English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

are parents of gay children disappointed?especially if it is an only child and it would mean the end of the family line

2007-03-27 22:48:07 · 14 answers · asked by returnofkarlos 2 in Society & Culture Cultures & Groups Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender

14 answers

i think they are more shocked than disappointed!!!parents love there children no matter what!!!!!

2007-03-27 22:51:45 · answer #1 · answered by (,'')Sweet guy 3 · 0 0

Hi!

Maybe there is a level of disappointment about a gay child not being able to pass on the 'family genes', especially if the child has no brothers or sisters. Many parents probably are disappointed that they won't have grandchildren. But then, there's probably a lot of parents that only want their child to be happy. In my opinion, when you have a child it is because you want to raise a child of your own and give them all the love and support you can - the most important thing is making sure your child is happy. People should not have children because they someday hope to have grandchildren - I don't believe this is a natural human 'right'. You have the right to have children, but anything your children do is their own right and their own path.

When I came out to my parents, whilst they were not over the moon, the grandchildren thing never seemed to be an issue. Having said that, I do have a sister, so they did have a 'back up plan' !

Also, gay people can of course have children, whether through adoption or insemination. The family gene could still be passed on if the gay person had a child using a surrogate, or some such.

xx Emmie

2007-03-27 22:55:20 · answer #2 · answered by Sparklepop 6 · 2 1

Thakfully now the meaning of the word family has changed totally, starting with when people could adopt kids way back - no difference iof both parents are straight or gay. So the fmaily lione doesn't end, but the genetic one does. No difference to a family name either, I am the last in my line, changes when I get married in a few months.
All these concepts have changed.

2007-03-27 23:17:00 · answer #3 · answered by Unicornrider 7 · 1 0

you have a simplified and idealized image of ways DNA works. Iy is unlike pistons in an engine shifting a motor vehicle forward. that's an occasion of sturdy engineering, the place the coolest purchase is crucial and streamlined to suitable carry out its activity. Biochemistry, controlled via DNA is carefully distinctive. it particularly is disorganized, chaotic and almost thoroughly unrecognizable on the molecular point. it particularly is barely while great numbers of competing and conflicting reactions are averaged over thousands and thousands of examples does some thing like order form of percolate to the exterior. besides the undeniable fact that it particularly is order rising from chaos, no longer from the graceful working of a properly prepared software. and that's the clue that it is not designed yet lashed at the same time via trial and mistake. lots of blunders. So the case can better be made that existence progressed many outstanding characteristics reacting to the on an frequently happening basis trials of residing issues in ever changing environments. each and everything, chemically which would be tried, from any given genetic beginning factor, finally would be tried. the huge numbers of mess ups are discarded via loss of existence or sterility and the very few outstanding advances are retained and massively better and further experimented upon. This technique has easily no resemblance to what's happening in a twister or one billion tornadoes. that theory is your person straw guy, on no account what evolutionary theory is claiming. The Pope accepts the validity of evolutionary theory. it particularly is a shame the e book I suitable to, decrease than, is so high priced. however the Pope could have sufficient funds it. -- Regards, John Popelish

2016-10-20 02:59:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I wouldn't be disappointed. There have been gay people since the beginning of time. If I want someone to pass on my name, then I'll just adopt a child or have another. Or my gay child can adopt a child themself. I'd still consider it part of my family no matter what.

2007-03-27 22:52:09 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I think so yes. But only because I would love to have a grandchild, and not because my child would be gay. My brother is gay, and my parents are sad for him because he might not have any children of his own. But medical science makes it possible for him and his partner to have a child with a surrogate. So I think it depends on the particular family and this question cannot be answered in general.

2007-03-27 23:07:34 · answer #6 · answered by feel_like 2 · 0 1

My Mum was a little disappointed when I told her I am gay. My brother and sister have given mum grand children. She accepts the fact that I'm gay and we get on really well.

2007-03-31 05:41:46 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

sure, i think there's disappointment, shock, probably anger. but i also think a lot of parents get over it, too. when i came out to my mom, she was very disappointed. but...she dealt with it and it didn't bother her anymore. i guess it would be the same if your children were straight and sterile. or if your grandkids pass away. crap might happen but happiness is a choice.
i once heard a guy explain his parents called him selfish for "choosing to be gay". that's bs, but it was followed with how they were "living" for grandchildren to take care of, and that their lives were changed forever. I"m sorry, but if you belong in the group that "lives for grandchildren", you seriously need to get a life. no one's happiness should depend on the actions of others, and no one is entitled to anything in life other than what they provide for themselves. everything else is just gravy.

2007-03-28 02:40:27 · answer #8 · answered by Jnr528 5 · 0 0

When did that become a basic human need??

2007-03-28 04:50:05 · answer #9 · answered by jasgallo 5 · 0 0

Being gay doesn't mean that your reproductive organs don't work!! I'm gay & I have a child.

2007-03-28 11:51:13 · answer #10 · answered by munki 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers