lol, yup, but they get further when they pretend as if sexual intimacy has nothing to do with it, or my favourite “it’s none of your business or the states.”The “love” word often gets thrown out by the gay argument to support same sex marriage. So is there any physical expression of this “love” in a gay relationship? Are gay relationships purely an emotional attachment?
If said same sex relationships are open to a sexual act…as are heterosexual relationships…or a physical expression of this “love”…then I guess the sexual act does have a bearing on this debate.
:clapping:
Be honest Lisa. What couple has ever sat around thinking “Gee, what a lofty goal for society our marriage would be.” since the middle ages?
It doesn’t have to help, but it doesn’t hurt either.
Actually we can and we do. As does every professional body of pediatrics, psychology, psychiatry, sociology, social workers, etc.
That practice is more common among heterosexuals so perhaps you should direct those questions in the opposite direction. That being said, the worst feeling a child can feel is that they are unwanted and we’re not the ones dumping them on the steps of this nation’s orphanages.
“Well, it’s already on fire. Break out the flamethrowers!”
Not everyone believes that society is what gives our relationships meaning and value.“Well, it’s already on fire. Break out the flamethrowers!”
On the contrary, it is our relationships that give society meaning and value. Why, then, should we endorse and celebrate relationships which serve none except those in the relationship itself?
I’m glad I have enough common sense not to take these supposedly “educated” people who claim what you have said seriously. Wait a minute, Are these the same “professionals” who worked for Goldman Sachs etc and claimed they found “A safer way of investing with less risk” before the Global Financial crisis 2007-08? lolDoes marriage ever really serve society in the United States? Not particularly. At least not in ways which cannot and are not done outside of it anyway and no one ever enters into a marriage for the purpose of benefiting society.
I think you’ve just described adoption.
Your seriously vouching for that? that biological ties between parents and children are irrelevant?I think you’ve just described adoption.
In terms of raising a child, absolutely. Biology has absolutely no bearing on parenting.Your seriously vouching for that? that biological ties between parents and children are irrelevant?
My thoughts along the same line.
Chances are your parents did not think so!
The fact that we are biologically related didn’t make them better or worse parents than if I were adopted. Biological relation doesn’t dictate a person’s parenting skills or lack thereof. Adoptive parents can and do provide a better life in many many ways than the biological parents ever could or would. You just can’t make a generalization on whether biological parents are the ideal household for every child.
Okay.
Okay, I agree that adoptive parents can sometimes provide a better upbringing for some children, but that is not what I was arguing, if they could have the same upbringing with their biological parents, than I would say that is absolutely the better option (not to mention that “better upbringing” is very subjective, however I think we would agree on alot of things there unless your Richard Dawkins),
I assure you, I am not Richard Dawkins.
I just don’t think the question is pertinent. No one forces children to part with their biological parents unless the child’s welfare is at risk. The vast majority of the time, at least one of the biological parents doesn’t want to be involved in their children’s lives. We cannot sit around contemplating what biological parents should do. They make the choices they make and the only consideration is what is in the best interest of the child.
So you agree that paid surrogacy is not a good thing?
I don’t have a problem with gestational surrogacy and I don’t view traditional surrogacy as any better or worse than adoption.
