A Child Can't Call 2 Women or 2 Men "Mom & Dad"

[Syriusly]

I was a single parent, and in the first grade, my daughters class made Mothers Day cards. She gave the one she made to me. I still have it. She still sends me Mothers Day cards. Sure, it's not what would normally be expected, but do you think that matters to either of us? As long as the parents and kids come to terms with the situation, it's nobody else's business.

That's fine, but you wouldn't call yourself married, nor would you call yourself your daughter's "mom and dad". This isn't about what's adequate; this is about what is married.

then why are you talking about mom's and dad's?

 

[JOSweetHeart]

Only the Lord can explain why both male and female were created and why their coming together is the only way that recreating can ever happen. To me, if both parents are of the same gender, the child will miss out on a having a child/parent relationship with the gender person that is not present. A boy will miss out on a father/son relationship if both his parents are female and a girl will miss out on a mother/daughter relationship if both of her parents are males. Yeah, the kids can always go looking for what is missing in their lives themselves, but in my opinion, they shouldn't have to do such a thing when their parents are supposed to be the one who provide for the children that they choose to have in their homes.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[Delta4Embassy]

This drum beat needs to be heard on behalf of the most meek voices in this debate: children. They cannot vote to affect their fate and they rely solely upon the citizens of their respective states to act as their custodians in this matter. If those voices are silenced, so are theirs.

California, the most permissive state in the Union with the longest opportunity to observe the LGBT culture (San Francisco, CA as ground-zero) and uber-aggressive-litigation-machine, voted to preserve the physical structure of marriage as man/woman TWICE. What this means is, the experimental-lifestyle-as-parents is repugnant to the most permissive state with the most experience with the brand spanking new lab experiment with children.

This is obvious upon it's face, but a child cannot call 2 women or 2 men "Mom and Dad". This thread in the link below goes into excruciating detail as to why states must be allowed to incentivize the best physical structure of marriage on behalf of children/future productive or nonproductive liabilities to that respective state. That state's discreet community MUST have a voice on behalf of its unprotected citizens: children...

Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Since marriage confers various federal benefits and priviledges, it should be left to the Supreme Court. Plus, as a basic human right of sorts, it's not something we should make subject to the whims of an electorate any more than interracial or school segregation was.

Quit caring so much about what people you've never met are doing and mind your own business.

 

[rightwinger]

Are all moms the same?
Are all dads the same?

What could be wrong with a child having two people that love him?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Calling some parents as "mom and dad" can really be a stretch, no matter if they are straight or gay. Sexual orientation doesn't dictate who is a good parent or who is a bad parent.
When I watch the news and the subject matter is child abuse, I can't recall it ever being gay parents, it seems that it's been heterosexual parents or single parents.
Food for thought.

There have been cases of abuse by gays but that's hardly a reason to disallow gays being parents. If that were a valid reason, then no straights should be allowed to have children because many more of them are abusive.

The ignorant phobes seem to think that children living in gay households or with two parents of the same sex is a new situation. Its not.

Children should be raised by people who love him. The sex of those people isn't important.

 

[JohnAdams]

Exactly! First of all, granting same-sex couples a license to marry will not create true marriage. Secondly, studies show that the ideal family structure for children is to be raised by both a mother and a father.

 

[rightwinger]

Exactly! First of all, granting same-sex couples a license to marry will not create true marriage. Secondly, studies show that the ideal family structure for children is to be raised by both a mother and a father.

There is a wide range of parenting skills among heterosexual parents. Many mothers and fathers do not deserve to be parents. But nobody passes laws preventing them from being parents.
The "ideal" of Ozzie and Harriet or Leave it to Beaver is not a reality for most. To try to ban everyone who does not meet that ideal will not result in many parents

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Kids' concerns don't enter into laws about marriage. If they do, or should, then we should take their thoughts on divorce into consideration and forbid many divorces 'for the sake of the kids.'

 

[Silhouette]

Since marriage confers various federal benefits and priviledges, it should be left to the Supreme Court. Plus, as a basic human right of sorts, it's not something we should make subject to the whims of an electorate any more than interracial or school segregation was.

Quit caring so much about what people you've never met are doing and mind your own business.

Delta, civil rights are always championed for those people in suffrage. The ones who are least powerful and least able to affect their fate. Stay with me here...
...the LGBT ligitious army is anything but weak. In fact, collectively, they have unseated several governors (covertly) and one Pope (overtly), several bakers, photographers, caterers, florists etc. Not to mention their collective trying to unseat a chicken franchise owner, Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty and a host of others who would not bow to the fold..

You never mention the civil rights of children, the most oppressed class in this debate and to which marriage is the most important institution of any of the players involved. What about a state protecting THEIR right to have parents called "mom and dad"? As soon as I bring up that point, about children's suffrage in this debate, suddenly you folks are all about how they don't have rights, can't vote, are a secondary concern...etc. etc. etc. It's almost as if when you speak of "children of gay marriages" you really aren't caring about children in general. Especially when it is brought up that they need both genders in order to fledge properly psychologically. You suddenly don't want to talk about how 50% of kids in so-called "gay marriage" won't have their gender represented as an adult role model.

Odd, that.

Divorce is the state reluctantly granting separation also on behalf of children. If their environment becomes so toxic as to, again, harm them psychologically, then sadly and with reticence, the State grants divorce hoping there will be remarriages.

Nice try though..

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Since marriage confers various federal benefits and priviledges, it should be left to the Supreme Court. Plus, as a basic human right of sorts, it's not something we should make subject to the whims of an electorate any more than interracial or school segregation was.

Quit caring so much about what people you've never met are doing and mind your own business.

Delta, civil rights are always championed for those people in suffrage. The ones who are least powerful and least able to affect their fate. Stay with me here...
...the LGBT ligitious army is anything but weak. In fact, collectively, they have unseated several governors (covertly) and one Pope (overtly), several bakers, photographers, caterers, florists etc. Not to mention their collective trying to unseat a chicken franchise owner, Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty and a host of others who would not bow to the fold..

You never mention the civil rights of children, the most oppressed class in this debate and to which marriage is the most important institution of any of the players involved. What about a state protecting THEIR right to have parents called "mom and dad"? As soon as I bring up that point, about children's suffrage in this debate, suddenly you folks are all about how they don't have rights, can't vote, are a secondary concern...etc. etc. etc. It's almost as if when you speak of "children of gay marriages" you really aren't caring about children in general. Especially when it is brought up that they need both genders in order to fledge properly psychologically. You suddenly don't want to talk about how 50% of kids in so-called "gay marriage" won't have their gender represented as an adult role model.

Odd, that.

Divorce is the state reluctantly granting separation also on behalf of children. If their environment becomes so toxic as to, again, harm them psychologically, then sadly and with reticence, the State grants divorce hoping there will be remarriages.

Nice try though..

Show me a political poll polling children, or serious push to grant minors the ability to vote and we'll begin discussing the opinions and thoughts of children re: adult laws.

 

[jknowgood]

Mentally deranged people raising future mentally deranged people. Supported by mentally deranged liberals. No wonder this country is going to shit.

 

[whitehall]

A child can't call three or four moms and a single dad his/her parents even if they are married. A child can't be adopted by animals or trees either but maybe someday if democrats keep getting elected.

 

[Silhouette]

A child can't call three or four moms and a single dad his/her parents even if they are married. A child can't be adopted by animals or trees either but maybe someday if democrats keep getting elected.

Children have been adopted by wolves, goats and even chickens. We would not call their "parents" married would we?

This is a matter for the states to decide. Kids caught up in unfortunate parenting situations that don't allow them to have a single human mom and dad is terrible for sure. But because they are suffering doesn't meant we dismantle the word "marriage". Marriage exists as it does structurally to entice people away from undesireable parenting (gay, single, polygamist, incest) and towards what is healthiest and best for children. Otherwise states simply wouldn't be involved. It's a fiscal decision the states long ago figured out that it's worth losing some in perks to legitimately married people in order to insure the best formed (and therefore least expensive) citizens that grow into adulthood there.

Inferior situations foster mental illness and the resulting indigency, crime and other woes that costs states tons more in fiscal losses.. There are a tiny handful of states who decided to take a risk on their future citizens by depriving them of a mom or a dad by incentivizing gay marriage. That's their right as a state, even though they've been hoodwinked IMHO by the APA into believing that won't be harmful to kids (see the links in the OP for details). But the vast majority of states don't have legal gay marriage. Marraige is and always has been up to the states. Federally-imposed "gay marriages" there by lower courts are not legal and never have been. Lifestyle-Marriage Equality Slugout State Authority vs Federal US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Syriusly]

Only the Lord can explain why both male and female were created and why their coming together is the only way that recreating can ever happen. To me, if both parents are of the same gender, the child will miss out on a having a child/parent relationship with the gender person that is not present. A boy will miss out on a father/son relationship if both his parents are female and a girl will miss out on a mother/daughter relationship if both of her parents are males. Yeah, the kids can always go looking for what is missing in their lives themselves, but in my opinion, they shouldn't have to do such a thing when their parents are supposed to be the one who provide for the children that they choose to have in their homes.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

Jo,

If that is really your concern - then shouldn't you first focus on the milions of children missing that opposite gender in the house because they are being raised by a single mom or dad, or a single grandparent?

We do not require that heterosexuals prove that they will be "perfect" parents before we allow them to marry. Why would you expect from homosexual parents what you don't expect from heterosexual parents?

 

[Syriusly]

A child can't call three or four moms and a single dad his/her parents even if they are married. A child can't be adopted by animals or trees either but maybe someday if democrats keep getting elected.

Children have been adopted by wolves, goats and even chickens.

And there she goes....right down the rabbit hole.......

 

[Syriusly]

Since marriage confers various federal benefits and priviledges, it should be left to the Supreme Court. Plus, as a basic human right of sorts, it's not something we should make subject to the whims of an electorate any more than interracial or school segregation was.

Quit caring so much about what people you've never met are doing and mind your own business.

You never mention the civil rights of children, .

Yes- what about the civil rights of children.

Why do you want to deny children whose parents are gay, married parents?

How does preventing their parents from marrying- protect any children's rights?

 

[Syriusly]

Mentally deranged people raising future mentally deranged people. .

No need to bring your family into the thread.

 

[Syriusly]

Exactly! First of all, granting same-sex couples a license to marry will not create true marriage. Secondly, studies show that the ideal family structure for children is to be raised by both a mother and a father.

So if it is 'ideal' do we require the mother and father to stay married and live together- i.e. do we eliminate divorce for parents?

 

[jknowgood]

Mentally deranged people raising future mentally deranged people. .

No need to bring your family into the thread.

Insults? So you know I'm right.

 

[Silhouette]

4-spammed posts from Syriusly.