• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Republicans Vote to Make It Legal to Ban Gays and Lesbians from Adopting

Atrus

Gold Member
Always interesting to see America's fear of "Sharia law" while in the same breath slowly push Christian law which ultimately will be the same thing.



If the organization is taking federal money they shouldn't have the right to turn anyone away.

Exactly. People advocating for the advancement of Christian values will be the same ones opposing the advancement of Islamic values by the same token.

I also find it disconcerting that there are several references to how this is akin to selling products between buy and seller.

Children are not products, they are individuals with rights, and chief amongst these rights are the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; rights not to be impeded by religious test as no child is born to a religion.
 

BANGS

Banned
People advocating for the advancement of Christian values will be the same ones opposing the advancement of Islamic values by the same token.
There certainly is an overlap, but most people don't want any religious law period...
 

Ke0

Member
Exactly. People advocating for the advancement of Christian values will be the same ones opposing the advancement of Islamic values by the same token.

I also find it disconcerting that there are several references to how this is akin to selling products between buy and seller.

Children are not products, they are individuals with rights, and chief amongst these rights are the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; rights not to be impeded by religious test as no child is born to a religion.

It's really nuts considering the end result will be the same between two. And yes I noticed how a couple have equated these kids are products, and talking about "the market."

There certainly is an overlap, but most people don't want any religious law period...

Is that really true though? I imagine a large portion of your country does otherwise it wouldn't be such a big component of Conservatives in America currently no?
 
Last edited:

BANGS

Banned
Is that really true though? I imagine a large portion of your country does otherwise it wouldn't be such a big component of Conservatives in America currently no?
Most people don't staunchly identify as conservative or liberal... there are issues they agree with and issues they don't...
 

ResurrectedContrarian

Suffers with mild autism
Why would government even get involved with adoption in this manner? Amh
Because theocracies are only bad when the muslims do it.

Um... what bizarrely confused responses. You have the actual causal relationship of this legislation almost perfectly inverted, which is a rather impressive feat given its simplicity.

The measure discussed here pulls back government micromanagement of adoption by not forcing a single viewpoint in the disputed matter of what kinds of parents are appropriate for a child, deferring it to the judgment of agencies. Adoption agencies themselves will then make that determination in accord with their own values, which preserves their independence and lets them pursue their own calling -- which is enormously important in this kind of social work which tends in all times and places to have the vast majority of its burden carried by those who feel deeply called to devote themselves to the difficult task, and who will therefore always tend to be predominantly associated with a strong religious affiliation.

If you really think the law should eject Catholic adoption agencies from the public square, which pair children only with natural opposite-sex couples, you'll absolutely end up with fewer total adoptions, because these are the groups that do the work. And if you say "just force them to conform to my beliefs about parenting or get out!", you're not seeing the motivating link that makes those who are devout -- and who see children as a natural gift rather than a project or right owed to any random two people -- inevitably be those who are most willing to work hard to help abandoned children find homes.
 

Atrus

Gold Member
“Devout” as a term is nothing more than egotistical, self-aggrandizing nonsense.

My grandfather was a staunch catholic, a Knight of Columbus yet his duty and compassion as a medical officer ensured that when his catholic sister-in-law sought an abortion, he went with her in the event there were complicating medical issues. This was in a time when abortion was illegal.

Is he suddenly less a Catholic? By whose decree?

If religious institutions must withdraw their participation because they won’t put the rights of the child first, then so be it. By their actions we see the inhumanity of their faith, an example of their constant and irrepairable weakness.

The true humanitarians will find a way to continue extending their compassion.
 
“Devout” as a term is nothing more than egotistical, self-aggrandizing nonsense.

My grandfather was a staunch catholic, a Knight of Columbus yet his duty and compassion as a medical officer ensured that when his catholic sister-in-law sought an abortion, he went with her in the event there were complicating medical issues. This was in a time when abortion was illegal.

Is he suddenly less a Catholic? By whose decree?

If religious institutions must withdraw their participation because they won’t put the rights of the child first, then so be it. By their actions we see the inhumanity of their faith, an example of their constant and irrepairable weakness.

The true humanitarians will find a way to continue extending their compassion.

I find your post completely without compassion and the fact you seem to be devoted to your belief ironic.
 

Atrus

Gold Member
I find your post completely without compassion and the fact you seem to be devoted to your belief ironic.

I have no compassion for religious dogma and it’s adherents. Religion is an artefact of humanity, a seeking intelligence in need for answers that are uncomfortable and unknown.

Some may use this as a model for life and that’s fine when it comes to your own action. Opt to extend its cruelty on others and well... expect to be opposed.
 
There's not even logic in this. If Republicans banned gay people as well as single parents, ok, maybe they're really sticking to a moral code where they only believe in a complete traditional family (although, completely misguided, it would at least be consistent). They're just running on hate and discrimination as usual.

I'm not for banning same-sex adoption, but I would like a system that puts heterosexual couples first on priority before same-sex ones.

It's only in recent human history have we toyed with the concept of same-sex partners and I would like to see more science done on this to fully understand the long term effects of what it could have on society.
Outright banning is a knee jerk move though.

LMFAO. Now we like science, but when science tells us things like we are destroying the earth, we do not like science. Or when a black person kneels for the flag we LOVE America, but when our President stands next to Putin and says "America should be ashamed of themselves, Russia is strong and powerful and I believe Putin" we do not love America.

It's amazing. Fucking mess.
 
Last edited:

BANGS

Banned
There's not even logic in this. If Republicans banned gay people as well as single parents, ok, maybe they're really sticking to a moral code where they only believe in a complete traditional family (although, completely misguided, it would at least be consistent). They're just running on hate and discrimination as usual.



LMFAO. Now we like science, but when science tells us things like we are destroying the earth, we do not like science. Or when a black person kneels for the flag we LOVE America, but when our President stands next to Putin and says "America should be ashamed of themselves, Russia is strong and powerful and I believe Putin" we do not love America.

It's amazing. Fucking mess.
It's almost like people are individuals and don't all share a brain with those in their group...
 

llien

Member
I must note here, that the bill is about religious beliefs, not sexual orientation (although one could argue that true Christian can't be homosexual).
Still, it doesn't call out religion either.
 
Call me a biological realist, because I feel like progressivism needs to be equally balanced with what nature laid out for us.

Heterosexual couples has been the norm for thousands of years and it's a model that clearly works for us. Same-sex adoption has only been a relatively new phenomenon so I'm going to express some skepticism to what effects it may have on a society.

Doesn't mean I hate LGBT. But if nature intended for humans to have a mother and a father unit for thousands of years, then perhaps we should continue working with that system before exploring other options.


It has nothing to do with the parades (their life style didn't cross my mind when I typed this).

I'm concerned with working with models we evolved with. A mother and a father goes back thousands of years and has kept society going. Same-sex hasn't so I express some cautions with changing the system.

lmao have you ever had a history class
edit: reading the moderation actions ITT while this shitposter is able to continue spewing his completely baseless shit is something else
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom