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

I have been trying to figure out how to respond further on this.

But pretty much your posts speak for themselves.

And its not pretty for children in need of adoption.

 

Sadly these days it comes down to foster care or adoption by gays in many instances. When I was a kid I had friends that lived at the local orphanage and that was a better system by far than this foster care thing. They were like one big family and the kids I knew didn't even want to be adopted, they liked it there.

 

Yea man, so that they can turn them gay and into sex slaves. Why else, after all, like he sai,d gays only adopt for their own gratification. TROLL ALERT!!!!!!!!:

 

This is for all of those ignoramuses who insist on bloviating about same sex marriage and adoption and how it allegedly harms children :

Utah's ban on gay marriage harms the children of gays and lesbians, despite arguments the state has made to the contrary, according to an amicus brief filed Tuesday by a group of national and state gay rights organizations.

The brief includes testimony from some of these children, who talk about growing up with gay and lesbian parents and how the same-sex marriage ban affects them. It was filed in the challenge to Utah's ban now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit.

"Family is really important in Utah and [Gov. Gary Herbert and the state of Utah] claim to want to protect families, but it hurts me and my brother to not be able to have married parents," one 12-year-old, identified by the initials R.H.P., told the authors of the brief. "My parents are good moms and are patient with me and are just regular people."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/04/utah-gay-marriage-children_n_4899080.html

 

Who is saying that gays can only adopt the unwanted kids? YOU that's who. Most people will opt for the problem free kids, and there are those, gay and straight who are willing to take on kids with problems. So what? What is your point.? I know, some kids are damaged already so we might as well place them with gays and finish the job. That's how you think is it not? Don't lie.

This discussion is idiotic! Children should be placed for adoption without regard for the parents sexual orientation. Plain and simple. We've been doing that in NJ for a long time with excellent results . Get over it!

 

Oh, well if New Jersey does it, then we should all just roll over and accept it nationally. Whats good enough for the most corrupt state in the nation must be good enough for the rest of us. Right? LOL

 

Here's a timely study: Lesbian and Heterosexual Two-Parent Families: Adolescent–Parent Relationship Quality and Adolescent Well-Being

It basically says that kids with lesbian parents have higher self-esteem than kids from heterosexual parents. One more myth put to rest.

 

That's sooooo thoughtful and intelligent!! Sharp as a marble !! I suppose that you another one who will feign concern for the kids as a smokescreen for gay bashing. What the hell does political corruption have to do with any of this. ? No matter, you will indeed be rolling over soon

 

A child that has gay parents will always be denied either a mother or a father.

 

Many children do not have both a mother and a father. Denying gays the right to adopt will only ensure that more children will lack BOTH a mother and a father, and grow up in foster care or a group home......unless you think that there is a straight couple willing and able to adopt for each and every child that needs a home. So what is your point now?

 

The same as before. Who says putting a child in a situation where perverted behavior is present is better? What happens if and when there is divorce? It doesn't make things better.

 

As a former child welfare investigator, I can tell you about a lot of perverted behavior and divorces on the part of straight people. On occasion, I would place the children with gay or lesbian foster or adoptive parents, and yes, it made things better. You're really struggling to find justification to deny adoption to gays and not doing real well.

 

The problems of "straight" society do not justify homosexuality. You are struggling to justify allowing this kind of perverted behavior to be a part of main stream society. It is as if your solution to a person drowning is to give them a glass of water. Try again.

 

And your personal prejudices and disdain for your fellow human beings does not justify discrimination. You have no desire to actually deal with the issue and no ability to learn anything. All that you're interested in doing in trolling and spewing hate. You know nothing about the issue of children and adoption and never will because you don't want to. You have nothing to contribute. You are dismissed.

 

So now you resort to phony accusations because you have no decent response. OK then. I understand. But I do have right to my opinion and it isn't based on hate as you say it does. It isn't that I am against gays as much as I don't see any reason to be for them. Thanks for demonstrating that there is no reason to support gay marriage.

 

Actually what I am saying is you can't do that. It's all or nothing so I vote for the nothing option. Gays should not be allowed to adopt.

 

I agree. Where is the proof showing this is a good thing?

 

http://www.hrc.org/files/images/issues/adoption_landing-page.jpg

http://i1.huffpost.com/gen/1652045/thumbs/n-GAY-ADOPTION-UTAH-large570.jpg

It is in the best interests of children that all qualified adults who have the room in their hearts and homes to adopt a child are permitted to do so, and are treated fairly in the process. Every day, more and more LGBT people are adopting children who need a good and loving home, and you could be one of them.

Lesbian and gay parents are raising over 65,000 adopted children and youth in the U.S. This accounts for more than 4 percent of all adopted children. Here are the stories of just a few of these families&#8217; stories, illustrating the many joys of adoptions &#8211; and in some cases, the challenges faced by LGBT families throughout the adoption process.

 

http://www.acpeds.org/?CONTEXT=art&cat=22&art=50

 

For every source that you come up with that puts out this kind of garbage, I can come up with ten that contradict it:

Zanga has described ACP as a group "with Judeo-Christian, traditional values that is open to pediatric medical professionals of all religions who hold true to the group's core beliefs: that life begins at conception; and that the traditional family unit, headed by a different-sex couple, poses far fewer risk factors in the adoption and raising of children."[6] The organization's view on parenting is at odds with the position of the American Academy of Pediatrics and other medical and child welfare authorities, which hold that sexual orientation has no correlation with the ability to be a good parent and to raise healthy and well-adjusted children.[4][7][8] A number of prominent researchers have complained that ACPeds mischaracterized or misused their work to advance its agenda.[1][9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_College_of_Pediatricians Bovine excrement propaganda!

But never mind the research, some of us here have real life success stories. I have shared a couple but you were probably not interested. Positive stories are all over the internet too. You just have to open your eyes and your mind

 

My personal favorite family that lives right here in my home state is that of Steven and Roger Ham and their 14 adopted children.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/25/steven-roger-ham-adopt-14-kids-gay-dads_n_3983978.html

 

Thank you!

 

It saddens me to think that there are some here who think these kids should be taken from their adoptive family and their fathers and put into other homes just because they have two dads, two dads which I might add, love and support them all very much and give them everything they need and protect them from the abusive homes they once lived in.

 

Allow me to call your attention to the recent Kentucky case where are Federal Judge ordered the state to recognize out of state same sex marriages:

"That Kentucky&#8217;s laws are rooted in tradition, however, cannot alone justify their infringement on individual liberties," writes Heyburn. "Over the past forty years, the Supreme Court has refused to allow mere tradition to justify marriage statutes that violate individual liberties."

Heyburn also addresses the defense of exclusionary marriage rights advanced by antigay group the Family Trust Foundation of Kentucky, which filed an amicus curiae, or "friend of the court" brief, contending that marriage is regulated by the state to encourage "responsible procreation and childrearing, steering naturally procreative relationships into stable unions, promoting the optimal childrearing environment, and proceeding with caution when considering changes in how the state defines marriage."

Heyburn flatly rejects these illogical arguments. "The Court fails to see how having a family could conceivably harm children," he writes. Indeed, Justice Kennedy [in Windsor] explained that it was the government&#8217;s failure to recognize same-sex marriages that harmed children, not having married parents who happened to be of the same sex." http://www.advocate.com/politics/ma...kentuckys-marriage-ban-ruled-unconstitutional

"No one in this case has offered factual or rational reasons why Kentucky&#8217;s laws are rationally related to any of these purposes," explains Heyburn.

The courts are not buying the horse(*)(*)(*)(*) and few others are either. Why are you? Oh, because you want to? Or do you also know that it's all a lie?

 

And a child that lives in an orphanage will always be denied any mother or any father- and a home.