Enough with the illogical idiocy being spewed forth from both sides. Here's some simple logic-bombs for those of you on both sides of the argument:

1) The author says the ideal outcome is the biological mother and father. As pointed out that's not possible for adopted children. So Muehlenberg's central premise is irrelevant. This leads to point 2:

2) The 'next best options'.
Now, after shredding his central premise, we come to the crux of Muehlenberg's argument - the next best option is a committed, stable relationship, with a man and a woman.

I don't think there's much disagreement here. I would agree with this (for the simple fact that it offers the perspectives of both genders).
The problem I have, is that there doesn't seem to be a similar crusade arguing against single parents, widows or widowers adopting children.

This exposes the hypocrisy of the other side. A stable, committed loving gay couple is infinitely preferable to a single-parent.
If you're not willing to acknowledge that, then you're the one being led by ideology. Two parents are better than one, more time, resources and commitment.
One parent is better than no parent.

Simple really.

So, here's a simple checklist anyone can follow:

1st choice: Stable, committed heterosexual parents.
2nd choice: stable, committed, homosexual parents.
3rd choice: single parent.

The real devil is in the detail. This is the roughest of guidelines. If the 2nd choice has no history of health problems that could potentially affect the life of the child, they leapfrog to number one in the event that the first choice has some kind of health condition that prevents them from certain aspects of parenting.

Ultimately, if homosexual couples really do have the kinds of lifestyles they're accused of, then this would rule them out - not because they're gay, but because of the home environment.

So screw the ideology from both sides. This isn't an ideological war, at least is shouldn't be. That's the one thing Muehlenberg is right about, though that hinders, not helps, his crusade.

I'm heartened by the recent posts from Johnny Rotten, R0bert, Kipp and especially TRTL.

I'll just add, for David G's benefit, that in my experience as a former anthropologist the supposedly "natural" nuclear family is a relatively recent invention. In many cultures there are numerous people besides their biological parents that children call "father" or "mother", or with whom they have a defined equivalent relationship to what most Westerners would regard as parent-child kinship. Indeed, anthropological literature is full of it.

Today, in some parts of Indigenous Australia and among our closest neighbours the most salient relationship a boy has is with his mother's brother, rather than his biological father. The point being that this supposed natural and sacred fatherhood business is more cultural than it is biological. Similar arguments can be made with respect to motherhood.

I rather like the apocryphal African proverb that says that it takes a whole village to raise a child. What children need is food, shelter, love, security and education. The gender, sexuality or biological relatedness of who actually provides those necessities are peripheral to those needs.

yes it takes a whole village to raise a child. that doesn't mean that that everybody in the village will at one time or another breast feed the child, bathe the child, kiss the child, change the child etc etc. that intimacy should be between the child and his biological parents... if they are not there for whatever reason then the guardian of appropriate gender should fill that roll. A little girl shouldn't have to talk about her privates to her 2 dads. A boy should not have to learn about his role as a male from his 2 mums alone.

Same sex adoption is a selfish unnatural and ultimately deviant concept which should not be allowed to bear fruit (excuse the pun) in any society.

CJMorgan, what are you suggesting? That we should we take the tribal behaviour of an African tribe as our guide?

What has that got to do with the issue of gays and lesbians acquiring or having children and the effect of that on innocent children?

What is largely forgotten in this 'discussion' are the rights of the children in same-sex relationships. Who will protect them from the negative effects of being brought up in a same-sex relationship? How do you think a child in a same-sex relationship feels when they go to school and discover that all their friends have a Mum and a Dad? Given that children learn via imitation, how do they sort out a married relationship where two men or two women are providing the role models?

To ignore nature is to ask for trouble!

David G all you are saying, is that things should only be the way you think they should be. Life is a journey and full of diversities, and positive contributions to the social fabric of society. To deny this is so, is living a blinkered and insulated life.
A recent report on children being brought up by same sex couples.
www.sciencecentric.com/news/10090142-children-raised-by-gay-couples-show-good-progress-through-school.html

David G, and Bach too who also said 'unnatural'.

Gay Penguins.

Gay Penguins exist in nature.

Gay Penguins Adopt orphaned and abandoned chicks.

Gay Penguins Naturally Adopt.

Gay Adoption is Natural.

Gay Penguins = you are wrong.

If you have a problem with this then take it up with whatever power or force or law of nature that made Gay Penguins and proved you wrong!
(Hint: If your religious then your God/s made Gay Penguins! If an Evolutionist then look up Kin Selection and see how Gay Penguins evolved as an advantage to Penguin-kind!)

Gay Penguins David and Bach, Gay Penguins! And again, they are not the only animal which has same-sex adoption of orphans, it's found in other animals too!

So the 'unnatural' argument is refuted. Broken, ended, shattered, demolished, shown to be untrue. Rendered a pathetic joke by the many non-reproducing child raisers from nature like Ants Bees Wasps and Termites as well as the many same-sex-couple adopting of orphans amongst many birds and mammals.

Gay Penguins are Natural David and Bach. Gay is natural David. Gay Adoption is Natural David. Maybe you need to learn more about nature?