Church's view on same sex adoption?

[CopticChristian]

".

Probably personal experience.

Probably suggests that it may or may not be true. “In my personal experience” is definetly true, if the experience is true. To suggest that any personal experience is the world experience, ie empiricism vs rationalism and to claim nonsense based on that is skewed and not taking into account all experience, personal and published.

The post I replied to was an obvious display of hatred/disgust of gay people. "As if they were a family

Here is the post you say you saw a display of hate and disgust for gay people…

When in the history of the world would any sane person propose that children be left in the custody of same sex people as if this were a family and healthy and moral?

The History of the World…ok all time

Sane person…suggesting that people are sane and not sane

Custody…care

Same sex people are not a healthy and moral family…this is Catholic Answer Forum. Same sex couples are not believed to be moral based on expression of same sex behavior. Same sex activity has been shown to be unhealthy…this does not speak to any one family, nor any one person but the statistics of reality. Studies do not show that these familes are equivalent in any way to

man/woman…mommy/daddy…many argue one way or the other…and those that want to continue to study this forget one thing…

What is in the best interest of a child…continually trying to prove that Homosexual parenting is normal…for whose interest…the child?

 

[marymary1975]

A child has a right to a mother and a father, if circumstances come along were its not possible to ensure this for the child, we should give them the support they deserve (child benefits for single parents for example) but to deliberately put the child in a situation where they lack a proper family unit is extremely immoral.

They actually make same-sex couples a priority over a man and a woman in adoption by the way, they call it “positive discrimination”. Way to compromise the rights of the child!

 

[devoutchristian]

Seriously, do you actually think this is a sane argument?

Thank you for proving Iron’s point that supporters of homosexual adoption tend to rely on their emotions rather than reason.

 

[CopticChristian]

What do u think the Vatican mean when they say “experience has shown….”?
Who’s experience are they talking about? Confusing.

Do you think the Vatican is basing their words on any kind of study by doctors on these kids?
If so, tho, they might have said “studies have shown” instead…?

Because children who have been adopted by same-sex couples often talk about how happy and loved they are…and they thrive–in school, in self-esteem, in all areas, as per the testimony of several kids a few weeks ago for the current supreme court case going on.

You cannot generalize anything from these testimonies.

 

[marymary1975]

Who is “they”? Who does this? Where and when did this happen?
I haven’t heard of this…

Lawmakers and the Supreme Court…affirmative action grutter v. Bollinger was the case which first legalized what he talks about. Due to this many States have enacted adoption laws that facilitate adoption on the base of homosexuals.

 

[ngill09]

You cannot generalize anything from these testimonies.

Neither can you make categorical remarks about the quality of life in all homosexual families. The claim being made by Catholics is that homosexual parents cannot raise healthy children. Those testimonies falsify that claim.

What is in the best interest of a child…continually trying to prove that Homosexual parenting is normal…for whose interest…the child?

Probably in the interest of the thousands of parentless children in the United States and millions more in the world. Is it worse for a child to grow up with no parents at all or for them to grow up with homosexual parents?

Saying that all children have “a right to a mommy and a daddy” is a meaningless statement. Denying homosexuals the right to adopt does not magically give orphans a mommy and a daddy.

Thank you for proving Iron’s point that supporters of homosexual adoption tend to rely on their emotions rather than reason.

Let’s see how consistent your “reason” is.

You say that the Catholic Church considers homosexuality to be immoral and this is grounds for homosexuals to be denied the ability to adopt children. Doesn’t the Catholic Church also teach that it is immoral to deny Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior? By that reasoning shouldn’t the Catholic Church also oppose the right of non-Christians to adopt, or even to raise children of their own? After all, aren’t Jews “living in a constant state of calling a terrible thing good” by denying that Jesus was the Messiah?

 

[CopticChristian]

Neither can you make categorical remarks about the quality of life in all homosexual families. The claim being made by Catholics is that homosexual parents cannot raise healthy children. Those testimonies falsify that claim.

Probably in the interest of the thousands of parentless children in the United States and millions more in the world. Is it worse for a child to grow up with no parents at all or for them to grow up with homosexual parents?

Saying that all children have “a right to a mommy and a daddy” is a meaningless statement. Denying homosexuals the right to adopt does not magically give orphans a mommy and a daddy.

Let’s see how consistent your “reason” is.

You say that the Catholic Church considers homosexuality to be immoral and this is grounds for homosexuals to be denied the ability to adopt children. Doesn’t the Catholic Church also teach that it is immoral to deny Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior? By that reasoning shouldn’t the Catholic Church also oppose the right of non-Christians to adopt, or even to raise children of their own? After all, aren’t Jews “living in a constant state of calling a terrible thing good” by denying that Jesus was the Messiah?

Published studies have not concluded that Homosexual parenting is in the best interest of the child. There is no data to support this.

Saying that all children have “a right to a mommy and a daddy” is a meaningless statement. Denying homosexuals the right to adopt does not magically give orphans a mommy and a daddy.

So, in the best interest of the child we give that child to quantities unknown to satisfy the Homosexual. What is in the best interest of the child? Absent the possibility of a mom/dad then the lesser of two potential evils is give the child to a Homosexual or leave them in an orphanage. My Father and his sister were orphans and I am grateful no one gave them to Homosexuals.

 

[ngill09]

Published studies have not concluded that Homosexual parenting is in the best interest of the child. There is no data to support this.

The standard isn’t that homosexual parenting is the best, but that it’s better than the institutional environment that results from being left without any adopted parents.

 

[CopticChristian]

The standard isn’t that homosexual parenting is the best, but that it’s better than the institutional environment that results from being left without any adopted parents.

In your opinion and if you have not noticed this is Catholic Answers where people come asking questions and where explanation and defense of the faith is offered. I have not seen you do anything but attack the faith. Did you have questions you want answered?

Concerning institutions, based on the Faith, it would be better for the child not to be in the home of a Homosexual, as Homosexual unions are not considered sacramental and homosexual behavior is deviant, disordered and sinful. It would be inconsistent for any agreement to send a child to a house that propagates a belief that this sin, against Chastity, is acceptable.

 

[ngill09]

In your opinion and if you have not noticed this is Catholic Answers where people come asking questions and where explanation and defense of the faith is offered. I have not seen you do anything but attack the faith. Did you have questions you want answered?

Concerning institutions, based on the Faith, it would be better for the child not to be in the home of a non-Christian, as non-Chrisitan unions are not considered sacramental and non-Christian behavior is deviant, disordered and sinful. It would be inconsistent for any agreement to send a child to a house that propagates a belief that this sin, against Christianity, is acceptable.

I fixed your post.

 

[Atticus_Sparrow]

I don’t think anyone thinks a child doesn’t need a mother…
(Besides, what about same-sex couples who are two women…)

But we are talking about kids who have NO parents at all.

And we can “mother” our children who are motherless. Or “father” them. As best we can. Hugs and love and emotional support and help with homework and having a home to go to and having someone come to your soccer practice…is much better than having none of that at all.

(PS–love yer name, Atticus. Love that book)

Thank you for the kind words! I think sometimes my side comes down way too hard on these matters. I will agree that one parent is better than none and I don’t think gay people are wicked or would intentionally damage children. I believe that type of rhetoric is both hate filled and counterproductive. I do however believe that, all things being equal, a child needs both a mother (especially so) and a father. They aren’t interchangeable. I bring a different set of skills to the parenting table than my wife does. Not better or worse but different, I believe that by being a good and loving father my daughter will grow to assume men should treat her with love and kindness and not accept mistreatment. My wife will illustrate what it means to be a woman in today’s society. I couldn’t emulate my wife’s life experience nor she mine. And children need both as guide posts to grow and mature and become functioning adults. That isn’t to say single moms or dads can’t raise good children but it is a lot more difficult and I know I wouldn’t want the responsibility all on my shoulders. Look no further than the inner cities or prisons and you will find plenty of men without fathers. Love is wonderful and I agree children need it but that isn’t all they need.

 

[fix]

Probably personal experience.

The post I replied to was an obvious display of hatred/disgust of gay people. “As if they were a family”.

It is not a family unless we redefine what a family is.

 

[fix]

Just because something hasn’t been done before, doesn’t mean it is wrong or should not be done now.
History changes.
I assume there was a time when single people could not adopt and at the time, people thought it would be harmful to the child? If so, we changed that.
Or maybe there was a time when mixed-racial couples could not adopt, fearing a child would be confused and disoriented, as per how some think about same-sex couples?
But if so, we changed that, too.

People also thought the world was flat.
We can’t only go by what has been done or believed before…because in time we grow and learn more, so we must make changes and adaptions along the way.

The thinking was and is…a child in a loving, caring household, even if it is not what all would consider perfect, is still better than a child alone in an institution.

You offer a lot of confusion. Homosexual relationships are not a family. Children have rights no matter how much the “gay” crowd wants to deny that.

 

[fix]

Thank you for the kind words! I think sometimes my side comes down way too hard on these matters. I will agree that one parent is better than none and I don’t think gay people are wicked or would intentionally damage children. I believe that type of rhetoric is both hate filled and counterproductive. I do however believe that, all things being equal, a child needs both a mother (especially so) and a father. They aren’t interchangeable. I bring a different set of skills to the parenting table than my wife does. Not better or worse but different, I believe that by being a good and loving father my daughter will grow to assume men should treat her with love and kindness and not accept mistreatment. My wife will illustrate what it means to be a woman in today’s society. I couldn’t emulate my wife’s life experience nor she mine. And children need both as guide posts to grow and mature and become functioning adults. That isn’t to say single moms or dads can’t raise good children but it is a lot more difficult and I know I wouldn’t want the responsibility all on my shoulders. Look no further than the inner cities or prisons and you will find plenty of men without fathers. Love is wonderful and I agree children need it but that isn’t all they need.

Can you point to a post that has called “gay” people wicked or intentionally want to damage children?

 

[ngill09]

It is not a family unless we redefine what a family is.

From Merriam-Webster:

1**
: a group of individuals living under one roof and usually under one head : household **
2
a : a group of persons of common ancestry : clan
b : a people or group of peoples regarded as deriving from a common stock : race
3
a : a group of people united by certain convictions or a common affiliation : fellowship
b : the staff of a high official (as the President)
4
: a group of things related by common characteristics: as
a : a closely related series of elements or chemical compounds
b : a group of soils with similar chemical and physical properties (as texture, pH, and mineral content) that comprise a category ranking above the series and below the subgroup in soil classification
c : a group of related languages descended from a single ancestral language
5
a :** the basic unit in society traditionally consisting of two parents rearing their children; also : any of various social units differing from but regarded as equivalent to the traditional family **
b : spouse and children
6
a : a group of related plants or animals forming a category ranking above a genus and below an order and usually comprising several to many genera
b in livestock breeding (1) : the descendants or line of a particular individual especially of some outstanding female (2) : an identifiable strain within a breed
7
: a set of curves or surfaces whose equations differ only in parameters
8
: a unit of a crime syndicate (as the Mafia) operating within a geographical area

 

[Atticus_Sparrow]

Can you point to a post that has called “gay” people wicked or intentionally want to damage children?

I didn’t specifically mean anyone in this thread. However, just talking with some people that can come through. I think that’s unfortunate because it makes it easier for those who may agree with the traditional idea of family turn away from us. We Catholics can make reasoned and logical arguments for preserving traditional marriage and parenting without using harsh language.

 

[livingwordunity]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

And people ask why the Catholic Church is against kids being raised this way.

I couldn’t show the pictures of the screaming “gay” activists who protested naked at the Vatican with obscenities written on their naked bodies.

For the claim we will hear on this forum that not all “gay” activists are like that I would say I’ve never seen any “gay” activists group ever publicly denounce it whenever another “gay” activist group holds such lewd public protests against the Catholic Church. One would have to go to a Catholic source to find any public denouncing of these acts while the mainstream media always seems to take their side against the Catholic Church.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Is it EVER permissible? Like a baby born with HIV who would otherwise just die in an orphanage without proper medical care?

IMHO, this is a dilemma of a type that the Church does not seem to be able to answer (like what to do with frozen embryos), because it deals with two immoral choices. Do you allow the child to be adopted by a “married” homosexual couple (immoral) and get their full attention; or not be adopted, continue to live with no parents, and get lost in the shuffle (also immoral). Many might argue that we should wait for a mother and father to come along, but the fact is there are many that will never be adopted because they are minorities, have disabilities, have disorders, or have certain diseases (HIV, etc.).

For me, when faced with such dilemmas, the interest of the child takes precedence. Between what I know from my ex-wife who dealt with such children as part of her profession, my social worker cousin, and experience with international adoption (both mine and others), the children that don’t get attention generally do not turn out very well.

We should always work toward an ideal, but we should never cause children to suffer as we work toward that ideal.

 

[fix]

From Merriam-Webster:

1**
: a group of individuals living under one roof and usually under one head : household **
2
a : a group of persons of common ancestry : clan
b : a people or group of peoples regarded as deriving from a common stock : race
3
a : a group of people united by certain convictions or a common affiliation : fellowship
b : the staff of a high official (as the President)
4
: a group of things related by common characteristics: as
a : a closely related series of elements or chemical compounds
b : a group of soils with similar chemical and physical properties (as texture, pH, and mineral content) that comprise a category ranking above the series and below the subgroup in soil classification
c : a group of related languages descended from a single ancestral language
5
a :** the basic unit in society traditionally consisting of two parents rearing their children; also : any of various social units differing from but regarded as equivalent to the traditional family **
b : spouse and children
6
a : a group of related plants or animals forming a category ranking above a genus and below an order and usually comprising several to many genera
b in livestock breeding (1) : the descendants or line of a particular individual especially of some outstanding female (2) : an identifiable strain within a breed
7
: a set of curves or surfaces whose equations differ only in parameters
8
: a unit of a crime syndicate (as the Mafia) operating within a geographical area

Uh huh, so a father and son in an incestuous relationship that adopts two kids is a family.

 

[livingwordunity]

IMHO, this is a dilemma of a type that the Church does not seem to be able to answer (like what to do with frozen embryos), because it deals with two immoral choices. Do you allow the child to be adopted by a “married” homosexual couple (immoral) and get their full attention; or not be adopted, continue to live with no parents, and get lost in the shuffle (also immoral). Many might argue that we should wait for a mother and father to come along, but the fact is there are many that will never be adopted because they are minorities, have disabilities, have disorders, or have certain diseases (HIV, etc.).

For me, when faced with such dilemmas, the interest of the child takes precedence. Between what I know from my ex-wife who dealt with such children as part of her profession, my social worker cousin, and experience with international adoption (both mine and others), the children that don’t get attention generally do not turn out very well.

We should always work toward an ideal, but we should never cause children to suffer as we work toward that ideal.

It sounds like your intentions might be good, but you are looking at this from the perspective of the flesh and as if all sin and immorality are equal. But the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that way. A child that is thrown into a situation where their main role models are engaged in open grave sin is scandal to the child. And scandal is the worst sin of all sins because it leads others to Hell. I’m sure that you would not agree that any kind of immorality is ok as long as a child gets adopted. For example, in Nevada prostitution is legal. Would you say that it’s better that a child gets adopted by a prostitute than if they don’t get adopted? I don’t think you would. So why make an exception for this kind of open grave sin? What good would it do to a child if they ended up in Hell forever because they were scandalized by this? As Christ said, what would it profit us to gain the world but lose our soul?