R
Rence
Guest
Ok, I read a lot of the responses, and truly I’m perplexed by some of them.
I understand that it’s against of the rules of the Catholic Church to be in a non-chaste homosexual relationship. I get that, I understand it. But let’s look at the children that gay couples want to adopt - from the perspective of the child. Adopt agencies from all over the world can’t place children fast enough. That’s a fact. There are countless children waiting to be adopted that will never be adopted. That’s also a fact. It is also a fact that a couple who wants a baby, rather than a child older than a toddler, would pay a LOT of money to buy a baby rather than save a child in an adoption agency. Not only are they bought on the market like puppies which is extremely disturbing to say the least, but a pregnant woman can be woo’d to have all of her medical bills paid for and a nice little stipend, to give her baby up for adoption to a desperate couple just so they can adopt an infant rather than adopting an available child.
Therefore, I don’t think it’s better for them to be on the street rather than being raised by homosexual couple. I don’t believe it is better for them to be bounced from foster home to foster home. I don’t believe it is better for them to grow up in an orphanage and then when they grow up, they are put out on their own. But I do believe it is better for them, and in their best interests, to be in a warm, loving environment in which they have a roof over their head, food on their table, clothes on their body and education attented to by their caretakers. The alternative is not better for them, or in their best interests, from my perspective.
In the case of my friends who adopted the little girl from China: I don’t believe it is better for her to have been a prostitute working the streets of China, rather than live with their “mothers” here in the States where, again, she has a roof over her head, clothes on her body, tuition paid for, food on the table, someone catering to her every need unselfishly, etc. I do not believe that if a heterosexual couple doesn’t want her, then nobody can have her. To me that is not in the best interest of the child. Seriously, I’m not trying to be controversial or argumentative, I don’t get it.
Regardless of how one feels about gay people, I don’t understand how keeping a child without any parents at all is in the best interest of the child. I have found no evidence that supports the likelihood that a child of gay parents “learns” to be gay. And certainly gay children come from parents who are not gay. Therefore, I don’t see the reason why sexual orientation of the parents matters when a child’s safety and welfare is at stake. To me, IMOHO, it is incredibly selfish and unloving to subject a child to NO parents, with the only reason being that the couple who wants to love the child is gay. I don’t believe it is right to subject a child to NO parents, If they can have SOME parents provide for them. It’s not like gay couples are trumping hetero couples in the adoption line. No one wants these kids. They’re alone. I don’t understand how it is MORE selfish to want to provide a home for a child with nothing. It seems to be that it’s the other way around.
And as for IVF, again, it’s beyond my comprehension to understand why a couple who seeks IVF is “selfish” for wanting to procreate, considering what a strong innate drive it is to procreate, for all, not just humans. In addition, it is a plain and simple fact that the Church pressures couples to have more children than they even want, or can afford, so important they consider having children, which kind of reinforces how important it is. Remember, that Catholic Church teaches that it is not only a blessing to have many children, but a commandment. So obiviously it’s important. Therefore, I don’t believe is it “selfish” to give in to those desperate wishes for a child when one using IVF to have a child. Please allow me to point out that the “immorality” of IVF is purely a Catholic teaching. Therefore, if one isn’t Catholic, or Christian, or follows a religion that forbids it, it’s highly unlikey that they could consider it immoral like practicing Catholics do.
IMOHO, it’s just one of the contradictions of the Church to forbid IVF given the importance afforded procreation also taught by the Church.
I understand that it’s against of the rules of the Catholic Church to be in a non-chaste homosexual relationship. I get that, I understand it. But let’s look at the children that gay couples want to adopt - from the perspective of the child. Adopt agencies from all over the world can’t place children fast enough. That’s a fact. There are countless children waiting to be adopted that will never be adopted. That’s also a fact. It is also a fact that a couple who wants a baby, rather than a child older than a toddler, would pay a LOT of money to buy a baby rather than save a child in an adoption agency. Not only are they bought on the market like puppies which is extremely disturbing to say the least, but a pregnant woman can be woo’d to have all of her medical bills paid for and a nice little stipend, to give her baby up for adoption to a desperate couple just so they can adopt an infant rather than adopting an available child.
Therefore, I don’t think it’s better for them to be on the street rather than being raised by homosexual couple. I don’t believe it is better for them to be bounced from foster home to foster home. I don’t believe it is better for them to grow up in an orphanage and then when they grow up, they are put out on their own. But I do believe it is better for them, and in their best interests, to be in a warm, loving environment in which they have a roof over their head, food on their table, clothes on their body and education attented to by their caretakers. The alternative is not better for them, or in their best interests, from my perspective.
In the case of my friends who adopted the little girl from China: I don’t believe it is better for her to have been a prostitute working the streets of China, rather than live with their “mothers” here in the States where, again, she has a roof over her head, clothes on her body, tuition paid for, food on the table, someone catering to her every need unselfishly, etc. I do not believe that if a heterosexual couple doesn’t want her, then nobody can have her. To me that is not in the best interest of the child. Seriously, I’m not trying to be controversial or argumentative, I don’t get it.
Regardless of how one feels about gay people, I don’t understand how keeping a child without any parents at all is in the best interest of the child. I have found no evidence that supports the likelihood that a child of gay parents “learns” to be gay. And certainly gay children come from parents who are not gay. Therefore, I don’t see the reason why sexual orientation of the parents matters when a child’s safety and welfare is at stake. To me, IMOHO, it is incredibly selfish and unloving to subject a child to NO parents, with the only reason being that the couple who wants to love the child is gay. I don’t believe it is right to subject a child to NO parents, If they can have SOME parents provide for them. It’s not like gay couples are trumping hetero couples in the adoption line. No one wants these kids. They’re alone. I don’t understand how it is MORE selfish to want to provide a home for a child with nothing. It seems to be that it’s the other way around.
And as for IVF, again, it’s beyond my comprehension to understand why a couple who seeks IVF is “selfish” for wanting to procreate, considering what a strong innate drive it is to procreate, for all, not just humans. In addition, it is a plain and simple fact that the Church pressures couples to have more children than they even want, or can afford, so important they consider having children, which kind of reinforces how important it is. Remember, that Catholic Church teaches that it is not only a blessing to have many children, but a commandment. So obiviously it’s important. Therefore, I don’t believe is it “selfish” to give in to those desperate wishes for a child when one using IVF to have a child. Please allow me to point out that the “immorality” of IVF is purely a Catholic teaching. Therefore, if one isn’t Catholic, or Christian, or follows a religion that forbids it, it’s highly unlikey that they could consider it immoral like practicing Catholics do.
IMOHO, it’s just one of the contradictions of the Church to forbid IVF given the importance afforded procreation also taught by the Church.
) pays me back for this favor I did for grateful-yet-still-non-repaying friend of many years ago. (Couple does agree that they “owe me.”)