Having two gay parents will cause a dysfunctional family

[Saro1020]

I think people misunderstood my stance. I never said the child would be dysfunctional but merely stated by definition it would be a dysfunctional family regardless of actions

At Unbiased:
By definition there is no such thing as normal. What people assume is normal is only relative to their personal experiences. Therefore what is dysfunction to some may not be to others. This means that in fact all homes are dysfunction relative to any other given home because no two environments will be the same and thus the experiences had will differ. So until you can give a functional definition of what a normal home might be you can not say what a normal home is not. Such a definition would have to encompass what is a true understanding of what growing up in a home is. Such a definition, though it might seem simple to create, is impossible to provide. This falsifies the premise of your argument, though I do in fact like your initial logic.

Until you can provide a sound justification of what a normal house hold to grow up in is, you can not state what isn't other than through relative means. But this doesn't factor in everyone's experiences, just your own.

 

[Unbiased]

At Unbiased:
By definition there is no such thing as normal. What people assume is normal is only relative to their personal experiences. Therefore what is dysfunction to some may not be to others. This means that in fact all homes are dysfunction relative to any other given home because no two environments will be the same and thus the experiences had will differ. So until you can give a functional definition of what a normal home might be you can not say what a normal home is not. Such a definition would have to encompass what is a true understanding of what growing up in a home is. Such a definition, though it might seem simple to create, is impossible to provide. This falsifies the premise of your argument, though I do in fact like your initial logic.

Until you can provide a sound justification of what a normal house hold to grow up in is, you can not state what isn't other than through relative means. But this doesn't factor in everyone's experiences, just your own.

yay a debater. According to my countries normal household a normal family id two opposite gender parents with a kid

 

[Shinobi Train]

that's garbage I wanted a debate I bet half the posters didn't even read it and comprehended my stance[/QUOTE]

Oh, I do, you're just saying that the family, by definition, is dysfunctional. One of "parents" is not biologically the parent of the child even if another is, and most likely neither are. However, this is a site filled with very young, very immature and very uneducated people...debate is impossible. xd

 

[Unbiased]

that's garbage I wanted a debate I bet half the posters didn't even read it and comprehended my stance

Oh, I do, you're just saying that the family, by definition, is dysfunctional. One of "parents" is not biologically the parent of the child even if another is, and most likely neither are. However, this is a site filled with very young, very immature and very uneducated people...debate is impossible. xd[/QUOTE]



man that sucks a lot of these people are good at debating well not alot but there's a good portion

 

[Elio]

like I said prior I wanted a debate. The majority of my threads involve debating.

A debate on what? Whether or not it's normal?

What do you call normal? If you say a pair of heterosexual parents is normal then that's normal to you. :shrug:

 

[Unbiased]

No...the chance of gays catching STD's is slightly higher than straight couples. The chance of a baby having a birth defect is MUCH higher in the case of incest than with a non genetically related couple. But as Hipster Madara said, incest isn't illegal, just frowned upon.

EDIT: Scratch that, it is illegal. Just not an easy law to enforce.

well my point is that they can't get married even though it's two consenting adults

 

[Unbiased]

A debate on what? Whether or not it's normal?

What do you call normal? If you say a pair of heterosexual parents is normal then that's normal to you. :shrug:

that's normal in my country. for me personally I didn't have two parents lol

 

[Shinobi Train]

man that sucks a lot of these people are good at debating well not alot but there's a good portion

That's how it goes though, controversial topics are just blasted and no one is actually able to debate even if they want to. On the bright side, it looks like it's calmed down now kinda', but will probably be closed anyway. U_U

 

[Unbiased]

That's how it goes though, controversial topics are just blasted and no one is actually able to debate even if they want to. On the bright side, it looks like it's calmed down now kinda', but will probably be closed anyway. U_U

more then likely. Even though I didn't intend on offending anyone apparently people misunderstood the topic or didn't even read it.

 

[Saro1020]

yay a debater. According to my countries normal household a normal family id two opposite gender parents with a kid

The issue with that definition is it is still limiting. You say it's considered a normal household in your country, but a normal household in some Native American (the Lakota to be specific) cultures involved a third Gender type. These were biological men but played a different role within the society and culture and would take husbands. In this culture it is relatively normal for a household to consist of same biological *** families.

 

[Unbiased]

The issue with that definition is it is still limiting. You say it's considered a normal household in your country, but a normal household in some Native American (the Lakota to be specific) cultures involved a third Gender type. These were biological men but played a different role within the society and culture and would take husbands. In this culture it is relatively normal for a household to consist of same biological *** families.

I see your point. No where in the world can something be culturally accepted. I do believe that for many tribes of people a normal family was two opposite gender parents. Maybe that's where the issues are derived from.

 

[amsy]

a quest for hot/popular thread....and it totally worked am sooo jealous ryt now though such a thread is some how Unnesessary at NB

 

[Saro1020]

At Unbiased:

What I'm trying to say is this: You can't claim something is normal or not normal. Because to do so you must first determine what is right and what isn't right. In this situation there is no fundamentally right or wrong way in which a home can function and exist in the world, as compared to saying that murder is right or wrong. Given this it means that you, by your definition of dysfunctional, have to list all households as dysfunctional or no household as dysfunctional. But even this puts a "right or wrong" spin on the situation. Of which there is none because as I've previously stated to determine whether some is right or wrong your looking at it from a individualistic view or a society view. These views are limiting in nature and in some cases (such as this one) attempt to force things into a black or white understanding.

 

[amsy]

At Unbiased:

What I'm trying to say is this: You can't claim something is normal or not normal. Because to do so you must first determine what is right and what isn't right. In this situation there is no fundamentally right or wrong way in which a home can function and exist in the world, as compared to saying that murder is right or wrong. Given this it means that you, by your definition of dysfunctional, have to list all households as dysfunctional or no household as dysfunctional. But even this puts a "right or wrong" spin on the situation. Of which there is none because as I've previously stated to determine whether some is right or wrong your looking at it from a individualistic view or a society view. These views are limiting in nature and in some cases (such as this one) attempt to force things into a black or white understanding.

well, one can chose what he belives and live the consequences him/herself

 

[Unbiased]

QUOTE=Saro1020;8878254]At Unbiased:

What I'm trying to say is this: You can't claim something is normal or not normal. Because to do so you must first determine what is right and what isn't right. In this situation there is no fundamentally right or wrong way in which a home can function and exist in the world, as compared to saying that murder is right or wrong. Given this it means that you, by your definition of dysfunctional, have to list all households as dysfunctional or no household as dysfunctional. But even this puts a "right or wrong" spin on the situation. Of which there is none because as I've previously stated to determine whether some is right or wrong your looking at it from a individualistic view or a society view. These views are limiting in nature and in some cases (such as this one) attempt to force things into a black or white understanding.[/QUOTE]

Everything must be taken to it's most basic forms then. The basic fundamental aspects of life are to survive and reproduce. If you cannot reproduce (meaning physically incapable) it isn't normal. Wouldn't that nullify homosexuality as something not normal?

 

[Saro1020]

QUOTE=Saro1020;8878254]Everything must be taken to it's most basic forms then. The basic fundamental aspects of life are to survive and reproduce. If you cannot reproduce (meaning physically incapable) it isn't normal. Wouldn't that nullify homosexuality as something not normal?

Ah, but you see that would be taking my statement to an overly extreme level. What I was trying to say was more, the characteristics of a home vary. When looking at characteristics there is not set in stone scheme to follow to make the correct home. The idea is that there isn't any way to truly define it even though you understand what it is. For example: Imagine a wood chair. Now when you thought of that chair what was the first thing that you thought of? 4 legs, a base to sit on and a back, I assume (though could be wrong). Now if I was to say define a wood chair. Would you just say something to sit on? Think now if you would, how accurate such a view would be of a wood chair and it's definition. In fact you have multiple possibilities when describing such a chair rather than the stereotypical one I suggested. As well as there are so many different things that you can also sit on (i.e. couch, floor, beanbag, bike sit, etc). So when thinking about a home, try to think of it again as if it was a wood chair.

There are multiple ways to define it, and any description of such a home would fall short because there are other things that could achieve the same purpose and not fall under said definition.

 

[Unbiased]

Ah, but you see that would be taking my statement to an overly extreme level. What I was trying to say was more, the characteristics of a home vary. When looking at characteristics there is not set in stone scheme to follow to make the correct home. The idea is that there isn't any way to truly define it even though you understand what it is. For example: Imagine a wood chair. Now when you thought of that chair what was the first thing that you thought of? 4 legs, a base to sit on and a back, I assume (though could be wrong). Now if I was to say define a wood chair. Would you just say something to sit on? Think now if you would, how accurate such a view would be of a wood chair and it's definition. In fact you have multiple possibilities when describing such a chair rather than the stereotypical one I suggested. As well as there are so many different things that you can also sit on (i.e. couch, floor, beanbag, bike sit, etc). So when thinking about a home, try to think of it again as if it was a wood chair.

There are multiple ways to define it, and any description of such a home would fall short because there are other things that could achieve the same purpose and not fall under said definition.

I know when I'm beaten you win. However what did you think of the two basic fundamentals of life?

 

[shadowcage]

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm why?

 

[Saro1020]

At Unbiased:

Please note, I'm not trying to argue for or against homosexual house holds or not. Though I morally see nothing wrong with homosexual house or their ability to provide stable environments for children, I was more concerned with your actual argument that you laid out rather than the statement you were trying to make. I felt your core argument flawed. I've enjoyed this immensely to be honest.

 

[Saro1020]

I know when I'm beaten you win. However what did you think of the two basic fundamentals of life?

I felt your leap to that conclusion was very pushed and I honestly had multiple arguments I wanted to use, but digressed back and choose to retain the primary argument as the discussion base.