The "family debate"...

[brendala.livejournal.com]

I recently saw this article that trashed Mitt Romney and the Republicans' "family values" platform and said that it's invalid because the author's parents just happened to be abusive, unfit monsters.


I see this argument peddled out ALL THE TIME when the subjects of gay marriage and "traditional family values" come up and it just drives me up the wall! NOBODY on the right is claiming that ALL heterosexual married couples are inherently better suited to raise kids than ANY single mom or gay couple. And, if given the choice between handing an orphan off to Neil Patrick Harris or Phillip & Nancy Garrido, no right winger would ever choose to give the child to the crazy rapists just because they're straight and married.



Also, an anti-gay zealot could easily counter this with his own stupid "apples and oranges" story like:
"Would you rather give a baby boy to a stable, loving, well-to-do heterosexual couple? Or would you rather give that baby boy to one of the EEEEVILL, ASS-RAPING HOMOS OF NAMBLA!?!???!?"

BOTH arguments are pointless because they purposely use ridiculous 'would you rather...' examples instead of dealing with FACTS!

I'd go on, but Adam Carolla already said it better than I ever could (warning, the person who posted Carolla's rant to YouTube added some dumb images/music to it :P):

This article I linked to was a powerful and emotional story about being raised by a "traditional" married couple who had no business having children and the scars that child abuse leaves on a person's soul. However, the writer loses all credibility when she starts ranting about how her personal story COMPLETELY invalidates the argument that a child is better off with a mom and dad than in any other family arrangement. She doesn't seem to realize that her story can easily be refuted by rattling off random stories about gay people who molested/abused children in their care or by pulling up all the statistics that back up the belief that single motherhood is not a good environment for a kid to grow up in.


I'll copy the author of that article and use a personal example: I have a gay relative who is an abusive alcoholic. She has hurt nearly everyone in my family with her temper and overall crazyness. Does this one personal example mean that all lesbians are abusive alcoholics (and does it give me the right to label them as such)? Or is this just a personal anecdote that has no bearing on weather or not gayness is a good thing or a bad thing?

Comments

[lazypadawan.livejournal.com]

Gotta love the old strawman!

Of course a kid is better off with a stable, responsible gay pair than a dysfunctional, abusive, or irresponsible husband and wife team of terror. Duh! There are teen or single parents who do a magnificent job with their kids and married couples who are rotten parents. I think we all know that.

But in reality, you don't have to choose from those extremes most of the time. On average, moms and dads married to each other, under the same roof offer greater economic and emotional support to their kids, as well as greater safety, than any other kind of arrangement.

[brendala.livejournal.com]

Exactly. I know a lot of people who grew up in poverty and managed to have relatively happy childhoods. And I know a lot of people who grew up wealthy and had miserable childhoods.
But those extreme examples don't mean that living in poverty is just as good for a child as growing up in financial security.

The same goes for family situations. The fact that some teen and single moms manage to beat the odds and do a fantastic job doesn't change the fact that, overall, that situation is not ideal (and certainly not better than a child growing up with both parents).

[gotsparkly.livejournal.com]

The more I read, the more I think that the gay rights movement has an awful lot of people who are simply looking for public validation of their personal preferences, nothing more.

[neemarita.livejournal.com]

This. It is them wanting to feel normal and accepted for something that isn't normal. I don't care what you do, don't shove it in my face and demand I tell you how awesome you are, kthx

[gotsparkly.livejournal.com]

I don't care what you do, don't shove it in my face and demand I tell you how awesome you are, kthx

I shall love this statement and hug it and call it George, because

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS

[neemarita.livejournal.com]

Yup. I don't want to validate your choices. Being gay isn't normal, it's abnormal, and I don't care if you are or not. Big. Deal.

Can we have a Straight Pride Parade? :P

[ladyrogue79.livejournal.com]

Seriously. I mean, I was a gamer back in the 80s when it was mainly males playing games. I didn't constantly tell people "hey, I'm a female gamer! Aren't I cool?!" Why? Because I didn't care! It's not like I was going to be oppressed by the fact that video games were marketed towards males back then.

[brendala.livejournal.com]

The more I read, the more I think that the gay rights movement has an awful lot of people who are simply looking for public validation of their personal preferences, nothing more.

I think this is why you see a lot of people (mainly the obnoxious, white, Social Justice Warriors who hang in places like Tumblr) arguing that things like polyamory should NEVER be judged and should be given the same legal and social validity as traditional marriage. Even though plural marriages would be a legal clusterfark as far as inheritance and divorce laws go.

[neemarita.livejournal.com]

My parents were assholes and I still think family values are important. Cornerstone to our society. Period.

[brendala.livejournal.com]

Ditto. My personal bad experiences don't invalidate basic facts. More people need to grow up and realize this.

[jacobs-muse.livejournal.com]

Ditto.

[kabiosile.livejournal.com]

Ironically, homosexuals were very much opposed to civil unions in the recent past. They saw their inability to get married as a good thing.

What happened? I'm not entirely sure. I'm guessing they want the perks of marriage. It might also be a way of subverting marriage... as most consider it to be an appendage of capitalism.

As for the traditional family... yes, it's essential. But being a good parent requires sacrifice... something most leftists aren't capable of, imho.

[gotsparkly.livejournal.com]

Off-topic and sorry about this - I know some people here mentioned moving this community to dreamwidth? Did that ever happen?

[modernelegance.livejournal.com]

I crated a dreamwidth community, but have not moved anything yet.

[kc-anathema.livejournal.com]

I did try to watch the video provided, but the image of Hitler as a gay marriage advocate and the rant itself reminded me why I don't tend to go to comedians as spokespersons for anything serious. I did read the article from Salon, however--although why people would read Salon when its leftist slant is well known surprises me.

What's funny is that her article barely touches on gay marriage, but rather the facade of normal that a traditional family can provide. I know my parents both suffered abuse at the hands of their parents, but I have not suffered any at their hands, largely because of a conscious effort on their parts to break the cycle. And while we do and should champion this ideal of a stable, supportive relationship of two people, I don't think that the debate can be declared over simply because it is the current ideal.

There are many gay people who find same-sex marriage to be meaningless. There are many who don't. The reasons vary, but it would be disingenuous to think all gays supporting it do so for subversion's sake. And until we can all share in the same state sponsored contracts, I think you'll find that many gays continue to advocate loudly to achieve those goals, especially when slipping and using the wrong pronoun, forgetting to use "he" instead of "she" when asked about partners at home, is often still considered throwing it in people's faces.

[brendala.livejournal.com]

To be fair, the "gay hitler" image wasn't Carolla's doing. The person who uploaded the audio put it there. And I couldn't find another copy of that particular segment anywhere else online (and believe me, I looked). :P

The point of this post (at least for me) was to express frustration over the fact that left wingers flat out DENY that a stable, two-parent environment with heterosexual married parents is the best one for a kid to grow up in. They always throw out the "What if the heterosexual parents are violent child molesters!?" canard instead of refuting the facts.

[kc-anathema.livejournal.com]

To be fair, the image felt rather in tune with the rant itself, at least for me.

In any case, I think the quieter, more evenhanded voices on the other side, which do exist, will always be drowned out by the louder types throwing out the extreme examples, usually to match the louder types throwing out the extreme examples on the right. After all, facts can so easily be interpreted differently or to different outcomes. To be sure, a stable, attentive and loving two-parent household is ideal for bringing up children, but we can debate what makes up a stable, attentive and loving two-parent household. I think the debate itself is valuable, until the extremes become the debate.

[glo-unit.livejournal.com]

Thanks for this post.

[kc-anathema.livejournal.com]

Thanks :) At first I wasn't gonna reply to the OP, but then I figured I shouldn't let all of what was said just slide.

[agentverona.livejournal.com]

About family life: When I was younger, all my friends/classmates/teachers were always really freakin confused by the fact that my parents were still happily married (and have been for over 35 years). I was the weirdo kid who didn't understand things like 'a weekend at dads', and I didn't have an abusive parent, or a drunk dad. All my friends did, and they gave me plenty of shit for it. (though, I also got ALOT of shit for being straight. Like, ALOT. If you were gay or bi in my high school, you were the most popular person ever. I was the weirdo breeder whose parents still loved each other.) Ahh...California.

So on that note, even though I had a good home life, I know alot of people who didn't, and you can't generalize either way.

I'm very pro adoption, and I think that as long as the same sex couple or single parent has some kind of set up where the child can benefit from their opposite gender (does that make sense? because I think you should be exposed to male and female influences) then I have no problem with it. Kids don't care, they just want love.

[brendala.livejournal.com]

(though, I also got ALOT of shit for being straight. Like, ALOT. If you were gay or bi in my high school, you were the most popular person ever. I was the weirdo breeder whose parents still loved each other.) Ahh...California.

REALLY!? That seems extreme even for California (fyi,I grew up near San Bernardino). Did you live in Berkley or San Francisco?



I'm very pro adoption, and I think that as long as the same sex couple or single parent has some kind of set up where the child can benefit from their opposite gender (does that make sense? because I think you should be exposed to male and female influences) then I have no problem with it. Kids don't care, they just want love.

I don't believe that gays and singles should be barred from adoption because, sadly, there are lots of kids who need homes and not enough willing families to take them in. I just wish people could look past political correctness and realize that kids do need a male AND female influence in their lives and that the nuclear family set up is the best way to get it.

[agentverona.livejournal.com]

As a matter of fact, I live in a very VERY conservative town called Bakersfield. The problem was, that when we were all teenagers, all the dumb people decided that they needed to rebel against their conservative parents. And to rebel, they decided to be liberal and gay. It was alot like: "Oh my god, that girl is so totally pretty! OH! I must be a lesbian!" (Not an exaggeration.)

Honestly, for most of the little shits they were doing it as a fad, which really pissed off all the properly gay people I was friends with who had to do alot of soul searching to come to terms with that.

[brendala.livejournal.com]

Ah, that makes sense. Most liberals fancy themselves "radicals" who are sticking it to "The Man" (aka Mommy and Daddy).


"Oh my god, that girl is so totally pretty! OH! I must be a lesbian!" (Not an exaggeration.)

I knew girls like that, too. I met a lot of them when I lived in a dorm (they believed that making out with a chick while drunk at a party somehow made them ~*brave*~ activists who understood the plight of actual gay people).

[neemarita.livejournal.com]

A lot of kids in my high school acted and pretended to be gay to be popular. I am in Ventura County, which is fairly conservative. I think I knew only two gay guys out of the many girls who said they were lesbians (who are incidentally now married to men now that we are 25-27).

[sreya.livejournal.com]

What they don't understand about our arguments about marriage being undermined is that we DO see all these problems with marriages now and we were already worried about how things have been going with divorce and abuse and the like even before the gay marriage debate. Trying to shove that on our faces is yet another tear at the fabric because it's one more thing watering down what marriage is supposed to be. Honestly, I wouldn't care about "gay marriage" if marriage itself wasn't already in so much trouble, because I don't think it would gain as much traction.

[glo-unit.livejournal.com]

Actually some people do claim that a heterosexual married couple are better than a same-sex couple no matter what. In fact quite funnily Adam says this exactly before he says "all things being equal" a heterosexual married couple is better. In fact form of arguing wouldn't be used as often if arguments about gay people not being as good parents weren't so often used to deny gay people the right to adopt.