Gays should not be allowed to adopt >>>MOD ALERT<<<

Perhaps you should learn the difference between cause and correlation.

Using the FRC (hate group) bogus claims only go to highlight you really have no idea what you're talking about.

 

Hmmm higher drug abuse, higher suicide rate, reduced life span, higher rates of pedophilia?

Sounds like Russia versus the U.S.

Clearly if Putin really thought those issues were important, he would ban adoption by any Russians and ship all of those orphans to the U.S.

 

Are we comparing countries or we are comparing heterosexuals vs homosexuals? The topic is why gays shouldn't be allowed adoption. And this is the reason why Vladimir Putin banned the adoption of Russian children by homosexuals.

Gays can never respond without offenses and are never adequate...
Skipping the rest of the trolling BS... Not going to waste my time that Russia is far not the worst country in the world and yes, Russia did have hard time due to change from socialism to capitalism and now, in fact, it has a lot of progress and improvements, in fact, due to V Putin's hard work, while "West" is degrading.
US also had hard times, like Mafia wars in 20-30s, Great Depression, etc. You are only ashaming yourself.

 

I was pointing out the hypocrisy. IF Putin- or you- or any of the other homosexual haters actually cared about the 'children' when it came adoption- they would use the same standards for everyone.

The fact is that for each of the things you try to impugn homosexuals by saying that their 'rates' are worse than heterosexuals, if applied to Russians versus Americans, would mean that a rational Putin would be shipping all Russian adoptees to America so that they could escape the decadent Russians.

The reality is that the conditions in orphanages in Russia are appalling. The reality is that Russian orphans are likely to be abused, to be underfed, to be neglected- and of course a large portion of them are just abandoned by their alcoholic and neglectful parents. For you, or Putin to make the claim that you want to protect the poor Russian orphans from homosexuals is so transparently false that it is laughable. Putin just despises homosexuals, because he is a bigot and a despot.

Russia isn't the worst country in the world. Russia has made a lot of progress, despite Putin's corruption and cronyism.

But he is still a bigot and a despot.

 

Hatred, hypocrisy... Where is coming from? Not from me and not from Mr. Putin. You are the one, who are always hateful to people who doesn't like your ways and finds it wrong.

Did you see my 1st response?

Where is hatred and hypocrisy? People simply care about future of the kids.

Russia is no longer allows any adoption to USA, due to many abuses, resulting in deaths.
And BTW, before that law, only most unwanted kids, like with birth defects, mixed race kids and psychological problems could be allowed for adoption. Adoption of quality kids is forbidden by law.


BTW, just recently a new law is introduced:
Russia bans adoptions from countries that allow gay marriage

This is our values, sorry that we are different. Putin doesn't despise homosexuals, he serves the interests of his people:

Only 12% of Russians think being a homosexual is normal. 43% think that it's a perversion or bad habit. 35% believe that it's illness or result of trauma. What you are going to get? It's the same as pissing against the wind or going against tidal wave, you know.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KyhOlvUocN8#t=28
Democracy, right, meaning that government is following wish of the majority. So, it's done in order to stop US from throwing these "authoritarian" accusations.


BTW, you are wrong that under Putin Russia is suffering from corruption,etc. It's only getting better and better:

 

I don't hate anyone- I oppose bigots. If you think my way of expressing my opinion is 'wrong'- well you join Putin- he also thinks people shouldn't be allowed to express their opinion.

I have seen absolutely no indication that either Putin or you care about the future of children. As I have pointed out- if you applied the criticisms you use against homosexuals versus 'straights' to Russians versus Americans, then Russians wouldn't be allowed to adopt at all. I mean if this was about protecting kids from people who have high rates of drug abuse, etc.

But its obvious that you just don't want kids adopted by homosexuals, because you don't approve of homosexuals.

Yeah- about that.....Russians care so much about their kids that they abandon them to orphanages..

The Kremlin has launched a programme to move tens of thousands of children out of institutions and into family homes.

Most have been abandoned by their parents and receive little or no education.

But the campaigners say there is opposition to reform from institutions that benefit from the state funding orphans attract.

"It's huge resistance of a system which wants to keep money, working places and jobs," said Maria Ostrovskaya, head of a St Petersburg charity, Perspectives, that is trying to open orphanages to the outside world.

Using official statistics experts calculate that about 300,000 children in Russia are in state residential homes at any one time, but estimates differ widely.

The government says there are 118,000 "orphans" in children's homes. Most have living parents, but have been rejected by them.

Fourteen-year-old Sonya, who lives in St Petersburg Children's Home Number Four, tells a typical story: "When I was born I had some problems, and in the hospital they said I was dead, or I wouldn't live long, so my parents refused to take me."

"It was never written, it was never spoken out, but this place was for children to be kept until they die," says Andrei Dombrovsky, deputy director of the St Petersburg home.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21994332

Yeah- tell me more how Russia doesn't want 'gays' or Americans to adopt Russian kids because they want to protect them. I can provide lots more horror stories about the fine care Russia provides its 'orphans'- the kids Russians don't want for themselves, but don't want adopted by those who are willing to take care of them.

"Quality kids"- my that sure echoes the stories of the Russians who have abandoned their kids who they regard as not 'quality'- sort of abortion after the fact.

I be those Russian orphans who are underfed and uneducated really appreciate how much Putin and Russians care about them.

Apparently the interests of your people is that children should be abandoned by their parents to orphanages, where the state inadequately feeds them and doesn't educate them- and won't let them be adopted by people who would- especially if they are homosexuals or Americans.

I agree entirely that Putin is playing to the majority when he acts against homosexuals.

Well that is not exactly what Democracy means.

Meet Russia's new boss &#8212; same as the old boss.

If anyone was still under the illusion that Russia had evolved from a totalitarian regime into something like a democracy, that notion was dispelled over the weekend when dictator-for-life Vladimir Putin announced that he intended to return to the Kremlin in March. Russia is for all intents and purposes a one-party state, so simply announcing his candidacy makes his election virtually certain.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/28/opinion/la-ed-putin-20110928

"This system is extremely profitable for the corrupted bureaucracy. That's why even the best practice in Russia, experience of moving children to family care, is paralysed and stopped by the system through the members of parliament," he says.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/o...ns-corruption-is-just-a-way-of-life.html?_r=0

CORRUPTION in Russia is so pervasive that the whole society accepts the unacceptable as normal, as the only way of survival, as the way things &#8220;just are.&#8221;

Thousands of people in Russia&#8217;s large cities took to the streets in recent months, unhappy with President Vladimir V. Putin&#8217;s system of running the country. Under his leadership, they believe, Russia is steadily becoming a medieval country with corruption trumping all laws. These people have traveled the world, and they feel embarrassed when their peers in London, New York or Berlin ask about the (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) Riot trial or the imprisonment of Mikhail B. Khodorkovsky. Members of this new class of Russians often hide their nationality just to avoid being compared to their country&#8217;s ruling elite or asked questions that they cannot answer.

I was born in Moldova, then part of the Soviet Union, but moved to New York in the early 1990s when my parents immigrated here. For more than a decade I have been going back to Russia, noticing how the country has become more and more corrupt and lawless. I have been working on this project for the past six months. I see corruption as more than something done to people; it is something they participate in. It involves both a resignation to and a justification of a state of iniquity, insecurity and mistrust.

How corrupt is Russia?

http://www.transparency.org/cpi2013/results

Score of 28(out of 100, with 100 being no corruption), ranks 127th, with Mali and Nicaragua, worse than Togo, better than Bangladesh.


So my point again is:

If Russia- or you- actually cared about Russian orphans- you would be encouraging their adoption by those who are willing to feed and educate them- rather than having them abandoned by their Russian parents and living in squalor- underfed, uneducated and unloved.

 

1000s of people? Hmmm... Sounds like Ukraine.
Putin has 63% approval rating:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2013/07/10/putins-approval-rating-is-still-holding-steady/

I am not here to discuss levels of corruption, etc. . I think that USA is most corrupt, money controlled country, including the NSA spying on everyone and totalitarian 2 party system, and that they kill Russian adopted kids. All the statistics you've brought about corruption is made by your organizations or loyal to US. It can go forever.
You've brought that up, I know, you hate Russia and Putin, because they protect traditional ideas about family. It's understandable, if you are a homo, now you are angry and want to say all the crap about Russia just to prove how good gays are.

We talking here about why gays should not be allowed to adopt. It's the current topic. I don't want to go off topic.

Ok, you hate Russia, Putin, etc. Russia is a crap on your opinion. Ok, ok... Same US for me. To learn about corruption in US go to RT News(http://rt.com/). US is not going to say, of course about themselves, how corrupt they are, right?

Back to topic. But it's not going to change fact that Russian people care of their orphan kids with birth defects abroad by not letting them to be adopted to people with high suicidal rate, drug abuse rate, reduced Life Span, higher rates of pedophilia, etc.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=Is01B1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_among_LGBT_youth

Did you get it how?

So, there is nothing else for me to say, except to highlight the depressing facts about life of a kid in a homosexual couple. And of course, I am proud that Russia made in important step in forbidding such adoption practices. I understand your anger, that you now finding any reason to put me down, just because I am Russian and I am supporting my country. No matter what I say against "gay agenda" I am getting mostly hateful trolling responses, like this one.
It was my goal here and it was accomplished.
Take care. No longer checking your responses here.

 

Just wanted to add more about US corruption. You came after me by starting this discussion, not me, I want to note. I am a defender and you are the attacker on this subject.
Recall thousands of people on every major city in US, known as "occupy wall street". Recall bailing out failed banks and giving them "golden parashoots" or bonuses and it was done on a tax payer money, which they robbed by allowing this crisis to happen. Recall Goldman Sacks trading against its customers, Mr. Merdoff's crimes, torches and illegal detentions in Guantanamo, drone strikes on marriages and other innocent people in Pakistan and Augustinian, torches in Iraq, US is militarizing the whole world, US has a military base in every part of the world, while I am asked for kid donations in the US stores(where my tax money go?), etc. Russia doesn't do this. Don't ashame yourself.
All about US corruption: http://rt.com/shows/breaking-set-summary/

 

The scientific and psychiatric consensus is that homosexuality has no bearing on one's ability to parent a child. This fits in with my own anecdotal observations - namely that homosexuals are just normal people.

I mean if you want to define your life around what other people are doing with their genitals than have at it. But I think that's weird.

 

From the Forbes article you quote

Does this mean that Putin is awesome and that Russians approve of each and every thing that he does? No. 63% approval is hardly unanimous, and 37% of 143 million is a lot of people. But the fact that Putin&#8217;s ratings have stabilized since the botched attempt to rig the 2011 parliamentary elections suggests to me that Putin is not nearly the &#8220;political corpse&#8221; that many assume him to be. Is he weaker than he was back in the heyday of the oil boom and the short, victorious war against Georgia? Yes, absolutely. But weaker doesn&#8217;t mean weak, and it would appear that Putin still has a decent amount of political capital and a reasonable level of support among average Russians. It would also seem to be the case that the increasingly tough approach that the Kremlin is taking towards the opposition isn&#8217;t causing much of a reaction among the broader public.

So Russians like corrupt politicians- that is their choice. Not my problem.

You are not here to discuss levels of corruption, and then you do. LOL.

Sadly there have been Russian adopted kids who have been killed by their American adoptive parents. Absolutely true.

Of course that has never happened in Russia......in Russia children are left to rot in orphanages- as my citations show.

I don't hate anyone. I certainly don't hate Russia or Russians. I think its a shame that Russia doesn't take better care of the children that some Russians abandon. I think that Putin is a very smart despot who doesn't give a damn about Russian orphans, and uses the issue of homosexuals in Russia to appeal to his base.

And I am quite happily heterosexual, married for over 20 years, and a father. I just dislike bigots and bullies.

Okay- once again I will point out that your argument that homosexuals should not be allowed to adopt because you argue that they have higher rates of suicide, drug abuse etc than heterosexuals, if applied to Russians, that Russians have higher rates of suicide and drug abuse than Americans.

Therefore anyone who was not a hypocrite or actually cared about Russian orphans would prefer that Americans adopt Russian children abandoned by their parents rather than Russians- who dont' adopt them anyway.

I will point out again- I don't hate Russia, I haven't said that Russia is crap- Russia has issues- all countries have issues. Russia however is one of the more corrupt countries in the world, and probably the most corrupt country with a modern economy- though some of the other Eastern European countries might compete.

RT times? Seriously that is where you get news? No wonder you are confused.

Russian people care so much about their orphan kids that they abandon them in their first place, and then leave them in decrepid orphanages where they suffer from hunger, lack of education and abuse. Putin cares so much about these children that he would prefer to leave them in that squalor rather than let them be adopted by homosexuals.


"Take care. No longer checking your responses here."

In other words: "Run away, Run away"

 

I disagree with that.

 

Bovine Excrement! The Family Research Council ? Are you joking?? They have a well known anti gay agenda. Try this from a reputable organization:

The results of several breakthrough studies are offering new insights on gay men, lesbians and bisexuals. Among the key findings:

Several studies suggest that gay men, lesbians and bisexuals appear to have higher rates of some mental disorders compared with heterosexuals, although not to the level of a serious pathology. Discrimination may help fuel these higher rates.


A study found lesbians reported equally strong levels of mental health as their heterosexual sisters and higher self-esteem.


A new study of gay and lesbian youth finds that they are only slightly more likely than heterosexual youth to attempt suicide, refuting previous research that suggested much higher rates.

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb02/newdata.aspx

Now read this:

Marriage Equality and adoption&#8230;The Right Thing to do For The Children
by The Progressive Patriot 9.26.13

People who use children to assail gay marriage and adoption either have not given much thought to the down side of these bans-or &#8211; are being intellectually dishonest in saying that they take their position on behalf of the children which they really care little about.

It is a logical fallacy-an appeal to ignorance if you will to insist that same sex marriage and adoption of children by gays will be detrimental to those children, and that society as a whole, will somehow be harmed by these arrangements. Many will take the position that children are entitled to a &#8220;mom and a dad&#8221; That may be so but the reality is that many people in this life do not have everything that they are entitled to. There are many children without both a mother and a father, and some without either. Banning gay marriage and adoption is not going to change that.

Children also have a right to a stable, nurturing and permanent home and it is well established that that goal can be realized in a variety of family structures. The NJ Department of Families and Children-the public agency charged with the responsibility of finding adoptive homes for children &#8211;states, in part, on their web site that no one will be denied the opportunity to adopt based on sexual orientation. In fact, the Department&#8217;s Division of Child Protection and Permanency (formerly DYFS) has been placing children for adoption with gay and lesbian people- those who are single and those who are in a relationship- for decades with good outcomes for the children. And there are many, many more who still need homes while there is a dearth of people willing and able to adopt them. I know this because I worked in the foster care and adoption field in New Jersey for 26 years. I might add that children who are placed for adoption are already in a situation where they have neither a mother nor a father available to them. To imply that that a child would better off languishing in the foster care system as a ward of the state, than to be adopted into a nontraditional family is beyond absurd.

Furthermore, the vast majority of child psychologists will tell you that there are far more important factors that impact a child&#8217;s development than the gender or sexual orientation of the parents. No doubt that one could dredge up research studies that claim to prove that gay parenting is harmful. However, well established organizations like the American Psychological Association take the position that gay and lesbian parents are just as capable of rearing emotionally healthy children as anyone else. Yet even if family composition was, as some purport, a critical factor in children&#8217;s development, the fact is that there are and will always be children in non-traditional living situations where they do not have a mother and a father. Like it or not, it is also a fact that gay and lesbian people have children, be it from a prior relationship, adoption, or surrogacy.

Denying gay and lesbians the opportunity to marry does nothing to ensure that any greater number of children will have a home with a mother and a father. All that will be accomplished will be to deny numerous children the legal rights, protections, status and stability that comes with having married parents. And, to deny gays the ability to adopt will only ensure that more children will have neither a mother nor a father. Everyone is entitled to their moral views and religious beliefs but it is disingenuous and opprobrious to use children as pawns in the lost fight against equality by bloviating about how children would be harmed by it. While single people can be great parents, the benefits to children of allowing two people who are in a committed relationship to be married are obvious for anyone willing to look at the issue objectively. Those who truly care about children should be willing to open all of the possible pathways for them to be adopted and to have married parents when possible.

 

One more thing. I want to tell you about my new neighbors. They are a married Caucasian couple-both professional men in their early 30s. One is a school social worker, and the other is a financial advisor for a well-known investment house. They introduced me to their 3 year old African American, special needs child and said that he is their son, who they adopted through the state. His parents were killed in an auto accident a year ago and the child had been in 3 foster homes since then. There was no extended family able and willing to care for him. Special needs children, especially minorities are very hard to place and to find a stable home for, but these two men stepped up to take that responsibility.

In what little spare time they have, they do volunteer work with Habitat for Humanity, and occasionally deliver meals on wheels. They plan on having two more children by a surrogate mother with each of them donating sperm for that purpose. Each will then adopt the child of the other as the second parent.
Now for the question.

Can you honestly tell me that these two men, who are contributing to society and the community in many ways, do not deserve the benefits, protection and status of being married or should not be allowed to adopt? Can you explain to me why it is more important to prohibit same sex marriage and adoption by gays than to allow this child to have the stability and security of having married parents? Can you say that this is not a family in every sense of the word? Please be honest and give your reasons

 

Anybody who thinks that children are better off in the cesspools that are the orphanages of Russia than being adopted by a homosexual couple clearly is more concerned about homosexuals than the welfare of children.

 

Gays adopting is the ultimate act of selfishness. Being a kid is hard enough without throwing gay parents into the mix.

 

Really? How about being a kid without a permanent, stable and secure home.....now THAT is hard Tell me how these people are selfish.....

I have new neighbors. They are a married Caucasian couple-both professional men in their early 30s. One is a school social worker, and the other is a financial advisor for a well-known investment house. They introduced me to their 3 year old African American, special needs child and said that he is their son, who they adopted through the state. His parents were killed in an auto accident a year ago and the child had been in 3 foster homes since then. There was no extended family able and willing to care for him. Special needs children, especially minorities are very hard to place and to find a stable home for, but these two men stepped up to take that responsibility.

I now know that in what little spare time they have, they do volunteer work with Habitat for Humanity, and occasionally deliver meals on wheels. They plan on having two more children by a surrogate mother with each of them donating sperm for that purpose. Each will then adopt the child of the other as the second parent.

Now, Can you or anyone tell me why these men should not have been allowed to adopt.Can anyone honestly tell me that these two men, who are contributing to society and the community in many ways, do not deserve the benefits, protection and status of being married? Can anyone explain to me why it is more important to prohibit same sex marriage and adoption by gays than to allow this child to have the stability and security of having married parents? Can anyone say that this is not a family in every sense of the word? Please be honest and give your reasons clearly and succinctly as possible

 

I think I was pretty clear in my first post on this. It's hard enough being a kid without having gay parents too. When gays adopt a kid that otherwise could have had a normal home with a mom and dad it is an act of selfishness. It is about fulfilling their wants needs and desires not about the kids best interest.

 

The only thing that you made clear is that you're pathetically ignorant. What are you basing that on? Do you know any gay people who have adopted. ? Do you know anything at all about children and adoption? Do you really think that's is easy to find homes for children ? YOU are the selfish one!

People who use children to assail gay marriage and adoption either have not given much thought to the down side of these bans-or &#8211; are being intellectually dishonest in saying that they take their position on behalf of the children which they really care little about.

It is a logical fallacy-an appeal to ignorance if you will to insist that same sex marriage and adoption of children by gays will be detrimental to those children, and that society as a whole, will somehow be harmed by these arrangements. Many will take the position that children are entitled to a &#8220;mom and a dad&#8221; That may be so but the reality is that many people in this life do not have everything that they are entitled to. There are many children without both a mother and a father, and some without either. Banning gay marriage and adoption is not going to change that.

Children also have a right to a stable, nurturing and permanent home and it is well established that that goal can be realized in a variety of family structures. The NJ Department of Families and Children-the public agency charged with the responsibility of finding adoptive homes for children &#8211;states, in part, on their web site that no one will be denied the opportunity to adopt based on sexual orientation. In fact, the Department&#8217;s Division of Child Protection and Permanency (formerly DYFS) has been placing children for adoption with gay and lesbian people- those who are single and those who are in a relationship- for decades with good outcomes for the children. And there are many, many more who still need homes while there is a dearth of people willing and able to adopt them. I know this because I worked in the foster care and adoption field in New Jersey for 26 years. I might add that children who are placed for adoption are already in a situation where they have neither a mother nor a father available to them. To imply that that a child would better off languishing in the foster care system as a ward of the state, than to be adopted into a nontraditional family is beyond absurd.

Furthermore, the vast majority of child psychologists will tell you that there are far more important factors that impact a child&#8217;s development than the gender or sexual orientation of the parents. No doubt that one could dredge up research studies that claim to prove that gay parenting is harmful. However, well established organizations like the American Psychological Association take the position that gay and lesbian parents are just as capable of rearing emotionally healthy children as anyone else. Yet even if family composition was, as some purport, a critical factor in children&#8217;s development, the fact is that there are and will always be children in non-traditional living situations where they do not have a mother and a father. Like it or not, it is also a fact that gay and lesbian people have children, be it from a prior relationship, adoption, or surrogacy.

Denying gay and lesbians the opportunity to marry does nothing to ensure that any greater number of children will have a home with a mother and a father. All that will be accomplished will be to deny numerous children the legal rights, protections, status and stability that comes with having married parents. And, to deny gays the ability to adopt will only ensure that more children will have neither a mother nor a father. Everyone is entitled to their moral views and religious beliefs but it is disingenuous and opprobrious to use children as pawns in the lost fight against equality by bloviating about how children would be harmed by it. While single people can be great parents, the benefits to children of allowing two people who are in a committed relationship to be married are obvious for anyone willing to look at the issue objectively. Those who truly care about children should be willing to open all of the possible pathways for them to be adopted and to have married parents when possible.

Get over it ! Learn something! Stop presenting inane opinions as fact! Read my signature line!

 

There is no way in Hell two happily married gays are anywhere near as good an environment for kids to be in as two happily married straight people.Your saying that I imply kids are better off in foster care than with gays is a straw man, I never implied such a thing. There is a shortage of kids that are considered adoptable and gays should not be taking them away from a normal couple which is exactly what happens when gays compete for the same kids.

 

So you think what is best for kids is if Gays are only allowed to adopt children that no one else wants.

Well that will be a great message to those kids.

 

First of all, I didn&#8217;t imply anything about you. YOU implied that gays should never be allowed to adopt by your rant about how doing so is selfish, without considering for a second that there may be ultraistic motives. You also said &#8220;Being a kid is hard enough without throwing gay parents into the mix&#8221; On top of that, I gave you an example of two men who adopted a special needs minority child and asked you how that was selfish. Not only did you not answer that question, you failed to take the opportunity to state whether or not they should have been allowed to adopt. So do not going telling me what I implied and accusing me of setting up a straw man.
Second of all, where are you getting your information on what kind of parents gay people make or the effects on children? You seem to know less than nothing. You make inane statement as though they were facts when they are only opinions. You offer nothing at all to back up your claims. Did you actually read my last post? Were you able to comprehend any of it? Seems not. I would have slightly more respect for you if you would just come out and say what you think of gays instead of this feigned concern for kids. Read my signature line.

 

I never said that. I said they currently adopt very adoptable kids that could have normal parents thus robbing them of a normal childhood. The question of should gays be allowed to adopt kids considered un adoptable is a tricky one but since they are considered un adoptable gays probably wouldn't want them either so the point is moot.

 

The problem is your post are so long and ask so many questions I can't answer every one so I blend them all together. Those gays that adopted a special needs kid that otherwise might get no home at all is a good thing IMO. It does however bring up the all or nothing problem Jeff brought up. How can you say gays can only adopt the unwanted kids but not the wanted kids? So you are left with two scenarios really, gays can or can't adopt and if they can they will for the most part scoop up health babies just like straights want.

 

It's not a moot point. I gave you the example of the two gay men who adopted a special needs minority child when no one else would. You just don't want to deal with it. You wont say what you really think. There is nothing tricky about the question. Children who are in need of a home should be matched with people who are qualified and willing to care for them. That includes children with or without problems. That includes gay and straight people, single and married people. Who are you to decide what is "normal"? How are children who are placed with gays being robbed of anything? That is asinine.

I asked you this before but you ignored the question so I'll try again. Why do you think that gay parents are inferior to straight parents. Present your evidence. You can't just say things and expect everyone to believe you without supporting you claim. Is it an opinion or a fact? There is a rule about that.

 

You make two points- both of which are highly suspect. "they currently adopt very adoptable kids"- how would you know?

And 'robbing them of a normal childhood'- how would you know? What exactly is a 'normal childhood'?

If by normal you mean robbing them of a heterosexual mother/father childhood- well part of that they would already have been robbed of.

Here is what I think- and this reflects my signature- heterosexuals have children on a whim, by accident- homosexual couples choose to want to have children and raise them. The most common example are lesbians who are artificially inseminated, and the other partner adopts the child. But the two gay men- who have the means(adoptive parents have to prove they have the means) and the desire to parent- you think that they are automatically going to provide a worse environment than every heterosexual couple out there.

I think otherwise- I think that assuming that a gay couple will be worse parents is like assuming that a white couple will be worse parents to a black child. Children need love and stability more than anything else- children have survived the challenges of having parents that their peers don't accept- there is no reason to automatically assume that this will be any different.

I can see why you would want the point to be 'moot'.

Here is what you said

There is a shortage of kids that are considered adoptable and gays should not be taking them away from a normal couple which is exactly what happens when gays compete for the same kids.

A) Do you think that a gay couple should be able to adopt a child that you consider in your eminent wisdom- unadoptable? Or
B) Do you think that a gay couple should only be able to adopt a child that you consider unadoptable?

And if so- what message do you think that is sending to the children you consider unadoptable?