It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should Gays be allowed to adopt?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 02:30 PM
link   
John Bull: yes, I am open-minded, but the butt plug discussion could not be an indication of that, since I have no interest in partaking in it.

I have to WHOLEHEARTEDLY disagree that we can't blame society for the stigma placed upon homosexuals. Society is the very SOURCE of that stigma.

I have yet to see any valid arguments here based on sociological, psychological or physiological fact. I see a lot of opinions based on tradition or biblical interpretations, but they just don't cut the mustard. If we can approach this without that cloud of "morality," and look at the facts, I think we've lost all reason to debate the obvious: there's no good reason to keep children out of loving homosexual homes, except that it makes some people squirm.

"Spend just one hour with the Loftons to understand why Florida's ban on gay adoption is wrong.

Frank, 14 going on 41, explains very patiently that their school merges two grades together with older kids like him directly tutoring the younger ones. Tracy, also 14, tugs at her skirt and quietly plays with her braids. Bert, "almost 11," stops talking about his swim team just long enough to tease Tracy over whether her braids are real. Wayne and Ernie, 8 and 5, are almost impossible to tell apartóeven if they ever would stop giggling and sit still long enough.

And all the while, Steve Lofton and Roger Croteauó"Dad and Rodge"ó alternately beam and nag. "Use your napkin." "Come here, let's blow your nose." "Do you need some help with your sweater?"

What their home lacks in silence it makes up for in warmth. Every kid knows he or she is loved completely and unconditionally. And everyone who comes into contact with themófrom the mailman who admires their crazy home-made mailbox to the waitress who quickly surrenders all efforts to keep silverware on the tableócan't help but see that the kids are the center of Steve and Roger's universe.

They may not be Ward, June, Wally, and Beaver Cleaver, but in just an hour with them it becomes clear that they're a family by any definition. Except Florida's.

No gay people in Florida can adopt childrenóperiod. Frank, Tracy, and Bert have never known any other family. They came home to Steve and Roger when they were infants. All of their memoriesófirst days of school, 5th birthdays, first vacations to Californiaóare with Steve and Roger and each other.

But because of Florida's ban on gay adoption, they have no guarantees. The state is now actively looking for another adoptive family for Bertóstarting the process of taking him from the family he's been part of since he was nine weeks old. Meanwhile, 3,400 kids in Florida are ready to be adopted, waiting in foster care. The state's gay adoption ban helps keep them there."




posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 02:32 PM
link   
"A Response To Rosie O'Donnell by Tom Cole

This past week news broke about Rosie O'Donnell's lesbian life and her experience as a gay adoptive parent. ABC's Primetime Live featured an interview with Rosie about her life as a lesbian mom. What came across was a witty, sincere, thoughtful, loving and compassionate mother, of which I have no doubt is true. Rosie's "coming out" was triggered by news of a story in Florida of gay foster parents who face losing the son they've raised for the past 10 years. The gay male couple have been foster parents to five HIV infected children. One of the children now tests negative for the HIV virus and is adoptable. The state of Florida allows gay parents to foster children, but will not allow them to adopt. The controversy over this case pressed Rosie into a corner and she felt compelled to tell her story as a gay parent.

After listening to Rosie and watching the gay parents of this young boy, I found myself confused. Rosie and the gay couple seemed to show great stability for the children. They raised their children in an environment of love, respect and constancy. I felt myself being drawn into their lives and asking myself "So what's wrong with this picture"? I mulled over my thoughts for several days and realized that very few Christians would be able to respond to this successfully. We seldom process situations so that we might have a biblical world-view response to those we work with and associate with.

After watching the show I determined that the government in Florida is steeped in hypocrisy. The standard they have for adoption should be the same standard they have for being foster parents. To allow gay couples to raise children from infancy to adulthood as foster parents, but then disallow them to adopt is hypocrisy. And now the entire nation is looking at Florida and asking "Why"?

No matter how you slice it Rosie and this gay couple are sincere, loving parents. Why does this surprise us? Many people are sincere, yet sincerely wrong. There are institutions and religions that care for the sick, the poor and those in prison, yet they deny the deity of Jesus Christ. The entire world looked on at the hospitality and family-friendly atmosphere of the Mormon church as they hosted the winter Olympic games, yet, they deny the basic tenets of the Christian faith. They are moral, family oriented people, but they are sincerely wrong.

Time and again we must go to God's word and seek out his truth. The creation account of Genesis is our standard for right relationship among the sexes. God has ordained marriage between one man and one woman for the standard of the family. We have seen this standard marred by divorce, pre-marital sex and homosexuality. The home is to be a place of love, comfort and safety with two role models, one of each sex. Every study done, whether Christian or secular, agree that the best environment for children is to have a mother AND a father. To rob children of this very basic necessity is cruel and wrong. When looking at the overall rightness and wrongness of gay adoption, we cannot be pulled in by our emotions. We cannot allow individual stories such as Rosie's and this gay couple to influence our world-view. We must look to God's word. As well, we cannot place public policy on exceptions, but on the rule. The subtitle of the interview of the Primetime Live broadcast was: Rosie: For the children. If we are truly concerned for the children, then we have to provide them with the best possible upbringing. And that simply is this, a mom and a dad."

I love this piece, because it demonstrates what I've been pointing out. Every measure of logic and reality points to the fact that these two men are providing a loving home for needy children. But at the end, it boils down to one thing: "MY belief system tells me that GOD considers this WRONG."

I'm sure that will be comforting to every child torn from the only home he's ever known.


[Edited on 14-12-2002 by St. Theresa]



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 02:42 PM
link   
St. Theresa, do agree with me, alien, and Byrd that gays should be able to adopt? Or do side with JB and say that they should'nt. Please I want a strait answear.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by JediMaster
St. Theresa, do agree with me, alien, and Byrd that gays should be able to adopt? Or do side with JB and say that they should'nt. Please I want a strait answear.

I thought I was transparent as glass, but, yes. If they are good people who can provide for the needs of a child in a safe, loving home, then YES!



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Theresa,

A wonderful picture you've painted the Loftons a modern day Waltons(Goodnight John Boy Lofton-Goodnight Mary Lou Lofton)

And you have a go at me for not quoting scientific evidence.Poor really poor.

Society is to blame.Am I correct.Yes?

Come on!I really expected better from you.

Other than that you didn't address any of the issues I raised.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Man, point me to that thread!

From my perspective: Of course gay couples should be allowed to adopt. The reality of it is, in the US anyway, so many children are left within the system because of not being 'ideal' to the main adopting demographic: white affluent couples looking for babies or toddlers at the oldest.
The biggest developmental advantage for a child is unconditional love. Where it comes from is far less important than if they get it or not. You can be sure the biggest drains and dangers to our society didn't get it.
So since we are likely talking about those kids that the 'A' list couples don't want, like let's say a black 9 year old, what's it hurt? I see it as helping tremendously.
I also think that gay people 'play the role' given the situation of parent: nuturing has nothing to do with sex & how you like it, but your instinctual parent drive and how you were socialized by that role.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by John bull 1
Theresa,

A wonderful picture you've painted the Loftons a modern day Waltons(Goodnight John Boy Lofton-Goodnight Mary Lou Lofton)

And you have a go at me for not quoting scientific evidence.Poor really poor.

Society is to blame.Am I correct.Yes?

Come on!I really expected better from you.

Other than that you didn't address any of the issues I raised.

I didn't paint a picture of that foster family as "The Waltons." If that was done, the writer did it.

I did address your assertion that society is not to blame for the shame and ridicule of homosexuals. It's not true. You say that those who come to terms with their sexuality do so at a time when they feel adrift from society. I disagree. When they come to the realization of who they truly are, they realize they're not "normal," and certainly not accepted, it's BECAUSE of societal bigotry, plain and simple.

In fact, many will deny their homosexuality and attempt to live "normal" lives. It's a rock in a hard place. They're damned either way.

And I don't buy your insinuation that gay parents are going to produce gay kids (as if that's a bad thing.) You're right about nature and nuture. Nature makes us who we are and nurture allows or prevents us from being accepting of ourselves. Children of gay parents are certainly going to be exposed to heterosexuality in their lives. Having that experience will help them be accepting of themselves if they grow up to discover they ARE gay, or to be tolerant of others if they happen to be one of the "lucky" ones who grows up to find out they're straight.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 03:06 PM
link   
St. Theresa. Thanks for giving me a straight answear! Like I said before as long as the gay couple will love the child. No problem let them adopt.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Why put normal in speech marks?Homosexuality is not normal.And ,to put it bluntly Homosexuals are abnormal.

Just out of interest have you been to the political conspiracy thread.There is a thread there entitled political compass.I would love to see where you stand.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Homosexuals are not normal!?!?! Please flesh that radically ignorant statement out from a regular poster whose common sense I have come to admire.
Though the thought of being sexual with another man repulses me, I have a niece who is gay as is my eldest brother......please define.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by John bull 1
Why put normal in speech marks?Homosexuality is not normal.And ,to put it bluntly Homosexuals are abnormal.

Homosexuality is no more abnormal than hysterical bigotry.

I had the unfortunate experience to be brought up Catholic. I was taught, that God created everything and everyone. I was taught that everything happened for a reason and that God had some sort of plan for us. I was also taught about deviation from God and answering Satan's call.

Well, now I'm supposed to believe that homosexuals are deviants who "choose" their lifestyle. Now, I'm a straight chick (although I think being a lesbian could have some DEFINITE advantages, especially where birth control is concerned.
) so I can't speak from the point of view of someone who has had to deal with their own "abnormality." But because I come from a pretty liberal part of the U.S., and because my online community of choice has a very high gay and lesbian population, I've listened. And I've learned.

Do you know what I see? PAIN. No matter what, and for whatever reason, there are young men and women finding out that they just don't see the opposite sex as attractive. They can't. It's not who they are. Most would RATHER be "normal," but that's just not the way it is. The only choice they really have is whether or not to deny who they are for the sake of society's prejudices.

So, fine. Let's call it abnormal. I could think of a lot of things, however, that might be considered abnormal, and would not be grounds to deny child custody, especially rare illnesses or physical deformities. If you're going to discriminate against gays, be prepared to extend the same discourtesy to the blind, the paralyzed and the ill. Unless, of course, you don't wish to be consistent.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 03:40 PM
link   
"Normal" defines the norm.I am not making a social comment.I am merely stating a fact.The average person is heterosexual therefore anyone that is not is not normal.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 03:46 PM
link   
JB, you are thinking like they did in the 1800s. Back then it was ''abnormal'' to be black. You are doing the same with gays.Bigotry is a sin against God.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by John bull 1
"Normal" defines the norm.I am not making a social comment.I am merely stating a fact.The average person is heterosexual therefore anyone that is not is not normal.

Since the only thing, as you are saying, is how someone likes their sex, is a married man who likes his wife to take him doggy style with a strap-on...abnormal? I don't mean to be flip, but my experiences with gay people are NOT to be aware of their preference till they tell me. Students and co workers, staff.....the same killer suits, same appreciation of sport, same cut throat business execs....just a bedroom difference.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Of course whether homosexuality is a matter of choice or hereditory depends on the argument in question.Now Theresa you say that it is choice on a different subject others insist it is hereditory.

It is difficult to debate subjects such as this when no one not even homosexuals can agree.

The question here if anyone can remember is whether homosexuals should adopt.

Theresa Quote:

Do you know what I see? PAIN. No matter what, and for whatever reason, there are young men and women finding out that they just don't see the opposite sex as attractive.

Now I don't know if Homosexuality is a matter of choice or it is hereditory.But I do know that I do not want to take any chances with todays children in the name of "equality".

Jedi,B-T,I am not a bigot.I really do not care what two adults do in their own house but I do take a little more time in making a decision when a third party is involved especially one that has no voice and possibly later may find that their life has been made hell by the selfishness of others.I may well be wrong but to be quite frank just how many children do think it is exceptable to potentially have psychologically traumatic upbringings just to be able to say that gays have equality.
In my opinion one is too many.

I welcome equality.In virtually every form.So don't paint me as a neanderthal.Children have rights too.

And finally,and I mean finally.Why don't you try and explain your theory of how society has got it wrong to an eight year old.

"Don't worry Billy about every one making your life hell at school,Yes you may be traumatised throughout your life but you see Daddy and Daddy decided they wanted a little boy and it's ultimately societies fault you're having a bad time"

Will that make Billy feel better?



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by John bull 1

The question here if anyone can remember is whether homosexuals should adopt.

Now I don't know if Homosexuality is a matter of choice or it is hereditory.But I do know that I do not want to take any chances with todays children in the name of "equality".

Taking chances? With what? Tolerance? Enlightenment?

See, you still believe that there may be a choice involved, and that's just not true. We don't choose what kicks our hormones into gear any more than we choose which foods we like or dislike. Maybe science can't tell us what chemical or genetic reasons there are for homosexuality, but we DO know that people don't find homosexuality. It finds them.

I think it's more than obvious, if you've known enough gay people in your life, that there are some sort of biological/chemical explanations, beyond a person's control. Not to stereotype, but you'll often find gay men who have typically feminine qualities and lesbian women who are quite masculine. These attributes are part of who they are: their build, voice, mannerisms, talents, interests. They did not build their personalities and characteristics by choice. Nature did.

Personally, I have a theory about hormone balances, considering we ALL have both male and female hormones in our bodies. And perhaps those levels are genetically determined. I'd like to see a lot more research on the subject.

So back to taking chances? Chances with what? The chance that Johnny is going to get beat up in the playground because he has two daddies? Lame. Again, that's society's fault if children find that a reason for ridicule. I was teased at beaten up because my hetereosexual parents dressed me like a dork. I was teased and beaten up because my last name was funny. Should people with poor fashion sense and funny names be prohibited from adopting children?

The ONLY barriers to a society of acceptance, which could open up a whole world of opportunity for children needing homes, are religious interference with secular law and sheer bigotry. I'm still waiting for one good reason why gay people shouldn't adopt children.

Also, I'd like a comment on the Florida case. Why are gays good enough to raise and love HIV-positive children, but not good enough to adopt them? Do you realize that if the child continues to test positive for HIV, he or she may never be adopted? Do you realize that, in that case, that "abonormal" gay couple has effectively raised that child from start to finish? What's the difference between long-term "temporary" care and adoption in that case?




[Edited on 14-12-2002 by St. Theresa]



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Homosexuality is wrong by god and it is a state of lust between two
of the same creatures.

JB is very correct here.

God created (natural) law.

The plaan is to have man and women (unite) to make one flesh. thats why man and
women are different. they unite in love in marriage.


To go agianst this means going against the nature of god which is an abomintion.

Point.

man and women faall in love and become one flesh to have (children).

this plan should continue for ever, and a gay couple having a kid will destroy that and the
kid for life.

if you think it will not you are 100% wrong.

what the child grows up with has an influence on him/her which will effect the outcome
of how they think most times.

having a gay relationship is an act of lust, and rarely do you find a gay couple who does not have
sex and (actually) loves the other person.

For who can have kids being gay (naturally) ?

therefor why are people gay?

a lustfull lifestyle ( 98 ) % of the time.

peace.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Truth

Homosexuality is wrong by god and it is a state of lust between two
of the same creatures.

JB is very correct here.

God created (natural) law.

BZZZ! That's incorrect, but thanks for playing!

I haven't even read any further, yet. I'm talking about a secular society, which is not based on any particular set of religious beliefs. In my country, I believe I am supposed to have religious freedom. And in my ACTUAL earthly experience, I know some gay men who would make GREAT babysitters for my kids and some priests I want nowhere NEAR my kids.

Not to mention, that if God created us, he created homosexuality, too. If there is a judgment day, consider the possibility that you may be surprised by a condemnation of your intolerance for all of God's children.


Of course, in South Park, only Mormons go to heaven, so I hope, for your sake, you're a Mormon.


I'm looking for tangible evidence for the excuse to punish gay parents AND needy children, outside of the bible. Also, the argument must be outside the notion that since most of society is bigoted, the adopted child would be teased.



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Truth
Point.

man and women faall in love and become one flesh to have (children).

this plan should continue for ever, and a gay couple having a kid will destroy that and the
kid for life.

if you think it will not you are 100% wrong.

what the child grows up with has an influence on him/her which will effect the outcome
of how they think most times.

having a gay relationship is an act of lust, and rarely do you find a gay couple who does not have
sex and (actually) loves the other person.

For who can have kids being gay (naturally) ?

therefor why are people gay?

a lustfull lifestyle ( 98 ) % of the time.

peace.

Wow, this is just too easy. Too much fun!

Point: men and women often fall in love and do not wish to have children.

Point: men and women may wish to have children, but may find themselves unable to do so. I ask, is their infertility an unnatural abomination before God? Should such abnormal people be prevented from adopting children?

I'd like the evidence that having gay parents will destroy a kid for life. If I can point to gay parents who raise well-adjusted children and straight parents who abuse and neglect and generally screw up their kids, where does that leave your argument?

FLUSH! Oops, there it goes!


And you're right, having gay parents could influence how a child thinks. He or she probably won't grow up homophobic or bigoted.

Point: heterosexual relationships also have a component of lust. If not, how would they have children?

Oh, by the way, science is actually advancing to the point where it may be possible to conceive children without men. Yup. You read that correctly. It seems the egg of a woman combined with DNA of an adult resulted in the initial cell division required to create an embryo. I know, I know...it's not "natural." But it's possible. Wait a while. Lesbians might not have to adopt children. They may be able to create their own, each the biological mother of their child.

Scary, huh?



posted on Dec, 14 2002 @ 06:03 PM
link   
"" i know gay babysitters that would be better than some priest ""

OK, but babysitting is ( not ) adopting kids who will see fathers around them or mothers around
them with thier friends and they will say...

Where is my daddy?

Why dont i have a mom?

see.

"" god created homosexuality ""

Not at all.

God created the ten commaands which includes adultury, he instituted ( marriage ) between
man and women.

people with lustfull ways created homosexuals, not god, as god set the rules for our salvation and he
set what is to be right and not right.

we have become lustfull and creat our own lifestyle which will destroy us in the long run.


The point is, is that, haing a gay couple have a kid will destroy the kid in the long run.

Thats what nature is.

grow up, fall in love, have kids ( naturally )

we should never alter this nature.

peace.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join