What are your thoughts on homosexuals raising children?

Oh, apology accepted. It's hard to read tone from words at times and I took it negatively. That was partially my fault.

I'm not trying to make that case. I think it's equal between homo/heterosexuals. Either orientation can be bad or good parents. Their orientation does not decide this, but their personality does. Not every homosexual is open to everything, but it's generally noticed that they are understanding because they deal with closed-minded people on a day to day basis about their orientation. I don't think either one is better. They are equal. Who a person is sexually involved with, and what gender they are, hardly merits attention to how well they would raise and love their children. The topics are on two different planes. That's similar to asking which is a better parent; the person who likes dogs better or the person who likes cats better? A person's preference in sexual partners is as important when raising children as their preference in companion animal. They don't affect each other.

I vote for a sexual disorder.

Homosexuality is not a 'sexual disorder.' Homosexuality appears naturally in nature when not in season, so do they have a sexual disorder also? It's just a person's preference. I prefer tea over hot chocolate, but that doesn't mean I have a food disorder.

Calling it a disorder or a preference are both extreme ends of the spectrum - and neither of them truly explains homosexuality.

Homosexuals are born with genetic markers that predispose them to developing it - doesn't necessarily mean everyone born with those genes will will go on become a full-blown homosexual.

There's no clear consensus on what environmental factors - and that includes stuff that goes on inside the mother's womb - engender it. And we're nowhere close to knowing it right now - there's only speculation as far as I am aware.

It's more like diabetes (using just as an example, not to connote homosexuality is a disease) - to develop it you have to carry the risk in your genes, but you won't necessarily get it even if you're genetically predisposed.

Biology is just not black and white.

Preference implies choice.

I call it a preference because I really don't know the right word for it. It's not a disease or disorder. It has its own category. If you have any suggestions on what it should be called, let me know.

In my Psychology class we were taught that, through past psychologists, it is considered to occur during lateralization. If you research, it is still widely accepted.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/x48n111630035705/ ; Page 2.

"It is suggested . . . that homosexual men may exhibit altered cerebral lateralization."

It is not claimed factual, but it's food for thought.

I said earlier that I don't think it's a choice. I know that. If you read my response to Spidergal, it should clear up what you're saying.

There is some data on that, Finn - but I don't save all this stuff; in the last month or two there were reports on that, if I remember, that children raised by lesbians were smarter (whatever words).
I could make my own dumb report, that children raised by lesbians were smarter because they were raised by women with brains who had been through difficulty.

I don't have the original link, I don't save everything.

This is why I didn't consider sociology, too mushy. Not re views, but re grabbable data and its causes.

Honey, you have no clue about Dyslexia. Or, irony.

No, that is not true.

I beg to differ.

1. to set or hold before or above other persons or things in estimation; like better; choose rather than: to prefer beef to chicken.

If you prefer beef to chicken, it is assumed you will eat either but you would rather have beef. You choose beef over chicken.

Someone might say they prefer life over death, but unless they are truly OK with death, it's a misuse of the word.

If, because of your genes, you have no choice but to be homosexual then you do not prefer homsosexuality over heterosexuality. You simply are homosexual.

Many years ago and far away, I had a boyfriend who both raved for my body, and was distant, as in disappearing. Well, like, what's new, but it was all new to me (that was the first time I got a glimmer of that behavior, however ordinary). He was also very engaged in all our idea conversations.

We had an intense number of months.

He did try to tell me. He set it up, we walked on the beach, and we talked about homosexuality, which I was still stupid about. This was '71, early or late days. I mentioned the word deviant. And then I tried to explain I thought it meant off the norm. Even then, I did not connect that with with him.

He didn't manage to tell me, straight out, though we talked for a few years later, off and on.

A decade and slightly after that, we talked at more length.

Would I want this man raising children, hell, yes. He was for years head of emergency at a key hospital. But never mind that, one of the wisest people in my life.

I wasn't commenting on dyslexia (the condition) rather dyslexia (the member) and his intolerance.As for having no clue about irony,I do know that ossobuco is made from knuckle of veal.Are you the knuckle head?

Sorry a lot of things found in nature are both "natural" and a disorder such as cancer, heart diseases, etc.

Given that any animal with this condition is as dead to his specie future as if he had been born dead if the animal does not take part with the correct "partner" during mating season.

In fact if it worst because he or she is competing for food and other resources with breading animals and in hard times that could result in breeding animals dying that would not otherwise die.

Your mention of the homosexual parents/smarter daughters study was interesting. I've never heard of that, but it would be neat to explore.

I'm glad to find another who feels so strongly about it. I don't want to be biased, as my older brother is a homosexual, but I would trust most homosexuals raising children, just as I trust any heterosexual parent. They are just as intellectual, emotional, trustworthy, and dedicated as any heterosexual - sometimes more. It's also refreshing to hear about someone with a positive experience like so. I have to say though, if you were intimate, weren't there clues other than the distance?

Point noted, but regardless, homosexuality is not considered a disorder in any study or definition that I am aware of.

Many species of animals engage in homosexual behaviors outside of mating season. During mating season, obviously the pheromones correct much of the behavior and they do adjust their 'partners.' Even if an animal does not mate, that doesn't make them worth 'dead.' Many animals compete like lions, deer, and buffalo. Just because they do not succeed means nothing because others are succeeding. Eventually they will grow larger/stronger and fend off others just as they were removed mating rights. That's the cycle of life. There is always going to be a group that is 'worth dead' because they're not tough enough to mate. They must die off as the survival of the fittest goes. If food was scarce, the weaker would die off and the strong would prevail. Not the other way around. Well, anyway, off topic.

Picking the wrong sex as a sexual partner for breeding is on it face a disorder of the sexual functioning of any animal including the human animal,

This is not a moral issue and say nothing of what kind of parent a homosexual would or would not made.

As humans are pack animals humans have other things to offer to it pack/tribe then breeding.

With all that said homosexuality is still a disorder of the sexual/breeding function of a human.

If I was up for adoption I would prefer these guys as parents:



over these folks:


At least I would get sung to sleep with Broadway show tunes instead of church hymnals.

Dyslexia, the a2k guy, is no one to diss, though that can be hard to catch from post to post or as a newbie. Man has a vast education and a big heart. Really big heart. But past that, he is picky about food. This is a matter of argument.

Dyslexia, the member on a2lk, often, even most often, posts ironically.

Cannot diasagree