@ your first response
Your only argument was based on public opinion polls and a very VERY loose argument on a type of osmosis :wink:

See, you're preaching to the choir here.

Why not make a friend with a "closed-minded" person, and explain that stuff to them?

Would it matter if a person COULD actually choose their sexuality?

'More likely' is not the same as 'always'.

Because it's an assinine question.

You're right, I don't have anything to back up my argument. Do you have anything to back up yours?

No it isnt. Its a very good question. It goes along with the argument in which we are discussing. If the general thought that gay parents will raise gay kids is true, then hetero parents should raise heteo kids right?


No need to be rude krem :wink:

It IS an assinine question, because it makes a strawman out of my argument. I said that gay parents are more likely to raise gay children than straight parents. Inversely, straight parents are more likely to raise straight children than gay parents.

My argument does not deal with absolutes; your question does. Therefore, it is not applicable.

Where is Kelley when you need her

Whatever Krem, your loosing the argument so I guess you feel a need to backpeddle.

Once again, your argument is laughable. You offer no basis for it at all, except a public opinion poll and a reference to osmosis.


Good thing you dont think this way Krem


P.S. No hard feelings on this argument Ok? :wink:

What you keep failing to realize is that you have no basis for YOUR argument either, just like I don't on mine. However, because the public opinion is on "my" side, the laws will go against your argument.

Which is what my whole point was about: you can't win that battle, unless you provide a solid case for it, and not just dismiss everyone who doesn't feel the way you do as religious zealots.

P.S. Strawman tactics might make you sound clever, but they won't win you any arguments.


Why would there be any feeling involved?

In Missouri?

I have solid proof. I know a few friends who are NOT gay, who have been raised by a gay couple. So there you go. Served~
:wink:
OK, lets pretend t that gay parents will always raise gay kids(which we both know isnt true) lets just pretend. Whats the harm? Where is the wrong doing?

Ok, while we're at it, let's change the word "gay" to the word" fascist".

Do you see any harm in raising children to be fascists?

If so, would you agree that people who are known fascists should not be allowed to adopt, in the interest of the society?

Hang on, before we start changing the name around, lets concentrate on the first question

It's important that I know where you stand on the issue of the government picking and choosing which groups of people can and can't adopt children.

Ok, well Im sorry but I dont think you can really equate fascists with gay people.

No, I can't, and I'm not. I just want to know if you consider it the government's job to discriminate in the case of adoption.

I guess it depends on the situation. Do I think they should be able to discriminate against a racist, fascist, horrible person....yes, only because that would not e a good, healthy enviroment for the child.
Is that what your asking?

The government SHOULD restrict who can and can't adopt.

There are some people who are fit and not fit to raise children. Those not fit should not be allowed to do so. There are unfit parents. That includes gay people (though I wonder why they would want to adopt in the first place then). They should't be raising children.

There are straight couples who give birth to their own children, are not ready for it, are not fit parents, and often that's not seen as wrong from a legal prespective, but for a gay couple to adopt..

But for those that are just trying to give them a nice stable loving home...there's no harm in it in my eyes and i know people who oppose it will disagree and not change their minds on the subject, so I don't knwo that I should be arguing the point. :wink:

I agree

Yup.

Now, if someone believes that an environment with two gay parents is not a healthy environment to raise a child (in part because a higher gay population means lower birth rates in the long run), would that make it OK for them to press the government to filter gays from the adoption process?

That's great. But, like I said before, not everyone is as cheery about that. You see those people everyday. It is up to you to shape their opinion, and it shouldn't be up to courts.

No, but what are the arguments for a gay enviroment to be unhealthy?

I would tell those people that, contrary to populasr belief, the population could probably be 50% gay and there still wouldn't be any risk of humans dying off. Unless it that 50% was the guys, in which case...it'd still be worth it.

:wink:

But I wouldn't get there because I stil don't think being raised by gay parents is gonna make you gay!

Some people argue that being gay in and of itself is not normal.

Others argue that living in a gay household makes one feel emotionally inferior and may cause emotional trauma for a kid, because of taunting at school, etc.