Gay foster/adoptive parents, or abusive home?

[fix]

Yeah it doesnt harm children though.

Sure it does. It robs children of their rights.

 

[fix]

this confuses me. love is not just the privilege of people walking a perfect christian walk. all of us have love, feel love, and receive love. when i dated women, i loved them and i loved my family. now that i’m chaste, i still love women, but in a different way. i also still love my family – in exactly the same way that i did before. if i had children, i see no reason why my love for them would be any different if my partner was male or female.

gay men and lesbians are simply doing the best they can to live their lives with love. as are we all.

Your argument may be used to defend all types of immoral things. Simply invoking the word love does not make it love.

Some people are greatly deceived. It reminds of that bumper sticker that claims: All it takes to make a family is love. That slogan justifies much that harms children and society.

 

[Scottgun]

The Church is very clear on this:

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 and in open contradiction to the principle, recognized also in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, that the best interests of the child, as the weaker and more vulnerable party, are to be the paramount consideration in every case.

Link%between%

 

[dwc]

this confuses me. love is not just the privilege of people walking a perfect christian walk. all of us have love, feel love, and receive love. when i dated women, i loved them and i loved my family. now that i’m chaste, i still love women, but in a different way. i also still love my family – in exactly the same way that i did before. if i had children, i see no reason why my love for them would be any different if my partner was male or female.

You know, there’s love, and then there’s Love. love is the sentimental, soft, feeling-good emotion. It’s pleasant and wonderful and parenting includes that. But then there’s Love. It’s not soft, or sentimental. It’s gritty and tough and for the long haul. It’s what lets parents stay up all night with a sick child or waiting up for a teenager, discipline a child even when they feel sorry for them and would rather hug them, make the tough choices and hard calls, give up career promotions and sleep and romantic time with their spouse, etc.

Love (big L) is what motivates parents to sacrifice and put aside their selfishness in order to give their child what’s best for the child. It seems the gay couples focus on their little l love for each other and the little l love they will feel as a parent in order to insist on having children while denying those children what is best for them. I feel the same about single women who deliberately pursue single motherhood in order to satisfy their “need” or desire to be a mother, while denying that child a father. It’s selfish, and incompatible with Love.

 

[Polaris]

You know, there’s love, and then there’s Love. love is the sentimental, soft, feeling-good emotion. It’s pleasant and wonderful and parenting includes that. But then there’s Love. It’s not soft, or sentimental. It’s gritty and tough and for the long haul. It’s what lets parents stay up all night with a sick child or waiting up for a teenager, discipline a child even when they feel sorry for them and would rather hug them, make the tough choices and hard calls, give up career promotions and sleep and romantic time with their spouse, etc.

Love (big L) is what motivates parents to sacrifice and put aside their selfishness in order to give their child what’s best for the child. It seems the gay couples focus on their little l love for each other and the little l love they will feel as a parent in order to insist on having children while denying those children what is best for them. I feel the same about single women who deliberately pursue single motherhood in order to satisfy their “need” or desire to be a mother, while denying that child a father. It’s selfish, and incompatible with Love.

You can by the same arguement say that it is selfish for a Widow to keep her children. Would not the best thing be to give up her children to a two parent household.

(I agree more with how Gardenwithkids arguement about relating with oppisite sexes)

 

[dwc]

The argument about the widow is not the same. Huge difference between deliberately starting a child’s life without a father and starting a child’s life with both parents and then having the father die. To have the child then lose his mother after losing his father would compound the harm. Apples and oranges.

 

[Polaris]

The argument about the widow is not the same. Huge difference between deliberately starting a child’s life without a father and starting a child’s life with both parents and then having the father die. To have the child then lose his mother after losing his father would compound the harm. Apples and oranges.

The ends are never justified by the means. It is cruel and unatural for a child to be raised by one sex in you arguement. The means of this end are just different. A truly loving mother would realize that she is not equipped to raise a child and would rightly give them up.

 

[Exalt]

Sometimes we need to put common sense aside and blindly trust God.

Wow.

 

[fix]

The ends are never justified by the means. It is cruel and unatural for a child to be raised by one sex in you arguement. The means of this end are just different. A truly loving mother would realize that she is not equipped to raise a child and would rightly give them up.

It is not about children being raised by a single person. It is about children being raised by same sex persons acting as husband and wife. The difference is undeniable.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

It is not about children being raised by a single person. It is about children being raised by same sex persons acting as husband and wife. The difference is undeniable.

Is it really a difference? We have a huge variance of household models nowadays. It is up to each person on how the children are raised. Who your partner is (if any) really does not matter.

From what the OP said, this couple gave everything of themselves and were even taken advantage of for their good hearts.

 

[Polaris]

It is not about children being raised by a single person. It is about children being raised by same sex persons acting as husband and wife. The difference is undeniable.

Im refering to his arguement about it being selfish and unloving for a single parent on the same level of same sex

dwc

Love (big L) is what motivates parents to sacrifice and put aside their selfishness in order to give their child what’s best for the child. It seems the gay couples focus on their little l love for each other and the little l love they will feel as a parent in order to insist on having children while denying those children what is best for them. I feel the same about single women who deliberately pursue single motherhood in order to satisfy their “need” or desire to be a mother, while denying that child a father. It’s selfish, and incompatible with Love.

The mothers love and the child love are little (l’s) until it comes to widows. To me a truth, if you believe it to be true, must be true in all circumstances. That is why I do not like the arguement he suggested, and am trying to nicely suggest that it does not help the cause. If you want to remove emotion and say Love is only action, you must be consistent. True Love to him requires what is best for the child which is not how the parents feel, nor how the child feels, but its environment as Natureintended which is aFather and a Mother. It is law in action which has no room for emotion.

 

[fix]

Is it really a difference?

Yes, and the difference is tremendous.

We have a huge variance of household models nowadays.

Indeed, we do. And many of them are pathological.

It is up to each person on how the children are raised.

It is? So, anything goes?

Who your partner is (if any) really does not matter.

The fact you used the word “partner” is revealing. That makes my point. We have lost the concept of marriage, mother and father, and right order. We have replaced them with hedonism, relativism, and a cloudy understanding of truth. Our children deserve better.

From what the OP said, this couple gave everything of themselves and were even taken advantage of for their good hearts.

Unfortunately, our society is confused. The solution is not more confusion.

 

[StevenFrancis]

Are there ANY loving, happy, heterosexual, married couples seeking to adopt children anymore? Or offer foster homes? Or do they all insist on IVF instead? What’s going on out there?

Oh please come Lord Jesus,

Amen

 

[dwc]

Im refering to his arguement about it being selfish and unloving for a single parent on the same level of same sex

And I responded to your point – it IS selfish to start out intending to deny your child a father. If the child dies and the mother is left alone, it is NOT selfish for the mother, with whom the child already has a parental bond, to continue to raise the child alone. To do otherwise would be to deliberately traumatize the child further by depriving that child of both parents. That would not be in the child’s interest. The difference is simple and pretty obvious.

My point, again, is that it is selfish to intentionally deny your child the benefit of a parent of each gender – whether it is a homosexual couple of two of the same gender or a single woman raising a child without a father.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

The fact you used the word “partner” is revealing. That makes my point. We have lost the concept of marriage, mother and father, and right order. We have replaced them with hedonism, relativism, and a cloudy understanding of truth. Our children deserve better.

I used “partner” in the union sense. You can say partner if it is a different-gender pairing. My fiancee will be my lifelong parter in life. It is just one variance of the husband and wife terms. It does not take away from the terms mother or father at all.

 

[fix]

And I responded to your point – it IS selfish to start out intending to deny your child a father. If the child dies and the mother is left alone, it is NOT selfish for the mother, with whom the child already has a parental bond, to continue to raise the child alone. To do otherwise would be to deliberately traumatize the child further by depriving that child of both parents. That would not be in the child’s interest. The difference is simple and pretty obvious.

My point, again, is that it is selfish to intentionally deny your child the benefit of a parent of each gender – whether it is a homosexual couple of two of the same gender or a single woman raising a child without a father.

My only disagreement with you is that these are not all of the same magnitude. A child without one parent will not be confused in the same way two men, as one example, acting as husband and wife would be confusing.

 

[dwc]

My only disagreement with you is that these are not all of the same magnitude. A child without one parent will not be confused in the same way two men, as one example, acting as husband and wife would be confusing

True. My vehemence probably stems from my years in the criminal justice system, both with delinquent minors and adult offenders. The percentage of young criminals who were raised by single, never married mothers is staggeringly high. I think the damage done to children raised without the benefit of a father is really underestimated in our society.

 

[DAWNCUROLE]

Are there ANY loving, happy, heterosexual, married couples seeking to adopt children anymore? Or offer foster homes? Or do they all insist on IVF instead? What’s going on out there?

www.adopt.org

According to the website there are 126,000 children waiting for adoption, that does not include the children in foster care who are not freed for adoption yet. It also does NOT include children who should be removed from homes but aren’t because there is no place to put them. But most, if not all, of these children need alot of love and understanding. They are far from perfect. I’m wondering of those who are against gay foster/adoptive parents how many of you are willing to do what it takes to help at least ONE child. Any takers?

 

[Polaris]

And I responded to your point – it IS selfish to start out intending to deny your child a father. If the child dies and the mother is left alone, it is NOT selfish for the mother, with whom the child already has a parental bond, to continue to raise the child alone. To do otherwise would be to deliberately traumatize the child further by depriving that child of both parents. That would not be in the child’s interest. The difference is simple and pretty obvious.

My point, again, is that it is selfish to intentionally deny your child the benefit of a parent of each gender – whether it is a homosexual couple of two of the same gender or a single woman raising a child without a father.

It is not selfish in the begging but it becomes selfish the moment she keeps her children rather then offering them a chance for a mother and a father. She should sacriafice her children what is best for them. The rest of arguement uses the emotional and gut response or small “l” not what is best “L”. Which is supported by the crime rate of widowed children are also very high, it is an unhealthy unnatural environment. There is no difference. Life is cruel but what is more important an emotional bond that can be reformed or a child destined to poverty and a corrupted view of reality
(Im just trying to get you to think about your arguement more because this is what a lot of individuals think when it comes to these situations, when we make laws about adoption single, married or gay, who has a “right to children” and what constitutes abuse. I have had a lot of conversations about this, so I know. If you can defend it instead of saying “its different and you know it is” that will not change my mind because I review it and see no difference, I have a different world view you must operate with in my world view or try to change it not just expect that I must agree with you)

 

[Polaris]

www.adopt.org

According to the website there are 126,000 children waiting for adoption, that does not include the children in foster care who are not freed for adoption yet. It also does NOT include children who should be removed from homes but aren’t because there is no place to put them. But most, if not all, of these children need alot of love and understanding. They are far from perfect. I’m wondering of those who are against gay foster/adoptive parents how many of you are willing to do what it takes to help at least ONE child. Any takers?

Im on the fence, but I would love to adopt someday.