Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Found Our Son in the Subway

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 182 posts

Re: We Found Our Son in the Subway

#81

Post by gambiting »

apendleton wrote: post #68
natrius wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is a shame really. Someone's open-minded curiosity shouldn't be cast aside because of a hypothesis that is politically incorrect.

I consider "political correctness" to be the sort of back-bending linguistic contortionism typical of politicians and PR departments terrified of offending anyone. That's not what's going on here. I'm gay, and while I don't have children, the idea that, were I to adopt one, I'd risk sexually damaging said child with my gayness is offensive. Can you imagine the reaction there would be to someone asking a parallel ques…

There is nothing wrong with the question you asked. Absolutely nothing. We are intelligent, educated people - if we ask these questions, it's not because we want to ridicule people or offend them,but because we are genuinely curious. The other option would be to remain ignorant and not ask in the fear that this question might offend someone, which in my brain is just sick and wrong.

Re: We Found Our Son in the Subway

#82

Post by slurgfest »

natrius wrote: post #51
westward wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Does he have problem with his sexuality ? You may not be aware of this, but this question will likely get you downvoted as it will be perceived as homophobia (or at least heteronormativity).

Which is a shame really. Someone's open-minded curiosity shouldn't be cast aside because of a hypothesis that is politically incorrect.

Supposing that people are recruited into homosexuality by gay parents is not precisely described as "open-minded curiosity".

If we are going to be open-mindedly curious, then let's ask questions like what is the basis for imagining that being gay is a choice?

Re: We Found Our Son in the Subway

#83

Post by slurgfest »

mtinkerhess wrote: post #38
siscia wrote: post #30

Love the story. When we talk about gay marriage and adoption I always need to query a little more, especially about the kids. What's about Kevin ? His life is "perfectly normal" (how stupid is this expression) ? He is happy ? Does he have problem with his sexuality ? Do anybody have any experience to share ? Please to be obvious, in neither way... (Why this is on HN ? Well, because I believe that HN is one of the bes…

Parents are parents. Straight parents are parents. Gay parents are parents. There's no fundamental difference.

One of the implications of this "question" relies on the common belief that gay men are pedophiles and/or will teach gay sex to the children. In some people's heads, it's a matter of wicked, unclean gays corrupting the innocent children.

If nobody had such beliefs, then it is virtually impossible to understand why we would suppose that gay people are unfit as parents.

Re: We Found Our Son in the Subway

#84

Post by slurgfest »

gambiting wrote: post #81
apendleton wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I consider "political correctness" to be the sort of back-bending linguistic contortionism typical of politicians and PR departments terrified of offending anyone. That's not what's going on here. I'm gay, and while I don't have children, the idea that, were I to adopt one, I'd risk sexually damaging said child with my gayness is offensive. Can you imagine the reaction there would be to someone asking a parallel ques…

There is nothing wrong with the question you asked. Absolutely nothing. We are intelligent, educated people - if we ask these questions, it's not because we want to ridicule people or offend them,but because we are genuinely curious. The other option would be to remain ignorant and not ask in the fear that this question might offend someone, which in my brain is just sick and wrong.

But these are not randomly selected questions. To illustrate, consider if someone posted a story asking whether Jews were genetically disposed to be greedy. This could be dressed up quite a bit, and it's not impossible that this would very rarely be asked by someone without any social awareness. But there's a smart prior which says that someone asking such a question has a strong agenda and that the "just asking questions" bit is a smoke screen.

Re: We Found Our Son in the Subway

#85

Post by icebraining »

Mz wrote: post #77
ianstallings wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WTF is social hacking? Such a trendy, useless, word.

Figuring out effective social solutions. The article is a great example of the judge cutting through red tape, a gay couple getting a child without having to fight social crapola tooth and nail, and culminates with a gay marriage which couldn't have previously taken place but is now possible. Plus the couple used the marriage as an opportunity to give some closure to their adopted child. I think it is brilliant on se…

But where is the hacking? The judge just used her prorrogative to make (something great) happen.

Re: We Found Our Son in the Subway

#87

Post by icebraining »

ianstallings wrote: post #76
gruseom wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This site is for technical and business discussion. Where did you get that from? This site is for things that are interesting. This story is so unusual that it's interesting. Meta subthreads are not interesting.

I would have thought the word "Hacker" in the title would give away the fact that yes, it is in fact a site for technical discussions.

The guidelines say otherwise.

Re: We Found Our Son in the Subway

#88

Post by s_baby »

ianstallings wrote: post #72
Geekette wrote: post #44

Ugh. This yanked a couple of thug tears outta me. And for those wondering what place this has on HN, I actually read HN for interesting, often-not-technically-related news.

But there are plenty of other places for that and although these stories are heart warming I come here for technical articles and discussion. These stories just clog that up and keep other more technical stories deeper in the site.

So do posts like this one.

Re: We Found Our Son in the Subway

#89

Post by mcherm »

mtinkerhess wrote: post #4

Great story. Can someone explain why this belongs on HN?

It doesn't belong on HN. But I read it, and... well... I just could not help upvoting it. Sometimes a judge can abuse her powers, and we hear those stories from time to time. This time a judge used her powers to transform the world in a wonderful way.

Re: We Found Our Son in the Subway

#90

Post by ianstallings »

icebraining wrote: post #87
ianstallings wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have thought the word "Hacker" in the title would give away the fact that yes, it is in fact a site for technical discussions.

The guidelines say otherwise.

Well I stand corrected then. Continue on with your heart string party.
Post reply on HN