Placing Children for Adoption - Gay vs Athiest Parents

  • Thread starter Thread starter nodito
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rau said:
It may be separate, but if is a more important question. It exposes the larger issue - which is the consequences of our failure to love.
Click to expand...
Rau, while it may be true that the greater question is “how can we increase adoption” or “how can we better love children in foster care,” my original question is one facet of the conversation and a legitimate one at that.

How can we discuss the relative merits of anything if the response is always going to be: there’s a more important issue to discuss.

Neofight seemed to be arguing that I ought not consider the “minimum qualifications” of those willing to adopt since I’m not adopting a child myself. I maintain that even if we are unwilling or unable to adopt, we can still be part of the discussion.

In any event, though, I’d be interested in hearing your perspective, Rau. Do you think Catholic adoption agencies should place children with athiest parents?
 
nodito said:
Rau, while it may be true that the greater question is “how can we increase adoption” or “how can we better love children in foster care,” my original question is one facet of the conversation and a legitimate one at that.

How can we discuss the relative merits of anything if the response is always going to be: there’s a more important issue to discuss.
Click to expand...
The matter you raised is being discussed by various posters. But the other poster pointed out a far greater truth - the consequences of our failure to love - and I felt it important to reinforce that observation.

My personal perspective on adoption is this: I see no reason for a secular adoption agency to prefer adoptive parents who are not atheists, while I’d consider it unrealistic for a catholic agency to ignore that issue.

Adoption agencies of either kind ought to recognise the inbuilt handicap that same sex adoptive parents present, and ought take that into account, if allowed to do so.
 
katy said:
I do know there are so very many straight, well balanced couples yearning to adopt that the whole discussion is needless.
Click to expand...
In many (?most?) countries, and certainly here in the UK, there are plenty of straight couples yearning to adopt healthy babies. When it comes to finding adoptive homes for older children, children with disabilities or serious illnesses, children who have developed emotional and behavioural difficulties because of the trauma they have sustained, etc, there are nowhere near enough adoptive or even foster families to place them all.
 
If you asked me to choose between an atheist heterosexual couple and a Christian gay couple, I would tell you I need more information. That isn’t nearly enough to make a rational decision on where the child should go.

The atheist straight couple might be drug addicts. The Christian gay couples might be embezzling money and risking prison. Who knows? If it were up to me to decide where a child should go, what (if any) religion they practice or the penis to vagina ratio would be at the bottom of the barrel. I would first want to know if they’re quality people who have the potential to be great parents. Being gay or atheist doesn’t automatically disqualify anybody. That’s nonsense.
 
Finite said:
If you asked me to choose between an atheist heterosexual couple and a Christian gay couple, I would tell you I need more information. That isn’t nearly enough to make a rational decision on where the child should go.

The atheist straight couple might be drug addicts. The Christian gay couples might be embezzling money and risking prison. Who knows? If it were up to me to decide where a child should go, what (if any) religion they practice or the penis to vagina ratio would be at the bottom of the barrel. I would first want to know if they’re quality people who have the potential to be great parents. Being gay or atheist doesn’t automatically disqualify anybody. That’s nonsense.
Click to expand...
That more information is needed to decide placement is clear. The better question is: if the would-be adopters are a same sex couple, is that a relevant fact at all? If they are atheist, is that a relevant factor at all?
 
Finite said:
If you asked me to choose between an atheist heterosexual couple and a Christian gay couple, I would tell you I need more information. That isn’t nearly enough to make a rational decision on where the child should go.

The atheist straight couple might be drug addicts. The Christian gay couples might be embezzling money and risking prison. Who knows? If it were up to me to decide where a child should go, what (if any) religion they practice or the penis to vagina ratio would be at the bottom of the barrel. I would first want to know if they’re quality people who have the potential to be great parents. Being gay or atheist doesn’t automatically disqualify anybody. That’s nonsense.
Click to expand...
You have changed the remit of the post?
 
1neophyte said:
That’s like asking if it’s better to place children with adoptive parents who will feed them dog food, or those who would feed them cat food.
Click to expand...
And that’s not a very charitable answer to the question.
 
Padres1969 said:
And that’s not a very charitable answer to the question.
Click to expand...
But it’s not a fair question. It’s as much of a nonsense question as my hypothetical alternative. If a child is placed with a same sex couple, he/she will be “fed” with the lie that their family is just as “good” as any family led by a male and female couple. If a child is placed with atheist parents, he/she will be “fed” with the lie that there is no God. Debating which of the two is preferable cannot lead to anything resembling truth or health.

It is certainly possible, and maybe even likely, that both homosexual couples and and atheist couples will do their best to love and provide for a child just like any good parent is called to do. They may make sure the child gets proper nutrition, shelter, education, medical care, emotional support, and they may do an superlative job at all of these things. But they will inevitably do some harm to the child(ren) simply by the example and message they present by their lifestyle and beliefs. If a mother drinks alcohol during a pregnancy, it doesn’t matter if it is beer or liquor. If a father smokes around a child, it doesn’t matter if it is cigarettes or cigars. Trying to figure out which is better is just foolishness, even in the name of “charity.”
 
Rosebud77 said:
Agreeing mostly bt again it depends on why the parents are atheist and how militant they re. Inculcating hatred of spiritual values in a child is easy to do.

When I was in Scotland and they were campaigning to allow schools to teach that gay partnership was a valid family lifestyle,one of the publcity films that aroused strong feeling was of two men in bed and a little girl atop the blankets playing in nightwear
Click to expand...
That’s messed up.
 
As a future social worker (hopefully), you have look into the mental health of each party first. If all things are equal on that level I’d choose the atheist parents for the fact that it provides the child a mother and father. Unlike the ever increasing trend of saying “just put them in a home where there is love” I sort of run the other way in the fact that I don’t think all households are equal in outcome. Same-sex pairings aren’t adopting in droves (as the “progressives” want you to believe, saving hungry orphans from the streets), the “gay household as a legitimate lifestyle” is purely an agenda, and I’m not willing to fork over a child for that. Then, that’s why I’m not seeking out DCFS jobs.
 
If you care about the child’s immortal soul (as a Catholic you do, right?) neither of these options would be acceptable.
 
All things being equal … that both couples are good people … I would have to go with placing the child with an atheist couple, with the hope that they will one day find God … placing a child in a family where there is no father AND mother should be a sin.
 
nodito said:
My friend and I were discussing the morality of placing children with adoptive parents who were in a homosexual relationship (a topic that, I am well aware, has been discussed at length here on CAF). One of the issues he raised was whether I thought doing so would be worse than placing a child with an adoptive married heterosexual couple who would not teach the child about God (or teach him that God does not exist). He argued that although a child does have a right to a mother and a father, he also has the right to know God, and that the gay couple is not necessarily “worse.”

I’m interested in your thoughts on this topic and also whether anyone here happens to know whether Catholic adoption agencies screen out couples who are not believers.
Click to expand...
Seems like I don’t have to look far for religious setting up the ball on the tee for me and the assumptions that religion is inherently bigoted.

Social studies conclude that a child raised in a family unit of two or more succeed farther in life than in a single family home. The gender and sexual orientation of the parents has no bearing on the child’s success in life. Sorry but homophobia is now the equivalent of being afraid of witches still. It’s an absurdity to hold in this or last century or ever actually.

slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/02/12/what_we_know_about_lesbian_and_gay_parenting_making_sense_of_the_studies.html

“The Columbia project is the largest collection of peer-reviewed scholarship on gay parenting to date. What does it show? We found 71 studies concluding that kids with gay parents fare no worse than others and only four concluding that they had problems. But those four studies all suffered from the same gross limitation: The children with gay parents were lumped in with children of family breakup, a cohort known to face higher risks linked to the trauma of family dissolution.”

As to the atheist family not teaching the children about a deity…so you seem to strongly suggest, I’ll go as far as to admit, that religion is a cultural, socio-geological issue and that faith in the supernatural has to be indoctrinated into people starting from infancy. That the evidence for the most important thing in your life is soo vague that you have to have a cult culture of conformation bias isolation till adult hood for people to continue to believe this nonsense. Gravity is real regardless of your culture, people exist regardless of your culture, reality exists regardless of your culture. Why is your deity not as evident as those examples if believing in it is soo important as you make it out to be?
 
Russell_SA said:
Seems like I don’t have to look far for religious setting up the ball on the tee for me and the assumptions that religion is inherently bigoted.
Click to expand...
Against behavioral sins that they openly identify?

Of course. Are you new to the concept of religion and sin?

And please don’t revive year-old threads. If you want to grind anew, start a new thread.
 
Vonsalza said:
Against behavioral sins that they openly identify?

Of course. Are you new to the concept of religion and sin?

And please don’t revive year-old threads. If you want to grind anew, start a new thread.
Click to expand...
The parents’ behavior is no more a choice than their skin color was a choice. When did anyone ever choose their sexual orientation or who they fell in love with? Besides you seem to think that being raised around homosexuals would be something that rubs off on the child? Like white skin color could be rubbed off? That’s really what you are presenting yourself as. How is the sin of the parents in this issue going to be a sin to anyone else not involved in that sin? Is the child participating in that sin? Well probably if the parents are catholic priests.

As for being raised around atheist parents, see previous post.

FYI - stay away from all women that you think are witches. They’re really not witches. Witches never existed by the way.
 
Russell_SA said:
The parents’ behavior is no more a choice than their skin color was a choice.
Click to expand...
Here we obviously disagree. Behavior is a choice; especially in self-aware species.
When did anyone ever choose their sexual orientation or who they fell in love with?
Click to expand...
I’m reminded here of that interesting case where one identical twin was gay and the other wasn’t.

There’s obviously a genetic component. But as being a purely genetic social behavior, sorry. That hasn’t been proven. 🤷
Besides you seem to think that being raised around homosexuals would be something that rubs off on the child?
Click to expand...
I wasn’t aware that I raised that point. Could you cite where I typed that, please?
FYI - stay away from all women that you think are witches. They’re really not witches. Witches never existed by the way.
Click to expand...
:confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top