# Same sex marriage poll



## JohnDoeRobot (May 25, 2016)

Just curious about how people in here feel about same sex marriage via an anonymous poll. I am new here and looks like most people in here hold fairly traditional views on marriage. 

PS. I am not going to take a side on this one.. I am just curious about the make up of the group.


----------



## Herschel (Mar 27, 2016)

Two adults can do whatever they want.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Lostinthought61 (Nov 5, 2013)

Everyone should be able to find love with another human being regardless of their sex. heterosexuality should not be cornering the market on love. Love is universal and what two consenting adults do is their business and their happiness.


----------



## happy2gether (Dec 6, 2015)

I don't have a problem with it, I have a problem with such a big deal being made about it from both sides.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

My W and I both feel the same way about sex, so I feel we definitely fit the same sex marriage mold :grin2:


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Yeah, my wife likes our sex to be the same every time too.


----------



## MrsAldi (Apr 15, 2016)

Imagine having to ask other people for the permission to marry someone you love.

This commercial explains it better than I ever could.

https://youtu.be/6ULdaSrYGLQ


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

I hold traditional views when it comes to marriage, but I also believe in civil liberty and equality under the law. As long as heterosexual marriage offers legal benefits not available to people in any other type of relationship, I feel obligated to support same sex marriage.


----------



## frusdil (Sep 5, 2013)

I absolutely support marriage equality. Adults should be able to marry who they love, no one should be denied that right because they happen to fall in love with someone of the same gender.

I think it's cruel that marriage is denied to same sex couples. My marriage is so precious to me and I'd be heartbroken if I had not been able to marry the love of my life.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Johnny, you want everyone else to voice their opinions... why not your own? You obvioysly have an opinion, so what is the real basis for this post/poll? 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


----------



## MarriedDude (Jun 21, 2014)

If two people determine that they have a relationship worthy of marriage..then by all means. They should join the club.

Both my wife and I have same sex marriages in our family. They appear to have the same issues as everyone else. Other than strangers attempting to dictate who they may love and/or marry...that's disconcerting.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

There's no option for "It bothers me not one way or the other. " ; )
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TX-SC (Aug 25, 2015)

I am absolutely in favor of two people being able to be married as long as they are of legal age and neither is being forced into it. So, yes I'm fine with same sex marriage.


----------



## tropicalbeachiwish (Jun 1, 2016)

I couldn't care less about what sex you are. It's consensual & you're both adults? Perfect, go for it! Everyone (well, almost everyone) deserves to be loved and to love. Isn't that what life is about?


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

tropicalbeachiwish said:


> Everyone (well, almost everyone) deserves to be loved and to love. Isn't that what life is about?


I mean, yeah, love is nice and all, but ice cream and cookies is where its at :grin2:


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

I have no idea how this is an issue. If they love one another I say go for it.


But they would be wise to look at the "success" rate of hetro couples and ask themselves if they really want that


----------



## tropicalbeachiwish (Jun 1, 2016)

EllisRedding said:


> I mean, yeah, love is nice and all, but ice cream and cookies is where its at :grin2:


Hee Hee! Nope. I say crab legs is where its at. :grin2:


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

tropicalbeachiwish said:


> Hee Hee! Nope. I say crab legs is where its at. :grin2:


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

I do notice that those who said no don't seem to be posting and willing to put their name behind it.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

Gays and lesbians getting married - haven't they suffered enough?


ETA: Yes, of course they should.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

CharlieParker said:


> Gays and lesbians getting married - haven't they suffered enough?


Huh, if a gay and lesbian got married, wouldn't that be considered a traditional marriage and not a same sex marrige 




>


----------



## Emerging Buddhist (Apr 7, 2016)

My daughter-in-law is exactly the person I would want my children to marry... and my daughter did.

I love them both with all my heart.


----------



## Joey2k (Oct 3, 2014)

Marriage is an institution the government shouldn't be involved with in the first place. If two people want to draw up a contract specifying their obligations and privileges within the context of their relationship, that's cool, it should be treated like any other contract as far as the government is concerned. But it's not the government's job to sanction or give it's blessing to one interpersonal relationship over another. 

That said, if heterosexual couples can do it, homosexual couples should be able to as well.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Starstarfish said:


> I do notice that those who said no don't seem to be posting and willing to put their name behind it.


It's an actual poll? Huh. I can't even vote on Tapatalk, and it's too much hassle to go on the computer lol. Idc if someone is for or against it (not that it matters anymore, anyway). Anyone can have whatever opinion they wish. It's when they force others to live by *their* standards that it becomes a problem. I have my own opinion on the subject. But that's exactly what it is... my own opinion. However, I don't have the right to browbeat others into submitting to my belief. This applies to both sides of the discussion. 

Sorry for rambling. Anyway... yes, no, I can't answer because I have yet to find a "answer the poll" option button on Tapatalk lol.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Completely agree. I'd just adjust to "two or more".

Various organizations, churches, etc can provide sample contracts that meet their religious ideas of marriage.






Joey2k said:


> Marriage is an institution the government shouldn't be involved with in the first place. If two people want to draw up a contract specifying their obligations and privileges within the context of their relationship, that's cool, it should be treated like any other contract as far as the government is concerned. But it's not the government's job to sanction or give it's blessing to one interpersonal relationship over another.
> 
> That said, if heterosexual couples can do it, homosexual couples should be able to as well.


----------



## Steve1000 (Nov 25, 2013)

CharlieParker said:


> Gays and lesbians getting married - haven't they suffered enough?
> 
> 
> ETA: Yes, of course they should.


Definitely! Gay people should have to endure marriage like hetero people have to....


----------



## Apexmale (Jul 31, 2015)

I see a lot of support for non-traditional same sex marriages, for reasons such as: as long as they are consenting adults, as long as they love each other, adults should be free to choose, etc... but when members post about their non-traditional "open marriages"... they really get hammered. 

Open marriages and same sex marriages both only work with consenting, loving adults. So why the double standard?


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

*While I hold more of a Biblical view on the great and hallowed institution of marriage itself, I cannot deny to people, unlike myself, to commit to, love, and honor each other in their own special way!

That alone is of God's choosing and I find more that what He has said is in the vain of love more than what He said out of hate and separation! 

In this regard, I choose "love!"*
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

MrsAldi said:


> Imagine having to ask other people for the permission to marry someone you love.
> 
> This commercial explains it better than I ever could.
> 
> https://youtu.be/6ULdaSrYGLQ


And yet that's precisely what you have to do when you apply for a government marriage license.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

I personally believe that the rights and privileges married couples receive are on behalf of what is needed to care for and raise the next generation. It is not about the love they have for each other, but about the sacrifices it will take for raising the children that result from that love.

Yet we live in a society where the government will subsidize sterilization for individuals that do not want children, and those individuals still get to go on in life and receive the full benefits of marital privileges. So for that reason discriminating on couples because their gender combination is not naturally fertile is unfair.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Maricha75 said:


> Anyone can have whatever opinion they wish. It's when they force others to live by *their* standards that it becomes a problem.


But that's life, in virtually every aspect. No matter where you are in the world, we are all forced to live by standards, usually dictated to us by our governments/rulers, or society as a whole.

Now, it's rather cryptic as to whether the "they" you are referring to is the government, or, for the sake of this thread, LGBT's. And I'm not sure it matters, TBH, because there will always be a "they".

There will always be an entity that oversees what we can and can not do in our daily lives. And there will always be a minority group that demands rights (or in the case of women, in THIS century, a majority), and rightfully so.

IMO, the anti-homosexual movement (of which there most definitely IS one) goes against all of the ideals in which many of us live by, in the Western world. Those of us who live in North America, the EU, and commonwealth countries so often espout "freedom" and "liberty", yet far too many of us draw these imaginary lines in which we essentially say "but not for you" based on our personal thoughts on the subject at hand. This is contradictory and at odds with one another. You can't have both.

Even if you don't agree with an individuals lifestyle (not choice), you should vehemently fight for their rights, or at the very least, NOT fight against it, otherwise it's unerringly hypocritical.

To paraphrase Forrest Gump, "that's all I got to say on that."


----------



## Joey2k (Oct 3, 2014)

Apexmale said:


> I see a lot of support for non-traditional same sex marriages, for reasons such as: as long as they are consenting adults, as long as they love each other, adults should be free to choose, etc... but when members post about their non-traditional "open marriages"... they really get hammered.
> 
> Open marriages and same sex marriages both only work with consenting, loving adults. So why the double standard?


There's a difference between not approving of a lifestyle and believing it isn't entitled to equal protection under the law. I think two dudes getting it on is gross (in fact, I think the male body in general is pretty unattractive and don't even understand why the ladies are attracted to us), but I think they should have the same rights as everyone else.


----------



## old red (Jul 26, 2014)

Any serious studies made about the effect of gay marriage on children? My understanding is that children need to have healthy relationships with significant adults of both genders during their formative years. Any gay marriage legislation should include a vow - whether secular or religious - to ensure that everything is done to have significant adults of both genders play important roles in the rearing of any potential children. Too much focus is given on the rights of adults in this debate, and not on those who are the most vulnerable in a family unit - the children. I'm not saying that gay marriage can't work, but I am very pissed off about the lack of discussion re the effect on children that occurs in the lamestream media, at least where I live. Btw, whose names (parents) goes on the birth certificates of the children? There was a case where the biological Dad's name was removed from the birth certificate by the courts, so that the non birth mother could be legally recognized as the mother, after the same sex union she was in dissolved. Same sex marriage is not legal in my country, but if it does become legal, then I think that it should have a different name/title, a name which is chosen by the gay community, and it should have different laws, so that some of the complexities that I have stated are dealt with in a fashion which protects the rights of the most vulnerable - the kids!


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

alexm said:


> Even if you don't agree with an individuals lifestyle (not choice), you should vehemently fight for their rights, or at the very least, NOT fight against it, otherwise it's unerringly hypocritical.


I agree with this. I hold a rather unusual view that religion can be very dangerous. But I would fight tooth and nail against any legislation to deny people the right to choose their religion or lack thereof for themselves.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

old red said:


> Any serious studies made about the effect of gay marriage on children? My understanding is that children need to have healthy relationships with significant adults of both genders during their formative years. Any gay marriage legislation should include a vow - whether secular or religious - to ensure that everything is done to have significant adults of both genders play important roles in the rearing of any potential children. Too much focus is given on the rights of adults in this debate, and not on those who are the most vulnerable in a family unit - the children. I'm not saying that gay marriage can't work, but I am very pissed off about the lack of discussion re the effect on children that occurs in the lamestream media, at least where I live. Btw, whose names (parents) goes on the birth certificates of the children? There was a case where the biological Dad's name was removed from the birth certificate by the courts, so that the non birth mother could be legally recognized as the mother, after the same sex union she was in dissolved. Same sex marriage is not legal in my country, but if it does become legal, then I think that it should have a different name/title, a name which is chosen by the gay community, and it should have different laws, so that some of the complexities that I have stated are dealt with in a fashion which protects the rights of the most vulnerable - the kids!


Let me google that for you.

Same-sex marriage and children's well-being: Research*roundup - Journalist's Resource Journalist's Resource


eg.
"Abstract: “Extensive data available from more than 30 years of research reveal that children raised by gay and lesbian parents have demonstrated resilience with regard to social, psychological, and sexual health despite economic and legal disparities and social stigma. Many studies have demonstrated that children’s well-being is affected much more by their relationships with their parents, their parents’ sense of competence and security, and the presence of social and economic support for the family than by the gender or the sexual orientation of their parents. Lack of opportunity for same-gender couples to marry adds to families’ stress, which affects the health and welfare of all household members.”"


----------



## GTdad (Aug 15, 2011)

Steve1000 said:


> Definitely! Gay people should have to endure marriage like hetero people have to....


It's almost certain to cut down on gay sex. :wink2:


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

old red said:


> Any gay marriage legislation should include a vow - whether secular or religious - to ensure that everything is done to have significant adults of both genders play important roles in the rearing of any potential children.


I guess you haven't thought this through very well, have you? 

There are no restrictions on who can breed. No requirement that a parent have the mother or father of the child remain in the house. No law dictating what adults of any kind are present in the rearing, as long as there is at least one parent. No requirement that a person even be married in order to procreate.

In short, you just singled our married gay couples for treatment that we don't apply to any other person or marriage. That is the very textbook definition of discrimination.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Correct.

Better stated as marriage is marriage and divorce is divorce, treat the divorce of a gay marriage with kids involved just as seriously.

Why are we talking about this?

It is now the law of the land whether you like it or not. Personally I was never 'in favor' of gay marriage, I was perfectly happy with some sort of domestic partnership cluge that solved the rights connundrum but didn't equate it 100% to marriage. 

But now we have it and that's ok, personally fine with it, move on. 




Cletus said:


> I guess you haven't thought this through very well, have you?
> 
> There are no restrictions on who can breed. No requirement that a parent have the mother or father of the child remain in the house. No law dictating what adults of any kind are present in the rearing, as long as there is at least one parent. No requirement that a person even be married in order to procreate.
> 
> In short, you just singled our married gay couples for treatment that we don't apply to any other person or marriage. That is the very textbook definition of discrimination.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

anonmd said:


> Correct.
> 
> Better stated as marriage is marriage and divorce is divorce, treat the divorce of a gay marriage with kids involved just as seriously.
> 
> ...






old red said:


> Any serious studies made about the effect of gay marriage on children? My understanding is that children need to have healthy relationships with significant adults of both genders during their formative years. Any gay marriage legislation should include a vow - whether secular or religious - to ensure that everything is done to have significant adults of both genders play important roles in the rearing of any potential children. Too much focus is given on the rights of adults in this debate, and not on those who are the most vulnerable in a family unit - the children. I'm not saying that gay marriage can't work, but I am very pissed off about the lack of discussion re the effect on children that occurs in the lamestream media, at least where I live. Btw, whose names (parents) goes on the birth certificates of the children? There was a case where the biological Dad's name was removed from the birth certificate by the courts, so that the non birth mother could be legally recognized as the mother, after the same sex union she was in dissolved. *Same sex marriage is not legal in my country*, but if it does become legal, then I think that it should have a different name/title, a name which is chosen by the gay community, and it should have different laws, so that some of the complexities that I have stated are dealt with in a fashion which protects the rights of the most vulnerable - the kids!


I guess the people who responded missed this little sentence in the middle of old red's post. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

Ah, ok. So what 'right of the kids' are you concerned about? If a gay couple has a child it is either going to be wholly adopted or involve a surrogate mother or sperm donor then 1/2 adopted. In either case the gay couple are now the parents forever. No do overs if you decide this whole gay marriage and build a family thing wasn't such a good idea. Care of child till 18 and child support for you both .


----------



## old red (Jul 26, 2014)

Cletus said:


> I guess you haven't thought this through very well, have you?
> 
> There are no restrictions on who can breed. No requirement that a parent have the mother or father of the child remain in the house. No law dictating what adults of any kind are present in the rearing, as long as there is at least one parent. No requirement that a person even be married in order to procreate.
> 
> In short, you just singled our married gay couples for treatment that we don't apply to any other person or marriage. That is the very textbook definition of discrimination.


Uhmm, get a grip. It was a short post on a specific topic. My point about what is good for children relates to all children. Soooo, if we were talking about heterosexual divorce laws, or discussing the best ways for single parents to bring up their children, I would make the same points. If you do not believe that children need positive role models of both genders, then you are a pair of clown shoes. I guess your avatar is fitting. Don't be so quick to pull the bigot card.


----------



## old red (Jul 26, 2014)

Cletus said:


> I guess you haven't thought this through very well, have you?
> 
> 
> *There are no restrictions on who can breed.*
> ...


----------



## Begin again (Jul 4, 2016)

old red said:


> Any serious studies made about the effect of gay marriage on children? My understanding is that children need to have healthy relationships with significant adults of both genders during their formative years. Any gay marriage legislation should include a vow - whether secular or religious - to ensure that everything is done to have significant adults of both genders play important roles in the rearing of any potential children. Too much focus is given on the rights of adults in this debate, and not on those who are the most vulnerable in a family unit - the children. I'm not saying that gay marriage can't work, but I am very pissed off about the lack of discussion re the effect on children that occurs in the lamestream media, at least where I live. Btw, whose names (parents) goes on the birth certificates of the children? There was a case where the biological Dad's name was removed from the birth certificate by the courts, so that the non birth mother could be legally recognized as the mother, after the same sex union she was in dissolved. Same sex marriage is not legal in my country, but if it does become legal, then I think that it should have a different name/title, a name which is chosen by the gay community, and it should have different laws, so that some of the complexities that I have stated are dealt with in a fashion which protects the rights of the most vulnerable - the kids!


Actually, children born to unwed parents fair the worst. And the percentage of children born out of wedlock is growing every year. It stands at 50% if the woman is under 30.

We should be encouraging marriage in all forms to maintain strong families. And this issue is not new. For anyone who dares talk about vulnerable kids, they have been ignoring the vulnerable for decades. I think having two men or two women as parents is much better than being the child born to an unwed mother. So let's turn the attention to the real issue. Over time, it won't matter if a kid has two moms... But it will continue to matter if he only ever had one and no dad.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## old red (Jul 26, 2014)

Begin again said:


> Actually, children born to unwed parents fair the worst. And the percentage of children born out of wedlock is growing every year. It stands at 50% if the woman is under 30.
> 
> We should be encouraging marriage in all forms to maintain strong families. And this issue is not new. For anyone who dares talk about vulnerable kids, they have been ignoring the vulnerable for decades. I think having two men or two women as parents is much better than being the child born to an unwed mother. So let's turn the attention to the real issue. Over time, it won't matter if a kid has two moms... But it will continue to matter if he only ever had one and no dad.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



I agree with you re children being brought into the world out of wedlock. However, this does not mean that gay marriages do not need to be especially mindful of the potential for a lack of either a male or female role model for any children who will be in the family. I have three children, and who knows, one or more of them might be gay. So, this issue might be relevant to me one day, and I would want what is best for my children, and that would include equal rights to marry. 

However, that does not mean that we should only focus on the adults. A simple vow to include significant adults of the opposite gender in the lives of future children in gay marriages would seem a positive step. Hell, a similar vow for heterosexual parents might be in order too, given the fragile state of modern marriages. Totally anecdotal, I know, but I work with teenagers and their parents, and have had lesbian mothers speak to me about their struggles with helping their troubled teenaged sons with their transition into male adulthood. These wonderful, loving mothers can recognize what their sons need and are struggling to fill that void. I have similar experiences with mothers and fathers of single parent families. I would imagine that many heterosexual parents of gay children probably reach out to gay friends and family members for advice/guidance at times too. Something about a village being needed to raise a child might be relevant here.

I think that it is a mistake to say that both sexes are not needed in the rearing of a child. That does not mean that gay marriages should be illegal. The development of gay marriage needs to develop as an institution which is similar but also different to heterosexual marriage. The gay community should lead this development. 

I find it funny that so-called progressives and sjw types can call me out as a bigot, even though I don't even know what the sexuality of my own children will be, as they are still too young. Nevertheless, they will all be loved by me equally, regardless of their sexuality. Then again, progressives and sjw types getting butt hurt by my views on gay marriage is kinda funny.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I very rarely saw my father when I was growing up. He worked, provided a paycheck for the family, and spent as little time at home as was possible. I don't see how it would have been any different if he had been female rather than male.


I would like to see parents better educated on how to raise children, to help avoid the mistakes that mine made. I think that is far more important than gender.


----------



## Begin again (Jul 4, 2016)

old red said:


> I agree with you re children being brought into the world out of wedlock. However, this does not mean that gay marriages do not need to be especially mindful of the potential for a lack of either a male or female role mode for any children who will be in the family. I have three children, and who knows, one or more of them might be gay. So, this issue might be relevant to me one day, and I would want what is best for my children, and that would include equal rights to marry.
> 
> However, that does not mean that we should only focus on the adults. A simple vow to include significant adults of the opposite gender in the lives of future children in gay marriages would seem a positive step. Hell, a similar vow for heterosexual parents might be in order too, given the fragile state of modern marriages. Totally anecdotal, I know, but I work with teenagers and their parents, and have had lesbian mothers speak to me about their struggles with helping their troubled teenaged sons with their transition into male adulthood. These wonderful, loving mothers can recognize what their sons need and are struggling to fill that void. I have similar experiences with mothers and fathers of single parent families. I would imagine that many heterosexual parents of gay children probably reach out to gay friends and family members for advice/guidance at times too. Something about a village being needed to raise a child might be relevant here.
> 
> ...


You want gay couples to take a vow that says they will find significant adults of the opposite gender to include the the raising of their child. Wow. Well, considering most ministers and coaches are male and most teachers are female, I think we've got it covered in society already. And let's just say again, a "vow?" Just so strange to ask anyone to take a vow about anything regarding how they raise their child and who they invite into the child's life. Besides giving the child food, shelter, and education, we try to let people raise their children as they believe. Of course, every person has their opinions and perspectives, but making a certain group vow to do anything with their kids because of who they are speaks to your bias, for sure.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## notmyrealname4 (Apr 9, 2014)

What about women who decide to have a kid without a dad.

They've decided that for the kid now too. Did the kid get a chance to say whether or not they didn't want to grow up without their dad? Almost all sperm donors don't want anything to do with whatever issue results from the purchase and use of their semen.

Tragedy, as in becoming an orphan, has always resulted in kids losing one or both parents. But that was seen as just that, a tragedy. Something to be avoided; not emulated.

So, I see the gay parent thing as similar. Biologically, it takes male and female reproductive matter to produce a child. The world is comprised of roughly half male and half female people.

It's probably good to have a parent of each sex around growing up. Role modeling and so forth.

And if you can't have that; then as oldred stated; shouldn't there be a measure to have kids get input and influence from the opposite sex of their same sex parents? Isn't that healthy for kids?

My bio father is unknown to me. He decided to walk away and not be involved. My stepfather did the same after several years of marriage to my mother.

It MATTERS what your parents do when you are growing up. One of the heaviest burdens my husband has had to carry being married to me, was my almost complete lack of trust in men.

So, generations of kids raised with only one sex as parents WILL have an effect. It's early days yet to determine what that effect will be, long term.

I know everyone is eager to be politically correct and say only what seems to be the most enlightened; but isn't it also okay to take it slow, and consider all the potential pitfalls?


----------



## notmyrealname4 (Apr 9, 2014)

badsanta said:


> I personally believe that the rights and privileges married couples receive are on behalf of what is needed to care for and raise the next generation. It is not about the love they have for each other, but about the sacrifices it will take for raising the children that result from that love.
> 
> Yet we live in a society where the government will* subsidize sterilization for individuals that do not want children, and those individuals still get to go on in life and receive the full benefits of marital privileges. *So for that reason discriminating on couples because their gender combination is not naturally fertile is unfair.


People who don't have kids don't get to claim children on their tax return.

People who don't have kids do have to pay property taxes that fund schools; directly if they own a home, indirectly if they rent.

Which is fine. Who wants to live in a society where no-one is educated.


And some people get married because they love each other.

Married people get marital privileges because they are married.

Marriage, even childless marriage (or childless gay marriage), forms a social bond; which is the building block of society.

So, it still "counts" as marriage.


----------



## old red (Jul 26, 2014)

Begin again said:


> You want gay couples to take a vow that says they will find significant adults of the opposite gender to include the the raising of their child. Wow. Well, considering most ministers and coaches are male and most teachers are female, I think we've got it covered in society already. And let's just say again, a "vow?" Just so strange to ask anyone to take a vow about anything regarding how they raise their child and who they invite into the child's life. Besides giving the child food, shelter, and education, we try to let people raise their children as they believe. Of course, every person has their opinions and perspectives, but making a certain group vow to do anything with their kids because of who they are speaks to your bias, for sure.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yes, I have a bias - for children. 

Marriage ceremonies make all sorts of vows, so why not one that is specifically for children and their well being? Boys need adult men and women in their life, and girls need adult women and men in their life. Smug progressives such as yourself follow political narratives for your virtue signalling, while conservatives like myself take our cues from biology. Children in gay marriage do not result from biology, rather, they come from the society's cultural norms. You said it yourself, children who are missing a father or a mother do it tough. If you take issue with the word vow, then fine, call it an awareness of what each sex brings to our world. Also, I never said that Gay couples should be forced to do anything, in the sense that the State forces this upon people. Instead, I stated my opinion on what *I think *would be a good way forward. However, as I said in my first post, there are issues within the idea of gay marriage which need to be addressed, and these issues would best be solved *by the gay community*. Focussing solely on what is best for the adults may allow you to feel smugly impressed with your own moral superiority, but I don't think that it is a good idea to embark upon a new cultural paradigm without a thorough awareness of how children may be affected.

Generally speaking, men and women are different. The role of Mum and Dad are not interchangeable. The things that my Mum taught me about women, could not be taught to me by my Dad, and the things that my Dad taught me about being a man could not be taught to me by my Mum. For example, and yes, I am only writing in general terms, as there are always exceptions, women have no idea of the sense of heady power that testosterone can give to a developing teenage boy. It does your head in when seemingly overnight you grow pimples, facial hair and muscles and your sense of strength goes through the roof. Women, generally, have no idea how strong the desire to fight/compete and have sex can be for a man. Look at the difference in incarceration rates based on sex and you can clearly see that there is a difference between men and women in general terms. Unfortunately I can't remember the author, but I remember reading an essay by a world famous contemporary neurologist (Polish sounding surname and female?) who stated that there are clear physical differences between the brain patterns of men and women when addressing the same problems. Her thesis is that men and women think and problem solve in different ways. But you keep reading your stuff about how gender is just a social construct, because, you know, the narrative must be maintained.

Interesting too, that the posters here who champion themselves as being tolerant, are the first to use words such as bigot and bias, etc. My concern is that in my country, there is very little discussion about children in the gay marriage debate. As an example, an advertisement advocating for traditional heterosexual marriage only was pulled from one of our government funded broadcasters, whereas an advertisement for Ash--- Mad---n was not. This is f!#$%ed up. When I married, I made a vow to love, cherish and respect my partner. I also made a vow to accept children from God. These are big promises, and so they should be. Now imagine this: two blokes are getting married, and as part of their commitment to each other, they promise that if they are ever blessed with a daughter that they will do everything in their power to understand their little girl. Why is that offensive? Hell, if I had my time again, I would happily make the same vow in regards to my own daughter.

I would like to see the same sex marriage debate in my country evolve. Given the holier than thou attitudes of many of the people posting here, I am not confident that progressives are capable of such a debate.


----------



## notmyrealname4 (Apr 9, 2014)

uhtred said:


> I would like to see parents better educated on how to raise children, to help avoid the mistakes that mine made. I think that is far more important than gender.




I think all parents should get education. But there's probably no way to mandate it.

Our local vo-tech is always offering parenting classes.

I think gay folks who want to parent should pay attention to the fact that their kid will only be getting consistent role modeling from one sex. I think I have heard of them making certain to do this, ie. lesbian couple have one of their brothers (the kids legal uncle), participate as much as possible.

It's terrible that your dad wasn't involved with you emotionally. That should be discouraged and avoided as a parenting approach.





Begin again said:


> You want gay couples to take a vow that says they will find significant adults of the opposite gender to include the the raising of their child. Wow. Well, considering most ministers and coaches are male and most teachers are female, I think we've got it covered in society already. And let's just say again, a "vow?" Just so strange to ask anyone to take a vow about anything regarding how they raise their child and who they invite into the child's life. Besides giving the child food, shelter, and education, we try to let people raise their children as they believe. Of course, every person has their opinions and perspectives, but making a certain group vow to do anything with their kids because of who they are speaks to your bias, for sure.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



Yeah, but ministers and teachers aren't intimate family members. It's not the same.

I actually think it would be great if there were higher standards imposed on parents. I mean, if my parents were not drunks and stoners, my life would probably have been a lot better. It's too bad that there wasn't some sort of "fear" in them to not raise my sister and I that way. But no-one intervened, 'cause it was their" right to raise us as they believed."

No, responsible loving gay parents are not like potheads; the point is that it is a new family dynamic in our culture, and it does present obvious limitations for the role-modeling and growth of children. All some of us are saying, is that we should be really careful about being blase about it. It *is* a concern.


----------



## old red (Jul 26, 2014)

notmyrealname4 said:


> What about women who decide to have a kid without a dad.
> 
> They've decided that for the kid now too. Did the kid get a chance to say whether or not they didn't want to grow up without their dad? Almost all sperm donors don't want anything to do with whatever issue results from the purchase and use of their semen.
> 
> ...




I suspect that the deep wisdom in the bolded above has been gained by hard experience.


----------



## Begin again (Jul 4, 2016)

notmyrealname4 said:


> I think all parents should get education. But there's probably no way to mandate it.
> 
> Our local vo-tech is always offering parenting classes.
> 
> ...


Whoa.... This sounds like the ultimate government intrusion into our lives. You want the government to judge not just whether the child has food and shelter, but whether the child is being raised properly and intervene if it's not? And who decides this? What standard do we use? 

Are you the ultimate socialist/communist? That is beyond anything I've heard on TAM! The government deciding that a child needs certain role models in their life and doing what? Mandating them? Inserting them into a child's life? I'm kinda floored by what you are suggesting.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## notmyrealname4 (Apr 9, 2014)

It's been said before: you have to get a license to drive a car, to be a cosmetologist.

But to be responsible for another human being's life? Nada. No demonstration of qualifications are required.

Government intrusion, communist, socialist; I think you believe I am of a conservative political persuasion. I am not registered with any party. I vote by issues, as much as possible.

There's no answer Begin again. Just putting my opinions out there. Very unlikely that anything I suggest would be enacted.


----------



## old red (Jul 26, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Let me google that for you.
> 
> Same-sex marriage and children's well-being: Research*roundup - Journalist's Resource Journalist's Resource
> 
> ...



Thank you, and now let me do some internet surfing for you. Seems to me that there is the real problem of a lack of political diversity in the halls of academia, particularly in relation to the area of social psychological sciences, and that the studies to which you link to may rely on sample sizes that are too small for adequate conclusions to be made. Still, your link provided for much optimism in regards to children's well being, but that does not mean that the conversation is over, or that the science has been settled, to quote a favourite progressive phrase. Same sex marriage, from my understanding, is a brand new paradigm for raising children, and it is therefore necessary to test this new idea in the public domain through thorough and rational debate. 'Shut up, bigot!' is not an adequate argument. In addition, isolating the effect of same sex marriage on children from other life experiences experienced by children such as divorce, etc. would be very hard to achieve in any study.


http://journals.cambridge.org/images/fileUpload/documents/Duarte-Haidt_BBS-D-14-00108_preprint.pdf

Abstract: Psychologists have demonstrated the value of diversity—particularly diversity of viewpoints—for enhancing creativity, discovery, and problem solving. But one key type of viewpoint diversity is lacking in academic psychology in general and social psychology in particular: *political diversity*. This article reviews the available evidence and finds support for four claims: 1) Academic psychology once had considerable political diversity, but has *lost nearly all of it in the last 50 years*; 2) This lack of political diversity can undermine the validity of social psychological science via mechanisms *such as the embedding of liberal values *into research questions and methods, steering researchers away from important but *politically unpalatable research topics*, and producing conclusions that mischaracterize liberals and conservatives alike; 3) Increased political diversity would improve social psychological science by reducing the impact of bias mechanisms such as confirmation bias, and by empowering dissenting minorities to improve the quality of the majority’s thinking; and 4) The underrepresentation of nonliberals in social psychology is most likely due to a combination of self-selection, hostile climate, and discrimination. We close with recommendations for increasing political diversity in social psychology. 


Same-sex parenting and children?s outcomes: A closer examination of the American psychological association?s brief on lesbian and gay parenting


Abstract

In 2005, the American Psychological Association (APA) issued an official brief on lesbian and gay parenting. This brief included the assertion: “Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents” (p. 15). The present article closely examines this assertion and the 59 published studies cited by the APA to support it. Seven central questions address: (1) homogeneous sampling, (2) absence of comparison groups, (3) comparison group characteristics, (4) contradictory data, (5) the *limited scope of children’s outcomes studied*, (6) paucity of long-term outcome data, and (7) lack of APA-urged statistical power. The conclusion is that strong assertions, including those made by the APA, were not empirically warranted. Recommendations for future research are offered.



Highlights


► A 26 of 59 APA studies on same-sex parenting had no heterosexual comparison groups. ► In comparison studies, *single* *mothers were often used as the hetero comparison group*. ► No comparison study had the statistical power required to detect a small effect size. ► Definitive claims were *not *substantiated by the 59 published studies.


How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study


Abstract

The New Family Structures Study (NFSS) is a social-science data-collection project that fielded a survey to a large, random sample of American young adults (ages 18–39) who were raised in different types of family arrangements. In this debut article of the NFSS, I compare how the young-adult children of a parent who has had a same-sex romantic relationship fare on 40 different social, emotional, and relational outcome variables when compared with six other family-of-origin types. *The results reveal numerous, consistent differences, especially between the children of women who have had a lesbian relationship and those with still-married (heterosexual) biological parents. **The results are typically robust in multivariate contexts as well, suggesting far greater diversity in lesbian-parent household experiences than convenience-sample studies of lesbian families have revealed.* The NFSS proves to be an illuminating, versatile dataset that can assist family scholars in understanding the long reach of family structure and transitions.



Highlights


► The New Family Structures Study collected data from nearly 3000 adults. ► I compare young adults who grew up with a lesbian mother or gay father. ► *Differences exist between children of parents who have had same-sex relationships and those with married parents. ►* This probability study suggests considerable diversity among same-sex parents.


----------

