Same-sex storks raising adopted chicks

In terms of "normal" or "natural," neither term applies to wild animals living in a zoo. Animal behavior changes in captivity.

I'm not knocking incidents of homosexual behavior in animals though. I believe a percentage exists in most, if not all, animals.

Reply

Whew! Thank goodness we don't need to have any discussion of gay marriage, traditional morality or any of that messy stuff.

Two pairs of storks sure shows how benighted all us traditional Christians and conservatives are.

/end sarcasm

Reply

Wow. Um. Is it hard to see with that plank in your eye, Occasus?

Reply

No, Occasus - two storks, some penguins, numerous apes, a few giraffes, any number of other animals...

Once they add up like that, they show how wrong screaming UNNATURAL!!!!!!!!! is, because it clearly *does* exist in nature.

If you still wish to make a case for *immoral*, you can try, though honestly, I think that God is probably more concerned with things like poverty, war, senseless death, and general unkindness to other humans than with the matter of whom you happen to enjoy having sex with.

Reply

It's not an issue of whether or not homosexuals are capable of raising a child. Sexual orientation has no impact on whether or not you can feed a child or teach a child, or in the case of humans, change a diaper. Homosexuals, just like heterosexuals, are capable of love and can make great parents.

It still remains unnatural, however, for homosexuality to result in the *conception* of a child.

Reply

It's funny how people care so much about the way someone else lives there life. It's not about you or what you think it's about someone elses happiness. Try focusing on your own life and If you have such a big problem with it then you have the abilty to decied who's apart of your life.

I think this is a great story and a great example

Reply

#5

If your last sentence is true, it must follow that any conception by other than the old fashioned way is unnatural.

That would include surrogates, in vitro, and sperm donors to infertile couples.

Was that what you intended to say?

Reply

Well, Ann, they *are* unnatural. And I'll be the first to say I'm stunned the day two lesbians or two gay men manage to have a child with both their genes, though I'm sure that day is coming along.

The question is: Is unnatural bad because it's unnatural?

Because that, my friends, is a whole can of worms I'm *sure* we don't want to be opening. There's entire chain letters on the subject.

Reply

Sure does doesn't it. I'm old enough to remember the uproar caused by the first test tube baby. Now it's ho-hum almost.

I'm sure you understood what I meant - that there are many paths to parenthood, not just one.

Reply

"No, Occasus - two storks, some penguins, numerous apes, a few giraffes, any number of other animals...

Once they add up like that, they show how wrong screaming UNNATURAL!!!!!!!!! is, because it clearly *does* exist in nature."

Never said it was unnatural. My comments pertain to the habit of condensing something as momentous and upending of traditional mores as gay adoption and marriage to what this post does - basically saying, "See, if birds/apes/etc do it, so can (and should) humans."

Man has the ability to rise above mere animality. We can choose what we do and don't do. I think there should be a discussion back and forth, not simplistic propaganda like this.

And thanks, Mir, but I'm quite clear on just how big the plank in my eye really is.

Reply