nimeth_nimora: (Swords)
That being gay adoption and gays in general. Most of my flist knows by now that I am very pro-gay rights and all that goes with it. More specifically I suppose I need to vent on my feelings about whether one chooses to be gay or not. I am firmly in the camp that it's not a choice. Oh sure people can choose who they sleep with, man or woman, but it still doesn't make them anything other than what they are, it just means that sometimes people hide the truth from themselves, from others.

Just for fun (haha /cynicism), I googled 'homosexuality is not a choice' and 'homosexuality is a choice' just to see what came up in the first couple of pages. For the former, I came up with a site for religious tolerance (yay for that one!), the American Psychological Association, an Australian Pyschology educational site, a debate site and some sites supporting LGBT rights. For the latter, it came out with a Conservative Wiki, a debate site, and with the exception of the medical sites, those other ones I already listed who claim that homosexuality isn't a choice. So, on one hand we have recognised national health organisations declaring that it is not a choice and and on the other, a politically biased Wiki. Doesn't quite measure up somehow does it? I think I also googled something similar about it being a choice and it came with the site NARTH, who claim they can cure people of gayness with therapy.

Plus the fact that scientists are finding more and more common traits in gay men that aren't in heterosexual men. It's so stupid though, the more science comes up with evidence that homosexuality and bisexuality is genetic and not a choice, the louder religion argues that they can 'cure' you of your debased and evil predilections (their words, not mine), despite proof that such 'therapy' can actually do more harm than good.

This line of thought was of course brought about by someone's comment on the HYS (I really should stay away from that place, it's like a vice to me) that homosexual parents were more likely to turn their adoptees gay. ?? Oh please, give me a break. Where's the evidence for that? Where? What's that? You mean you have no evidence for it and it's just a bigoted opinion? Surprise, surprise. I once heard someone respond to a claim like that, that if all children had their parents' sexuality, there would be no gay people. Best comeback ever, and accurate.

Funnily enough, two years ago the Karolinska Insititute in Sweden did a study on homosexual/heterosexual brains and found that homosexual men have a brain that is identical in size to heterosexual women and were smaller than that of heterosexual male. Homosexual women had a brain that looked and was of similar size to a heterosexual male. Lesbians and hetero males have more nerve connections in the the part of the brain that regulates sex (I think it's called the amygdala),whereas hetero women and gay men have more neural connections. And from what I understand, these things are formed due to genetics in pregnancy. At least that's what certain institutes in the US (can't remember which ones exactly) have discovered through research.

Then of course, there's the age old question 'why would LGBT people choose to be that way knowing all the ridicule and persecution they face from others?' I've never, ever gotten a satisfactory answer from someone who believes it's a choice. In fact, more often than not I don't get an answer at all, they usually just dodge the question, at which point I stop debating and leave.

Anyway, I'll climb down off my soapbox now, I just needed to vent.
nimeth_nimora: (Slash)
I heard this morning that a Catholic adoption charity lost it's case in the UK to deny gay/lesbian couples the right to adopt. There was a related Have Your Say on the topic and I couldn't resist and went and read the comments (I gotta stop doing that, some of those people....*shakes head in disgust*) Anyway, I was actually surprised that so far, most seemed to support the ruling and agreed that religion should not be above the law, which in this case would be that no one has the right to discriminate against others based on their sexuality.

Doesn't mean that there weren't people opposed, but I found those people tended to make sweeping generalisations about gays/lesbians, which happens to be a debating pet peeve of mine. I hate generalised statements because they often paint people wrongly who don't deserve it. Comments like this would apply:

The UN convention on the rights of the child.
Article 21....Adoption....the first concern must be what is best for them.
Article 12.....Respect the views of the child. Children have the right to have their views heard.
Article 3....Best interests of the child. this should be the primary concern when making decisions that affect them.
Article 2.....Non Discrimination.....No child should be treated unfairly on any basis.
These should be respected when placing a child in the care of others. Their rights MUST come first. I contend that a same sex couple is NOT in the best interests of the child if we apply the above conventions.

 
Generalised and a slap in the face to any gay couple wanting to adopt. I'm sorry where's the evidence that a same sex couple would do anything other than what's best for the child in question? Any evidence? No? Plenty of evidence that heterosexual couples often don't do what's best in the interest of the child, things like child abuse are most often commited by parents or close relatives and yes, those parents are often hetero. I saw another comment saying that the happiness of the child must come first and the desires of homosexuals to have children shouldn't count. Huh? Yet more generalisations that homosexuals are incapable of providing a child with a happy, healthy upbringing without a shred of evidence to support it. I saw another comment about allowing gays/lesbians to adopt would be akin to indoctrinating children to think homosexuality is ok, to the erosion of moral values in this country, or some tripe like that. I didn't pay much attention to that one.

This idea of some that gay/lesbian parents are incapable of providing a well-round, happy upbringing for a child who desperately needs a loving home......I can't fathom it. When you look at it really, homosexual couples can't be any worse than heterosexual couples at raising children and from what I've seen of it, are often much better parents than many heterosexual couples. There's loads of heteros out there who are terrible parents, can't or don't want to provide for the child, are too self-interested, or mistreat their children.

The laws made to govern us are secular for a reason, to prevent the forcing of religious views on others' whose views differ from their own. Forcing your religious views on others is just plain and simple intolerance and disrespect for that other person. Something that ties into this would be Catholic hospitals in the US, which I had a little rant about a few days ago, but that's beside the point here.

Gay and lesbian couples are no worse at parenting than any heterosexual couple out there and they should be afforded all the same rights to adopt that are given to heteros. it's called tolerance and equality. I just can't get along with anyone who says that homosexuals are abnormal and would be bad parents based on that alone.

Edit> I've just seen a comment that takes the cake, a claim that any same sex couple wanting to adopt are selfish. OMG, wth?! I swear my jaw just dropped. Unbelievable, how in god's name does wanting to provide a child with a loving home make them selfish. Dear Jebus, sometimes I despair of some sections of humanity. *shakes head*

About Me

nimeth_nimora: (Default)
nimeth_nimora

February 2011

M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
1415161718 1920
21222324252627
28      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 22/07/2017 22:32
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios