English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

This is a raging debate, but I don't see why it should even be contentious. The answer is clear.

2006-06-26 03:16:16 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Cultures & Groups Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender

20 answers

Absolutely NOT. Mother Nature has decided to take you out of the gene pool by not making you want to have sex with the opposite sex. Lets not piss her off now.

2006-06-26 03:25:53 · answer #1 · answered by Darthritus 3 · 2 6

It is my firm belief that if ANY person has the means, the love and the patience to raise a child should be able to.

Heterosexuality doesn't guarantee a child's safety. Heterosexuals are the reason there are so many children who don't have parents or homes.

When heterosexuals learn to control their procreation and violent tendencies, we will have fewer unwanted/abused/neglected children to worry about getting into decent homes. At that point, they can try to restrict the "rights" of homosexuals regarding adoption and foster care. Not before. It is a well known fact that children are not safe in heterosexual homes. Nobody is trying to restrict them from producing more children, though.

The debate is about hate and discrimination. It isn't really about the safety of children. Hateful straight people do not think gay people deserve the rewards of raising children. They probably think of it as some sort of punishment.

If the debate were really about the safety of children, there are MANY more effective ways to make that happen. You won't find them trying to regulate their own, though. It's much easier to find a smaller group and make them the enemy.

2006-06-26 16:30:52 · answer #2 · answered by Dustin Lochart 6 · 0 0

My partner and I pondered this question and questions related to it for a long time.

Then we adopted a 4 year old girl who had been passed around the foster system since she was a baby. Without a stable home environment (among other, much more unpleasant problems in some of those foster homes), she was well behind in her development compared to other kids her age.

I shudder to think what would have become of her had we not taken her out of that system. And there are tens of thousands of kids awaiting adoption... some of whom never get their chance.

Florida has banned gay adoption, even as the number of kids in that state in the foster system continues to rise. What message are those kids getting? "You are better off without a stable home than you are with loving parents who don't happen to be straight and married."

To everyone reading this, think about what that message and that system is doing to those kids, and then search your heart to see if you still don't know the answer to this question.

By the way, our daughter is 9 now, at the head of her class, and is the pride and joy of our lives. Sweet and bright and wonderful, she is. All she needed was a home, a chance, and a lot of love... and my partner and I had those things to offer.

2006-06-26 16:33:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Of course you should. There are so many children in need of homes out there, I'm surprised there's any debate at all. Plus, it's been proven that gays are no more likely to have gay children than straights are, if that's the big problem with gay adoption. People should recognize that gay adoption is just as good as when straight couples adopt.

2006-06-26 11:52:26 · answer #4 · answered by Nick 4 · 0 0

Of course! Everyone should have equal opportunity, especially a child in need. I personally don't want to have my own children, I had much rather adopt, even if I end up with a man. Gay people should enjoy the gift of parenthood, just as every child should have parents.

2006-06-26 11:41:47 · answer #5 · answered by Kaleidoscope Eyes 2 · 0 0

Yes, It doesn't matter about sexual orientation. Everyone has the right to adopt as long as they are good parents. Gay people make great parents to and they are very accepting when their kids grow up. So yes gays should be able to adopt or foster.

2006-06-26 14:39:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Every single anti-child accusation has been refuted. We now have studies showing what some of us already knew: we're not child molestors, rapists, nor will we bring our children up gay. We'll probably try a little harder to bring them up tolerant, but that's definitely no guarantee.

So, there's literally no reason not to ban us. And there's a very good reason to let us: these kids need homes.

2006-06-28 04:10:24 · answer #7 · answered by Atropis 5 · 0 0

A clear yes. I raised two boys -- both of them would say I was a good father. I think the opinions of children raised or partially raised by gays should count, since they are the only people that know. Don't you?

Reyn
http://www.rebuff.org

2006-06-26 14:40:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

clear cut yes!
1.being LGBTQs do not in any way hamper our ability as parents, in fact, since its a conscious choice to adopt i think we'd be able to provide more love to the child.
2.just cuz we are not the stereotypical family unit, it doesn't mean we cannot raise a child successfully,rather i think tolerance would be high up the "to teach" list
3.most abandoned children ad from straight families in the 1st place..... so we'd be doing the community a favor and spread the love around

regards

2006-06-26 12:02:35 · answer #9 · answered by Rainbow nation 3 · 0 0

A very clear yes. There are some people meant to be parents of any and all sexualities, and some who are not. Many gay people can and will be incredibly good parents.

2006-06-26 10:24:10 · answer #10 · answered by scorp 3 · 0 0

Yes. Gay people make as good of parents as straights. The only difference is their sexual orientation. It doesn't change who you are, your morals, your ability to raise children. Because you happen to be gay and raising a child doesn't mean that the child will be gay.

2006-06-26 10:45:31 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers