Gay Parenting In Ireland: The Reality

by hmmmmmmmm - should obese people adopt thin children? Wed Dec 14, 2005 16:39

has invited Mc Dowell to consider an equivalent to the PACS law in france, which is itself under review as those who proposed it and opposed it now want to change it yet again to bring it into line with the Spanish law, which is the most liberal in Europe and perhaps hasn't turned heads in the USA.
http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=70883
And I thought the recent UK decision to allow such partnerships in the NI statelet first, would be accompanied by the Irish government making adjustments to the Bunreacht so as to continue the "all ireland" fudge.

I suppose someday we'll look at the issues of fat people being allowed to adopt kids without fat genes or people with chronic adiction genes being allowed to adopt kids with the genes of sobriety. but we'll have to wait for that kind of progress. I hope we make it though.

And before anyone dismisses that as offensive, let us be quite clear, that under the PACS and other jurisprudence mechanisms allowing people of the same sex to marry, the definition of "sexuality" has been left out.

Coz we can't define it legally. Unless we define it scientifically. & that means "genes".
And I for one will be very dismayed if in the search for "rights" the LGBT "community" opens the door on Genetic selection and sooner or later we get to....

The Question should people carrying the obesity-mental retardation-delayed puberty-macroorchidism-acanthosis nigricans-hyperinsulinemia syndrome gene
be allowed to adopt children, or celebrate civil marriage unions or even encouraged to form stable loving and committed relationships considering it touches on several areas of morality and ethics and public health.

Can we imagine the sort of homelife a child without the obesity-mental retardation-delayed puberty-macroorchidism-acanthosis nigricans-hyperinsulinemia syndrome gene would experience, constantly being expected to sit on the sofa and eat junk food?

But in the absence of any specific scriptural guidance on genetic inheritance or established occidental jurisprudence due to unfortuanate incidents with the papyri going up in smoke, might it be too phariseeiac (they didn't go away) to suggest that people with obesity-mental retardation-delayed puberty-macroorchidism-acanthosis nigricans-hyperinsulinemia syndrome genes only be allowed to adopt children with obesity-mental retardation-delayed puberty-macroorchidism-acanthosis nigricans-hyperinsulinemia syndrome genes.

do you really want to trust Mc Dowell with this one?

by Paddy - Consistent life ethic(inc animals) Thu Dec 15, 2005 18:56 achorusline19 at hotmail dot com

Ive no interest at present of getting married,even in fabulous soho in february my birthday,i know lots of lesbian couples in Ireland with kids,and am considering donating to a single lesbian lady looking for a donor,but id want a fair bit of input in the childs life,even if the lady gets married,thats fine,money and love will still be their for that gift of a child!!IM only going to be 22 in feb,but sowhat!!

by sidhbhra - Alternative Parents Ireland Fri Dec 16, 2005 13:17 sidhbhra at gmail dot com

... of a lesbian getting married in Ireland Paddy so you're safe enough in that regard. You should join the mailing list accessible from API www.alternativeparents.com and make your proposal there. API are always looking for donors and coparents.

by Jimmy Tue Dec 20, 2005 16:28

I dont think this will happen in Ireland judging from an independent point of view.

by sidhbhra Wed Dec 21, 2005 09:51

...indeed as lesbians would be united in a civil ceremony and would not be "marriage" which is mostly regarded as a religious heterosexual institution with all its nonsense.

by orphan child Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:19

And offering the opinion that the Irish constitution may not afford equal protection to _non-married_ couples.
Well fear not, for there is movement across Europe's rightwing parties and ideologues on the same question.
We may see this is as a reaction to progress made for minority same sex relationship recognition varying from full "legal equality" to other types of law. Or it may be influence of Ratzinger. Or it may just be something they put in the water. Anyway, today's Libération France's daily left newspaper outlines the debate within the ruling French right wing part UMF at the publication of their "100 points for the family". Not only fo the french right expect their families to have children, but they also expect them to have two parents with different genitalia. They also expect them to pay tax, not complain, and not get to uppity about religious symbols. They'd also like it if these families disciplined their kids and taught them not to burn other peoples' cars.

i swear the right is getting loonier.
http://libe.com/page.php?Article=354139

by The Child Thu Jan 26, 2006 14:43

The rights that come first in this situation are those of the intended child, surely? The account above is written from the first person perspective of the woman 'wanting' a child as though that was all there was to justifying having one.

This isn't a question of whether a child can be adequately looked after, its a question of doing what's right for it. Children can't naturally be born except by male and female sexual realtions. This is way more than a mere technicality. Is there not a deeply psychological and spiritual dimension to the process and isnt it mainfestly a heterosexual function? No one alive can honestly deny they need to know they were the result of a well-motivated union of their father and mother. It's hugely important to us.

What a preposterous idea to reduce the process to something so devoid of meaning as scraping semen out of a yoghurt carton and inseminating yourself in a toilet. Rather than feeling sympathy for the narrators tribulations, I'm struck by the latent absurdity of it , as much as anything else. Wouldn't any sane person be saying 'what the hell am I doing here? This can't be right!' If heterosexuality is not in my nature, why am I involved in this ludicrous imitation of it?' To pretend the reality of that moment is umimportant is seriously delusional.

What will be the longterm damage to people who are brought into the world by such unnatural means? Sure, it's true that many children of heterosexual couples may not be born for the best of reasons either but that can't be a justification for pretending you are procreating in a way which is actually impossible (male/male female/female). I dont intend any censure of homosexuality itself by this or to doubt that homosexual couples can be considerate and caring about children. But it is leaving the whole dimension of who and what we are completely out of the equation - a fundamental denial of the true nature of the intended child. We need to be born of committed parents of both sexes and to be cared for by them as we grow up in order to understand the world of people around us. Heterosexual parents are not just models of a particular type of sexuality, its about much more than that.

The nature of homosexuality precludes having children, by definition. Why do some homosexuals aspire to the characteristics of heterosexual relations (marriage and children) if they are so sure of their natural orientation? Isn't it a sort of betrayal? Don't we need to respect that model of relationship in all its own unique characteristics. It's like women believing they are liberating themselves from sexism by imitating men.

by child eile Thu Jan 26, 2006 20:34

One homosexual parenting does not preclude homosexual procreation. In Spain since the simple addition of a phrase "marriage will be equally valid regardless of the gender of partners", those couples who have succesfully applied for and won adoption rights over their children, count on one natural parent of the child. To put it simply, mammy thought she was straight and had a baby, now she knows she's not straight, and has a loving committed and stable relationship we term marriage, and her partner has equal responsibility of wardship for _their child_.

Quite honestly sexuality is not so black and white at whatever end of the scale you look.
& though the belief that children are best "with two parents one of either gender" is widespread it is not the only opinion in our society today, nor properly reflects the changes in our society over the last 40 years.

There are as many fulfilled individuals who grew up in single parent homes as there are those who were adopted as those who grew up in nuclear families or earlier "established norms" - the extended family.

I believe you're overly sentimental in hoping that all people alive are the result of planned conception and gave nothing but joy to their parents. But those are your opinions and this debate needs mutual respect to be established by all who enter into it.

by R. Isible Fri Jan 27, 2006 04:31

QUOTE: Children can't naturally be born except by male and female sexual realtions.

Are you implying that there's something un-natural about masturbating into a clean vessel, then a friend using a turkey baster (syringe with a bulb on the end) to collect the semen and then insert it into herself? (Note, if you're trying this at home: it's important to use a syringe with a wide aperture and to suck in and squeeze out the sperm slowly, otherwise there's a chance they'll be damaged by sheer forces.)

Or are you saying that the above act is "male and female sexual relations"?

by asef Sat Feb 25, 2006 18:18

The poor guy above using the "it's not natural" argument should be made aware that such an argument is ridiculous. By the same argument it can be said that pretty much all of medecin is not natural. While perhaps the good writer might like to deny thamselves such unnatuaral things I would hold on to such things as antibiotics, vaccines and clean water and keep those neglecting such things far away from me.

Defining natural is next to impossible.
Defining it as that which humans have not has significant input into is not useful as we see by medicines's inclusion.
Defining it as a subjective assesment of what things appear designed for is not useful since, especially with life, the things alter as they are used for different purposes and so any design or intent seen within is an illusion and completely subjective.
Defining natural as that which exists in the natural world is a good definition, I believe, but since homosexual parenting clearly does exist it is as natural as anything else which exists.

Expansion of the argument put forward by such appeals to nature in this context would mean all infertile couples being blocked from parenthood -clearly ridiculous.

by Bill Tue Feb 28, 2006 23:49

I work in Ireland and got bereavement leave on the death of my partner and compassionate leave before. It depends on the employer.

I think the treatment of the grandparents in this article isterrible. What about the child's right to a relationship with it's grandparents? The writer's argument with her parents is her business but it seems strange to deny the child a relationship with them - it's like punishing them by using the child.

by thinkofthekids Sat Mar 25, 2006 14:37

As I read this I wondered who exactly the child was. The author makes a valid point about equality of recognition, but couches it in a level of vitriol towards her parents that is very telling. She believes having a child makes her 'a complete adult' - that was a disturbing thing to read.
It's sad really.
The Leaving Cert. level of writing (look Mommy I know big words) lessens any point she is trying to make.
Has the author given up on answering her critics? Are the toys out of the pram?

by Gay Geori Sat Mar 25, 2006 14:55

Rights of Gay Parents? Just look at the rights of fathers (i.e., dads, not priest) in hetero marriage.... total disgrace. women have it all their own way in courts. thank god for John Waters and David Norris to voice all these issues...

by James Mon May 29, 2006 01:36

How many times is this person going to tell her sorry tale in the national media?
We've had it here, in the Sunday Tribune, on Newstalk radio and now in Ireland on Sunday.
We get it - you're spoilt, you hate your parents - now please give us all a rest from it all and go mind your child.

by sidhbhra - API Mon Jul 03, 2006 13:12

...tend to defend their own complexes lest someone destroy them behind their backs, "James" child. The IOS was a dreadful reportage but then I was accosted outside my own house by them. It is interesting to see that you however read it which proves a valuable point. This is not only "my" story but that of hundreds of other Irish gay parents who are doing the same thing. Heightening awareness of what we are doing and will continue to do on this small island is the best thing for the progress of society as a whole . You and your conscience will have to get a room.

by factoid Mon Jul 03, 2006 18:16

The simplest and most liberal gay marriage & adoption law change in the world.
Thousands of people got married but only 50 families applied for adoption. & interestingly 3 suits have been filed for divorce and the first one has passed. People are a bit bemused at the reasons cited in the first divorce case, the plaintiff said he had been treated "like a housewife".

Obviously all those who benefit from liberal laws aren't liberal and all those who benefit from gender political progress are not incapable of sexism.