Gay adoption

[HoppityRedux]

So it seems we all agree that there is not much data to support the kinds of effects gay adoption has on the children…

But what I can’t come to terms with is why we would subject the children of future generations to be the ginnie pigs, so to speak, of such a dysfunctional relationship. Here is the difference with a homosexual relationship verse any other dysfunctional relationship… its not in the best interest of the children. We are experimenting on them.

Teaching virtue and any sort of moral standard to kids in the future is going to become extremely difficult. If everything becomes “okay” there is no longer a need for any moral Truth with a capital T because everyone will have their own truths. We will become so scattered and as a result drift further away from God. The only truth we should follow is that of God’s. Our teachings explicitly state that the union of homosexuals is WRONG. If we turn our backs on that, we are turning our backs on God.

Just with my generation as a 20-year-old female. I like to think my parents instilled morals in me, yet at times it seems near impossible to fight for what I, as a Catholic Christian was raised to fight for. I mean come on…gay adoption!!! Its obsurd to open our hearts to such an intrinsic evil.

Peace Be with you all,

Regis University Student

Fortunately, the children of past and current generations save those of future generations from being guinea pigs. There has been gay adoption in this country for the last 25 years. (Catholic Charities of Boston had been placing kids in gay homes for 20 years.)

All we have to do is look at these kids compared to those placed in straight homes to see if there is any discernable and measurable difference.

Teaching virtue and moral standards is probably getting more difficult as a function of time. This is because increasing education has reduced the probability people will simply defer to someone who says they have the answers. The teacher will have to be much better at answering honest and pointed questions. Those who can’t will fail.

Teaching virtue will always be much harder than simply expecting people to accept what they are told.

 

[fix]

Fortunately, the children of past and current generations save those of future generations from being guinea pigs. There has been gay adoption in this country for the last 25 years. (Catholic Charities of Boston had been placing kids in gay homes for 20 years.)

All we have to do is look at these kids compared to those placed in straight homes to see if there is any discernable and measurable difference.

Teaching virtue and moral standards is probably getting more difficult as a function of time. This is because increasing education has reduced the probability people will simply defer to someone who says they have the answers. The teacher will have to be much better at answering honest and pointed questions. Those who can’t will fail.

Teaching virtue will always be much harder than simply expecting people to accept what they are told.

With all due respect you have it backward. Moral relativism, guised as sophistication, is much easier to accept than rigorous moral reasoning.

More folks accept bunk as truth today because we are murdering our consciences at an alarming rate.

 

[setter]

Hi Setter,
Your post quoting me, and infering that I’m not a real “Catholic” is highly insulting. I’m not sure if it violates a specific rule here to infer such a thing, but it certainly does nothing to advance your argument with my point of view. If you research my posts, by the way, you’ll see that I’m no advocate of gay adoption, except in cases where the child has otherwise bleak alternatives.

Calling someone a “self identified Catholic”, or putting “Catholic” in quotes such as you did, is an insult. I happen to be a faily devout Catholic. praying daily, attending daily Mass when possible, following the Church’s moral code as taught in the Catechism, and using the confessional relatively frequently.

I happen to have the opinion that there are some terrible situations in this world for children, and that adoption by homosexuals might be better than no home at all. Please go back and thoroughly read my previous posts before casting stones my way. Yes, I am of the opinion that practising homosexuals aren’t totally worthless people with nothing at all valuable to contribute to the world. This does not mean that I support the homosexual political agenda. But I try and look at the good in people, not just at their faults.

I am simply calling you to task as a fellow Catholic: Depositing an innocent, totally vulnerable and impressionable infant/toddler with two people aping a legitimate union in a gravely immoral, intrinsically disordered, sexually-based living arrangement is an outrageous, unacceptable, and unconscionable proposal by any Catholic worth their sand. Period. I am unconvinced otherwise. There is no lesser of two evils. As a proactive Catholic, one should attempt to create win-win moral solutions, not settle for lose-lose options.

 

[setter]

John,
this is what the Church as told us on the matter:

Thank you fix for your usual poignant citation of official Church positions. I will emphasize the “This is gravely immoral …” summary aspect of placing a child in adoption with illicit homosexual unions for those Catholics who would argue otherwise:

…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. This is gravely immoral …

vatican.va/roman_curia/co…unions_en.html

 

[St_John]

I think, setter, that there are usually enough homes for babies and toddlers, at least in North America. I more had in mind otherwise unadoptable children who are more difficult to place. The same goes for single parent adoptions, many of whom might not think twice about shacking up or entertaining guests in the bedrooms to whom they are not married. As far as I’m concerned, this is also less than ideal as well.

I do agree, I’m troubled by the recent attempt to make adoptions by homosexual couples on par with those by married, stable men and women. Unfortunately, the homosexual political agenda is highly aggressive and is seeking full recognition by all of society.

 

[gardenswithkids]

Fortunately, the children of past and current generations save those of future generations from being guinea pigs. There has been gay adoption in this country for the last 25 years. (Catholic Charities of Boston had been placing kids in gay homes for 20 years.)

All we have to do is look at these kids compared to those placed in straight homes to see if there is any discernable and measurable difference.

For the record, here’s the story from LIfeSites News:

Homosexual Adoption Ends 100 Years of Adoption Services by Boston Catholic Charities
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/mar/06031003.html
A press release from Catholic Charities notes that "Over the past two decades Catholic Charities has placed 720 children in permanent homes through adoption. Of those 720, 13 children were placed with same-sex families."

**13 children over 20 years–hardly a wide scale study on the issue. Given that humans can live up to 90+ years, we won’t know how those children really turned out for quite some time. **

----
**Back in the 1970’s people said divorce didn’t hurt the children. They were wrong. There may be some extreme cases where one parent rightly leaves an abusive spouse, but generally speaking “no fault divorce” damaged our society to the point that we’re now here debating about homosexuals adopting. **

 

[goofyjim]

Try looking at the narth website. They are the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, an organization of psychiatrists and psychologists who have no connections with any religion and who provide good evidence that homosexual behavior is psychologically disordered. In many cases, motivated patients can “re-orient” themselves.
Another helpful resource on this issue is the Alliance for Marriage, which also has an excellent website.

Yeah motivated and wealthy.

 

[gardenswithkids]

I think, setter, that there are usually enough homes for babies and toddlers, at least in North America. I more had in mind otherwise unadoptable children who are more difficult to place. The same goes for single parent adoptions, many of whom might not think twice about shacking up or entertaining guests in the bedrooms to whom they are not married. As far as I’m concerned, this is also less than ideal as well.

First regarding the children themselves: I realize that some biological parents demonstrate horrible morals like you painted, but the state shouldn’t place children in those situations voluntarily and permanently. Adoption is permanent. The state has little authority to remove the child once adopted. The otherwise “unadoptable” as you call them deserve more protection, not less.

I do agree, I’m troubled by the recent attempt to make adoptions by homosexual couples on par with those by married, stable men and women. Unfortunately, the homosexual political agenda is highly aggressive and is seeking full recognition by all of society.

Secondly, don’t you recognize that those who push for acceptance of homosexual acts progress further if we allow homosexual couples to adopt? What makes you think they will still only want the “unadoptable” children once homosexual adoption gains acceptance?

 

[HoppityRedux]

With all due respect you have it backward. Moral relativism, guised as sophistication, is much easier to accept than rigorous moral reasoning.

More folks accept bunk as truth today because we are murdering our consciences at an alarming rate.

That may be true. The problem lies in the fact that so few are skilled at that rigorous moral reasoning that it carries less and less weight in the culture. Assertion still tends to vastly overwhelm RMR. RMR is far more than repeated slogans.

 

[HoppityRedux]

For the record, here’s the story from LIfeSites News:
**13 children over 20 years–hardly a wide scale study on the issue. Given that humans can live up to 90+ years, we won’t know how those children really turned out for quite some time. **

----
**Back in the 1970’s people said divorce didn’t hurt the children. They were wrong. There may be some extreme cases where one parent rightly leaves an abusive spouse, but generally speaking “no fault divorce” damaged our society to the point that we’re now here debating about homosexuals adopting. **

I agree that 13 out of 720 is hardly a wide scale study on the issue. The sample size should always be examined prior to acepting any study. For example, a widely quoted study by Paul Cammeron used a sample size of 17 self selected people to conclude that kids raised by gays were poorly adjusted. My reference to the Boston adoptions was made to forstall those who might disagree that gays have been adopting for the last twenty-five years.

It’s true that we don’t know how a twenty-year-old will turn out at age 90. But we should be able to see how the twenty-year-old turned out at age twenty.

The fact that you think folks were wrong about divorce tells us what about gay adoption? I agree that humanty has a long history of being wrong. Has anybody been recently bled by their doctor to release the malicious spirits causing disease?

 

[perez639]

Some still seem to not understand one thing…

Times have changed which brings many to the conclusion that we simply need to adjust how we traditionally think. In this particular case allow homosexuals to adopt because its our new culture …BUT…one must never forget that even if times have changed God remains the same. What more do we need to know. If ur not Catholic, then of course you will disagree. For those of us who are practicing Catholics we know that something much greater is at stake. Like*, our souls* and how we are called to be disciples of our Lord which means we MUST take an active stance on an issue that has already been adressed.

Peace be with you all,

Regis University Student

 

[HoppityRedux]

People are free to take whatever stance they choose on gay adoption. However, there are some things which can be determined regardless of one’s personal convictions. For example, we can determine if there is any discernable difference between kids raised by straight or gay adoptive parents. We can also recognize the context in which adoptions take place by determining if the two gender family which raises kids to age 18 is actually the norm.

I doubt anyone is required by their religion to believe there is a discernable and measurable difference between kids raised by straights vs gays.

We can also discuss how a society which represents various conflicting beliefs comes to a decision when someone’s beliefs must be honored, and someone else’s rejected. That’s the reality we face.

 

[MikeinSD]

("Spiritual warfare) “ll means in the spiritual realm, the highest being the sacrifice of the Mass.”
Good. I hope you find peace in the Catholic Mass. However, so many spiritual warriors cannot keep their war in the spiritual level. Eventually, they have to confront Satan and his playthings here on earth. Armed with absolute truth, God warriors have divine permission to wage war on Satan and all Satan’s supporters. In this war, there are no innocent bystanders. That’s why I advised the poster to watch his back. Sometimes spiritual warriors realize a bullet in the back can be more effective than a month of prayers when you are fighting ultimate evil.

“Do you believe in the existance of personal evil, that is Satan and his minions of fallen angels, whose only agenda is to bring as many souls with them to their eternal destiny of separation from God in the never ending fire?”

No. I’m not a Christian. Us humans do an excellent job torturing, murdering, swindling, and otherwise destroying our fellow humans without supernatural help. And a lot of time, we destroy other men, women and and children in our God’s name.

Back to the thread. I read through the postings. I think I’m the only one here how actually knows gay/lesbian adoptive parents and their children. So far since 2004, our little neighbor in San Diego welcomed 6 kids adopted by 4 same sex couples and 1 single man. The latest was 2 Chinese girls adopted by a lesbian couple in August. Both moms and their daughters are doing fine.

The single gay man adopted his then 11 year old son in 2004. His son is Chechen. Spent 6 yrs in a refugee camp. Family all killed in the war. Refused to talk to adults and self mutilated. Now, he’s a great kid, freshman in high school, speaks beautiful English, has a girl he likes (not allowed to date yet — too young) and loves his father. And his dad is crazy about his son.

So I see 6 kids who now have loving parents and a shot at life. None of these children are blond blue eyed Gerber babies. The Chinese girls are developmentally delayed. And not many parents want an 11 year old boy from a refugee camp. Brave gay and lesbian parents took in these damaged kids. Who knows their children will turn out. But the kids have a far better chance at a happier life now.

 

[St_John]

There are some perfect examples, Mike. I really don’t like hearing this demonizing of homosexuals. I’m not one, incidentally. I’m as straight as can be and believe in all the Catholic teachings on chastity. I do believe that homosexuality is a disorder. It’s a terrible cross to bear.

Well, some people have an anger disorder too. They are prone to tirades that are sinful. It’s not entirely up to their free will because of something in their body chemistry that maybe was exaserbated by an environmental trigger. But, maybe they also have some postivie aspects to their character. I had a teacher like that in 6th grade. She was a great teacher. But she was high strung and prone to verbal tirades against the whole class. Maybe she had a bad case of PMS, I don’t know.

I’ve know many homosexuals over the years, through work, people in the neighborhood, and other ways. Some of them were pretty witty, kind, compassionate people. I’ll be some of them would be great parents. The only thing is that they’ll teach the kids things I disagree with. I don’t think Catholic Charities should be forced to adopt kids out to homosexuals.

I knew a woman who adopted a girl from Catholic Charities. She wasn’t a very great mother. She was a workaholic. She let her daughter get aways with things I would never approve of. She let her get a deprovera shot every 3 months because all the girls were doing it to prevent their periods. She didn’t go to church, and she was a lousy mother. There are all sorts of lousy parents.

 

[setter]

("Spiritual warfare) “ll means in the spiritual realm, the highest being the sacrifice of the Mass.”
Good. I hope you find peace in the Catholic Mass. However, so many spiritual warriors cannot keep their war in the spiritual level. …Sometimes spiritual warriors realize a bullet in the back can be more effective than a month of prayers when you are fighting ultimate evil.

It depends on how you define “in the spiritual level”. If by this you means crossing over into an attack against the person captured, snagged, trapped, oppressed, possessed by the tempter, then yes, this is a not part of the armament of the spiritual warrior – see Ephesians 6: 10-20.

“Do you believe in the existance of personal evil, that is Satan and his minions of fallen angels, whose only agenda is to bring as many souls with them to their eternal destiny of separation from God in the never ending fire?”

No. I’m not a Christian. Us humans do an excellent job torturing, murdering, swindling, and otherwise destroying our fellow humans without supernatural help. And a lot of time, we destroy other men, women and and children in our God’s name.

Then you are literraly missing 50% of reality. This should not be too easily dismissed, as the spiritual entities are far more powerful than humans.

“For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.” Ephesians 6: 12

Back to the thread. I read through the postings. I think I’m the only one here how actually knows gay/lesbian adoptive parents and their children.

This is a strong self-endorsement.

The single gay man adopted his then 11 year old son in 2004. …And his dad is crazy about his son.

Brave gay and lesbian parents took in these damaged kids. Who knows their children will turn out. But the kids have a far better chance at a happier life now.

Feelings (“crazy about …”) and subjective assessments (“chance at a happier life”) not based on objective reality (with out reference to absolute basis for truth) are ultimately a disservice to the real developmental and spiritual needs of the child at hand.

 

[fix]

I think, setter, that there are usually enough homes for babies and toddlers, at least in North America. I more had in mind otherwise unadoptable children who are more difficult to place.

Where is there a place where the only alternative is death and abuse or placement in same sex unions? And why are these unions acceptable? What about an incestuous union that gives a roof and clean clothes? What about a marriage with two men and one woman? Why are two same sex persons ok and other variations not ok?

The same goes for single parent adoptions, many of whom might not think twice about shacking up or entertaining guests in the bedrooms to whom they are not married. As far as I’m concerned, this is also less than ideal as well.

It is wrong, but not as wrong as two same sex folks acting as married.

 

[setter]

I’ve know many homosexuals over the years, through work, people in the neighborhood, and other ways. Some of them were pretty witty, kind, compassionate people. I’ll be some of them would be great parents. The only thing is that they’ll teach the kids things I disagree with. I don’t think Catholic Charities should be forced to adopt kids out to homosexuals.

By “homosexuals” I am assuming that you are referring to those who are either actviely living or a proponent of the “gay” lifestyle. If this is the case, this “only thing …that they’ll teach the kids” is a gross distortion of truth and a lie that left unrepentent will send one’s soul to eternal seperation from God in a hellish existance beyond all imaginings…a sobering thought.

Your post comes across as minimizing this reality at hand which has the effect effect of evangelizing others away from the gospel of life.

 

[nydas]

This is what i have come to understand from this topic:

You don’t ant gays to adopt because the child will be living in a sinful enviornment.

• Every house hold is filled with sin. Why should homosexual acts be considered more worse then any other sin?

You don’t want homosexuals to adopt because you feel that the child will be “brainwashed” to accept the homosexual lifestyle.

• O you mean similar to how Catholic “brainwash” there kids to be Catholics? Or how Muslims “brainwash” there kids to be Muslim? Thats all parenting is, brainwashing. You’re forcing beliefs and morals on the child, the child never has a choice.

Homosexuals don’t make good parents because kids need a male and female role model.

-I forgot that all homosexuals lock there kids in the basement and don’t allow there kids to interact with other adults on a daily bases. O wait! They don’t! Who would have imagined homosexuals would let there kids go to school and let teachers be role models.

 

[fix]

This is what i have come to understand from this topic:

You don’t ant gays to adopt because the child will be living in a sinful enviornment.

• Every house hold is filled with sin. Why should homosexual acts be considered more worse then any other sin?

Ok, why just two homosexuals? If all sin is the same why not 3 men? What about a father and daughter married to each other?

You don’t want homosexuals to adopt because you feel that the child will be “brainwashed” to accept the homosexual lifestyle.

• O you mean similar to how Catholic “brainwash” there kids to be Catholics? Or how Muslims “brainwash” there kids to be Muslim? Thats all parenting is, brainwashing. You’re forcing beliefs and morals on the child, the child never has a choice.

Some beliefs are legitimate and some are illegitimate.

Homosexuals don’t make good parents because kids need a male and female role model.

-I forgot that all homosexuals lock there kids in the basement and don’t allow there kids to interact with other adults on a daily bases. O wait! They don’t! Who would have imagined homosexuals would let there kids go to school and let teachers be role models.

I see. So, why not let kids be raised by four men and one women living in a marriage? They will see other marriages to help form them. Why are two men or two women suddenly acceptable?

 

[perez639]

MikeinSD,

You mentioned that you were not a Christian…yet this forum strikes your interest? Perhaps deep in your heart you are searching and you don’t even realize it…

Peace be with you all,

Regis University Student