News Should gay couples be allowed to adopt children?

[Clausius2]

Our loved president Zapatero wants to establish the legal adoption of children by gay couples. What do you think of that? What would happen if it was established in your country?. If it is established yet in your country, what has happened with the children?.

 

[arildno]

Our loved president Zapatero wants to establish the legal adoption of children by gay couples. What do you think of that? What would happen if it was established in your country?. If it is established yet in your country, what has happened with the children?.

The kids are doing just fine up here in Norway.

 

[check]

Perfectly fine. If they're caring people that can provide a good home for the children then who cares about their sexual orientation?

 

[chroot]

The US already supports it, at least socially. One of my good friends actually acted as a surrogate mother for two gay male friends, and I support her decision whole-heartedly.

Many children grow up abused, neglected, undereducated, underfed, and worse -- those are the real child-welfare issues, not the sexual orientation of parents. Gay people are just as capable of raising a child in a healthy, nuturing, loving environment as straight people -- perhaps even more capable, since adoption is much more difficult than conception.

It can easily be argued that the first five years are the most important years of a child's development -- long before the child will even have a concept of what it means to be "gay." Once the child is old enough to understand sexuality and the meaning of being "gay," he or she will be old enough to handle the implications.

Despite prevailing ignorance, studies have shown that children raised by gay couples are no more likely to become gay than childen raised by straight couples -- so, even if one is anti-gay for some kind of moral reason, one still has no justification to denounce gay couples raising children. It's not going to spread homosexuality, or any such nonsense.

Children need food, shelter, care, attention, education, love, openness, guidance, a proper measure of freedom, and more. They don't need straight parents. If a gay couple is capable of providing a healthy environment for a child, it is unconscionable to deny them the opportunity.

- Warren

 

[Gokul43201]

What are the legal requirements ? What role does the surrogate mother play, legally ? Chroot, anyone ?

 

[wasteofo2]

I know a few people who have gay parents, they seem to be just as normal as anyone else.

 

[Artman]

Children need food, shelter, care, attention, education, love, openness, guidance, a proper measure of freedom, and more... - Warren

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Clausius2]

Thanks. I've looked into all your answers but chosen two for quoting:

Perfectly fine. If they're caring people that can provide a good home for the children then who cares about their sexual orientation?.

In my opinion, A LOT of people truly cares about sexual orientations, less directly (speaking about it in public) than indirectly (speaking about it in their homes).

It can easily be argued that the first five years are the most important years of a child's development -- long before the child will even have a concept of what it means to be "gay." Once the child is old enough to understand sexuality and the meaning of being "gay," he or she will be old enough to handle the implications.

I do not agree. For instance, if some child has gay parents he will suffer a lot in the school. Why, because the other children probably will laugh at him. Why, in spite of the other children have no idea about what does it mean to be a gay, their parents do know what is it, and probably the other children have heard their parents to talk about gays couples in their home. And you must know how cruel and malicious are we when we were younger .

So that, the children adopted can be displaced in class or school to the group of "rare guys".

The problem here is that our society has to be prepared for accepting such new guidelines, and probably this law is being to be issued before that happens. Therefore, a conflict between children, gay parents and parents will be served.

 

[chroot]

I do not agree. For instance, if some child has gay parents he will suffer a lot in the school.

The other children never have to know the child has gay parents. If this is really a concern, a little discretion would prevent the knowledge from getting out anyway.

Why, because the other children probably will laugh at him.

Children laugh at other children who have braces, who wear glasses, who need to wear orthopaedic shoes, who cannot afford to buy the popular sneakers, and more. Are you also suggesting that children should not have their teeth straightened or their joints cared for because it might get them laughed at?

Would you prefer to place a child in a less-caring heterosexual home simply to prevent any possibility of ridicule from stupid, bigoted classmates?

- Warren

 

[Gokul43201]

The other children never have to know the child has gay parents. If this is really a concern, a little discretion would prevent the knowledge from getting out anyway.

I'm not sure this will work. How do you teach a 5 year-old discretion ?

Children laugh at other children who have braces, who wear glasses, who need to wear orthopaedic shoes, who cannot afford to buy the popular sneakers, and more. Are you also suggesting that children should not have their teeth straightened or their joints cared for because it might get them laughed at?

This part, I'm more in agreement with...

Would you prefer to place a child in a less-caring heterosexual home simply to prevent any possibility of ridicule from stupid, bigoted classmates?

but I won't go so far as calling little kids "stupid bigots". If at all, the blame belongs with the parents.

 

[russ_watters]

It concerns me how a child would be raised by two parents of the same sex. And I don't mean that they might somehow teach their kids to be gay. Its actually more of a concern of mine that the kid has both a mother and a father. Single parents aren't a bad idea just because they are overworked, they are a bad idea because they don't represent both sexes. Same applies to a gay couple.

That said, having two moms or dads is still better than having only one of either and being in a loving family is better than being in an abusive family. I think adoption potential should be ranked according to family quality, and custody battles and adoption questions should be decided accordingly. From most favorable to least:

1. Two good parents, heterosexual
2. Two good parents, homosexual
3. Single parent, heterosexual
4. Single parent, homosexual

And these should be ranked against other family traits (as is already done).

 

[Clausius2]

The other children never have to know the child has gay parents. If this is really a concern, a little discretion would prevent the knowledge from getting out anyway.

If I were that child, I wish nobody knew my parents were gays. Discretion is impossible with some couples of gays.

Would you prefer to place a child in a less-caring heterosexual home simply to prevent any possibility of ridicule from stupid, bigoted classmates?

- Warren

Sure I would not. But you have to agree with me that exposing children to be "different" of their companions since the beginnings of their life, is too dangerous and malicious.

Anyway, I have a couple of gays as neighbors. They are really discreet. I have no problem if they adopt a child. Surely they will give him a good education. But I do not tolerate the adoption of children by such an indiscrete gays we see on TV in gays celebration dates, worn ridicule and acting in an embarrassing way.

 

[wasteofo2]

It concerns me how a child would be raised by two parents of the same sex. And I don't mean that they might somehow teach their kids to be gay. Its actually more of a concern of mine that the kid has both a mother and a father. Single parents aren't a bad idea just because they are overworked, they are a bad idea because they don't represent both sexes. Same applies to a gay couple.

What do you think the problem with having only one gender influence is? I have many friends who all have divorced parents and live with their mothers, what kind of flaws/poor character traits do you think would be common among them that wouldn't show up among children with non-divorced parents.

1. Two good parents, heterosexual
2. Two good parents, homosexual
3. Single parent, heterosexual
4. Single parent, homosexual

I see what you mean, 2 homosexuals are clearly inferior to 2 heterosexuals, but superior to 1 heterosexual. Let's say, homosexuals equal about 3/5 of a heterosexual, sound reasonable?

 

[Gokul43201]

I think adoption potential should be ranked according to family quality, and custody battles and adoption questions should be decided accordingly. From most favorable to least:

1. Two good parents, heterosexual
2. Two good parents, homosexual
3. Single parent, heterosexual
4. Single parent, homosexual

And these should be ranked against other family traits (as is already done).

I don't see why 3 and 4 are not equal ...okay, it's a bit of a stretch, but I think I see it.

 

[wasteofo2]

I don't see why 3 and 4 are not equal ...okay, it's a bit of a stretch, but I think I see it.

By Russ's logic, it seems that it should be

1. 2 heterosexual parents
2. 2 homosexual parents
3. 1 homosexual parent
4. 1 heterosexual parent

The reason he gave for thinking gay people raising kids would do worse than straight people raising kids is that you don't get the influence from both genders with a gay couple that you do from a straight couple. However, with a homosexual man, he clearly is male, but will generally act more effeminite, so that's kind of like a mix of both gender characteristics, and should give a broader spectrum of influence on the child, since gay men steryotypically do things that women steryotypically do.

 

[Clausius2]

It concerns me how a child would be raised by two parents of the same sex. And I don't mean that they might somehow teach their kids to be gay. Its actually more of a concern of mine that the kid has both a mother and a father. Single parents aren't a bad idea just because they are overworked, they are a bad idea because they don't represent both sexes. Same applies to a gay couple.

That said, having two moms or dads is still better than having only one of either and being in a loving family is better than being in an abusive family. I think adoption potential should be ranked according to family quality, and custody battles and adoption questions should be decided accordingly. From most favorable to least:

1. Two good parents, heterosexual
2. Two good parents, homosexual
3. Single parent, heterosexual
4. Single parent, homosexual

And these should be ranked against other family traits (as is already done).

Yes, I totally agree . Maybe I never had said something like that, it's a too real and common thinking to be expressed in public taking into account the newadays hypocrisy. Here (in my country) you will be named fascist or something like that for saying that. But that hypocrisy is a proof that our people is not prepared for this new law.

 

[wasteofo2]

Yes, I totally agree . Maybe I never had said something like that, it's a too real and common thinking to be expressed in public taking into account the newadays hypocrisy. Here (in my country) you will be named fascist or something like that for saying that. But that hypocrisy is a proof that our people is not prepared for this new law.

How is it hypocritical of people to criticize you for saying homosexuals are inferior to heterosexuals?

 

[Clausius2]

How is it hypocritical of people to criticize you for saying homosexuals are inferior to heterosexuals?

I DID not mean that! Read carefully the post of russ_watters. He is not saying what you mean. No inferiority is meant.

 

[BobG]

It concerns me how a child would be raised by two parents of the same sex. And I don't mean that they might somehow teach their kids to be gay. Its actually more of a concern of mine that the kid has both a mother and a father. Single parents aren't a bad idea just because they are overworked, they are a bad idea because they don't represent both sexes. Same applies to a gay couple.

That said, having two moms or dads is still better than having only one of either and being in a loving family is better than being in an abusive family. I think adoption potential should be ranked according to family quality, and custody battles and adoption questions should be decided accordingly. From most favorable to least:

1. Two good parents, heterosexual
2. Two good parents, homosexual
3. Single parent, heterosexual
4. Single parent, homosexual

And these should be ranked against other family traits (as is already done).

I agree with Russ.

Specifically,

1. Mother's interaction with the child should be responsive and affectionate. This factor has been found important for the child's social competent, maturity, self-reliance and intellectual competence.

2. Father's interaction with the child should be responsive and affectionate as well. This has been found important for the child's cognitive development.

Another problem that might be seen as an issue:

... even though older kids may protest, signs of affection between their parents make kids feel secure. "Children need to know that their parents like each other, and that they have a friendship," says Siegel. A kiss hello or goodbye, a hug, a touch on the shoulder or a compliment go a long way to nurturing your own relationship, and they help children develop emotionally. If kids don't routinely witness displays of affection, they tend to "move into the dating world with suspicion," says Siegel. (http://www.parentstages.com/index.asp?header=par&partnerid=75&content=article.asp%3Fid=1094 )

But, two homosexual parents will still wind up providing a better environment than a single parent. Not only are the logistics (money, time, etc) much harder for a single parent, all problems are laid upon one person who has to handle not only the problem, but they also have to handle the frustration all alone, as well. Seeing supportive help in any kind of relation is better than seeing life as a never ending struggle. A single parent had better at least have some good friends (of course, when you think about it, that advice sounds good in almost any situation).

But, there is one other problem with homosexual relationships:

How Can A Stranger Tell If Two People Are Married?

"You might have to guess, based on whether they seem to be yelling at the same kids." - Derrick, age 8

 

[arildno]

Don't bother about psychologists say. They're a bunch of cranks.
For example, check out what psychology said about children born out of wedlock at the turn of the 19th century.

 

[russ_watters]

What do you think the problem with having only one gender influence is? I have many friends who all have divorced parents and live with their mothers, what kind of flaws/poor character traits do you think would be common among them that wouldn't show up among children with non-divorced parents.

Perhaps there is a little bit of the 1950s separation of the sexes in there (some of my female friends would say so), but there is more to it than that: a man really cannot explain sex/childbirth/relationships to his daughter anywhere near as well as a woman can. And vice versa for mothers with their sons. Equality of the sexes only goes so far: there are differences that will always exist and kids need to see both sides.

For both sides of the coin, my sister took more from my father, but that's partially from observing my mother and realizing she didn't want to be what my mother represented.

How is it hypocritical of people to criticize you for saying homosexuals are inferior to heterosexuals?

wasetofo2, you prove his point by attributing something to us which neither of us said.

 

[russ_watters]

I don't see why 3 and 4 are not equal ...okay, it's a bit of a stretch, but I think I see it.

No, its probably just simpler than you realize. If either of #3 or 4 gain a partner, which of #1 or 2 will they become...?

 

[Gokul43201]

No, its probably just simpler than you realize. If either of #3 or 4 gain a partner, which of #1 or 2 will they become...?

Ah, I knew I was missing something !

 

[wasteofo2]

Perhaps there is a little bit of the 1950s separation of the sexes in there (some of my female friends would say so), but there is more to it than that: a man really cannot explain sex/childbirth/relationships to his daughter anywhere near as well as a woman can. And vice versa for mothers with their sons. Equality of the sexes only goes so far: there are differences that will always exist and kids need to see both sides.

So are you saying that you wouldn't expect to find people who live primarily with their mother to have any major problems/differences besides not understanding sex/relationships etc? My mother's a physical therapist, my father a guidance counselor (they're not divorced), and my mother's pretty much the one who explained the stuff you mentioned to me because she's the one who has a scientific knowledge of them, and just in general talks more about her childhood than my dad.

wasetofo2, you prove his point by attributing something to us which neither of us said.

I'm really lost, where was I being hypocritical now?

 

[wasteofo2]

I agree with Russ.

Specifically,

1. Mother's interaction with the child should be responsive and affectionate. This factor has been found important for the child's social competent, maturity, self-reliance and intellectual competence.

2. Father's interaction with the child should be responsive and affectionate as well. This has been found important for the child's cognitive development.
:

Wha? You're saying the mother's and father's interaction with children should be identical, how does that show heterosexual parents are better than gay ones, are you suggesting gays can't be responsive and affectionate?

Another problem that might be seen as an issue:

... even though older kids may protest, signs of affection between their parents make kids feel secure. "Children need to know that their parents like each other, and that they have a friendship," says Siegel. A kiss hello or goodbye, a hug, a touch on the shoulder or a compliment go a long way to nurturing your own relationship, and they help children develop emotionally. If kids don't routinely witness displays of affection, they tend to "move into the dating world with suspicion," says Siegel. (http://www.parentstages.com/index.a...e.asp%3Fid=1094 )

What are you talking about, gay people can touch each other and show affection too, you haven't showed anything indicating a difference between the ability of heterosexual and homosexual parents to raise a child.

But, two homosexual parents will still wind up providing a better environment than a single parent. Not only are the logistics (money, time, etc) much harder for a single parent, all problems are laid upon one person who has to handle not only the problem, but they also have to handle the frustration all alone, as well. Seeing supportive help in any kind of relation is better than seeing life as a never ending struggle. A single parent had better at least have some good friends (of course, when you think about it, that advice sounds good in almost any situation).

But, there is one other problem with homosexual relationships:

Glad you can see that at least.

 

[Moonbear]

Perhaps there is a little bit of the 1950s separation of the sexes in there (some of my female friends would say so), but there is more to it than that: a man really cannot explain sex/childbirth/relationships to his daughter anywhere near as well as a woman can. And vice versa for mothers with their sons. Equality of the sexes only goes so far: there are differences that will always exist and kids need to see both sides.

Perhaps that would just suggest that it would be best if they matched the child being adopted to the same sex as the adoptive parents. However, I don't really thing that's necessary. Other relatives can help out in providing the influence of another sex, such as an aunt or uncle or even a best friend. And, quite frankly, I think either sex can explain the birds and the bees equally well (or equally badly). I learned very little about sex from my mom, nothing about childbirth, and she was no help with relationships either. When my nephew was born, I was frankly baffled at my mom's questions about him and his birth, which sounded like she'd never been through it herself (then again, that might explain a lot). Anyway, I think gay couples (or even single people of any sexual orientation) adopting is a wonderful thing. You take an orphaned child in need of a loving parent and an adult who desperately wants to love a child and put them together...it's a great thing. And, to take it a step further, it might even be better for children to be adopted by gay couples than heterosexual couples. I've known a few adopted children, and one thing that sometimes leads to problems is when their parents who thought they were infertile suddenly manage to conceive and then tend to exhibit a lot of favoritism toward their biological child rather than their adopted child. With a gay couple, there's no chance they'll have any biological children.

Anyway, there is no shortage of orphaned or foster children in the world, so anyone willing to take on caring for and loving them should be allowed to do so.