Gays/Lesbians and Adoption

[haas mark]

Should gay/lesbian couples be allowed to adopt? Sorry guys, but after that "thing" ove rat SB, I had to see what reactions here would be, in a calmer environment. Personally, I think they should be able to, after showing a sufficient time of commitment (which leads into a gay marriage thing which is ALSO for another thread). I would like this not to go through the genetics and AIDS things it did at SB, so PLEASE try to keep this on track.

Thanks,
ver.

[Coyote]

I don't see why not. A child asking why s/he has two mommies/daddies would be little different in this modern age than asking why is mommy black and daddy white, or another possible mix you can think of.

[neoolong]

If they're just as loving and nurturing and all that good stuff as a straight couple then sure.

[Frank Hipper]

While I personally have no desire to raise kids, anyone who can provide a safe and caring enviroment and wants to adopt, should of course be allowed to do so.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Yes.

I see nothing wrong with a homosexual couple of either gender adopting and raising children, or having them on their own.

They should also be able to be married. Shit, if a woman can marry a rock, I think two gay men should be able to marry each other.

[NecronLord]

Why not

What does sexuality have to do with parenting?

[Shinova]

As long as they don't abuse the child and as long as the child is exposed to normal social life somewhat daily, I'm perfectly fine with gay/lesbian adoption.

Could be a bit weird if a boy grew up with two moms or a girl grew up with two dads. Major tomboy and tomgirl effect perhaps present, but kindergarten and elementary school can solve that.

[weemadando]

While growing up, on my block we had a gay couple and another gay guy there for the whole time I lived in the area. Later an airline started using one of the houses as an "overnighter" location for their flight crews and attendants, many of whom were also gay. After my dad walked out on my mother and I when I was about 9 the only adult males that had any real influence on my life were the "honourary uncles" who lived around us.

I have no problem with the possibility of children having homosexual couples as "parents". In fact I think that we should take away the children who risk being indoctrinated by fundamentalist parents, of whatever religion, and let the gay couples that wish to adopt have them. Or is that a *little* extreme.

[Pu-239]

While I personally have no desire to raise kids, anyone who can provide a safe and caring enviroment and wants to adopt, should of course be allowed to do so.

I hate children

[haas mark]

While I personally have no desire to raise kids, anyone who can provide a safe and caring enviroment and wants to adopt, should of course be allowed to do so.

I hate children

lol, so do I. And I totally agree with (so far) everyone. I think that as long as it can be shown that a loving environment can be developed, there should be no problems with the adoption. Besides, a kid could very well help keep a relationship together!

[Colonel Olrik]

Why not

What does sexuality have to do with parenting?

You're being a bit too radical. They're obviously related. I'm not a parent, but I'm sure I prefer to have my own child, from the woman I love, than to adopt. It's the result of Evolutionary pressure, if nothing else.

Answering the question, I think that a traditional functioning couple is the perfect environment to raise a child (their own). But I see no reason why adoption shouldn't be allowed to all the others.
Fundies/disfunctional families are surely way worse an environment, and can't be restricted.

[Dargos]

Sure why not. I have a couple of lesbian friends who are raising a child. And I must say that the child is one of the most well adjusted 5 year olds I've ever met.

As for those who wish to have no childeren...well...thats your choice..and IMO your loss as well.

[haas mark]

Sure why not. I have a couple of lesbian friends who are raising a child. And I must say that the child is one of the most well adjusted 5 year olds I've ever met.

As for those who wish to have no childeren...well...thats your choice..and IMO your loss as well.

Hey, I just don't want to go through the hell of raising kids again...it was bad enough when my mother stopped caring and I had to take care of five littler ones and have no social life and be held home form school to clean up after them. So, some of us have our reasons for not wanting kids. And damned good ones, I think. But I may eventually look into having a child. ONE.

[Stormbringer]

They absolutely should be able to. A stable homosexual couple has every bit as much right to adopt as straight couples.

[salm]

sure, why not? and it might not be that far from becoming legal either, now that they´re allowed to marry.

[haas mark]

sure, why not? and it might not be that far from becoming legal either, now that they´re allowed to marry.

Not in the States they're not.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I love Germany. not only am I learing the language, but I find it ironic that to escape oppression I have to leave the US and go to germany.

[salm]

I love Germany. not only am I learing the language, but I find it ironic that to escape oppression I have to leave the US and go to germany.

if you love germany you´re going to worship holland.

[RedImperator]

There's absolutely no reason why they shouldn't, and considering the number of children trapped in the adoption/foster care system, the more people who are adopting children, the better (I'm opposed to cloning and in vitro fertilization for exactly the same reason). And there's no reason why gay marriage (I prefer "civil union", since it sidesteps any potential religious issues in the definition of "marriage") shouldn't be allowed either. I find it strange that fundies who (rightly, I think) hate abortion would be opposed to gay adoption, since presumably adoption is the only moral way for a mother to be rid of unwanted children.

[Stormbringer]

I find it strange that fundies who (rightly, I think) hate abortion would be opposed to gay adoption, since presumably adoption is the only moral way for a mother to be rid of unwanted children.

Because they replaced logical thinking with the Man in the Sky. Of course it makes no rational sense but since when have they been?

[Hotfoot]

I have yet to see a good arguement presented against this, and have seen several good arguements for it. Adopt just like everyone else does.

[Guest]

I voted Unsure as I am a little skeptical. The nuclear family has been a conerstone in many cultures. Father for authority, Mother for nuturing. Stereotypical stuff. Personally, I don't really care, but only time will tell if single parent/homosexual parents are a workable environment to raise children. I am not saying that they are bad people, I just have my doubts that same sex parents/single parents can pull off a well balanced kid in comparison to the track record of the normal family. I guess that is up the the sociologists and their continuing studies. It takes more than just love to raise children and to be in a marriage. Oh well...who knows, maybe what I just said is a bunch of nonsense, but it is my half cent worth.

[data_link]

Personally, I'm all for homosexual couples being favored for adoption, as they are very unlikely to be fundamentalist. As for King Cosmos argument that a nuclear family is preferable, I don't think there is anything substantial to that line of reasoning. The important thing is that the family works - beyond that it matters not weather the family is a mother and a father, or two mothers, or one person, or even an unusually well run orphanage. The problem is that so few families actually do work that the fundies have latched on to this fact and used it to promote their nuclear family - which has the advantage of being so "natural" in human thinking that the child doesn't think critically about the family arrangement - this uncritical acceptance of their family making it easier to indoctrinate the child with fundamentalist beliefs, because they don't realize until they have already been assimilated that their parents are fallible. So, while in the hands of people who teach their children to think, family structure is irrelevant, fundies have a legitimate intrest in preserving the nuclear structure. This is why we see so many "studies" showing that children are better off in nuclear families.

Anyway, that's my $.02 worth.

[Coyote]

I understand the attraction of the typical nuclear family; the tradition it has in our society makes it feel comfortable and knowable. But in truth, when we peel back the comfortable feelings and look at hard facts, it is the worth of the individuals in question that make or break a family.

"Typical" families have abuse, alcoholism, incest, murder-- I know, not all families deal with this but it happens. The individuals in the family are screwed up, and there's no reason to believe that a straight person is any more immune to it than, say, a black, Hispanic, or Asian person would/would not be.

A gay child abuser, a straight abuser, a black child abuser... all are bad. Or, if they were loving instead of abusive, then all would be equally good.

[pecker]

Ideally, a child should have both male and female influences in life. So as long as the parents don't completely immerse their children in a single-gender lifestyle (Gay or not, a kid only exposed to women is going to have major issues). Let the kid go fishing with an uncle every now and then, and things should be A-OK.