Seems to me that OLO has taken a lurch to the far right (it was always slightly right if centre) but with the publishing of virtually 2 identical articles condemning the adoption of children by same sex couples is troubling indeed.

I guess only the ABC has to provide balance.

As others have pointed out the numbers of children available for adoption is few and the scrutiny that prospective adoptives parents are placed under is intense. A shame that prospective biological parents aren't placed un the same inquisition - might eliminate.

Having just posted at Wariwck's equally bigoted attitude to same sex couples, I have no wish to repeat myself, so will indulge in a link to my post there.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10934&page=0#181781

Nate10

" My brother and his partner would not be able to provide for a child in the ways a mother could. That is a biological fact.
Posted by Nate10, Friday, 3 September 2010 6:50:27 PM"

Riiight. Men can't get preggers only women, we know that. We also know that men are as capable of caring and compassion as women and if you are going to mention breastfeeding - not all women can do this and I know from my own experience men are just as able to heat a bottle as women.

I can well understand why you haven't mentioned any of this to your brother, he might think you are a bigot.

Bill, not only are the rights of the child being ignored in the gay and lesbian push for legitimacy but so are the basic facts of life.

Males and females of all species are designed by nature to create life. In human society, for thousands of years, men and women create life and bring up the children. That way children learn the difference between males and females and how they relate to each other. Nature, in its wisdom, also has designed things so that two males or two females cannot create children, no matter how hard they try!

Putting children in a situation of having two fathers or two mothers is, dare I say it, completely unnatural! It gives the child a one-sided, distorted view of adult human relationships.

If gays and lesbians want to live together, then good luck to them.

But keep innocent children out of it.

http://www.dangerouscreation.com

I agree David G. Furthermore what strikes me as rather sad is this anti christian paranoia that seems to evoke such emotion as to totally disregard the legitimacy of the rationality of the simple factual argument that children do indeed have a born right to a mother and father, as nature (however you define it) intended.

The only Christian agenda it seems is to protect and look out for the rights of innocent children foremost to selfish adults who's happiness seems to essentially hinder on the deprivation of a child's right to a mum and dad.

If there is justification in making the interests of the child paramount when deciding who should adopt, then shouldn't this apply equally to the question of whether two people should be allowed to produce a child biologically? Think of all the misery inflicted on so many people simply because their parents were cruel, exploitative, incompetent or just plain stupid. I'm sure that two loving and intelligent homosexual adoptive parents would do an immensely better job of child-raising than many of those biological parents did.

So shouldn't we legislate to outlaw reproduction without a license, which will be issued to aspiring heterosexual parents subject to their passing a strict assessment of their fitness for parenthood?

And to all those ridiculous people who keep bleating about the "lifestyle choice" of homosexuals, get into your heads this simple fact: homosexuality is not a matter of choice; like heterosexuality it is biologically determined.

Oh and for what it's worth I'll mention that I'm a practising Christian.

Children have no rights. Just hypocritical adults with 'do as l say, not as l do' rules. Parents have obligations. When the youngens become adults, they'll come to understand that. Or not probably.

Crabsy, as a Christian maybe you should review what the bible says about homosexuality. Not simply disregard or rewrite the bible because a sin makes you uncomfortable to rally against.

Johnny Rotten:
"A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs. The predominant usage in modern American English refers to persons hostile to those of differing race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation and religion."

So far it has been you exhibiting the bigotry.

My argument ties in more with the fact that while both genders can provide love and compassion, they provide it in different ways. A child by the pure fact of having a mother and father, will also have a parent of the same gender of whom they can learn and develop from.

We each are shaped individually by our parents, but particularly from the parent of the same gender. On the negative extreme, the child abuse cycle can particularly be devastating when experienced by a parent of the same gender. Another example (highlighted in an advertising campaign in Victoria) is sons developing the same drinking habits of their fathers. Yes they can also learn of their mothers, but it is particularly damaging from a father. There is genuinely a connection that all children will have with their same sex parent. When this doesn't exist due to lack of same sex parent, there can often be a negative impact on development. Sometimes the consequences of this take time to exhibit including even when they have kids of their own. Plenty of people can testify to this. In allowing same sex adoption, some might make it through unscathed, but some may not. I object because i just don't think it should be left to chance.