Moral Conundrum: Gay Adoption

[Zooey]

True, but the horse has already run out of the barn and it’s too late to close that door.

Another moral alternative is for the “gay couple” to act as foster parents until a proper family could be found.

This is actually a very good idea. I saw a TV documentary some years ago, about 2 gay men, a couple of long standing, who became foster parents for a series of troubled young people. These were kids who had grown enough that they weren’t “cute” any more, & no one wanted to adopt them.
The kids–now grown & with lives of their own, made the film as a tribute to these 2 guys who had reached out to kids, no matter how troubled, no matter how much they acted out. Because they genuinely loved children, & had compassion on those in need.
I thought it was a great example of how anyone, anywhere, has the capacity to do more than we ever imagine. But:crying: too few people do…

Time will tell, I guess. I hope and pray (and suspect) that this little girl will grow up happy and loved, and will go on to live to her potential as a human being.

It’s up to God.

Yes, and to all of us, who could, at the very least, spend more time in prayer for the unwanted children among us.
Is this an ideal situation? No, but it is a way to offer at least this one wee one a fighting chance in a very cruel world.

 

[SirOscar]

Yes, there were moral evils all the way around, very bad things. Two gay men are never going to be proper parents for the poor girl regardless of how much they love her. It is really appalling how some peoples “needs” to feel like a “normal family” out weigh child’s need for a proper family. The influence on this girl as she grows up could do incalculable damage.

I disagree only from experience. My brother is gay and has been living in a homosexual relationship for 25 years. They raised 2 children successfully. Each child was given the love & discipline needed to lead them to being caring & responsible adults. Neither of them are “damaged” as a result of being raised by homosexual parents. Both of the children, are by the way heterosexual, and never questioned their sexuality.

I know the church doesn’t approve, but I too, am conflicted.

 

[Publisher]

We live in a world of shades of grey. Two biological parents ARE the best to raise their children. Even two biological parents can be abusive and damage the “soul” of their child…the above poster who made the observation that leaving a child to “rot” in an institution instead of allowing two loving gay parents to take care of them just reeks of …I don’t know what…but love and mercy aren’t the words such a belief system embraces.

It’s better to condemn the child to a life of deprivation to “save their soul” than to provide a whole life provided by a couple who loves them who happen to be gay…amazing!!!

What I read is that the concern truly is not for the child…but that temporal suffering and borderline poverty is better than having loving gay parents…says more about the “soul” of the poster than the “soul” of the gay couple…IMO

 

[fix]

And I’ll tell you again, fix: it’s acceptable to place children in an arrangement where they will be loved, cherished, cared for, and taken care of. Leaving a child to rot in our severely deficient social services when there is a reasonable alternative is contrary to justice and charity.

How is one loved and cared for when they are intentionally exposed to deviant notions of right and wrong?

I say again the failure to see the grave moral illness in these situations is appalling. Not surprising anymore, yet still appalling.

 

[Michaeljc4]

We aren’t going to see eye to eye on this, fix. I appreciate your discussing this rather hot topic with me, and I wish you well. We are at an impasse, and I’ve found that–on these forums–things quickly lose the spirit of charity when folks reach this sort of wall between their opinions.

So in the spirit of charity, I withdraw from this discussion. God bless you, friend.