Oh my god, oh my god, if you don’t get the context of the title line, it’s an inside joke from summer 2006. I do not hate gay people. I like gay people as much as any other people. I absolutely think gay people should be allowed to marry: maybe your religion doesn’t allow two dudes or two ladies to get it on, whatever; but separation of church and state etc, and legally there are benefits to being two people who want to spend their lives together, and it’s not fair if some people are oriented* towards that other person being the same sex. Hell, the state should only allow civil unions for any couple, straight or gay. “Marriage” seems like a religious term, and the state shouldn’t worry about it.
*I am accepting as an axiom that gay people don’t “choose” to be gay. If you disagree with that axiom, either we can agree to disagree, or you can show me evidence that it’s false (I have yet to see any), or you can meet some gay people and talk to them and maybe you will be convinced.
OKAY! Now that’s out of the way, we can get on with the content of the post. (note that most of the time, people who have to say that they like gay people, or that they have gay friends, actually don’t. Please take this post as an exception to that rule.)
Huuggh. Right. The issue: adoption. Now, in the current world, I say hell yes, let gay people adopt, because orphanages exist. If there are two loving men or two loving women who want to give a poor kid a chance at life by bringing him/her up in a family, why are we stopping them? Even someone who thinks gay people are weird should agree that some parents are better than no parents!
BUT! Say the world were different. Say there was a shortage of babies, and a surplus of parents who want to adopt. Should we give equal adoption rights to gay and straight couples? I say no, from the perspective of balance. Men and women are different, and having two perspectives on life, from two people who are different in one of the most fundamental ways that two people can be different, is better than having an overly masculine or overly feminine perspective. Yin and yang n’at. Are there exceptions? Sure- there are tons of gay couples who would be better parents than straight couples. But, all other things being equal, I’d vote to give the kid to the man and woman.
Why am I even posting this? This is apropos of nothing: it’s not like I’m in an argument with someone over this. I guess I’m feeling a conservative backlash, because I’m getting sick of politics in general. Hey, diehard Obama-ers: you’re no easier to take than diehard McCainers. Okay, maybe a little easier to take because I agree with you usually. But still, there’s a lot of smugness and sarcasm, and if I were a McCain supporter, I would say fuck off! There’s no way you’d convert me to vote Democrat with the kind of attitude I’ve been getting. Give me a soft-line approach, or an argument that doesn’t demean the other side, and I’ll give you more than six seconds of my time.
So here it is: my little dash of conservatism. Of course I’m still supporting Obama- please vote for Obama. Today’s reason is because McCain is super anti net neutrality, and Obama is for it- but geez Obama folks, lighten up!
(… aaaaand I just alienated 100% of Seattle. I do not think I have met a Republican here. Yeah, great, we Emerald City dwellers are the enlightened ones. But don’t get smug about it.)
Erik Swanson -
I’m surprised at your opinion on the gay adoption thing Dan. I agree that in a total abstract, there may be some advantage to a child to grow up in family A (mom+dad) than family B (mom+mom/dad+dad). However, there are a couple of complicating factors. First, how would you handle single parents? Currently, single heterosexual people (and single gay people) are allowed to adopt. Is it better for a child to grow up in a single parent home or in a two parent home? Also, there is nothing to prevent one partner of a gay couple from adopting a child (unless the agency is actually asking for sexual orientation and then disqualifying based on it, which would be fairly blatant bigotry). Gay couples are looking not so much for the right to adopt in the abstract, but for the right to adopt as a couple. This issue is similar to gay marriage, where it is important for gay couples to gain protections like next of kin status and power of attorney.
Finally, think about the quality of an adoptive family from a statistical perspective. Even if we accept the fact that straight couple A will be better parents on average than gay couple B, there are certainly a considerable number of gay couples which would make better families than straight couples. Think of overlapping normal distributions, where mean(A)>mean(B), but there is still considerable overlapping density. Is it really the job of the government to unilaterally disqualify families from the right to adopt because of one of myriad factors contributing to their parental skills?
Hi! Two issues here:
1. Well, gay couples > single people (straight or gay) because 2 parents is better for the kid than one parent, I’d imagine.
2. Oh my god I never said unilaterally disqualify gay couples from adoption in ANY world. I said, if a straight and a gay couple wanted to adopt the same kid, all other things being equal (which of course they never are), the straight couple should get the kid.
Of course this is all in the total abstract. And how many points does it count for, to have a man and a woman raising a kid instead of two men or two women? I don’t know. I’m just saying it counts for more than zero.
blog 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010