idiocracy and marriage

For the record I'm not opposed to homosexual marriage. In fact I remember discussing this with Mark (he's homosexual), who was happy with being "stuck" with civil partnership, while I was arguing that whether the benefits are the same or not, treating the issue differently (giving it a different name for example), is by definition not equality. We don't have marriage for the white race and civil partnership for blacks, why would it be any different for sexuality?

Also, I don't oppose homosexual couples having children. I think children are better off with homosexual parents than single parents (2 parents = twice the love ). My mother lost her father when she was very young, and while she turned out perfectly fine, it wasn't joyful for her. My (female) best friend's parents separated and she turned out perfectly fine, but her teens were a rough ride. In contrast to that, my (male) best friend's parents were living under the same roof but reached a point where they wouldn't even talk to each other. It wasn't as tough for him.

All of this certainly beats being looked after by the state or foster parents (another friend of mine was in that situation it it was really tough for her). Orphanages/institutions just don't provide adequate care, despite getting a lot more money for each kid than the average joe gets in a year after paying the rent. Foster parents? Nothing wrong with that, however they tend to be temporary. I can understand why some children can't be adopted, but why constantly move them to a new home? Baffling policies.

I think any couple, same sex or what ever, or single person married or not, that chooses to adopt and raise a child clearly shows genuine intention of raising them properly.

Ideal, Rickie, but not absolute. Some couples adopt for the money they can get from the state per head and the free labor.

And some people are just sick. Though they seem to prefer kidnapping's lack of paper trail to adoption.

rugadd wrote: Ideal, Rickie, but not absolute.

Only Sith deal with abslouts. Just had to say that.


Some couples adopt for the money they can get from the state per head and the free labor.

More the exception than the rule.

And some people are just sick. Though they seem to prefer kidnapping's lack of paper trail to adoption.

Ditto

PS. I've adopted and haven't gotten any money from the State so I'm not sure what you mean?

Rickie, he may have been talking about the fact that a lot of times if you adopt a child with any sort of disability you usually get money. At least in America you do. Not sure about the laws in other countries.

Foster homes suck, you always feel like an outsider no matter how hard they try....I know this because 3 times in my early childhood I've lived in foster homes... the trouble with adoption is that there are too many children that need homes and most people that take that route are seeking babies, or toddlers....children too young to have that many firm memories of parents....it makes the transition easier...whereas older children have those memories and can develop feelings of resentment towards the adoptive parents...

RyuJin wrote: Foster homes suck, you always feel like an outsider no matter how hard they try....I know this because 3 times in my early childhood I've lived in foster homes...

not -always-.. but yeah.. most the time


My grandparents took in a foster child while they were raising my mother, they're still best friends 30+ years later.

unfortunately this is the only time I've heard of the foster system being any good.

Its probably a generational thing....(baby boomer generation vs. GenXer)

Of course I nearly always feel like an outsider no matter where I am...