think many societies are still saying NO.
I agree with Ms Chang on this issue.The issue here deals with more than just the homosexual couple involved.One might argue that love between 2 persons, whether homosexual or heterosexual, is a very personal thing and so is their desire to bring a child into the family to complete it.Therefore,it should be their personal decision to adopt a child.However when homosexual parents are involved,it is inevitable if their decision to do so is blown out of proportion.This is because homosexuality is not widely accepted yet.The child may then be discriminated against because he has homosexual parents.Nature has made it in such a way that man and woman are very different.Thus,if the child lacks either maternal or paternal love it might have an adverse effect on how he might grow up to be like.
Whew.
that's long.
i din noe i was typing so much.i shall shut up now.
=X
my point is THEY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADOPT!
Shikin
Yes. One huge concern is if the child would suffer from social pressure.
Cheng Hong
Human rights is a big issue, especially in Western countries.
Every country has a different view on how much "right" to confer to people. Remember, every "right" could also potentially cause discomfort to others.
A simple example is nudist beaches. While some countries allow people to sunbathe without clothes, some countries has made it illegal. Why? because it affects others in uncomfortable/negative way.
Some "rights" are limited. For example, smoking. Though people are allowed to smoke, they have to do it at specific locations. Why? Because second-hand smoke affects others.
Same principle applies to your issue. Once homosexual parents are allowed to adopt, some segments of society will be offended.
homosexual parents should not be allowed to adopt.
for one thing, personally i am very sure i wouldn't want to have parents of the same gender. true, they are able to provide love, home, and warmth. but will these suffice to protect me in future when i go out into the society? i will grow up with taunting and teasing of friends. and what should i call my mother, who is a male, when the dictionary defines it as a female parent?!
lets say i performed badly in my exams in school. teacher requests to see my mummy and daddy. i bring 2females/2males to her. what will she think? did i perform badly because my parents are "abnormal"? or was it because i was plain stupid? or probably homosexuals are not good enough to be parents, thus leading to my bad results?
accepting homosexuals already raises alot of controversies. adopting a child means bringing a third party into this "abnormal" and "unhealthy" relationship.
even if homosexuals are allowed to adopt, the child in question would have to have a say, whether or not he/she wants to follow 2 homosexual parents home.
interesting.. would i have homosexual parents or stay in a orphanage. i guess i would still choose the orphanage. at least i still have a chance wait for normal parents or stay there with all orphan friends until i grow older. then i'd go out into the society more independently than others.
of course it's not up to me to say because i'm not an orphan and cannot understand how they feel. but how is it like for the child to feel when he sees his/her parents-to-be are of the same gender? the child might NOT want them! it's not like every orphan is desperate for some parent love and would jump at any chance of it, even though it's given by homosexuals who are capable of providing love.
for example, for a 5 yr old orphan, he/she might be delighted at the chance of someone adopting her and bringing her away from the orphanage. but when he/she get older, will he/she regret that decision? she was so small at that time when she agreed, not being able to analyse the problems she'll face in the future.
one more thing. FAMILY means (Father And Mother I Love You). what does the kid call the female of the males? mother? it's totally spoils the image of a family. cause there is no image of a mother to speak of in the first place.
what does the kid writes in a composition titled "my family" or "my mother"? he/her friends would be able to visualise clearly in their mind their mummy at home, wth her bosom and rounded hip, wearing a flowered apron and baking some cookies. would the child of the homosexuals be able to do the same? or would the female of the male even bake cookies for the child?
of course. i'm just refering to one side of them. i thought it would be too long-winded to digress both sides of them.
or if you want, what do i call the male of the female (butch)? father? haha.
cuiling you said : Just because if the family has parents of the same sex, it spoils the image?
truthfully, yes. it totally spoils the image. i know the world is advancing and changing, views and opinions are also on-the-go. but somethings, despite the changes, still has to remain traditional, and that is parents will have to be 1 male, 1 female.
i think it is very important to insist on this. if not, the world would be able to do anything isn't it? thinkings, beliefs will have to be changed. pictures, illustrations of mother will have to display both male and females.
growing up without any parental love is sad, but growing up with 2 men/2women is questionable. woman can never match up to a role of a father no matter how much we try to be and act like one, and for man, vice versa.
also, IF the child they adopt is a girl, wouldn't she be worried when she reaches puberty, when she wants to ask her "parents" about menstral cycles, bras and so on? would the parent even be able to answer her?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
On a personal note, homosexual parents should be allowed to adopt. They should be looked upon by the society with open-ness. They deserve the rights and ability to adopt children like straight couples?
When the society decreeded that alcoholics, people under psychological treatment, old people, etc. cannot adopt, I had no objections. But I don't see why homosexual parents are not allowed to adopt. There had been, and are still existing, countless loving families that do not have the "normal" mother and father, yet the children still turn out quite well. They may even have a higher tolerance level and understanding of the society we live in.
I wonder which part of this society dictates on who gets to have a family, and how it should be raised, and under what structure.
Everyone have feelings. But because of the society's judgement, many homosexual couples have to surpress all their feelings just because they are a minority. It's time that the society open up towards homosexual couples and their rights for adoption.
Adoption is a privilege, not a right. Most Americans instinctively understand that the age-old natural family is best for nurturing kids, and that it’s wrong to create intentionally fatherless or motherless homes. Even studies by ardently pro-gay researchers (see American Sociological Review, April 2001) show that children in homosexual-led households are more likely to experiment sexually, break gender norms, and identify as homosexual or bisexual than kids raised in more traditional homes.
Garry sets up a straw man by saying the choice is between having homosexual parents and no parents at all. Truth is, there are hundreds of thousands of husband-and-wife couples waiting desperately to adopt children. Now gay activists are fighting to ensure that those married couples do not receive the favored status they deserve in adoption and custody proceedings. They want two homosexual men to have the same chance at adopting a baby or becoming foster parents as married mom-and-dad couples. This radical social experiment, if successful, will only put more kids in unstable homes — and expose innocent children to homosexual behavior — when they could have had both a mom and a dad.
i said somethings, despite the changes, still has to remain traditional. evidently, pre-marital sex has not remained as it is so common everywhere now. however, it is still strongly discouraged in society. my point is, relationship between a woman and a man is natural, whereas having homosexual relationships are not meant to be.
i believe it is taboo and punishable by capital punishment in some less developed countries. in more developed countries, they have already accepted their abnormality into the society. homosexuals should already thank god for that. why do they have to push it and adopt a child into their unhealthy relationship?
also, parents are the one who sets good example to their kids. i wouldn't call homosexuality a good example.
Just occurred to me, this issue can be linked to another issue; that of singles adopting.
If man/woman, say, at aged 40 decides that he/she is not about to get married in the near future decides to adopt.
Is the situation the same as homosexuals adopting?
Is it better or worse?
Or is it comparing apples and oranges?
Hmm. im not from this class (im from DTRM 01! ^^) but its an interesting topic. im doing on whether gay marriages should be allowed, and i find that there's some link in between (:
I agree with the topic. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, the lowest level, physiological need, should be attained before one can move up to the other level. This includes basic things like food, water and shelter. The next level would then be safety need, and so on.
Let's take a step back and look at the world with all the orphans (or children) suffering, especially in developing countries. They suffer from malnutrition and many other diseases. They do not have the proper education. Is it not a good thing if they are adopted, even if it is homosexuals who raise them? Is it not fortunate that they have a warm home and proper education? Does this all not benefit the children?
In short, adoption is for the benefit for the children and as mentioned by Cui Ling, it is not at all proven that a child that is adopted by homosexuals are 'disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents'.
Cheng hong's group
I have just realised that the issue has been wrongly phrased all along!
it should be "Homosexual PARTNERS should be allowed to adopt"
Cheng Hong's group
Some questions to consider:
1) What harm/good are we doing to/for the homosexual couple?
2) What harm/good are we doing to/for the adopted children?
3) What harm/good are we doing to/for the society?
Homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt
If you think Kids should have a male and a female influence in their lives and agree with this argument then you also agree that every child of a single parent should be removed from the home. If kids of single parents can grow up fine without an influence from the opposite gender, then so can kids of homosexual parents.
Kids of homosexual parents won't develop normally. There is absolutely no proof for this statement. Kids need love, support, attention, nurturing, etc. Homosexual parents are just as capable of this as heterosexual parents. Homosexual parents can teach their children manners, morals, etc just as competently as heterosexual parents.
Homosexual parents are more likely to abuse their children. This is based on the stereotype that being gay (for an example) equals being perverted. Not true! In fact the most likely people for abusing children are adult males abusing young females. It seems wholly illogical for this to fit gay men.
Finally, homosexuals are not creating the problem of unwanted pregnancies or children. They are not creating children they can't handle. Heterosexuals are. We should be thanking the homosexual for picking up the heterosexual slack.
Therefore I think that homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt
Post a Comment
<< Home