Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I do have questions about gay couples raising children, I ask out of curiosity and hope I do not say anything you consider insulting... in a gay marriage is one partner in the role of the man /husband and the other the role of the women / wife? And if so do they continue in those roles when raising children ? Or do both partners think of themselves as both husband and wife to the other partner?
My fiancee and I are women, and we will both be wives. We don't have man or woman roles, we have human roles. We each tend to do what we do best. I love to cook, do home repairs, take care of the animals and yard. She is better with electronics, and works full time. I don't consider anything either of us does to be "husband" or "wife" roles. we do what we are best suited for. When it comes to the kids, she is better with helping with math, martial arts, literature, and loves to play video games. I am better helping with science, art, and mechanical things.
Why do there have to be "roles" that either person has to play in a marriage or with raising kids? Why can't each person do what they are good at?
Generally few gay couples adopt a "man" or "woman" role. It's a stereotype.
I have noticed in lesbian relationships and the lesbian weddings I have seen on tv that one lady is often dressed in man's clothing while the other is often dressed in a wedding dress or other feminine clothes and I wonder if they take those roles into their relationship and to raising of children if they have any? With gay men I thought in some cases it may be similar. I remember in an episode of Modern Family the gay couple's fathers were arguing over which of their son's was the husband in the relationship and which was the wife.
I have noticed in lesbian relationships and the lesbian weddings I have seen on tv that one lady is often dressed in man's clothing while the other is often dressed in a wedding dress or other feminine clothes and I wonder if they take those roles into their relationship and to raising of children if they have any? With gay men I thought in some cases it may be similar. I remember in an episode of Modern Family the gay couple's fathers were arguing over which of their son's was the husband in the relationship and which was the wife.
Some women like to wear pants, some like to wear dresses. Some women dream of the big wedding and the fancy dress and the whole 9 yard, some women don't really care about the pomp of a wedding. I'm just as comfortable in jeans a tee shirt and my boots as I am in heels, full makeup and a dress.
Modern family is a TV show. They play to stereotypes, I don't know of any gay guys among my friends that are anything like the couple on modern family.
My fiancee and I are women, and we will both be wives. We don't have man or woman roles, we have human roles. We each tend to do what we do best. I love to cook, do home repairs, take care of the animals and yard. She is better with electronics, and works full time. I don't consider anything either of us does to be "husband" or "wife" roles. we do what we are best suited for. When it comes to the kids, she is better with helping with math, martial arts, literature, and loves to play video games. I am better helping with science, art, and mechanical things.
Why do there have to be "roles" that either person has to play in a marriage or with raising kids? Why can't each person do what they are good at?
There do not have to be gender specific roles I just wondered if some some gay couples had them and the kids kind of thought of one parent as the father and one as more the mother? All a child really needs is love to be raised well . Too many children do not get enough of that. I just thought it might be confusing for them in society not to have it that way.
Still I will add that as an unwed mother my parents and I raised my child as a family so in a way my daughter had two moms, myself and my mother ( her grandmother) both raised her. The father of my child was not in the picture at all and considering what a bad person he turned out to be it is better that way. My father is the only father figure my daughter has ever known.
Last edited by vanguardisle; 02-15-2015 at 10:08 AM..
There do not have to be gender specific roles I just wondered if some some gay couples had them and the kids kind of thought of one parent as the father and one as more the mother? All a child really needs is love to be raised well . Too many children do not get enough of that. I just thought it might be confusing for them in society not to have it that way.
Still I will add that as an unwed mother my parents and I raised my child as a family so in a way my daughter had two mom's myself and my mother ( her grandmother) both raised her. The father of my child was not in the picture at all and considering what a bad person he turned out to be it is better that way. My father is the only father figure my daughter has ever known.
Why would it be confusing for them? They have grown up knowing that some people are good at some things and some are good at others and the sex of the person doesn't matter. Our daughter is an aviation in the navy mechanic, a girly girl, and happily married. One son is in college on a full ride scholarship and has been in a relationship with a girl for 5 years now. Our youngest son is a straight A student, honor guard, boy scout, and volunteers in the community. None of them are confused about anything. All are well adjusted and good people.
Why would it be confusing for them? They have grown up knowing that some people are good at some things and some are good at others and the sex of the person doesn't matter. Our daughter is an aviation in the navy mechanic, a girly girl, and happily married. One son is in college on a full ride scholarship and has been in a relationship with a girl for 5 years now. Our youngest son is a straight A student, honor guard, boy scout, and volunteers in the community. None of them are confused about anything. All are well adjusted and good people.
I did now know your children were already grown I thought they were all still young. It sounds like you have been in a very longstanding relationship with your fiance. Have you and your partner been together that whole time? May I ask if it was hard to decide which one of you would be the one to get pregnant and have your children, or are some biologically yours and some biologically hers ? Or did you decide to adopt or maybe use a surrogate?
I did now know your children were already grown I thought they were all still young. It sounds like you have been in a very longstanding relationship with your fiance. Have you and your partner been together that whole time? May I ask if it was hard to decide which one of you would be the one to get pregnant and have your children, or are some biologically yours and some biologically hers ? Or did you decide to adopt or maybe use a surrogate?
2 are grown (early 20s), one in 5th grade.
We have been together for a long time, she carried one I carried 2. It wasn't a hard decision at all, we both chose to carry when we were ready and wanted to. We would have possibly adopted but it was not legal for us to do so.
Like Mr/Ms jjrose. I don't want to go deeply into personal circumstances. But I own a good-sized house in a stable neighborhood and sometimes paid the bills for it while working out-of-town by renting it out. I've had a variety of tenants, including same-sex couples, and in one instance, saw one of them stabilize her life, and reduce the problems passed on to the landlord by finding a stable partner of the same sex.
So my problem isn't with sexuality -- it's with irresponsibility.
In the earlier times of a simpler, less-industrialized society, those in power also preyed upon the sexual mistakes of the young and the less-responsible -- usually by the route of the forced marriage or "shotgun wedding". And that sort of manipulation still goes on today -- moreso in less-cosmopolitan areas. I can't offer an answer for it -- the emotions, prejudices, and underlying causes all run too deep.
But I think it's time that our society identified the most irresponsible among the flock, and redeveloped the mechanism to hold them accountable, rather than continue to expand an unresponsive bureaucracy which has little interest in solving the problem and reducing its own power, influence, and budget. But our current national polarization over this issue is driven by the more-simplistic on both sides, of whom the OP of this thread is a prime example.
Can someone explain to me what this has to do with same-sex relationships?
I said (admittedly, in an indirect way) that the push for same-sex-marriage will add to the burden of "societal overhead" for which all taxpayers and responsible individuals are compelled to pay.
The founding fathers designed the Constitution to be changed with the times. Their greatest wisdom was knowing that they were not the wisest men to walk the Earth. If you knew anything about them you would know that they all wanted the Constitution to be malleable, not rigid and dogmatic.
If they didn't want total separation they sure had an odd way of showing it.
You wanted me to respond to your post, then you post new drivel?
Why can't you anti-religion people understand the difference between "no establishment of religion" vs. the interpretation of separation of church and state? The FF's just did not want the government mandate a religious ruling authority such as the Church of England. However that is a far cry from what atheists are trying to do today be removing every aspect of religion from public life. They forget the part where it reads no law "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" ;
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
Simple words to understand unless someone wishes to subvert them for their own warped beliefs.
As to allowing change, yes they were visionary's enough to know societies evolve as times change. So they left a mechanism for us to do so, if the overwhelming majority of citizens wanted such change. So we can amend our Constitution if need be.
However liberals who know their kooky ideas will never be approved by any such large majority it takes to amend the Constitution, so they want to do an end around by having unelected liberal judges do it for them.
`
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
