Is homosexual adoption of older children moral?

  • Thread starter Thread starter atassina
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

atassina

Guest
Is it better that older unadopted children remain unadopted or is it moral for homosexual couples to adopt them and give them a less institutional home?

The underlying issue here is that infants are highly adoptable and desired by married couples. The older a child becomes the less adoptable he or she is. Is it better that the child remain in an institution or is it better that they are adopted- by a married couple or by a homosexual couple?
 
atassina said:
Is it better that older unadopted children remain unadopted or is it moral for homosexual couples to adopt them and give them a less institutional home?

The underlying issue here is that infants are highly adoptable and desired by married couples. The older a child becomes the less adoptable he or she is. Is it better that the child remain in an institution or is it better that they are adopted- by a married couple or by a homosexual couple?
Click to expand...
It is NEVER moral for homosexuals to adopt children, no matter the age.
 
Nope.

But as to the idea that babies are more adoptable, I don’t necessarily agree. I would much rather adopt older children, especially a family so they wouldn’t get split up. I have friends who adopted five sisters (Oy!). And there are a lot of people who adopt kids with some handicap. But regardless, you don’t offer an immoral home because of the stigma of an institution.
 
Dale_M said:
Why would that be so?
Click to expand...
Because homosexually is unnatural, gravely disordered and immoral. Children should be protected from morally dangerous situations such as being brought up by homosexuals.
 
thistle said:
Because homosexually is unnatural, gravely disordered and immoral. Children should be protected from morally dangerous situations such as being brought up by homosexuals.
Click to expand...
Does that mean when the natural parents choose to live gravely, disordered, immoral lifestyles they should be taken away and put in an institution? What about alcoholic parents? What about parents that use contraceptives? Which mortal sin is worse and why would you want any child living in a situation in which the parents are constantly in a state of mortal sin? Why not give them to a loving homosexual couple? 4:24 a.m.
 
atassina said:
Is it better that older unadopted children remain unadopted or is it moral for homosexual couples to adopt them and give them a less institutional home?

The underlying issue here is that infants are highly adoptable and desired by married couples. The older a child becomes the less adoptable he or she is. Is it better that the child remain in an institution or is it better that they are adopted- by a married couple or by a homosexual couple?
Click to expand...
That really depends on the homosexual couple. These cases should be decided on a case by case basis, however a couple should not be denied a child just because they’re homosexual.
 
Why not? Homosexuality is a disordered lifestyle. This disorder permeates every aspect of their life. Do we want this corruption passed on to children? Imagine this, “Daddy, can Johnny come over and play so we can have pretend sex? Both of us are now past puberty! It will be fun. We can do it just like daddy and daddy.” What is to prevent this situation? The homosexual lifestyle encourages frequent sex with multiple partners.
 
atassina said:
Why not? Homosexuality is a disordered lifestyle. This disorder permeates every aspect of their life. Do we want this corruption passed on to children? Imagine this, “Daddy, can Johnny come over and play so we can have pretend sex? Both of us are now past puberty! It will be fun. We can do it just like daddy and daddy.” What is to prevent this situation? The homosexual lifestyle encourages frequent sex with multiple partners.
Click to expand...
Reverse the situation to a heterosexual couple, make the friend female, and realize that the exact same situation could go down, but with heterosexual sex.

The modern heterosexual lifestyle encourage frequent sex with multiple partners.

While I believe that homosexuality is religiously wrong, I do not think it compromises two people’s ability to lovingly raise children.
 
When considering the morality of adoption, the question that should be asked is, “What’s best for the children?”

Situations can vary greatly, but many times it is much better for a child to be with parents who are sinning in their bedroom than to be institutionalized. It should be decided on a case-by-case basis.

I don’t know all the numbers, but children who grow up in institutions are much worse off than children who are adopted, even adopted into less-than-ideal situations.

BTW, this is a separate can of worms, but from my research on homosexuality (I’m a mental health major) it is not contagious. Children raised by homosexual parents are not much more likely to be homosexual when they grow up than children raised by other parents.
 
In the same way as it would be innappropriate to adopt a child into the house of a fornicator, and adultress or a drunkard; willfully placing children into a confusing and dangerous environment would be cruel. It is better for them to be kept in institutional care where they can be guided and supervised by trained proffessionals rather than trusting some disordered adults to “do it there way”. – Love is not the only thing that is important in parents; competence is up there too.
 
Either there is truth or there is not. Debate based on opinions does not lead to guidance and good decisions. Here is clear teaching as given by the Catholic Church:

“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.”

God bless,
Ed
 
Before you adopt a child, you must check yourself to make sure you are mentally, socially, morally and spiritually sound. Homosexuals may be rich with enough money to take care of the child but they lack the moral and the spiritual aspect. Even some societies are unfriendly to homosexuals and if you bring the child into such a society, that may affect the child.
 
thistle said:
Because homosexually is unnatural, gravely disordered and immoral. Children should be protected from morally dangerous situations such as being brought up by homosexuals.
Click to expand...
So that they can grow up in the wonderful foster-care system and be bounced from one abusive home to another until they turn 18 and are cast out onto the street. Much better. :rolleyes:
 
edwest2 said:
Either there is truth or there is not. Debate based on opinions does not lead to guidance and good decisions. Here is clear teaching as given by the Catholic Church:

“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.”

Actually, a recent study shows that the adopted children of lesbians may be more psychologically and emotionally well-adjusted than their “normal” counterparts. time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
 
BobObob said:
When considering the morality of adoption, the question that should be asked is, “What’s best for the children?”

Situations can vary greatly, but many times it is much better for a child to be with parents who are sinning in their bedroom than to be institutionalized. It should be decided on a case-by-case basis.

I don’t know all the numbers, but children who grow up in institutions are much worse off than children who are adopted, even adopted into less-than-ideal situations.

BTW, this is a separate can of worms, but from my research on homosexuality (I’m a mental health major) it is not contagious. Children raised by homosexual parents are not much more likely to be homosexual when they grow up than children raised by other parents.
Click to expand...
YES.
 
40.png
Thoughtfulone:
A study can say anything. The social and natural norm is one mother and one father, preferably the actual biological parents.

God bless,
Ed
 
Thoughtfulone said:
Yes, but this is not always possible.
Click to expand...
Exactly, we are in a fallen, and as a result, very messy world where the reality is often much at odds with the Truth.

While not a moral relativist, we do have to try to do the best we can with a less than ideal situation, keeping at heart what is best for the child.

I can think of few instances where an institution can offer a child the same benefit as genuinely loving, albeit imperfect, parent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top