Which is better: kids growing up in a foster home or kids growing up with gay parents?

[buffalo]

Woman Petitions Ontario Court for Third Parent Status for Lesbian Partner’s Son -

Who is parenthood for - Adults? Children? - New Study Asks -

“Same Sex Marriage Harms Children’s Rights” Marriage Symposium Hears -

Written legal arguments of the Alliance for Marriage and Family in the 3 parents case heard by the Ontario Court of Appeal. This case concerns the application by the lesbian partner of the mother of a child to be declared the third parent of the child without extinguishing the parental rights of the biological father. (August 2006) -

Review Of Research On Homosexual Parenting, Adoption, And Foster Parenting -

Is This Diversity, Or Tragedy? Children as Victims of their Parents’ Choices -

Children Need Both A Mother And A Father, NARTH. -
extracted 09/04/2006

Gender Complementarity and Child-rearing: Where Tradition and Science Agree -

Flawed Studies Used For Promoting Same-Sex Marriage, Says Policy Institute, NARTH. - extracted 09/04/2006

Homosexual Parenting: Placing Children at Risk -

Children of Homosexual Parents Report Childhood Difficulties
familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/children-of-homosexual-parents-report-childhood-difficulties-2/

Are Over A Third of Foster Parent Molestations Homosexual? -

Homosexual Child Molestations By Foster Parents: Illinois, 1997-2002 -

Dr, George Rekers and Dr. Mark Kilgus, “Studies of Homosexual Parenting: A Critical Review,:”
professorgeorge.com/Publications_%7C_Professor_George_files/14_2Rekers.PDF

Same-Sex Parenting is Harmful to Children
realwomenca.com/archives/newsletter/2004_mar_apr/article_1.html

Canadian Marriage Policy: A Tragedy for Children -

Maggie Gallagher and Joshua K. Baker, “Do Mothers and Fathers Matter?”, iMapp Policy Brief, Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. See - extracted 27/03/2005.

No Basis: What the Studies Don’t Tell Us About Same-Sex Parenting -

French Report Submitted on Behalf of the Mission of Inquiry on the Family and the Rights of Children (Edited English Version) -

 

[vz71]

So who one chooses to have sex with effects how good of a parent they can be? Seriously, that is what you believe?

No, what I am saying is one who creates an environment in which sin is acted out, unrepented and continued is not in a position to provide the moral guide that the child requires.

A homosexual couple simulating a marriage is just one example of a couple that is not qualified to raise a child. There are other examples, but they are not pertinent to this thread.

 

[buffalo]

Pro-Homosexual Researchers Conceal Findings:
Children Raised by Openly Homosexual Parents More Likely to Engage in Homosexuality

Research by social scientists, although not definitive, suggests that children reared by openly
homosexual parents are far more likely to engage in homosexual behavior than children raised by
others. Studies thus far find between 8% and 21% of homosexually parented children ultimately
identify as non-heterosexual. For comparison purposes, approximately 2% of the general
population are non-heterosexual. Therefore, if these percentages continue to hold true, children of
homosexuals have a 4 to 10 times greater likelihood of developing a non-heterosexual preference
than other children.
Some researchers who uncovered sexual preference differences between homosexually and
heterosexually parented children, nonetheless declared in their research summaries that no
differences were found. Many believe they concealed their findings so as not to harm their own prohomosexual,
sociopolitical agendas.
All social scientists who conduct research in this emotionally-charged area have personal biases.
That’s a given. But if the authors of these studies want to be regarded as scientists, and not
activists, they must set aside their biases and straightforwardly present their findings.
Regardless, no one should be surprised that homosexual parents are more likely to raise
homosexual children. As one of the few forthright pro-homosexual advocates proclaimed, “Of
course our children are going to be different.”

more…

 

[Los_Angeles]

If I had to make a choice for myself, I would rather grow up in a foster home than be adopted by homosexual parents.

If anything I have said is against the Catholic Church, let it be anathama.

 

[sweetpealover]

Hi everyone, During my period as a minor I (pre 18 yrs) I was pushed into and out of many foster homes.( My mother died when I was 3, and soon after my father abandoned me) I don’t know if it has changed now however I am still battling the earlier sexual abuse(with my father) and at a younger house, and experiences with my last foster home: 0h they told me on my birthday (same time as high school graduation – just two days apart) that I had to move out immediately because they no longer received money for my upkeep by the state. No discussion, no issue. I had no job and no source or mode of transportation. They didn’t care but that was that. My high school graduation gift was a suitcase.

Now the gay side: I am not gay but was at one point married to one. From that union we had a daughter who is now 26 yrs. I divorced my husband in 1996 and he died in 2003. Marriage followed by divorce is so devastating to children (loud arguing yelling, threats, cheating , alcohol and drug abuse, other abuse (emotional, sexual, all of it) that every child must be protected from. No matter what that child(ren) is told they will feel responsible. Children are really smart,whatever age, and pick up a lot more than we are aware.

It comes down to this, as parents it is our job to do everything we can to provide a loving home environment where children can prosper and become responsible adults, either with a man and a woman or with two people of the same sex. Catholic Answers probably won’t like my opinions but they are mine. Pre-marital counseling is only 6 mo long ? - lengthen it , more intensive and mandatory for all marriages. Children suffer in other ways when the parents are constantly arguing, physical confrontations, drug and alcohol abuse, and everything else that happens before a divorce. I feel that if married parents (a man and a woman) cannot provide the right atmosphere for a child to prosper then we , as humans, must find another option, whatever that means. And this includes more detailed and expanded family investigations, before and after placement.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Catholic Answers probably won’t like my opinions but they are mine. Pre-marital counseling is only 6 mo long ? - lengthen it , more intensive and mandatory for all marriages. Children suffer in other ways when the parents are constantly arguing, physical confrontations, drug and alcohol abuse, and everything else that happens before a divorce. I feel that if married parents (a man and a woman) cannot provide the right atmosphere for a child to prosper then we , as humans, must find another option, whatever that means. And this includes more detailed and expanded family investigations, before and after placement.

Why would you think that Catholic Answers would not like your opinions? Well, let me take that back: There are some posters on this forum that apparently believe one must never question what their larger Church and smaller parish ever does, ever. No matter how ill-advised it is to have a paltry 6 mos. (or less!) of marriage preparation. Boy, could I not agree with you more: both in content and in length, religious marriage prep should be lengthened & deepend, and spread over time, and be highly interactive; and secular marriage prep is right now absent, at least in any mandatory way. (I invite you to wander over to the World News forum to where I discuss, on the “abortion pill at home” thread, why I think serious, realistic marriage prep is essential to changing some of the most toxic social trends of our times. )

The only way I would disagree with you, is that, I do not believe that two gay people make a better arrangement than one straight person, for reasons that I won’t repeat, because I have abundantly stated them. Adoption agencies are getting much frriendlier to adoptions by singles, but it used to be that you could just Forget It if you were single. I know many single men and single women who would make excellent parents of an adopted child, and in fact many, more recently, have become adopting parents. That vs. foster home, yes.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Just elaborating on my post above, because I don’t want anyone who has found that a short marriage course has been fully sufficient (so far, or indefinitely) to think that I am implying that their marriage will fall apart! But I do think that if that has been, and continues to be, sufficient for those couples, they are special (perhaps) and/or lucky, and more power to them!

I think that an abbreviated preparation is, for most people, quite risky. Most marriages are many-layered, and while they may appear to purr along for absolutely years, almost every couple experiences at least one significant crisis in their relationship, at some point. Unfortunately, for too many couples, that moment is the break-up moment. It tends to be that relationships which are regularly renewed (through retreats, through ‘repeat honeymoons,’ and more) end up being the strongest. I think some couples assume that renewal of one’s marriage is a sign of weakness in the relationship; no: it’s a sign of fervor about the relationship, and trust that the relationship can withstand being examined. (I mention the regular renewal of marriage on that thread I referred you to, sweetpealover.)

The arrival of children brings many couples even closer together & more ecstatic about their relationship (it did for hubby and me), but even then, there is often some tension related to that arrival, because it changes the dynamics and priorities in the spouses’ relationship.

Hardship (including financial, including medical) can really test a marriage, and experiencing a true tragedy or trauma (death of child, tragic accident, crime, etc.) can strain it to the breaking point. But even the everyday misunderstandings about modes of communication (male vs. female) and personality differences and personal preferences & needs can also accumulate and undermine harmony.

 

[LemonAndLime]

So if homosexual parents cannot adopt because they’re in a state of mortal sin, what about unmarried couples? Are they just as bad? Or married couples, one of whom was previously married - but didn’t get an annulment? Should they also be rejected because they’re living in a state of mortal sin?

 

[buffalo]

So if homosexual parents cannot adopt because they’re in a state of mortal sin, what about unmarried couples? Are they just as bad? Or married couples, one of whom was previously married - but didn’t get an annulment? Should they also be rejected because they’re living in a state of mortal sin?

If we all just followed God’s plan faithfully…

 

[Elizabeth502]

So if homosexual parents cannot adopt because they’re in a state of mortal sin, what about unmarried couples? Are they just as bad? Or married couples, one of whom was previously married - but didn’t get an annulment? Should they also be rejected because they’re living in a state of mortal sin?

I have absolutely no idea whom you are addressing, but if you’re addressing me, you’re mistaken in the very question. I never mentioned anything about sin. (For about the 3rd time on this thread now, I have to assert that.) Are you questioning someone else, who is asserting that “sin” keeps people from permission to parent? God hasn’t stated that through any of His representatives, the Roman Catholic Church hasn’t stated that, the Catechism of the Catholic Church hasn’t stated that “sin” per se should keep people from parenting. The human race would have become extinct with our first parents if sanctity is a requirement for parenthood.

 

[Sister_Angel]

Excuse me but Why is it people are afraid of using the word sin? Is it not a sin to take the word of God in vain? Are we to pacify people that are sinning because we know them does this makes it right or should we just put them on our prayer list and walk way without letting them know they are living in a sinful, state? LemonAndLime were you referring to two gay people that are single or heterosexuals?

I two hope the day will come when people will be better parents and that means all people not just gay people. If two people are gay and adopt and never teach their child to like the same sex all their living days with them, it would still affect them in bad ways and their is a very good chance they will look to the same sex also. I cannot imagine waking up every day to two mothers sleeping in the same bed and wearing the same clothes taking me shopping and to the doctors to see if i have something wrong with me.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Excuse me but Why is it people are afraid of using the word sin?

Who’s “afraid”? Not I. It’s just that “sin” is not the argument, because if it were, all adults would be denied parenting rights based on all of us being sinners. Again, it is not the Church’s position that “sin” disqualifies homosexuals from being parents. It is that their relationship is invalid by its nature (in addition to its sinfulness, which is a separate subject). The Church maintains that the male-female relationship is what mirrors God’s creation, and is the procreative & unitive aspect of a valid marriage. It further states that parenting is to evolve from that natural relationship, not through invalid relationships which oppose natural law.

It’s also important to maintain the focus on the inappropriateness for the health of the child, because the secular world, and its courts, are not interested in ‘sin’ being the disqualifier for a homosexual “marriage,” and will not figure that into their rulings. Nor will adoption agencies decide based on that kind of reliigous terminiology By their nature, such arguments have little credibility in U.S. courts of law. The subject of the thread is the benefit, or lack of it, to a child growing up in a foster home vs. with supposedly idealized gay “parents,” which several of us have pointed out is a fantasy dichotomy.

 

[gtrenewed]

The Church maintains that the male-female relationship is what mirrors God’s creation, and is the procreative & unitive aspect of a valid marriage. It further states that parenting is to evolve from that natural relationship, not through invalid relationships which oppose natural law.

In one of your earlier posts you gave a number of alternatives to gay adoption, a number of which were single parents.

How can you suggest this if it takes a male and female to properly raise a child?

 

[vz71]

Who’s “afraid”? Not I. It’s just that “sin” is not the argument, because if it were, all adults would be denied parenting rights based on all of us being sinners.

Not quite.
It also has to do with the unrepentence involved in the sin.

It is a mortal sin, being acted out in front of the children, with absolutely no intention of reconciliation.

This does not disqualify everyone that sins. It disqualifies those that are actively providing the example of the sin as something that is not a problem.
That are teaching the children the sin or a tolerance for sin.

 

[Elizabeth502]

In one of your earlier posts you gave a number of alternatives to gay adoption, a number of which were single parents.

How can you suggest this if it takes a male and female to properly raise a child?

Totally fair question. glad to answer it.

It is less ideal to have a single parent, but more ideal than a homosexual couple. Again, adoption agencies deal with secular law for the most part. I have not investigated how Catholic adoption agencies work, relative to single heterosexual parents. I just know many single women, and a few single men, who have adopted.

I will pose another possibility, because I know of such a situation, although he has not declared himself interested in parenting an adopted child.

I have a gay friend who no longer has any gay lovers, and he was never promiscuous. I believe he had one gay partner his entire life. He’s living a celibate, chaste life (which he wouldn’t describe as such, not being a believer; he, and the secular world, would describe it as “single and unattached.”) He shows no signs of being interested in re-establishing any gay partnerships for the rest of his life. He’s retired (he retired early after earning almost a fortune). If he were to express an interest in fathering an adopted child from a foster home or any other environment, and the only other simultaneous choices were

(1) a Christian heterosexual couple with a history of domestic abuse
(2) a homosexual couple, wth or without proclaiming a faith tradition
(3) a foster home environment, especially for a child like sweetpealover who had been bounced around and had a number of negative experiences with that

I would hope that the agency would select him over those three choices. Such a child would have probably no exposure to any gay lovers, would be exposed to his range of friends (which are, currently, overwhelmingly straight, and often coupled), and I believe he would be focused only on the generic, non-sexualized well-being of this child. I think he would be objective about teaching the child about sexuality and do not believe he would try to influence the child to select a gay lifestyle, question the child’s sexual identity, etc.

Keep in mind that I know this person extremely well, and thus I would be a qualified reference for him, should that ever become a possibility. I have known him for years, rather closely. He’s very much like a brother to me. I trust him. Adoption agencies – at least the better ones - seek exhaustive research, of a personal nature, about prospective parents. They seek people who have an intimate knowledge of the home environment the child is likely to encounter. And this person and I, whom I will call “W,” have had actual discussions about differences between genders. He is firmly in the camp I’m in (and the RCC is in!) as far as gender being a radical element of a person’s identitty. So, I know he would not mislead any child to believe that genders are interchangeable, that they don’t matter, etc. Further, I believe (I think someone in the family told me this) that he does not approve of SSM because he considers it not a desirable environment for a child. He’s also a gentle person, a kind person, with a strong personal ethic/morality, and has examined some of his previous more opportunistic values he used to espouse, and now comes down on social justice being a moral path, not to mention an enlightened economic path, when done right. And this is all without his being a believer, at all. (He’s an atheist.)

 

[angelerulastiel]

There are an awful lot of children that are bouncing around in foster homes and group homes. It may not be the rule, but it happens enough. I’m not sure whether a stable home with homosexual parents would be better than living with in a group home for a year which then closes, living in another group home that closes, moving to a foster home that decides they don’t want the child, to a couple that takes in foster children while they wait to be adopted, but my instincts say that stability is better. With a lack of stability children can develop attachment and emotional disorders. That could lead to homosexuality just as easily living with loving homosexual parents.

 

[paxbwu]

So who one chooses to have sex with effects how good of a parent they can be? Seriously, that is what you believe?

Should “what” one chooses to have sex with have any bearing on the adoption process?

 

[Elizabeth502]

Should “what” one chooses to have sex with have any bearing on the adoption process?

Again, the critera for adoption are not sex and sin. The criteria include the entire home enviornment, and what that environment entails: who the child will interact with on a daily basis, what are the priorities and lifestyle of the adopting parents (without even regard to sexuality). Thus, someone who would not be able to furnish a contradictory reference to the many personal witnesses who say that Dad and/or Mom sit in front of the TV all day long (or computer), not communicating with live people, And don’t assume this is an extreme. I had such a relative in my own family. He was like the parents in the film Mathilda (almost as caricatured). My uncle would have been a very unhealthy influence on a minor, but he had not a homosexual bone in his body.

Someone who lives in a narrow environment, not exposing the child to anything/anyone but a very circumscribed set of influences, can be just as harmful as parents who expose a child to absolutely everything, with no screening.

All the gay couples that I know (my friend is not a couple) live in neighborhoods which are also heavily gay. Their friends/associates and social life are also drawn from that community, and I mean heavily. Similarly, someone who associated only with people in a cult would be unlikely to be granted parenthood based on that, even if they were straight. The environment and all its elements, micro and macro, is the key. That’s also why extreme poverty would disqualify a straight person; it’s why an unhealthy abode would disqualify someone.

 

[gtrenewed]

Totally fair question. glad to answer it.

It is less ideal to have a single parent, but more ideal than a homosexual couple. Again, adoption agencies deal with secular law for the most part. I have not investigated how Catholic adoption agencies work, relative to single heterosexual parents. I just know many single women, and a few single men, who have adopted.

I will pose another possibility, because I know of such a situation, although he has not declared himself interested in parenting an adopted child.

I have a gay friend who no longer has any gay lovers, and he was never promiscuous. I believe he had one gay partner his entire life. He’s living a celibate, chaste life (which he wouldn’t describe as such, not being a believer; he, and the secular world, would describe it as “single and unattached.”) He shows no signs of being interested in re-establishing any gay partnerships for the rest of his life. He’s retired (he retired early after earning almost a fortune). If he were to express an interest in fathering an adopted child from a foster home or any other environment, and the only other simultaneous choices were

(1) a Christian heterosexual couple with a history of domestic abuse
(2) a homosexual couple, wth or without proclaiming a faith tradition
(3) a foster home environment, especially for a child like sweetpealover who had been bounced around and had a number of negative experiences with that

I would hope that the agency would select him over those three choices. Such a child would have probably no exposure to any gay lovers, would be exposed to his range of friends (which are, currently, overwhelmingly straight, and often coupled), and I believe he would be focused only on the generic, non-sexualized well-being of this child. I think he would be objective about teaching the child about sexuality and do not believe he would try to influence the child to select a gay lifestyle, question the child’s sexual identity, etc.

Keep in mind that I know this person extremely well, and thus I would be a qualified reference for him, should that ever become a possibility. I have known him for years, rather closely. He’s very much like a brother to me. I trust him. Adoption agencies – at least the better ones - seek exhaustive research, of a personal nature, about prospective parents. They seek people who have an intimate knowledge of the home environment the child is likely to encounter. And this person and I, whom I will call “W,” have had actual discussions about differences between genders. He is firmly in the camp I’m in (and the RCC is in!) as far as gender being a radical element of a person’s identitty. So, I know he would not mislead any child to believe that genders are interchangeable, that they don’t matter, etc. Further, I believe (I think someone in the family told me this) that he does not approve of SSM because he considers it not a desirable environment for a child. He’s also a gentle person, a kind person, with a strong personal ethic/morality, and has examined some of his previous more opportunistic values he used to espouse, and now comes down on social justice being a moral path, not to mention an enlightened economic path, when done right. And this is all without his being a believer, at all. (He’s an atheist.)

This has been my point all along - learn about the prospective parents before dismissing them. Prejudice dismiss entire groups of people with preconceived biases and without examination. While this may be easier on the system, it may not yield the best results for all concerned.

 

[vz71]

This has been my point all along - learn about the prospective parents before dismissing them. Prejudice dismiss entire groups of people with preconceived biases and without examination. While this may be easier on the system, it may not yield the best results for all concerned.

While I would agree that a certain amount of scrutiny should be applied to prospective homes for a child, one need look no further then the homosexual simulated marriage to determine the couple should not have a child.

Of course, one could readily expect the more glaring the issue the less time needed to make a determination.