Jahanshah Javid

Gay adoption

Thanks Ben. You said, "Two men cannot have children, nor can two women. So, two same-sex parents raising children is unnatural."

I guess we have to figure out what is "natural" or "unnatural". The union of a man and and a man, or a woman and a woman, is as natural as of a man and a woman.

Homosexuality has always existed along with heterosexuality. That's as natural as it gets.

When a married man and woman cannot have children of their own in a natural way, they adopt. So why not two women or two men?

Kids need food, shelter and love. And they can get it from a mother and father, or just a mother, or just a father, or two fathers, or two mothers!

This is getting complicated.

Ben, I think as far as adoption and "not being able to", well married men and women are usually "not able to" that they adopt.  So this will go both ways.  As far as rights of children, as long as they are loved, that's enough for them.  Marg mikhan berand ghiyas abad!

Maybe we should have another "constitutional hall" and try to figure out how the custody should work, like do married gay couples need a prenuptual agreement about who'll get the custody since the current law goes for mothers first? Would that mean that gays are discriminated against because of a "required" prenup? If it is not discrimination then is it a priviledge or special right just for them? Then does that mean "all men" are NOT created equal?! What about lesbians?

Of course gay marriage is my business

That is, if marriage were what it is suppose to be.

Ben Madadi got it right.

The fact that JJ and others here immediately and exclusively think about sex when considering marriage is testimony to how far marriage has come from its real and just intent. And it is very easy to show the inconsistency in their reasoning. The same state that has made gay marriage legal has laws against incest and polygamy. If gay marriage should be recognized on the basis that sexual practices is the business of the couple and no one else's then why should marraige between a father and a daughter or a brother and sister be frowned upon or worst yet made illegal? Why are you not defending that?

Rather this is what marriage was intended to be and should be:

A society is not static. It must get new members or it will die. Entry of new members is everyone's business and it will affect every individual in time. Marriage is not just a contract between a couple but a three way contract between a couple and the society whereby the society entrusts and protects the couple to raise new members for the society. This is primary done through having children but also may be through adopting. This is why marriage needs to be recognized by the society. No one is interested in my contract with my gardner for his care of my garden in contrast. Such a contract between the couple and society has a name and it is called marriage. Now, there is nothing magical about the name. You can call it googgo for all I care. Nevertheless, such is different than the sexual activity of a couple that yes is their own business and no has the right to coercively stick his nose where it is not his business.

Why should gay couples wish to force the society to recognize their marriage if they do not want to?

Come On JJ ;0)

Come On Jahanshah,

I do agree on the issue of equal rights for Gays or any other minority ( although they are tending to become a majority these days) to love and be loved. However I don't think that homosexuality (or BiSexuality) as such is a "natural' behaviour. By that I don't mean it is not "humane" for homosexuality is as old as humanity. But to claim that it is a "natural" behaviour is absurd.

In that case why not accept incest, zoophilia and anyother form of sexual behavior as a "norm" in the name of brotherly and sisterly love and rights ?

Is Homosexuality perverted sex ? Certainly Not but Incest and zoophilia yes. But Be Honest about this issue at least for those of my generation ( 40 Upwards) and the fact is that had it not been for AIDS and the tragedy it involved and still involves to see that the simple act of love making could lead to death, None of us honestly would come to admit that homosexuality was an act to be tolerated or understood. As a matter of fact most men regarded homosexuality as a threat to their own masculanity and would openly make fun of anyone with such a behavior. I personally was shocked when I found out that Rock Hudson was Gay. I loved the actor and still do and I got to admire his guts for admitting that fact (which was one of the most well kept secrets in Hollywood) and also drawing attention and empathy on AIDS victimes but I can't claim that I had a mindset prepared to accept Rock Hudson's homosexuality as a "normal" one.

Hollywood but also the theater are filled with Gay Talents and many were and are remarkeable artists: Sir Laurence Olivier, Charles Laughton, Marlene Dietrich, Raymond Burr, Sir John Guilguld to name a few. Others from Ava Gardner to Sharone Stone have flirted with Bisexuality.

But Come On don't tell me you think that until recently people at large considered homosexuality as a natural 'behavior'. Fortunately this segregation and intolerant attitude towards homosexuals has evolved in most progressive and modern societies and I entirely endorse. We now come to admit that being Gay is not a mental disease as the Nazi's who sent many to the Gas Chambers in the same horrible way they exterminated Jews, Gypsies and mentally or physically disabled people. Society needed and continues to need to evolve towards accepting differences and from that point of view I do not see why Gay people should not be allowed to get married and live togather.

I don't think however that this recognition is not without its share of problems when it comes to living in a collectivity that is in society. We know that racism is a bad thing so we try to fight it or at least most try to fight this flaw more or less with sincerity. However one cannot deny that cultural and racial differences do exist and that they can in some circumstances create conflict. Whether this conflict is a good or bad thing is another debate but what cannot be denied is these conflicts do exist.

The same will go with Gay marriages that could lead to acknowledging other rights to such minorities as the right to adopt children.

Is adoption of kids by Gay couples something that should be accepted ? I have no definitive answer to this question for a Gay couple may well love and care for a child much more than a torn couple where the father beats his wife ( or vice versa) or drinks or has anyother shortcoming. The point of the matter however is whether such an adoption would alter or not or even threaten a childs sexual identity.

I think all human societies need "norms" it may sound backword in today's so called "liberal" terms but pro-creation is what has guaranteed the human species to thrive. The notion of "Family" is a sexual notion. It was and is built by the union ( not just spiritual but physical) of a Man and a Women. That leads to Kids. That this can be done "in vitro" thanks to medical and scientific progress does not mean that it does not also carry its share of ethical issues very much as contraception did in the 60's and 70's.

I don't think that we can avoid the issue of Gay adoption and parenthood once the Gay community is given the right to marriage and thus equal rights. However I cannot claim that ALL societies are prepared to such liberalizations nor that reaching such levels of tolerance is such an easy going process.

Religion whether we like it or not has shaped most human societies over not just a decade but for centuries. It largely considers homosexuality very wrongly as immoral and even un natural and a sin ( even if homosexuality exists in all communities including in the clergy ). But to want to replace or substitute what has shaped human mindest and behavior at large for over milleniums by laws adequate to a more marginal or more accurately a minority seems to be a regression rather than progress.

Isn't Democracy about the rule of the majority after all ? What will happen when heterosexuality will be superseded by homosexuality in human society ? That may never happen you may say BUT philisophically the question deserves an answer.

Mankind ( Notice the use of the word "Man" ) has hardly been able to give equal rights to Women even in our so-called "progressive" and "modern" be it in terms of salary and we are already worried about Gay rights !

Let me be clear about this : I don't claim to be right nor do I claim to have the adequate answer to this issue but honesty and sincerity on the question from a heterosexual point of view ( If that is I am given the right to be or think of myself as a heterosexual these days  ;0) ) tempts me to think that we are simply endorsing Gay marriage only to counter our intolerant behavior towards a community that deserves respect and understanding and not because we truly consider homosexuality as a natural behavior. Also another hypocrisy is when the liberal left often endorses Gay Rights as if they had the monopoly of a kind of democratic mindset. What does Gay Rights have to do with being Left Wing or Right Wing in Politics ? I don't know who you mean by the Iranian Opposition leader in question but I think its an easy shot at who ever that person is.

I simply think that acknowledging Gay Marriages will certainly contribute to enhancing a necessary level of tolerance in society but like every social change ( necessary or not) it will also bring its share of problems that can only be solved in a civilized manner if Society at large can accept and be mature enough to accept it as a "norm" or just behavior.

I doubt humanity is as perfect to accept such social changes without its share of difficulties.

The role of the intellegenstia is not just to clap hands for any kind of radical change in society but to also underline and predict the difficulties it will trigger off.

I suppose Orson Welles summarized it best in this narration:

"Too Much Freedom leads to disorder"

See video: The River of Freedom

I sometimes come to think that the Western World and civilization with its share of great universal values is nevertheless looking more like the Roman Empire crumbling under promiscuity, orgies and corruption by reducing its role models to the likes of untalented Paris Hilton and nevertheless talented but emotionally confused Amy Whinehouse and their regular rehabs instead of offering them more constructive and positive people in society.  

"The River of Freedom is in our hands"

Good Ol' Orson was right !

My humble opinion,

DK

Re:

Well, I don't know. I am not saying they shouldn't, but I'm not sure they should. Having children requires a man and a woman. Two men cannot have children, nor can two women. So, two same-sex parents rasing children is unnatural, and it has nothing to do with freedom, because here we are talking about children, and their rights, who are also human beings. I think free men, and women, should be able to do whatever they like with each other, including marrying. But I am not so sure about adopting children. Not that the children would become gay, no, but simply that when they cannot have children naturally, then maybe they are not supposed to have children!?!? It's not about their rights any more but about the child's rights. Well, I don't know!!!

Adoption

JJ I think Ben is talking about custody of the children, although he can speak for himself.  In American custody is given to the mother after a divorce, in Iran given to the father.  Who'll have the custody after divorce? How does that work?!

Adoption

Thanks Ben.

What about adoption? You mean gay/lesbian couples should not be allowed to adopt children? Why not? Will the homosexual parents force or encourage their adopted children to become gay?

The questions could imply that sexual preference is shaped by parents. But the fact is that you are either born gay or heterosexual or something in the middle -- or not. Parents or people and society do not create the hormones that make men or women attractive to me and you.

There may also be concerns about sexual abuse of children and minors by gay/lesbian parents. Why? Is it that we think gay men are more likely to abuse ther sons (natural or adopted)? It's a myth.

Sexual abuse has nothing to do with whether your parents are gay or not. Watch TV news and often you will hear about "straight" fathers being charged and sent to prison for sexually abusing their children.

Maybe we should stop heterosexuals from adopting children :o)

I agree

All people should have the Right to be equal in the eyes of the law, no exceptions.

In the case of "Iranian opposition", nothing is funnier than these sad bunch!

We have long ways to go...

Even the most liberal intellectuals of our country would have a problem with personal freedoms and the concept of "live and let live"!

It takes a conscious effort for most of us to be able to keep an open mind about a lot of issues. Could it be fear of the unknown, anxiety over change or just plain prejudice and traditionalism? who knows, we're just the type of people who keep looking back a lot, not watching where we're supposed to be going.

We're not that bad when you consider how slow the Americans are progressing in that aspect.

IRANdokht

Writing yet another constitution for Iran

Is as gay as it gets! That should have given out that he is a closet gay person like Senator Larry Craig. 

Larry Craig got his fix in men's bathroom stalls (while fighting gay rights) and this guy was getting his in the Constitutional halls!

What about adopting children?!

???

I never understood what the fuss is about

I'm not interested in other people's sexual practises, nor do I care if they get married or they don't or whatever.
It's only "the spiritual" who are so obsessed with other people's genitalia.

Sareshoon to koone hamast.;)