Adoption / Civil Unions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Elzee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Elzee

Guest
Please help me understand…what is the theological reason for the Church not supporting adoption by gay couples in a legal civil union? Is this a position Catholics are obliged to be in communion with? I know gay marriage is one of the 5 non-negotiables…what about gay adoption?

I’m in a discussion with a friend of mine who is upset with Catholic Charities for not providing gay adoption services for him and his civil union partner and would appreciate any help you all can give me.
 
To Catholics civil unions destroy the definition of marriage… Don’t ask me to explain it…

Marriage is the only institution for a couple and it’s intended purpose is for procreation… Gays cannot have kids…

As for adoption well according to the Church its best to have a mother and father for a child…
 
Elzee said:
Please help me understand…what is the theological reason for the Church not supporting adoption by gay couples in a legal civil union? Is this a position Catholics are obliged to be in communion with? I know gay marriage is one of the 5 non-negotiables…what about gay adoption?

I’m in a discussion with a friend of mine who is upset with Catholic Charities for not providing gay adoption services for him and his civil union partner and would appreciate any help you all can give me.
Click to expand...
Catholic Charities is a Catholic institution and is required to obey the rules of the Church. The Church teaches that 1) sex is only acceptable for married people AND 2) two properties must be met: the unitive property and the procreative property. Gay couples and co-habitating staight couples do not meet this requirement. According to Church teaching, anyone living in conditions that don’t meet the above requirements is living in a state of mortal sin, and those living in a state of mortal sin are not candidates for adopting children. These conditions apply to co-habitating hetero couples, as well as gay couples. One can’t walk into Catholic Charities and adopt a child if they are living with their girl/boyfriend either. You have to be either single or married. The reason is for the child’s sake. In the eyes of the Church, placing a child into a home in which the adoptive parents are disordered would be detrimental to the child’s spiritual welfare. Tell your friend to go to a non-Catholic adoption agency and not go to a place where they can’t fulfil their wishes.
 
aolnews.com/2010/10/17/st…have-gay-kids/

Study: Gay Parents More Likely to Have Gay Kids

Oct 17, 2010
Schumm concluded that children of lesbian parents identified themselves as gay 31 percent of the time; children of gay men had gay children 19 percent of the time, and children of a lesbian mother and gay father had at least one gay child 25 percent of the time.
Click to expand...
Furthermore, when the study restricted the results so that they included only children in their 20s – presumably after they’d been able to work out any adolescent confusion or experimentation – 58 percent of the children of lesbians called themselves gay, and 33 percent of the children of gay men called themselves gay. (About 5 to 10 percent of the children of straight parents call themselves gay, Schumm says.)
Click to expand...
Schumm next went macro, poring over an anthropological study of various cultures’ acceptance of homosexuality. He found that when communities welcome gays and lesbians, “89 percent feature higher rates of homosexual behavior.”
Click to expand...
Finally, Schumm looked at the existing academic studies, the ones used to pillory Cameron’s work. In all there are 26 such studies. Schumm ran the numbers from them and concluded that, surprisingly, 20 percent of the kids of gay parents were gay themselves. When children only 17 or older were included in the analysis, 28 percent were gay.
Click to expand...
 
It’s not JUST gay couples. They also won’t adopt to a man and woman living together and not married. So in essence it has nothing to do with them being gay. It has to do with them not being married.
 
Rence said:
These conditions apply to co-habitating hetero couples, as well as gay couples. One can’t walk into Catholic Charities and adopt a child if they are living with their girl/boyfriend either. You have to be either single or married. The reason is for the child’s sake. In the eyes of the Church, placing a child into a home in which the adoptive parents are disordered would be detrimental to the child’s spiritual welfare. Tell your friend to go to a non-Catholic adoption agency and not go to a place where they can’t fulfil their wishes.
Click to expand...
That’s what I heard from a Catholic priest, too. You can be single and adopt a child from Catholic Charities, or you can be married and adopt a child. But they won’t let heterosexual couples adopt if they live together without being married to each other, and they won’t let homosexual couples adopt because as far as the Church is concerned, there’s no such thing as gay marriage. God is the author of marriage, and as far as the Church understands it, God set up marriage as the institution comprising one man and one woman. Therefore the Church has no authority to overrule God’s divine law, and recognize the relationship between same-sex partners as “marriage”. Partners in a “gay marriage” are living a lie, and it would be detrimental to the child to place him/her in a household where the couple pretends that they are married while in reality they are not. It would also be detrimental to the child to place him/her with a heterosexual couple who are living together without being married to each other.
 
Wow - thank you! I’ve learned a lot so far…and apparently have a lot more to learn. I look forward to more comments. Thank you!
 
Elzee said:
Please help me understand…what is the theological reason for the Church not supporting adoption by gay couples in a legal civil union? Is this a position Catholics are obliged to be in communion with? I know gay marriage is one of the 5 non-negotiables…what about gay adoption?

I’m in a discussion with a friend of mine who is upset with Catholic Charities for not providing gay adoption services for him and his civil union partner and would appreciate any help you all can give me.
Click to expand...
Catholic Charities are required to follow Catholic doctrine on the subject…

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith explicitly opposed these actions in 2003:

As experience has shown, the absence of sexual complementarity in these unions creates obstacles in the normal development of children who would be placed in the care of such persons. They would be deprived of the experience of either fatherhood or motherhood. Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development.

In 1992, the CDF stated:
  1. There are areas in which it is not unjust discrimination to take sexual orientation into account, for example, in the placement of children for adoption or foster care, in employment of teachers or athletic coaches, and in military recruitment.
The Church is to do nothing to provide any indication that homosexual tendencies are in any way normal or acceptable. Back in 1986, the CDF wrote:

Nevertheless, increasing numbers of people today, even within the Church, are bringing enormous pressure to bear on the Church to accept the homosexual condition as though it were not disordered and to condone homosexual activity. Those within the Church who argue in this fashion often have close ties with those with similar views outside it. These latter groups are guided by a vision opposed to the truth about the human person, which is fully disclosed in the mystery of Christ. They reflect, even if not entirely consciously, a materialistic ideology which denies the transcendent nature of the human person as well as the supernatural vocation of every individual.

The Church’s ministers must ensure that homosexual persons in their care will not be misled by this point of view, so profoundly opposed to the teaching of the Church. But the risk is great and there are many who seek to create confusion regarding the Church’s position, and then to use that confusion to their own advantage.
Allowing the adoption of children by those with deep-seated homosexual tendencies, particularly those who have fallen into this deception so deeply as to simulate marriage with a “partner”, would be granting that immoral behavior ecclesiastical sanction.

And we can go on.
 
markomalley said:
Catholic Charities are required to follow Catholic doctrine on the subject…
Click to expand...
Further, the teachings of the Church have unity and consistency. In addition to what you laid out from the CDF Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, her teachings on same sex ‘marriage’ are clear and uncompromising.
In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty.
Click to expand...
The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself.
Click to expand...
It is no secret that the Church teaches Catholics to treat homosexuals with respect and dignity. During the AIDS crisis (1981-1996), more people died of AIDS in New York City than American soldiers in the entirety of the war in Vietnam. The Church was first in the line up of giving comfort and treatment to homosexual men dying of AIDS at St. Vincent’s Catholic Medical Center in New York City in the height of said epidemic.

Gay couples in the current milieu of their demand for same sex ‘marriage’ and adoption should perhaps look to this Church action not so long ago. It’s not that the Catholic position on SSM and adoption of children is a secret or is a new doctrine.

Yet, same sex couples approach Catholic parish facilities to hold same sex ‘weddings.’ Yet, same sex couples, possibly including your friend and the partner approach Catholic Charities to adopt children. Why? They know they have non-Catholic options.

Gay couples are forcing the Church to ‘play’ and accept their wish for unimpeded access to all financial and social/family benefits that heterosexual married couples have, in their efforts to normalize homosexual relations and make gay ‘marriage’ equal to traditional marriage.

It’s more than a culture war. The Church and Catholics face a spiritual warfare.
,
 
To clarify your confusion a little bit, I’ll ask you a question.

What is a civil union, really?
 
I’ll never understand why people condemn homosexual couples for having sex outside of marriage then turn around and refuse them the ability to get married.

It is a well known fact that children growing up in heterosexual households - even households that are strongly against homosexuality - can end up being homosexual (consistently about 10% of the population.) The much touted Schumm study has serious flaws.
 
Rence said:
Catholic Charities is a Catholic institution and is required to obey the rules of the Church. The Church teaches that 1) sex is only acceptable for married people AND 2) two properties must be met: the unitive property and the procreative property. Gay couples and co-habitating staight couples do not meet this requirement. According to Church teaching, anyone living in conditions that don’t meet the above requirements is living in a state of mortal sin, and those living in a state of mortal sin are not candidates for adopting children. These conditions apply to co-habitating hetero couples, as well as gay couples. One can’t walk into Catholic Charities and adopt a child if they are living with their girl/boyfriend either. You have to be either single or married. The reason is for the child’s sake. In the eyes of the Church, placing a child into a home in which the adoptive parents are disordered would be detrimental to the child’s spiritual welfare. Tell your friend to go to a non-Catholic adoption agency and not go to a place where they can’t fulfil their wishes.
Click to expand...
I understand that Catholic Charities has to adhere to the rules of the Catholic Church hence why they will not let homosexual couples, or unmarried heterosexual couples. But what I’m confused by is why are single people OK to adopt? Is it simply because of the state of mortal sin these pairs are living in? It’s not contingent on people who should be having kinds (aka only married couples). And, not to derail the topic, but are there other mortal sins that stop Catholic Charities from letting someone adopt?
 
chepner3 said:
I’ll never understand why people condemn homosexual couples for having sex outside of marriage then turn around and refuse them the ability to get married.

It is a well known fact that children growing up in heterosexual households - even households that are strongly against homosexuality - can end up being homosexual (consistently about 10% of the population.) The much touted Schumm study has serious flaws.
Click to expand...
What reason would society have to condone the institution of gay marriage? If they have no reason to do it, I do not think they should. If society does have a reason to condone institutions that embody intentional acts which are ordered to realize basic human goods, then both because procreation is a basic human good and because marriage among heterosexuals does embody an intentional act which is ordered to realize basic human goods (procreation), society would have a reason to condone heterosexual marriage. If marriage as an institution necessarily embodies these procreative intentional acts, then I don’t think there would be any reason for society to condone the institution of gay marriage. I do not mean to say that marriage is solely understood in terms of procreation, but rather that it cannot be understood without it. This might not mean that gay people living together in a home should be prohibited from adopting however.
 
chepner3 said:
I’ll never understand why people condemn homosexual couples for having sex outside of marriage then turn around and refuse them the ability to get married.

It is a well known fact that children growing up in heterosexual households - even households that are strongly against homosexuality - can end up being homosexual (consistently about 10% of the population.) The much touted Schumm study has serious flaws.
Click to expand...
Are you Catholic just by virtue of baptism? On the basis of your comments, it would seem that there is a lot that you have skipped in Catholic education. Please read Gay Marriage, a Catholic Answers tract, which explains why the Church and Catholics are against it.
,
 
chepner3 said:
I’ll never understand why people condemn homosexual couples for having sex outside of marriage then turn around and refuse them the ability to get married.

It is a well known fact that children growing up in heterosexual households - even households that are strongly against homosexuality - can end up being homosexual (consistently about 10% of the population.) The much touted Schumm study has serious flaws.
Click to expand...
All sexual acts that are intrinsically closed to life are impermissible, there is nothing homosexual couples can do that are open to life. There are many far better ways to express your love for someone than sodomizing them. By cutting off sex it in fact forces them to have a more thoughtful and meaningful relationship which deepens the ties. So in fact disallowing them sex is a high form of compassion and love that proves more fruitful in the end.
 
chepner3 said:
can end up being homosexual (consistently about 10% of the population.)
Click to expand...
the 10% stat is an urban legend. it’s actually closer to 3 to 4% by the pro-homosexual activists’ own admission (see amicus curae briefs in Lawrence v. Texas supreme court case). broken down by sex, females are at 1% or less; males hover between 3 and 4%.
 
michelleds said:
the 10% stat is an urban legend. it’s actually closer to 3 to 4% by the pro-homosexual activists’ own admission (see amicus curae briefs in Lawrence v. Texas supreme court case). broken down by sex, females are at 1% or less; males hover between 3 and 4%.
Click to expand...
The 2 or 3% percent figure is correct. But, strictly speaking, the “10%” is not an urban legend, but it is calculated from extremely problematic data obtained from Kinsey and used in his Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Judith Reisman does an excellent job exposing this fraud.
 
In the modern West, according to major studies, 2% to 13% of the population is homosexual or has had some form of same-sex sexual contact within his or her lifetime.[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] A 2006 study suggested that 20% of the population anonymously reported some homosexual feelings, although fewer participants in the study identified themselves as homosexual.[18] Homosexual behavior is also widely observed in animals

From Wiki. I know it should be taken for 100% fact, but it’s fairly legit.
 
pilots13 said:
In the modern West, according to major studies, 2% to 13% of the population is homosexual or has had some form of same-sex sexual contact within his or her lifetime.[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] A 2006 study suggested that 20% of the population anonymously reported some homosexual feelings, although fewer participants in the study identified themselves as homosexual.[18] Homosexual behavior is also widely observed in animals

From Wiki. I know it should be taken for 100% fact, but it’s fairly legit.
Click to expand...
Why is this claim “fairly legit”? Do you not find it odd that there is such an 11% spread? That should tell you that at least some of the studies are incorrect.

Also I dispute the relevance and accuracy of the final sentence. It is not relevant to the question of human homosexual behavior: need I point out that some animals engage in cannibalistic behavior as well? Moreover, human persons are not automatons: we can choose our behavior. Neither is the claim accurate: we can argue that sexuality, and in particular homosexuality, are terms not applicable to non-human animal life, for sexuality, in contrast to the bare reproductive instinct, has a psychological component.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top