gay couple adopting a child is privilege, not a right; If nature intended it to be so, then...?

Question

reproduction would be possible via gay relationships. Am I wrong?

Alexandra, a child doesn't have the right to a loving family. That's not a right, love is a privilege.

Answer 1

You're wrong.

The competence and willingness necessary to raise a child isn't contingent upon the ability to procreate.

Answer 2

Well, any couple (or single person) adopting a child does so a privilege, not a right. Nobody can just demand 'give me a child!' and get one- that would be a right.

I don't know exactly what your question is- I think you're mixing ideas about gay adoption and the naturalness of gays raising children since they can't reproduce on their own, which, in fact, is a lie. We live in a society that is blessed by technological advances that allow children to be created without actual sex occurring. Reproduction is certainly possible in gay relationships by these means. And I hate it when people cite 'nature intended . . .'. Nature intends nothing; it just is. Nature is not God- if you're going to use that argument, you must state it for that, a religious one. Nature is not an entity that decides something, but the state of the way things occur. We intervene in 'nature' in so many ways for the better- lovely things like heating, medicine, etc.. If you think about it, we're always messing with nature's "ways" to make our society better. Did nature ever really intend human beings to live in Antartica- a place almost inhabitable without some human workings? It certainly wouldn't seem so.

Let gay people adopt, let them have their own children, let them do it, and if you're going to argue against it, come up with a better argument than the whole nature thing.

Hope that's opened your eyes a bit!

Answer 3

Adopting a child is a privilege, not a right, for EVERYONE, regardless of their sexuality. Adoptive parents should be chosen based on the best interests of the child - will the parent(s) provide a healthy and loving environment, and encourage the child's mental, emotional, and physical growth?

A gay couple is just as likely to provide all that as a straight couple is, so it would be unfair to prohibit them from adoption for something so unrelated to their effectiveness as parents.

I really don't understand the whole argument that "heterosexuality is right because it allows for reproduction." The logic is faulty, because many straight couples are unable (or unwilling or profoundly unsuited) to reproduce. But no one seeks to ban to condemn those relationships (the old, the infertile, etc).

And nature obviously DID intend for homosexuality, because numerous studies have revealed homosexuality all over the animal kingdom. So yes, you are wrong, and need to take a heaping tablespoon of logic daily.

Answer 4

I just think that for the better good of humans, heterosexual relationships should be encouraged more than gay (same-sex) ones.

In other words, our genes have to keep mixing up so that we become a stronger, more diverse and more capable of acheiving better things for the whole planet.

As history has told us, when trying to go against nature or even tempering with it - as it's the case for cloning (that's a totally different debate but I thought I'd mention it here just for the sake of it), as all men have sperm and all women have wombs, give or take the 'point-zero' or something percentage of unfortunate infertile & 'inerectile' bunch, the results for the majority can only be adversive.

Answer 5

I think any child has the right to a loving family of their own. I think it is a privilege of a person to adopt a child, and give that child love and attention.
I think your argument is flawed greatly, as there are many people who by choice or nature, have not had children, they are still allowed to adopt.
Instead of being so narrow minded, think about this......... if more gay couples were allowed to adopt there would be less children in orphanages, waiting ever so patiently for a good loving home.
Instead of worrying about harming someones bigoted ideals, shouldn't we think about what is best for the children?

Answer 6

What has nature to do with adopting a child?
Adopting a child is neither a right nor a privilege it is a loving and caring experience and should be given to ALL who can provide a loving and caring home no matter if they are gay or straight.
There are many thousands of children in the USA that need to be adopted but do ALL the straights step up to the plate? NO!
Have you? Didn't think so.
So to answer your question- YOU ARE SO WRONG.

Answer 7

I agree that adoption is a privilige. But I don't think we're using the word in the same way. Tell me what straight people have done to earn the privilige of adoption. You can't, because by definition, this type of privilige is completely undeserved. Straight people have power, ergo straight people get priviliges.

Answer 8

Hmmm another simplistic street thug with absolutely no idea about reality.
You are completely wrong.
Adoption, so long as you meet the criteria, is a right. If you wish to adopt, can pass all of their testing and standards, they have no right to deny you.

Answer 9

You're wrong. A single woman who can not or chooses not to concieve and decides to adopt would be the same as a gay couple (male) who also want to adopt.
It's about raising children in a happy home, not who's gay or straight or who's biologically able to.

Answer 10

Yes you are wrong. Adopting a child is a privilege, but not one reserved for heterosexual couples. You could also make the argument that if nature intended for childless couples to have children they would be able to reproduce. Raising children is about the amount of love you are able to give, not sexual orientation.

Answer 11

You are right. If it were natural for people to be gay, then they would be able to reproduce. Their gay sex isn't natural either. Look how a man and a woman fit together. A woman with a woman, that doesn't fit in any way whatsoever. A man with a man? Eww but the only way they fit is by using a body part that isn't meant to be used for that. Oh and by the way, you shouldn't put questions like this in the section meant for people that are gay. You'll get s*it from everyone who answers you!