Humor will not be tolerated!! -Portia

[sigh]

Yeah, being in a quasi-single parent family myself, I can attest that having two functional parents is such a great thing. I am honestly concerned about the large number of children in the world who are missing a parent or have two working parents and are not getting the guidance and discipline that comes from having a parent at home with them.

I worry that our government has become so "individual" oriented, as far as individual rights, individual freedoms, etc. go, that we've lost the ability to talk about families in modern government. And frankly, I'd rather have strong families than strong individals.

Agreed. Completely. I just read an excellent book on this phenomenon within our culture, if anyone's interested. It's called Generation Me, and the BYU library has it, although it's in hot demand. After I read it, I began to realize more than ever how deeply we are steeped in the culture of individualism, surrounded by slogans such as "Because you're worth it!" and gadgets that are ridiculously tailored, not to mention the self-esteem movement. In fact, whether or not you think you're interested, you should read this book. It will be good for you. At the end, the author gives some excellent suggestions for combating the negative effects of our individualism.

Yellow wrote:[sigh]

I know Mormon single adoptive parents, fwiw.

Yellow wrote:

Imogen wrote:i still maintain that it is wrong to use one's personal beliefs to judge others actions if those actions do not concern or harm said person. i'm a staunch believer in John Stuart Mill's "harm principle." and if the guy down the street from me is gay, it's none of my business and does me no harm.

i'm sort of playing to my audience with this example, but whenever someone around me disparages mormonism, i defend it for the same reasons. people are free to do and blieve whatever they want, no matter how strange it may seem to some. and as long as they're not causing me any sort of trouble, than it's not my place to say they're wrong. same goes for homosexuals, transgendered people, etc.

The problem with basing decision on whether or not it hurts me is that it doesn't protect everyone. The alleged sexual abuse taking place on the FLDS ranch in Texas probably doesn't hurt you or I directly, but I don't think that makes it okay. At some point, our culture has decided that if it hurts anyone in our culture, it is wrong. (Gross overgeneralization, I know, but you get what I'm trying to say.) So the question then becomes: Does gay marriage harm anyone in our community? I think my biggest concern is that if marriage between two people of the same gender is codified under law, then same-gender couples will probably be allowed to adopt children. These children don't choose to be born in that situation any more than children born on the YFZ ranch chose that lifestyle, and yet both are brought into it.

So, are children raised by gay parents harmed in anyway? Are there psychological or emotional issues that may make it difficult for them to trust people of the "other" sex, much as children in single-parent homes might not learn to see authority figures of the other sex in a good light?

For that matter, does anyone know if single-parent adoption is legal? Because frankly, I think my concerns about gay marriage are only slightly stronger than my concerns about single-parent adoption would be. (There are a few other issues, but I think this is the big one for me.)

i just wanted to point out that 1) in my perfect world what's going on at the YFZ ranch would remain illegal because it hurts children. what they're doing IS harmful, maybe not to me, but to the children there. so it's not the same. two consenting adults wanting to be together is none of my business, but it's society's job to make sure children are fed, clothed, housed, and educated.

as for single parent families, i think there's so much BS out there about how harmful it is. would my mom have preferred to have my dad around. yeah. but she did a great job. if a single parent really takes care of their responsibilities, than the kids will still be fine. i don't have issues with men because my dad is a jerk (i love him, but he's a jerk). the children i know here at vassar who are being raised in single-sex households are happy, healthy, polite, and enjoy life. they're don't mistrust men because they have two moms.

it's MORE harmful to have to crappy parents than to have one great parent. having two parents is no guarantee of success. it makes it easier for the parents to have someone helping, but single parents are the heros of the world.

you didn't CHOOSE to be born into and LDS family, i didn't CHOOSE to be born into a family with divorced parents. i didn't CHOOSE to be a minority. none of choose our biological family, so i think that argument against gay parents adopting is inherently weak and flawed. it applies to everything.

But see, Imogen, Latter-day Saints believe we DID choose our families.

Craig Jessop wrote:But see, Imogen, Latter-day Saints believe we DID choose our families.

Really? Where was that doctrine explained?

I know that Patriarchal Blessings aren't standard to the Church, but mine quite specifically and deliberately tells me I chose the family I would be born into.

Craig Jessop wrote:I know that Patriarchal Blessings aren't standard to the Church, but mine quite specifically and deliberately tells me I chose the family I would be born into.

A family that is a friend of ours includes a daughter who was also told that she chose to live with that family.

I'll have to read mine again to be sure, but I don't remember it saying that.

So, you could say that some of us chose our families, but I think it is an overgeneralization to say that everyone did.

Yeah, while it may apply to some individuals, it is inaccurate to say that we chose our families.

Fredjikrang wrote:I'll have to read mine again to be sure, but I don't remember it saying that.

So, you could say that some of us chose our families, but I think it is an overgeneralization to say that everyone did.

Definitely.

Fredjikrang wrote:

Craig Jessop wrote:But see, Imogen, Latter-day Saints believe we DID choose our families.

Really? Where was that doctrine explained?

Saturday's Warrior, maybe?

I believe this could be individually true, but certainly not true across the Board. Smells like "Will I Wait For You?" . . .

So. I don't think gays should be denied any fundamental human rights. Can anyone give a good argument for how marriage and/or raising children is a right? Yeah, equal pay for equal work, avoiding bigoted language . . . all of these are good ideas. But what about marriage?

(I tend to think that a federal amendment either way is a bit too far, and it should be left up to the states. And also, before any foaming-mouth Republican and/or Religious Righter (our forum is free of them, I hope) goes off on gay marriage, etc., I think they should stop, oh, preying on adolescents of the same gender? Mark Foley? I really wish politicians who claim to stand for good values would actually possess them and act on them themselves. But such is another topic.)

Craig Jessop wrote:But see, Imogen, Latter-day Saints believe we DID choose our families.

This is individual revelation for you, and not for the church as a whole. Just so you know.

Portia wrote:So. I don't think gays should be denied any fundamental human rights. Can anyone give a good argument for how marriage and/or raising children is a right? Yeah, equal pay for equal work, avoiding bigoted language . . . all of these are good ideas. But what about marriage?

(I tend to think that a federal amendment either way is a bit too far, and it should be left up to the states. And also, before any foaming-mouth Republican and/or Religious Righter (our forum is free of them, I hope) goes off on gay marriage, etc., I think they should stop, oh, preying on adolescents of the same gender? Mark Foley? I really wish politicians who claim to stand for good values would actually possess them and act on them themselves. But such is another topic.)

politicians and their ilk are all sleazy jerks. same with talking heads like bill o'reilly and keith olberman. i hate those guys for turning what should be rational important discourse into hate speech and trying to prove alpha male dominance. makes me sick.

the question is: is marriage in and of itself a fundamental right? and if we establish that it is (which i think has been established by previous rulings in inter-racial marriage) than it MUST be available to all citizens. anything we establish as a right should not be restricted for any reason. "separate but equal" (in this case domestic partnership) is never equal. that has been proven multiple times in our nation's history. if i pay my taxes and follow the law, than i have earned my rights regardless of skin color or sexual orientation or religion.

Imogen wrote: the question is: is marriage in and of itself a fundamental right? and if we establish that it is (which i think has been established by previous rulings in inter-racial marriage) than it MUST be available to all citizens. anything we establish as a right should not be restricted for any reason. "separate but equal" (in this case domestic partnership) is never equal. that has been proven multiple times in our nation's history. if i pay my taxes and follow the law, than i have earned my rights regardless of skin color or sexual orientation or religion.

But just because we can doesn't mean we should. Our society has become focused on satiating the desires and whims of the individual so much that we ourselves are losing our own identity, our own morals that we once stood for. Humans, by nature, procreate through a man and woman, although due to technology, anyone can have a baby nowadays. I say being able to have a child and raise a baby is not a right, it is a privilege. Things like tax breaks and divorce protection and what-not can be considered rights, but I'd say that the ability to have a baby is the same category of driving, it is a privilege, where are all able to do so, but not all should. Yes there are many couple who may be better parents that many in the nation, but where do we draw the line? Where do we say no? Or are we going to allow ourselves to devolve into a society where the individual can do pretty much whatever they want without anyone caring?

Cognoscente wrote:

Craig Jessop wrote:But see, Imogen, Latter-day Saints believe we DID choose our families.

This is individual revelation for you, and not for the church as a whole. Just so you know.

In the premortal existence we were made aware of the circumstances we would be living in on Earth. It's not a far stretch of the imagination to think that many were given options to pick from, although I'm not aware of any doctrine saying as much.

We chose to follow Christ, and thus come to Earth, and we were chosen to live in the families we are now in. I readily accept that many people chose the families in which they would live, but it seems doubtful to me that people would have chosen to live in squalor and starvation, or to be sacrificed to Moloch, or to be abused.

We understood the risks, difficulties and trials that would face us, and we did choose to accept. It's similar to the way you choose to serve in your mission, I would think.

I don't think that the question is whether marriage itself is a fundamental right. Currently, everyone adult in this country does have the right to marry. What they do not have is the right to marry another individual of the same gender.