fartz Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 My vote is no. Aside from the psychological problems the child may have, there is something twisted in the DNA of gays that makes them yearn for same sex and that can't be trusted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 NO to gay adoption...Plenty of heterosexual couples willing to adopt. Kids need a MOM and a DAD... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 NO to gay adoption...Plenty of heterosexual couples willing to adopt. Kids need a MOM and a DAD... Plenty of kids needing adoption. You extended your families helping hands yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Plenty of kids needing adoption. You extended your families helping hands yet? I have 2 kids of my own...But another good try! Thanks, Comrade! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 I have 2 kids of my own...But another good try! Thanks' date=' Comrade! [/quote'] Just another example of your hypocrisy. You would deny others the right to adopt, yet lack the balls to actually do it yourself. I sense a pattern. You send kids off to war, but didn't have the balls to do it yourself. You are a true American. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buc McMaster Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 *IF* a person/couple are able to provide a stable home for a child' date=' that is the most important thing. [/quote'] Granted. But a "stable home" means nothing to a child. They don't understand what "stable" means. But they are subject to the slings and arrows of cruel kids. Does the child understand why his/her peers pick on him/her because of two mommies or two daddies? No. All they know is they are being persecuted because they have same-sex parents. This is a stable home? Yes, same-sex mommies/daddies may well provide shelter, nurturing and love for the child (as I said before), but how does the child reconcile this with the taunting they get at school? "My two mommies love me and care for me......and I love them too!" "But you have two mommies! You're suppose to have a mommie and a daddy! Your parents are queer!" How does a child that doesn't have a concept of sexuality deal with this kind of peer pressure? Yes, kids are cruel for a myriad of reasons that we may or may not have any power to change. But this is one form of cruelty we can protect kids from. Is it about the kids, or not? From my perspective same-sex couples that adopt, inspite of their good intentions, are making it about themselves at the expense of the child. A taunted child may or may not try to talk to their same-sex parents about the emotional beating they take at the hands of their classmates, but it is unreasonable to expect that it could be explained in terms the child would understand - the child has not the faculties to grasp sexual orientation. All they know is their friends tease and berate them because they have two mommies/two daddies. And I agree that far too many children are born to hetero parents that have no clue how to nurture and love a child. Sad to say that unless we are willing to surrender a hell of alot of personal freedoms we're not going to change that. But the question at hand is about same-sex couples adopting, not about children born to incompetent hetero couples. That's a whole 'nuther subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Just another example of your hypocrisy. You would deny others the right to adopt' date=' yet lack the balls to actually do it yourself. I sense a pattern. You send kids off to war, but didn't have the balls to do it yourself. You are a true American. [/quote'] Where does your fascination with testicles come from? Is that taught in your manifesto, UAW re-education camps or in the book of laws? I ALREADY HAVE TWO KIDS, I CAN"T AFFORD TO RAISE ANYMORE... You are a true Marxist/Leninist dumba$$! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluemoon Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 NO to gay adoption...Plenty of heterosexual couples willing to adopt. Kids need a MOM and a DAD... Fail...there are a lot of kids that need adopting. And what kids need is a nurturing place to grow up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Fail...there are a lot of kids that need adopting. And what kids need is a nurturing place to grow up. FAIL! What kids need is a loving, stable home with a MOM and DAD...What they get is not always up to this standard...but that's what they need. If you and your "partner" want to adopt, and it's allowed where you live then go for it....good luck!;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 FAIL! What kids need is a loving' date=' stable home with a MOM and DAD...What they get is not always up to this standard...but that's what they need. If you and your "partner" want to adopt, and it's allowed where you live then go for it....good luck!;) [/quote'] There were those that said the same thing about white couples (mom/dad) adopting Asian or Black kids. You would have been one of those a few years ago I'll wager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 There were those that said the same thing about white couples (mom/dad) adopting Asian or Black kids. You would have been one of those a few years ago I'll wager. Well Comrade dumba$$, race is not a choice or a lifestyle, so I have no problem with mixed race couples...I am the product of a mixed race couple...GOOD try! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Rax Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Whatever........ but PLEASE don't let wimps adopt a Gibson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 Well Comrade dumba$$' date=' race is not a choice or a lifestyle, so I have no problem with mixed race couples...I am the product of a mixed race couple...GOOD try! [/quote'] By mixed couple you mean a jackass and a halfwit? Or perhaps a Goldwater and a McCarthy (junior senator from Wisconsin)? Or (as proudly posed in another thread) the product of a love connection between Ayn Rand and Hitler? Are those the mixed races you had in mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 By mixed couple you mean a jackass and a halfwit? Or perhaps a Goldwater and a McCarthy (junior senator from Wisconsin)? Or (as proudly posed in another thread) the product of a love connection between Ayn Rand and Hitler? Are those the mixed races you had in mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluemoon Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 FAIL! What kids need is a loving' date=' stable home with a MOM and DAD...What they get is not always up to this standard...but that's what they need. If you and your "partner" want to adopt, and it's allowed where you live then go for it....good luck! [/quote'] Well, we will agree to disagree on the standard. As for me, no room at the inn. My wife and I already have three kids--all under the age of three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Well' date=' we will agree to disagree on the standard. As for me, no room at the inn. My wife and I already have three kids--[b']all under the age of three.[/b] So, you really haven't slept in three years? That might explain why you are so cranky sometimes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Well' date=' we will agree to disagree on the standard. As for me, no room at the inn. My wife and I already have [b']three kids--all under the age of three[/b]. I understand, thank God mine are now in their twenties. You have my best wishes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluemoon Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I understand' date=' thank God mine are now in their twenties. You have my best wishes![/quote'] Thanks..they are good kids. Daughter is nearly three. And my twin boys are 8 months old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyK Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I think normal can be defined in many ways. Normal is a perspective from a certain point of view. How about a lady who decides to have a baby and has embryonic implant? She is single and heterosexual' date=' but didn't have her baby the normal way. The elusive point of normal is always moving. [/quote'] Normal is not elusive. One dad, one mom... How elusive or complicated is that? Single parent homes are not normal. In the case of a widow, hopefully she has the sense that her boys need adult male interaction. That might mean getting a grandfather, brother, male cousin, or just a good friend, involved in his life. Girls need adult male interraction as well, but in a different way. That doesn't meen she has to get married again. Same goes for single dads with girls, but with female role models. Parents who are single by choice, i.e. out of wedlock pregnancy, invitro, whatever, are just being selfish and puting thier, especially if the child is of the opposite gender, at a social and developmental disadvantage. A single gender couple cannot hope to provide normalcy for a child. Take your pick, a single gender lifestyle or parenting. That should not be mixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyK Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 If this is true' date=' why are there still so many children in foster care or waiting to be adopted? . [/quote'] Not so. Most foster children are not in 'the system' to be adopted. They are in the 'system' to protect them from their parents. For most of these childrens' incarceration, the DCFS 'intends' to work to re-unify the children with their natural parents, once these parents get their act together. Some parents take longer to get their acts together. Some never do. Very few children are adopted out of the system. I've been involved with 'the system' ... I know. If there were enough adoptable children to satisfy the normal parents' desire to adopt, none would be going to far flung corners of the world in search of adoptable children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluemoon Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 If there were enough adoptable children to satisfy the normal parents' desire to adopt' date=' none would be going to far flung corners of the world in search of adoptable children.[/quote'] I think you mean traditional Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 Not so. Most foster children are not in 'the system' to be adopted. They are in the 'system' to protect them from their parents. For most of these childrens' incarceration' date=' the DCFS 'intends' to work to re-unify the children with their natural parents, once these parents get their act together. Some parents take longer to get their acts together. Some never do. Very few children are adopted out of the system. I've been involved with 'the system' ... I know. If there were enough adoptable children to satisfy the normal parents' desire to adopt, none would be going to far flung corners of the world in search of adoptable children.[/quote'] There's more then enough. That's the problem. Millions of unwanted children, world wide. If only they could be adopted and have a chance at a "so called" normal life. Anyone with a stable environment and deemed safe should be allowed to adopt. Your exclusiveness clause simply keeps kids from potential loving parents. IMHO it shows how little many feel for the welfare of the children. Many are to occupied with some notion of right and wrong and jaded by outdated religious texts to see the central problem. Kids need homes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyK Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Granted. But a "stable home" means nothing to a child. They don't understand what "stable" means. ... You don't give children enough credit. They may not understand the word, but the all too well understand instability. Children want, and crave, stability. From the time children are born, they can sense stress in their parent's.. heart?.. mind?... soul? Whatever they sense it. Even toddlers, too young to know that Mom and Dad are having financial difficulties, for example, can sense the fear and frustration and become clingy and fearful and not want to be left alone. They will cry or act out until they get the attention they crave.. the hug that says, "It'll be all right." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Effects of Fatherlessness (US Data) 1) BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS/ RUNAWAYS/ HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS/CHEMICAL ABUSERS/ SUICIDES * 85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes (Source: Center for Disease Control) * 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census) * 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools.) * 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (Source: Rainbows for all God's Children.) * 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census) 2) JUVENILE DELINQUENCY/ CRIME/ GANGS * 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26, 1978) * 70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988) * 85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992) * California has the nation's highest juvenile incarceration rate and the nation's highest juvenile unemployment rate. Vincent Schiraldi, Executive Director, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, "What Hallinan's Victory Means," San Francisco Chronicle (12/28/95). These statistics translate to mean that children from a fatherless home are: * 5 times more likely to commit suicide. * 32 times more likely to run away. * 20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders. * 14 times more likely to commit rape * 9 times more likely to drop out of high school. * 10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances. * 9 times more likely to end up in a state-operated institution. * 20 times more likely to end up in prison. * Juveniles have become the driving force behind the nation's alarming increases in violent crime, with juvenile arrests for murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault growing sharply in the past decade as pistols and drugs became more available, and expected to continue at the same alarming rate during the next decade. "Justice Dept. Issues Scary Report on Juvenile Crime," San Francisco Chronicle (9/8/95). "Crime Wave Forecast With Teenager Boom," San Francisco Chronicle (2/15/95). * Criminal behavior experts and social scientists are finding intriguing evidence that the epidemic of youth violence and gangs is related to the breakdown of the two-parent family. "New Evidence That Quayle Was Right: Young Offenders Tell What Went Wrong at Home," San Francisco Chronicle (12/9/94). 3) TEENAGE PREGNANCY * "Daughters of single parents are 53% more likely to marry as teenagers, 164% more likely to have a premarital birth, and 92% more likely to dissolve their own marriages. All these intergenerational consequences of single motherhood increase the likelihood of chronic welfare dependency." Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, Atlantic Monthly (April 1993). * Daughters of single parents are 2.1 times more likely to have children during their teenage years than are daughters from intact families. The Good Family Man, David Blankenhorn. * 71% of teenage pregnancies are to children of single parents. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services. 4) CHILD ABUSE * The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states that there were more than 1,000,000 documented child abuse cases in 1990. In 1983, it found that 60% of perpetrators were women with sole custody. Shared parenting can significantly reduce the stress associated with sole custody, and reduce the isolation of children in abusive situations by allowing both parents' to monitor the children's health and welfare and to protect them. 5) POVERTY * "The National Fatherhood Institute reports that 18 million children live in single-parent homes. Nearly 75% of American children living in single-parent families will experience poverty before they turn 11. Only 20% in two-parent families will experience poverty." Melinda Sacks, "Fatherhood in the 90's: Kids of absent fathers more "at risk"," San Jose Mercury News (10/29/95). * "The feminization of poverty is linked to the feminization of custody, as well as linked to lower earnings for women. Greater opportunity for education and jobs through shared parenting can help break the cycle." David Levy, Ed., The Best Parent is Both Parents (1993). 6) KIDNAPPING * Family abductions were 163,200 compared to non-family abductions of 200-300. The parental abductions were attributed to the parents' disenchantment with the legal system. David Levy, Ed., The Best Parent is Both Parents (1993), citing a report from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice (May 1990). http://www.childrensjustice.org/fatherlessness2.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.