gay parents "comparable" to straight parents

[financeguy]

questions not discussed there...so I wanna to talk about it...
But I prefer to wait next further researches to talk again, I'm gonna leave this thread...no offence here but I would have preferred a more "open minded" environment here, it's "free your mind" here isn't it?
so respect my ideas...
farewell all!!

You happen to be expressing a view that is probably a minority here: ergo, expect robust challenges (FYM = a debating forum).
If you choose to walk away from a debate - that's your choice - but don't try turn into a 'Eek, those people that don't agree with my point are trying to censor and oppress me'.

 

[Carek1230]

Sorry but I can't see no sense here. I wasn't absolutely talking about races and I remember you that the word "race" is banned from the U.N. as referred to human being. So there are no problems with mixtures at all. All the other words are what YOU said, but I don't. And I still wonder why I care about what you say when you seem to put words in my mouth that I didn't said. I just wanna have a share of thought with you all, since difference in position is good, but it requires not just a passive acceptance of thoughts, but a confrontation phasis, and you should accept this, if you wanna be ready for a democratic confrontation. otherwise we would be separated in our position forever, in two intellectual ghettos...stand up for your ideas, I don't care about how "rude" you might be, but please, try to accept that some people could not think like you...not farewell him, try to understand him. But once again, we derailed from the topic....
and the definition of "regular family", if you wanna know, it's a "a man and a woman founding a family": the regular fact is given by the average of the families of a country or an area so that the child suffer less the integration problem. You know, if you have a particularly noticeable position the child may suffer of psychological stress even if it's not adopted, immagine an adopted one!
As incredible as you may think I'm not a racist and not even an homofobic (I just had a dinner with a dear friend of mine who is gay and we had lots of loughters and all).
ok let's get back in the race, and please don't feel afraid of support your opinion, we're not deciding anything here, we're just talking with our brains open. I repeat what I truly believe: free your mind!

I agree with VP, I am a single parent, with bragging rights. Don't get me started on raising a child as a single parent in this society. My son is also adopted, thru a private adoption. We were there for his birth, brought him home at 3 days old, to our "regular family"that really wasn't so "regular" which brings debate to this term "regular"--this word, like "race" should be removed. When my son was 7 yrs old I went thru a bitter divorce and I moved from No. Calif to So Calif, basically raising him myself since the adoptive father really wasn't a father, just a checkbook. As a PARENT I chose to make changes and choices not to mention sacrifices for the good of my child. Part of my divorce agreement ridiculously forbade me from any "co-habitation with member of either sex" or I would lose my support money. (Don't get me started on the legal system of Family Law in the US either) Long story short I am lucky I raised a healthy young man who is 2nd year in college and I am proud of him.

As for PARENTING, who can dictate other than what I feel is a twisted society anyway, who are fit or unfit PARENTS of any child, biologically birthed or adopted? What a child needs, as has been proven for thousands of years, are family members who provide the care, nurturing and love that is so important in Life. It doesn't matter if said "parents" are hetero or gay, mixed race or religion or single parent. The important factor is that the child is provided a healthy home and well cared for to hopefully become a mature healthy individual and able to contribute to society.

My son made many observations throughout his years telling me how lucky he felt he was in my household when most of his friends were from broken homes where parents weren't there, or were into drugs, with partners sleeping over or worse and he also commented that his few friends who lived in homes where the parents were still together or had re-married were tense and the parents fought all the time.

It's really a crap shoot and each "family unit" needs to be scrutinized.

I also want to mention what we endured during the adoption process. We were interviewed numerous times, drilled about our past, our records checked, we had to undergo medical tests, chest x-rays, bloodwork and physicals. Our finances were studied, friends and family members as well as employment records checked. We endured several home visits by social services. All of this we willingly endured because we truly wanted to become parents and weren't able to do this biologically. So if a gay couple chooses to pursue adoption I say let them. Obviously they have enough love and desire to be PARENTS to a lucky child out there in this sometimes cold, cruel world.

 

[Carek1230]

VP, we should talk! We can share single parenting and bragging stories!

 

[Irvine511]

All of this we willingly endured because we truly wanted to become parents and weren't able to do this biologically. So if a gay couple chooses to pursue adoption I say let them. Obviously they have enough love and desire to be PARENTS to a lucky child out there in this sometimes cold, cruel world.

 

[BVS]

Sorry but I can't see no sense here. I wasn't absolutely talking about races and I remember you that the word "race" is banned from the U.N. as referred to human being. So there are no problems with mixtures at all. All the other words are what YOU said, but I don't. And I still wonder why I care about what you say when you seem to put words in my mouth that I didn't said.

Ok if you didn't mean race then exactly what did you mean by:

For the adoption, I would privilege a regular family...(mother father middle earning same origin as the child)

"same origin" what does that mean?

Now I admit, I've taken a few liberities here and there in communicating with you, for I get the impression English isn't your first language. If I've taken things out of context then I apologize, please explain.

But you still haven't defined "regular family". I haven't called you a racist or homophobe, so please don't leap to any such accusations.

But I would like an understanding of what these terms mean and what they have to do with raising a child.

 

[Angela Harlem]

mixed race adoptions work as fine as any other adoption. it is 'society' which is the issue, when it is one.

i cant repeat this enough, but a child born into something grows knowing no different. it is outside sources who make things an issue. you think a child born to 2 men is going to feel less for them? a black child will think less of 2 white parents? a korean baby will be uncomfortable with maori parents? this is just ridiculous. as well as ignorant.

 

[yolland]

Part of my divorce agreement ridiculously forbade me from any "co-habitation with member of either sex" or I would lose my support money.

Is this commonplace?!? Wow.

Carek, you sound like a great parent. I'm a huge admirer of single mothers for all the added burdens they carry, bringing up their kids in a society that often seems only to either shake its fingers at them or to take their extra sacrifices for granted. My mother raised my two youngest sibs on her own after my father died and quite frankly, they're the least fucked up of us . It used to make me really angry when well-meaning people gave my little brother and sister the "What a shame, growing up without a father! Poor dear!" routine in front of her, because it's not like she asked for any of it, plus more to the point, it was just wrong to make her feel guilty about that situation. They missed out on knowing a wonderful man, yes, but they didn't miss out on a solid and loving upbringing, and that's what matters.

 

[indra]

mixed race adoptions work as fine as any other adoption. it is 'society' which is the issue, when it is one.

i cant repeat this enough, but a child born into something grows knowing no different. it is outside sources who make things an issue. you think a child born to 2 men is going to feel less for them? a black child will think less of 2 white parents? a korean baby will be uncomfortable with maori parents? this is just ridiculous. as well as ignorant.

I think you might have hit on the reason so many people are against these "different" families -- that is the children will think it's perfectly normal. We certainly can't have that now, can we?

 

[melon]

mixed race adoptions work as fine as any other adoption. it is 'society' which is the issue, when it is one.

i cant repeat this enough, but a child born into something grows knowing no different. it is outside sources who make things an issue. you think a child born to 2 men is going to feel less for them? a black child will think less of 2 white parents? a korean baby will be uncomfortable with maori parents? this is just ridiculous. as well as ignorant.

Bingo.

Melon

 

[Carek1230]

Is this commonplace?!? Wow.

Carek, you sound like a great parent. I'm a huge admirer of single mothers for all the added burdens they carry, bringing up their kids in a society that often seems only to either shake its fingers at them or to take their extra sacrifices for granted. My mother raised my two youngest sibs on her own after my father died and quite frankly, they're the least fucked up of us . It used to make me really angry when well-meaning people gave my little brother and sister the "What a shame, growing up without a father! Poor dear!" routine in front of her, because it's not like she asked for any of it, plus more to the point, it was just wrong to make her feel guilty about that situation. They missed out on knowing a wonderful man, yes, but they didn't miss out on a solid and loving upbringing, and that's what matters.

Many thanks, Yolland. What was put in the MSA in the state of California isn't "commonplace" but avoiding a long story, my Ex hired a really stupid lawyer who wasn't even a family law specialist. Lawyers are SO expensive, I went thru 3 of them and thou$ands before finally finding a great female atty who basically allowed some of the ridiculous verbage to get things over with and who slipped in some edits and some other things so that we could agree on the 32 page agreement and be done with it. In the end I've come away doing alright, my son moved out at age 18 and his Dad is supporting him AND paying for his college and new car. I am supporting myself comfortably.

to you and your family especially your mother for enduring the comments all those years. What an ordeal. This society really confuses me sometimes. I am sorry to hear about your father, but I can't commend your mother enough for all she obviously did to raise you and love you so much. Don't ever forget or stop thanking her for that! Single parenting is certainly not easy, whether chosen or not.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

mixed race adoptions work as fine as any other adoption. it is 'society' which is the issue, when it is one.

i cant repeat this enough, but a child born into something grows knowing no different. it is outside sources who make things an issue. you think a child born to 2 men is going to feel less for them? a black child will think less of 2 white parents? a korean baby will be uncomfortable with maori parents? this is just ridiculous. as well as ignorant.

Exactly. Here's a novel idea for society in general, how about each family deal with their own children and their own problems before running around trying to tell other families whether or not they're "normal" and worth being considered a "true family"?

Also, I salute those of you who are taking on all the struggles you have to deal with in regards to raising your kids (Carek, that divorce agreement thing sounds...yeeeeesh. I wasn't aware that people could actually order you to do that). Your guys' care and concern and love for your children is definitely shining through, and I think that's wonderful. Those kids are quite lucky to be in the families they're in . Keep it up.

Angela

 

[tommyvill]

ok now that's turning into a debate!
And somehow I like it now....
So let's go again, with the expression "same origin" i meant that if I got a colored child, for example, and I got a family that wanna take the responsability of raising him of the same ethincal group, well hell I'd give the child to them, I'd privilege this, because I find it could give the child more ease in growing up.
And as regarding for Carek, congratulations for what you did for your child, really. We're not talking about your case since when you adopted your dear child, you were married, and we were talking about not single mum raising a child (which I actually admire) but single parent adopting a child. So we're not talking about case like yours, but if we would we sure had considered it an example.
I would call it a "regular family" actually your family because of the strong feelings that are born between you and your child. And for what concernes "family unity", I think we all can agree with the fact that's not necessary, but WHEN THERE IS, it's enough.
So it's a more "powerful" factor (given the other factors...) and should be privileged. But it should be by no means the ONLY factor to consider...
And for mixed families, they really work out very well. I'm sure. But all should be very natural, we should take care not to "force" anything. Mixture should be natural as a multicolored blanket in which everyone sew up a piece from it's traditions and his goals...so if you got a family born from the love of two person of very very distant origins, well that's a blessing!! That mixture can enriches very much the "humanity blanket"...
but with adoptions, if I have a mexican family offering hospitality toa child that happens to have soth american origins, I would never take the children out of this mexican family to give him to a Corean family (for example) just for the "mixture's sake". That would really be a dictatorship act (it actually reminds me what stalin did with the central asian population, and the tensions in the area are evident still now...) Remember not to push things too far, in a verse or in the other one... mixture when happens it ALWAYS an enrichment, but we should care not to fall in the mixturism (btw, I hate all the -ism's because they may become the root of fanatical thinking...so let's call it xenofilia as someone calls it here in the E.U.) that would be an eccess in the opposite side...
Let it happen, do not force it to happen!
Forced things have always weird outcomes...
And one last thing: remember that 'gays' and 'lesbians' are different categories than the ethical origin's ones. Homo people are born everywhere in the world always have and always will, and it touches not just a superficial dimension like physical feature but the inner being of a person, his/her sexuality. Please remember that in the future, so that the discussion can be clearer in the future...
Bye you all...

P.s.: ehehe! hey financeguy, I expected a lot of challenge here, but since I'm minority I though I coul have access to the minority tutelations!
no I'm joking...probably, the very only thing I'm minorated in is my brain!

 

[VintagePunk]

It's not exclusion because as I said it's not a rights issue. In adoption I only see children's right, whereas from the parent's side there are responsabilities...the most generous couple of all wants to take this responsability, and if they are fit they can adopt, otherwise they don't.
And I know that heterofamilies can be detrimental, but those are exceptions, and we're talking about not "what it is" but "what should be", the normal families...even I does never use "normal" as an adjective...and case-by-case could be very important, but if it's applied to regular families...exception in a way or other may be apinful for the child, every other adoption expert can tell you this...

I believe that it's the right of the child to be nurtured in the most loving environment possible. One that will provide for them materially, as well as fostering their intellectual and emotional development, ultimately providing them with the tools that they will need in order to go off into the world, and live a happy, productive life.

If you live in a place where "regular" families not adequately providing these things for the child are an unusual exception, then I'm happy for you. Sounds like a rather utopian world, but I can assure you, in North America, it's not as unusual as you make it sound. Many "regular" families are deficient in raising children, in one way or another. Many children come from families that are called, by people who work in the mental health/family services field, "good enough families," meaning that these families are able to provide just the bare minimum as far as family function goes. The number of these families is startling.

So, getting back to the rights of the child, say for a minute that potential adoptive parents are scored on a scale of 1 to 10 for their ability to optimally provide for a child, and that there are 5 families vying for one child. Four couples are hetero, and one is gay. If the 4 hetero couples scored 7.5 and the gay couple scored 8, just a tiny bit higher, I believe with every fiber of my being that that child should go to the gay couple. After all, it's the right of the child to be raised in the best environment, correct? No one is suggesting that adoption should be an automatic right for gays. It's not like each couple setting up house together should be awarded a bonus baby as a free gift with the purchase of a new home! Just that they be considered equally, along with straight people.

Leaving that aside, many gay/lesbian couples are willing to adopt children that are considered hard to place - older children, or those with health problems, or special needs. Children who are all but unadoptable by "regular" families. Would you recommend that these children are allowed to languish in foster care, rather than be permanently placed with a loving, capable homo couple?

Something else I find kind of odd - you stated that the research out there showing that children raised by gay/lesbian couples isn't good enough for you, and that you would rather wait for new research. Why is this? I suspect that you would find fault with any new research that showed the same thing.

 

[VintagePunk]

I forgot this part....
Yeah really congratulation!! I'm sure you are a wonderful parent, but that's not what I was saying...
Natural parents are a thing, adopted parents another one...
For the adoption, I would privilege a regular family...(mother father middle earning same origin as the child)
Nobody wants, or even can remove the child from you without a strong reason...but in much of Europe isn't possible for a single parents to adopt a child...and I don't criticise this choice...

Thank you. But reread your post, that's what it sounded like you were saying.

So tell me, why is it different for natural parents, as opposed to adoptive parents? A good parent is a good parent, no? My child has been in a program for gifted learners since grade 2. Her teachers would tell me, with great chagrin, that she would routinely correct them when they made errors while teaching. In high school, she maintains an average well into the 90's. She participates in a variety of extracurricular activites. She's politically aware with very strong opinions, and can debate circles around adults. She's curious about the world around her. She's has zero interest in drugs or alcohol. She has a great group of friends, many of whom share her interests. She's tolerant and empathetic of others. She's not sure of what she wants to do in the future, too many possibilities, but I'm certain she'll contribute to the world in positive ways. I know that a great deal of this is probably inherent, but I'm sure I've contributed to the person she's become in some ways.

As mentioned, I'm a single parent, but let's take this a step further (yes, there was a point to my glowing description of her ). What if I became a single parent because I discovered that I was attracted to other women? Would that negate my abilities? Or, what if I had these parenting abilities, but knew I was homosexual all along, and my only outlet for this, my only chance to become a parent, was to adopt? It would be immensely unfair to deprive me of the opportunity to raise a child, and it would also be unfair to deprive a child the care that I could provide for it, when I have complete confidence that this care would be superior to what most "regular" families could provide for it.

I only know Irvine from what I read on here, but there is absolutely NO doubt in my mind, when reading of his desire to be a father, that he could provide a similar environment for a child. And any society that would deny him (and others like him) and a child that opportunity is one that I will vehemently fight against, with everything I have.

VP, we should talk! We can share single parenting and bragging stories!

Call me.

 

[tommyvill]

Something else I find kind of odd - you stated that the research out there showing that children raised by gay/lesbian couples isn't good enough for you, and that you would rather wait for new research. Why is this? I suspect that you would find fault with any new research that showed the same thing.

Ok I'll answer this.
No I actually didn't said that the research isn't good enough, I'm not a scientist so I couldn't say things like that...but it was incomplete to me, there are some topics that haven't been dealt with it, we need further infos...And I were demonstrated that I'm wrong, well I would be happy for all of those child whoi needs love and family....but we all know a big truth: to love someone doesn't means just love him, we need somthing other. Good feelings aren't enough. And for those things (since I wouldn't suggest a scientifical demostration thru experiment with children ) we need to proceed step by step, and this study that irvine brought us isn't enough to convince me...and there was also that other guy that brought the other documents demonstrating quite the opposite...and I cannot judge the validity of a research and not of the other one...so let's wait.
Ok, make it clear and simple:
the reasons for what i doubt that homofamilies can be "comparable" to straight ones are:
1) they can contitute an involontary misguide to children. NOT because of an INTRINSECAL unfitness of the gays or lesbians for parenthood but because they are models of behaviour for the children in every field and this side has to be clearified by researches. I said that I won't express myself about this. I'll wait.
I can't be any help with this. Let's talk the scientists.
2) adoption in a homofamily can be stressfull for the child. And that's was all that we were talking about, in fact.
Are we there? So we can restart in the right line!
And VintagePunk, as I said, regular family is not a NECESSARY coundition but when there is in a couple, well that's ENOUGH...

 

[VintagePunk]

Ok I'll answer this.
No I actually didn't said that the research isn't good enough, I'm not a scientist so I couldn't say things like that...but it was incomplete to me, there are some topics that haven't been dealt with it, we need further infos...And I were demonstrated that I'm wrong, well I would be happy for all of those child whoi needs love and family....but we all know a big truth: to love someone doesn't means just love him, we need somthing other. Good feelings aren't enough. And for those things (since I wouldn't suggest a scientifical demostration thru experiment with children ) we need to proceed step by step, and this study that irvine brought us isn't enough to convince me...and there was also that other guy that brought the other documents demonstrating quite the opposite...and I cannot judge the validity of a research and not of the other one...so let's wait.
Ok, make it clear and simple:
the reasons for what i doubt that homofamilies can be "comparable" to straight ones are:
1) they can contitute an involontary misguide to children. NOT because of an INTRINSECAL unfitness of the gays or lesbians for parenthood but because they are models of behaviour for the children in every field and this side has to be clearified by researches. I said that I won't express myself about this. I'll wait.
I can't be any help with this. Let's talk the scientists.
2) adoption in a homofamily can be stressfull for the child. And that's was all that we were talking about, in fact.
Are we there? So we can restart in the right line!
And VintagePunk, as I said, regular family is not a NECESSARY coundition but when there is in a couple, well that's ENOUGH...

1) Much of my existence for the past several years has been devoted to research/reading the research of others/critiquing said research, and examining it for flaws. One thing I can tell you is that research funded/conducted by organizations with a clear agenda is generally not to be trusted. This is what the umbrella of anti gay/lesbian research would fall under, whereas the research showing that homo/straight parents are comparable had been conducted by unbiased sources, and is subject to stringent peer-reviews.

2) How can adoption into homo-families be stressful for the child? Where's the proof? And more importantly, will this stress be of any greater degree than the stress that can also be found in a hetero family?

3)

as I said, regular family is not a NECESSARY coundition but when there is in a couple, well that's ENOUGH...

I'm not really sure what you mean by this (although generally, you're quite good at communicating your thoughts in English). Care to elaborate?

 

[tommyvill]

Thank you. But reread your post, that's what it sounded like you were saying. So tell me, why is it different for natural parents, as opposed to adoptive parents? A good parent is a good parent, no?

Ok I'm sorry if I'd given you this opinion. I could bring on the fact that english isn't my first language as explaination for this, but I won't. It would be mean and I prefer to take the responsability for anything I said.
Obviously, Natural Parents and Adoptive Parents are the same, legally and in every other single sense...It would be unbearably materialistic to me to think that they're different just because that natural parents didn't physically gave bith to the child.
But we're talking about natural parents and POTENTIAL adoptive parents. Ok? The whole thing is settled BEFORE the choose of giving the child in adoption. And in fact it regards the "fitness" of some individuals to adopt children. Not the qualities or whatsoever. Qualities are referred to the parent himself/herself, "fitness" regards the the parent IN RELATION with the children...you can be the best teacher in the world, the best educator (qualities) but not equally good as a parent (fitness to adoption).
But please once again,your abilities as a parent are NOT something to discuss on, it's absolutely evident how brilliantly your son grew up...

 

[BVS]

2) adoption in a homofamily can be stressfull for the child.

You keep saying this over and over, but what evidence of this do you have?

 

[tommyvill]

I need help here, sorry but I would like to comment single pieces of statements, but I'm absolutely not able to do that...anyone here have idea on how can I do that? Since the discussion is getting longer and longer, I need it in order to be clear...thanks to who helps me with that!

 

[VintagePunk]

But please once again,your abilities as a parent are NOT something to discuss on, it's absolutely evident how brilliantly your son grew up...

I wasn't trying to be self-indulgent in discussing that, and I apologize if it came across that way. I was only using that as a way of illustrating that different types of family can be as successful as the very best "regular" families, and to show that the same can be extended to gay/lesbian families.

And it's my daughter, btw.

 

[BVS]

I need help here, sorry but I would like to comment single pieces of statements, but I'm absolutely not able to do that...anyone here have idea on how can I do that? Since the discussion is getting longer and longer, I need it in order to be clear...thanks to who helps me with that!

Just go to whatever comment you want to post and press the 'quote' button. You can keep or erase whatever part you want to quote.

 

[martha]

I thinking about all this this morning on my walk. It's hard not to let your mind wander whilst walking around in the dark.

I have a feeling that research will eventually find that overall, gay parents are better parents that straight parents. A good portion of straight parents are parents by accident, with most of those kids an unwanted accident. (I know. I have them in my class every year.) Gay parents have to be committed to being parents before they start, because it's such an ordeal to obtain their children, whether through adoption or other, more intrusive, medical means. This means that they may take raising their kids more seriously than so many straight parents do.

Now, settle down before your panties wad up and think about it. Think of all the kids you know being raised by parents who could give a damn about how their kids are being raised. Are those parents accidental parents? Yep.

You'd think that the anti-choice rabble would be freaking clamoring for gay adoption, because they make so much racket about adoption. But they don't because their cause is all about control, and not letting gays and lesbians adopt the legion of babies that straight women have been forced to carry to term helps them maintain more control over the elements of the population they find distasteful.

 

[Irvine511]

I thinking about all this this morning on my walk. It's hard not to let your mind wander whilst walking around in the dark.

I have a feeling that research will eventually find that overall, gay parents are better parents that straight parents. A good portion of straight parents are parents by accident, with most of those kids an unwanted accident. (I know. I have them in my class every year.) Gay parents have to be committed to being parents before they start, because it's such an ordeal to obtain their children, whether through adoption or other, more intrusive, medical means. This means that they may take raising their kids more seriously than so many straight parents do.

Now, settle down before your panties wad up and think about it. Think of all the kids you know being raised by parents who could give a damn about how their kids are being raised. Are those parents accidental parents? Yep.

You'd think that the anti-choice rabble would be freaking clamoring for gay adoption, because they make so much racket about adoption. But they don't because their cause is all about control, and not letting gays and lesbians adopt the legion of babies that straight women have been forced to carry to term helps them maintain more control over the elements of the population they find distasteful.

kick-ass post.

 

[AliEnvy]

I thinking about all this this morning on my walk. It's hard not to let your mind wander whilst walking around in the dark.

I have a feeling that research will eventually find that overall, gay parents are better parents that straight parents. A good portion of straight parents are parents by accident, with most of those kids an unwanted accident. (I know. I have them in my class every year.) Gay parents have to be committed to being parents before they start, because it's such an ordeal to obtain their children, whether through adoption or other, more intrusive, medical means. This means that they may take raising their kids more seriously than so many straight parents do.

Now, settle down before your panties wad up and think about it. Think of all the kids you know being raised by parents who could give a damn about how their kids are being raised. Are those parents accidental parents? Yep.

You'd think that the anti-choice rabble would be freaking clamoring for gay adoption, because they make so much racket about adoption. But they don't because their cause is all about control, and not letting gays and lesbians adopt the legion of babies that straight women have been forced to carry to term helps them maintain more control over the elements of the population they find distasteful.

This is the best post in this incredibly drawn out discussion. Never fails to astound me how common sense gets muddled by intellectual babble and biased research.

 

[BAW]

I thinking about all this this morning on my walk. It's hard not to let your mind wander whilst walking around in the dark.

I have a feeling that research will eventually find that overall, gay parents are better parents that straight parents. A good portion of straight parents are parents by accident, with most of those kids an unwanted accident. (I know. I have them in my class every year.) Gay parents have to be committed to being parents before they start, because it's such an ordeal to obtain their children, whether through adoption or other, more intrusive, medical means. This means that they may take raising their kids more seriously than so many straight parents do.

Now, settle down before your panties wad up and think about it. Think of all the kids you know being raised by parents who could give a damn about how their kids are being raised. Are those parents accidental parents? Yep.

You'd think that the anti-choice rabble would be freaking clamoring for gay adoption, because they make so much racket about adoption. But they don't because their cause is all about control, and not letting gays and lesbians adopt the legion of babies that straight women have been forced to carry to term helps them maintain more control over the elements of the population they find distasteful.

I absolutely agree with this.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

You'd think that the anti-choice rabble would be freaking clamoring for gay adoption, because they make so much racket about adoption.

Indeed, you would think so, yes. But eh, that's too logical, I guess, or something.

Bah. Anywho, I'll second the others. Superb post. Very well put.

Angela

 

[nathan1977]

"I have a feeling that research will eventually find that overall, gay parents are better parents that straight parents."

Sorry, gang. But the emperor really has no clothes on this one.

We really aren't talking about equality at all here, are we?

 

[AliEnvy]

I think what martha means is, although I'm not speaking for her, all other things being equal, gay parents always make the conscious, informed decision to be parents and straight parents do not.

Making an informed decision on anything generally has a better outcome than leaving things to chance.

 

[martha]

I think what martha means is, although I'm not speaking for her, all other things being equal, gay parents always make the conscious, informed decision to be parents and straight parents do not.

Making an informed decision on anything generally has a better outcome than leaving things to chance.

That's exactly what I meant.

 

[martha]

"I have a feeling that research will eventually find that overall, gay parents are better parents that straight parents."

Sorry, gang. But the emperor really has no clothes on this one.

We really aren't talking about equality at all here, are we?

What does this mean? What equality? The equality you're willing to extend to gay parents? Oh wait. There's none of that, is there?


By blocking gay adoption, you're ensuring that they'll never have a chance to be proven good parents. And please stop hiding behind the diapers and saying that you "don't want to experiment with children." There are PLENTY of very successful families with gay parents.