Should homosexual couples be allowed to adopt

[ShyGuy68]

I saw this poll on the Danish CNN site today, and since the result was a big surprise to me, I wonder what kind of result the same poll will get here.

My opinion is that of course they should be allowed to do it, I’m convinced that a child who grow up with either a gay or lesbian couple, can be just as complete a person as those that grow up with a straight couple.

Please vote, and share your opinion about it.

 

[lavender]

 

[Never]

You're not going to get a poll anything like what the 'general population' would vote.

You have to remember 70% of Americans believe that gays are immoral or unnatural.

 

[plasticman33]

Sure, why not?

Same sex couples can be just as loving and nurturing as hetro couples.

 

[ShyGuy68]

The result on the Danish site was:

26% Yes
65% No
6% Don't know
3% Don't care

out of 632 votes

 

[Tipsy]

ofcourse

Personally I know this couple raising a child and never seen more love and caring for a child anywhere else so why not let them adopt I mean they are people just like you and me with the same love to give to someone either way.

 

[bluntforcemama]

One of my closest friends was raised by a homosexual couple, and she's just fine. If you want to get into gays adopting children, then you have to include cultural-cross adoptions as well. For example, if a caucasian couple can adopt a child of a different race, then how can anyone say that a homosexual couple can't adopt a child as well? Now, for something as controversial, how many African American couples do you know that have adopted a caucasian child?

 

[nasty]

This may sound cliqued, but I know Homosexuals, and their the kindest people in the world. Althoiugh, he's a bit hung up on himself.

 

[april-wine]

loving and nuturing has nothing to do with sexual orientation.....my answer......yes

 

[riff]

Maybe?

I don't like the idea.

 

[lilfrk]

As long as it's a safe and happy home. Sure. I think it's important for kids to grow up with 2 parents. It shouldn't matter if they are a same sex couple or not.

 

[riff]

It just doesn't make sense? Nothing against homosexuals, but:

Heterosexual intercourse is how babies are made!

 

[Mischka]

Heterosexual intercourse is how babies are made!

Excluding discussion of artificial insemination, etc., many people's sexuality isn't that straightforward. I've known several mainly gay-oriented people that had serious hetero relationships in their lives. One is now raising his child from that relationship with his male life partner.

And I agree with lilfrk. If a child has the opportunity to be with two loving parents, I fully support that environment.

 

[Laurel]

I'd like to hear one rational argument against it.

"Since they can't marry, they may not be committed/responsible/caring/loving enough to say together."

The same can be said of hetero couples.

"A child needs a mother and a father."

What about all the children in one-parent households who do wonderfully?

"Babies are made by a man and a woman."

What about infertile couples who use other methods to conceive? Should they not be allowed a baby? And how, exactly, does the method of conception adversely affect the child?

It's amazing to me that the very same people who criticize the Chinese government for interfering in its people's reproductive rights will say that OUR government has the right to do the same. If your stance is, "People should be free to do whatever I think is moral", then you have no concept of liberty. Freedom is not confined to your rather limited moral spectrum.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Take all the couples that want to adopt, hetero and homo, and arrange them in order of ability to provide a loving, stable home, and I guarantee you all the homos won't be on one end of the spectrum, and heteros on the other.
There is a whole freaking list of parental qualifications that come before "Where do their pee-pees go?"

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Nothing against homosexuals, but Heterosexual intercourse is how babies are made!

Nothing against ignorance but what the hell does that have to do with seeking qualified applicants for adoption?

 

[lavender]

DCL

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

If I hear a smart argument I'll do exactly what you say.

If I hear an argument that's about as dumb and archaic as "homos aren't worthy of adopting because only heteros can procreate" then I'm pretty much going to respond as I did.

 

[Gilly Bean]

Honestly, IMHO, I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be able to, unless they are found unfit. Which, is the same with any adoption. But, sexual preferance really shouldn't be a qualifier.

I think age should almost be more of one, like if a couple is rather old. I just read an article about some famous people who adopted thier first child. The 'mother' was 53, or 54, and the 'father' was in his 60's. No offense against them personally, but how are they going to be able to handle a teenager when they are in thier early 60's, and 80's? Let alone see them through college? I dunno, I guess in some cases it might work, but when there are so many people out there in thier 30's, and early 40's trying to adopt, I would rather give them a chance, because I know they won't die of old age before that child is even out of grade school.

again, just my opinion, feel free to blast away if you want.


Gilly Bean

 

[lavender]

 

[lilfrk]

Just because you are in a hetero relationship and you CAN reproduce doesn't mean you SHOULD.

Example:

I work with a girl that is 25 and has 3 girls ages 4years-10months. ALL of them with different fathers. She is currently with the baby's father, but I can see that it isn't going to last long. It's an abusive relationship. I feel bad for her daughters that they have to see her treated like that. Now they will most likely grow up and think they deserve to be treated the same way.

Someone please tell me how that is better than growing up in a homosexual household with 2 loving and caring parents looking out for your well being.

I applaud riff for having the balls to admit he voted no. But it doesn't change the fact that I think his reasons are ignorant.

Someone once told me that they believed that homosexuality was God's birth control. It gave many unwanted children a loving place to go. Maybe they were on to something. Then again maybe not.

 

[WriterDom]

There are a lot of heterosexual couples that shouldn't be allowed within 100 feet of a child, adopted or not.

 

[Gilly Bean]

There are a lot of heterosexual couples that shouldn't be allowed within 100 feet of a child, adopted or not.

Not entirly true.

There are alot of PEOPLE that shouldn't be allowed within 100 feet of a child, adopted or not.

Reguardless of sexual prefrence. There are homosexuals, and hetrosexuals alike who mistreat children.

 

[april-wine]

i too would like to hear the con.....come on folks....why bother voting when you don't have the balls to back up your beliefs......

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

This may sound cliqued, but I know Homosexuals, and their the kindest people in the world. Althoiugh, he's a bit hung up on himself.

Gay people are just like Straights; there are good and bad.

I would say that one reservation I would have is that, according to studies, male homosexuals are quite a bit more promiscuous than female homosexuals and male/female heterosexuals. If true then it is possible that such a relationship might have a higher chance of dissolution - which is not a good thing for the child.

That said, I don't think such generalities should necessarily be a factor in adoptions; I am sure that those homosexual couples that do try to adopt are probably put under as much scrutiny as heterosexual couples - probably more.

I do believe that the natural parent(s) have the right to determine what persons can adopt their child, including the exclusion of anybody regardless of how prejudiced it may seem to others.

STG