Why is there the limitation that it’s only between 2 tw citizens ? What’s the reasoning behind this ?
I presume the adoption clause is the way it is because they didn’t want to give them adoption rights, but they didn’t want it to happen either that the natural parents of the kid die and the only relatives alive are gay and unable to adopt
Very weird. Obviously put in to reflect the commonness of this practice in traditional Taiwanese society but very weird. Why would you want to link the two practices?
There are several issues with this act that stems from presuming same-sex couples are unable to have children.
The Executive Yuan presumed inability to have children and said people can have civil unions with closer kinship ties than heterosexual union.
While that is true to a certain degree for now, it will certainly not be the case in the future. There are already ways to coax stem cells to turn into sperm or eggs. People will be able to have children regardless of gender.
The Executive Yuan thought they were clever, but the reality is technology is already rendering their presumption moot and they’ve created more problems down the road for everybody.
This is a hard no for me and I’m sure it will not be accepted for many people. Adoption at least puts the interest of the children at heart giving them a home and such. But creating a child this way is clearly about the interest of the adults and not children. We have no idea what it means to do this and there’s no ethical means for them to test this that I know of.
Any idea what’s the background to limiting it to tw citizens ?
I have no idea. I’m dumbfounded… It’s like they deliberately sabotaged a perfect marriage law.
I’m reading two conflicting reports on this:
This article by a lawyer says people can marry non-Taiwanese under this version of the civil union act.
This article says it’s unclear, therefore might not be able to.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Similar experiments have already been going on for years. Coaxing stem cells into any type of cells is the dream for future transplants, generating blood for people with rare blood types and more. If successful, coaxing stem cells into sperm/egg would be beneficial to heterosexuals as well as same sex couples.
As for adoption, the current version already says same sex couples cannot adopt outside of their kinship. So they either have to get a kid from their relatives, or artificially conceive a child by finding a sperm donor or surrogate mother.
Every single person is born of a man and woman. It is completely in the interest of the adult to do this instead of how it may be for the child. I’m guessing it would also allow a kid to be born using a single persons DNA. Why is it the question is not should children have the right to have a biological mom and dad. Instead its should same sex couples have the right to make kids.
On the other hand there’s a fairly good argument that having solid responsible parenting from a committed gay couple is better than being raised in a broken home…
That’s not the argument here. We can agree it’s in the interest of the kid to have a stable home. And we have certain rights afforded to the kids like being safe in a home.
Are there any kids born for the interest of themselves instead of adults?
If there’s a higher risk of having deformities or genetic diseases, like what happens with couples with close kinship ties, then it shouldn’t happen.
If they can have a fairly high chances of having healthy children, I don’t see why not.
It is totally up to them to decide, just as having children is totally up to heterosexual couples to decide.
I don’t see why it has to be different for same sex couples.
They don’t take away children’s right to a biological mom and dad.
Do children have rights?
And if you’re a child. Do you really think you would feel you are able to freely express disagreements with the situation, or even as adults? Lots of reports of kids of same sex parents saying they felt tremendous pressure to agree even as adults to avoid back lash.
You mean the inteest of children is their right to biological mom and dad? Kids between the same sex couples may have the right to biological mom and mom, or dad and dad. They might have more rights than kids born by artificial insemination of donated sperm.
But they don’t have the right to be born from a mom and dad. Like all of us.
Why would that be a “right”? What’s the benefit? Kids clearly don’t have the right for their birth parents to be involved in their lives, as things stand now.
Men and women are biologically different genders, and gay couples by definition would not provide a man and a woman as parents. We also have a lot of evidence of the roles of or lack of the role of fathers and mother have on kids development.
Can we agree at least on the 2 things I said above?
That doesn’t mean gay couples cannot try to emulate the role model to a sufficient capacity. The difference, is that a gay couple must artificially create both role models whereas in heterosexual couples, it’s innate. Do heterosexual couples all do a good job, certainly not.
You add another of difficulty to the equation when both your biological parents are the same sex. You take away the possibility entirely of the kid ever having a both a biological mom and dad and the possibility to ever having that relationship. You can call it a right or not, but you do that that option completely off the table. Adopted kids have the ability to know who they are and who their biological parents are, although it is sometimes impossible due to death and lack of information. But there is a possibility. And it is entirely possible many kids would want a biological mom and dad. Is it right that they don’t have that?
they have the right to know who are their biological parents. Why should it be dad and mom?
Because they could want that. And every single person who is born has that. I would want that. If i’m born with same sex parents and feel this way, then what?