Biological parents, married to each other, are best for children: better than divorced parents, step parents, cohabiting biological parents, or single parents. We have no right to assume that children will do just fine with same sex couples. Giving preference to married couples as adoptive parents is completely rational.
Read my article on this subject on my website or at MercatorNet.com.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I found some more research for you:
In "Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents," a 1992, article in Child Development, Charlotte Patterson states, "Despite dire predictions about children based on well-known theories of psychosocial development, and despite the accumulation of substantial body of research investigating these issues, not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantages in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents."
So now we know! :)
I keep finding more info that I feel I need to share with you:
"A study, based on 2000 census data, says same-sex couples who are raising adopted children are more educated, older and have more economic resources than other adoptive parents. Past studies of how children fare with gay, lesbian and bisexual parents have found no negative consequences, according to the Urban Institute report".
Isn't that great! More potential parents for children without families! And with no negative consequences! (in face, maybe more positive one!) Wonderful news wouldn't you say?
I agree -- it's all about the adults. Not that that is always a bad thing, but these policies need to be tailored to the children. In the name of all that is PC, I don't see that happening.
I would disagree with this statement: "We know that children do best with their biological parents, married to each other." Children adopted by married, heterosexual parents fare as well, as shown by numerous studies. Biological relationship does not always make for superior parenting.
It's kind of a two sided argument. The adults are allowed to love someone and they may be more nurturing than a heterosexual couple in a few cases but what about the children? I beilive same sex adoption should be allowed under the regualated circumstances that the child is old enough to give personal consent (15) of moving into a household run buy a gay family. On the other hand a young child make grow up confused and lead down a wrong path. I do not believe people are born gay. It has to do with the Nurture over the Nature.
My comment to that is how could you possibly know if it is nature of nuture if you yourself are not gay? You cannot possibly pretend to understand someone else's experience more than they do? Beyond that a child doesn't have to give consent to be born into a home with drug/alcohol addicted parents or child molesters - these are people with 25 plus page home studies stating all the reasons they are good parents and could serve a child. Beyond that there is no evidence of more gay children coming out of these homes than out of any other home! It seems people are just out to find new ways to discriminate.
The discussion is getting pretty far away from my original article, which said absolutely nothing about nature, nuture or the origins of same sex attraction. My original point was that it is perfectly reasonable for adoption agencies to prefer stable, heterosexual married couples over other couples and individuals.
It is utterly irrational for the state to pretend that there are no differences between opposite sex married couples and cohabiting couples or single individuals or same sex couples. To ban such discrimination by otherwise responsible and reputable private adoption agencies is more than irrational. It is an indefensible violation of the freedom of those private agencies.
"The homosexual activists and their allies in the British government evidently hold that gender is an irrelevant category for parenting. They apparently believe that there is no unique contribution of either gender to anything that matters to the well-being of children. But if men and women were really perfect substitutes, the very idea of sexual orientation would make no sense.
A gay man who insists on a male sexual partner does not regard men and women as perfect substitutes. A lesbian woman’s desire for a female partner illustrates that she does not regard a man, even a feminine man, to be just as good as a woman. If men and women were truly interchangeable, then the idea of “sexual orientation” would be incomprehensible. Evidently, the same sex experience cannot be replicated by having an opposite sex partner....
It is incoherent to claim that gender is irrelevant to parenting and at the same time claim that gender is absolutely crucial to sexual activity. ...
(I)reject the gay activists’ arguments that adults are entitled to have what they want, and that children have to take whatever we give them."
Post a Comment