Pages

Wednesday, December 03, 2008

Homosexual adoption

This is in answer to a question I was asked. Basically, the question was this: is it better to let homosexuals to adopt a kid if no one else will? In response, I said the following:

1. If you place a kid with homosexuals, that’s an inherently unstable situation. And a foster child doesn’t need any more instability in his life.

a) The incidence of suicide, drug use, illness, and domestic violence is higher among homosexuals than the general population. And I’m sure some of this is underreported since it’s politically incorrect to publish stats about the homosexual lifestyle that expose the aggravated problems with that lifestyle.

b) Homosexuals have open relationships with a lot of turnover among the partners. This is especially true among men (and our laws wouldn’t permit discrimination between male homosexuals and lesbians). So this also fosters an unstable domestic environment.

c) In my observation, lesbians are lesbians, not because they’re attracted to other women, but because they’re angry with men. This is not a proper environment to raise either a boy or girl. To have man-hating women raise a boy or girl invites social malformation.

d) We know from the Catholic priestly abuse scandal that homosexual men are prone to seduce teenage boys. If you place a boy in their custody, then, sooner or later, you’re exposing him to a high risk of molestation.

e) Boys and girls need normal, natural role-models. That’s how we mature socially and emotionally. Needless to say, they don’t get that in a homosexual environment.

f) One of the problems with homosexuality is an inability to distinguish between sexual affection and asexual affection. Since both forms of affection are directed at members of the same sex, that’s catastrophic for child-rearing.

Children need physical affection, but they don’t need sexual affection (which is very harmful at that age).

g) Homosexuals are bound to hate Christian values. You’re placing a child in an environment that’s bound to be militantly anti-Christian.

h) Even if they’re raised by a secular couple, that’s a more natural, normal, healthy environment.

2. Homosexuals are statistically insignificant. (The 10% figure was discredited years ago.) So there aren’t enough homosexuals to take up the slack, even if it were an otherwise good idea (which it’s not).

3. Homosexuals are perfectly capable of having kids the old fashioned way. They adopt, not because they can’t conceive kids of their own, but to make a political statement. To prove something. So they don’t adopt kids for the sake of the kid, for the kid’s benefit. The child is just an equal rights trophy.

4. It may be objected that you can have many of the same problems in a heterosexual family. That’s true, but...

a) By definition, placing a child with homosexuals is a worst-case scenario. It’s bound to be really bad in various ways.

We know, in advance, that we’re harming the child when we place him in that environment.

That’s not automatically the case with normal foster care. And there are degrees of harm.

b) There’s a difference between placing a child with strangers and removing a child from the custody of his biological parents. For better or worse, children have a profound, built-in emotional bond with their biological parents.

As such, it’s generally best to leave kids in the care of their own parents unless the situation is quite dire. Even when separation is necessary, that still takes an emotional toll.

So, up to a point, we tolerate situations involving a biological family that we wouldn’t (or shouldn’t) tolerate when placing a child with strangers.

I don’t see that placing a child with homosexuals is much different than placing a child with a pimp or junkie.

11 comments:

  1. A good friend of mine, who used to go to our church but has now moved to live about 20 minutes away, recently told me she was a lesbian. She has only told about 3 people in our church (one being the pastor) because she thinks many of the members might not take it very well.

    I asked her how she could reconcile being a lesbian with the Bible. She replied she thought all the references to homosexuality were added in Victorian times. When I told her how I thought this rather dubious, she then said that one of her friends goes to seminary and she had asked him for a Greek dictionary. After looking through it, she came to the conclusion that the text would permit different translations.

    Obviously, I can't read minds but it seems to me that she sincerely believes homosexuality to be permitted.

    I bought the Same Sex Controversy by James White, and was very impressed by his concise argumentation. I read it the day I got it, and I'm not even gay! Do you think I should just give her the book and allow her to work this out for herself? Do you have any advice?

    ReplyDelete
  2. This website has a lot of good freebie material:

    http://www.robgagnon.net/

    ReplyDelete
  3. Detailed, logical, well-reasoned, and unassailably convincing.

    Therefore, it's sure to earn you the undying enmity of the GLBT crowd.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't disagree with everything here in terms of children needing a mother and father, but you do realize that most cases of sexual and physical abuse occur within heterosexual households, right? You can look up the stats yourself on male on female sexual abuse (it's frequent even in "Christian" households - esp. some Amish areas).

    I think the "pimp/junkie" analogy is thus a bit of a stretch. There are instances where a child might be safer in a gay household than in their biological one, even if it's not the ideal.

    ReplyDelete
  5. JAMES SAID:

    “I don't disagree with everything here in terms of children needing a mother and father, but you do realize that most cases of sexual and physical abuse occur within heterosexual households, right? You can look up the stats yourself on male on female sexual abuse (it's frequent even in ‘Christian’ households - esp. some Amish areas).__I think the ‘pimp/junkie’ analogy is thus a bit of a stretch. There are instances where a child might be safer in a gay household than in their biological one, even if it's not the ideal.”

    You’re either equivocating or oversimplifying.

    Child abuse is the weapon of choice in custody battles. So you need to take the stats with a ton of salt.

    It’s like “repressed memories” about ritual satanic abuse.

    I don’t think normal fathers have any inclination to molest their biological offspring, do you?

    Where there’s rape or incest, that generally involves the boyfriend or stepfather or stepbrother.

    The Amish are a special case. They are so inbred that incestuous rape (e.g. a cousin raping another cousin) is a short step from endogamy.

    Moreover, the Amish believe in unconditional forgiveness, and they are loath to report crimes to the police. In addition, they reject personal vengeance. So there’s not much to deter sex crimes in the Amish community.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Steve I heard a former president of a seminary said that homosexual orientation is not sinful but only the act is, I feel that he is wrong what do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  7. LONELYBOY SAID:

    "Steve I heard a former president of a seminary said that homosexual orientation is not sinful but only the act is, I feel that he is wrong what do you think?"

    In Rom 1, Paul condemns both the desire and the deed.

    ReplyDelete
  8. the first problem is that scripture never declared homosexuality a sin, it is erroneous to label homosexuals as non christian.

    homosexuals have never been found wanting in any sector of society compared to heterosexuals. they are not less a brother, friend, attorney, teacher, counselor ,doctor,neighbor,father, etc so what evidence do have that being foster parents is somewhat different.

    homosexuals bond out of the same spirit as heterosexuals, which is out of mutual love, respect,affection,devotion, and trust for a shared committed life together.

    what part of that committed love do you feel is offensive to a child.

    the truth is that children because they are children have less a problem with homosexuality than adults.

    what part of the spirit of this bonding process mitigates providing a loving nurturing home for raising children?

    ReplyDelete
  9. feetxxxl: "the first problem is that scripture never declared homosexuality a sin".

    Of course Scripture declares same-sex behavior as sin. Thus, the first problem is you don't acknowledge the clear, transcendent, objective, moral teaching of Scripture on this particular issue.

    ReplyDelete
  10. fine, then explain romans 1:24-27 how do the words of these verses say homosexuality is a sin. do you propose to transpose the word "homosexuals for all the personal pronouns?

    ReplyDelete