Dear Yuyutsu,

Now you've thrown a spanner in the works.

It never occurred to me to think about the issue of
preventing homosexuals from adopting children. I went
on the assumption that not every homosexual couple
would be interested in adopting children - therefore
I was asking the question - that those that wanted to -
should they be allowed or not?

However - I believe that those two questions are inter-linked.
You can't have one without the other.
How can you say yes homosexual couples should be allowed
to adopt children and then turn around and say - but they
should be prevented from doing so.

I'm going to keep on working my way through this conundrum.

Parents play a major role in the lives of their children.
Children must have years of physical care, including food,
shelter, and protection from harm. Love and affection are
also necessary to stimulate children to learn and mature.
This love should come from a person or persons with whom
the children can develop a lasting attachment.

Youngsters who have been raised in institutions and haven't
received enough individual attention or love often experience
problems in forming personal relationships later in life.
They may also fail to achieve other kinds of normal growth
and development, even though they have received the
necessary physical care.

Parents therefore play a major role in a process called socialisation
by which children learn to become independent members of
society. For example, parents train their youngsters to speak,
to dress themselves, and to perform other basic activities.

Girls and boys also learn sex roles - that is, the roles they
are expected to play as adult females or males - by identifying
with the parent of their sex. With a same sex couple -
this may become a problem.

Children are born with great individual differences in
intelligence, physical ability, and temperament, and so they
vary greatly in talent, personality, and other characteristics.

As you can see - I certainly don't have the answers.

Dear Foxy,

The questions (1) and its opposite (1a) are simply two different ways to ask the same question: either we allow adoption by homosexual couples, or we prevent it.

Now lets concentrate on the second question: is it good to have homosexual parents adopting?

Yes, children have so many needs and the average parents are unable to provide them adequately, so if you find a couple that can provide say 90%, then I think you've got a good bargain.

One need you mentioned is: "Girls and boys also learn sex roles - that is, the roles they are expected to play as adult females or males - by identifying with the parent of their sex."

I disagree. I believe that the best we can do for our children is to teach them that sex is unimportant and creates unnecessary problems, that life is too precious to spend their time and energy on sex and if stupid others expect it of them, then they should just ignore them. I wish I had this training myself as a child!

It seems that gays in general would, on this particular issue (which is of course just one factor among many), be inferior parents because sex is an important and overemphasised feature of their life. Obviously this is not necessarily true for all homosexuals, yet likely so if they identify with being "gay" rather than simply lead a normal life with their partner which happens to be of the same gender.

Dear Yuyutsu,

Thank You for your response.

There's much to think about - and I am still
undecided on this issue.

Here's a few more thoughts on the subject:

All children will have to face people outside
the home. They could remain defenceless when stepping
outside the family into the outside larger society
which is still increasingly complex
and is based on the principle of gender complementarily.

If a child's emotional, mental, and spiritual integrity
is jeopardised, their welfare is at risk.

Children should not be the means of enlightening society.
A child can benefit from both male and female sides -
this is important for the child's development and it will
help them grow aware of society as it exists rather than
human excuses.

Just thinking out loud - and tending to lean more towards
the answer - NO (at present) on this issue.

.

Homosexuality is a perfectly natural phenomenon, just like heterosexuality.

As Petter Boeckman, a zoologist at the Norwegian Natural History Museum of the University of Oslo, pointed out:

« No species has been found in which homosexual behaviour has not been shown to exist, ... a part of the animal kingdom is hermaphroditic, truly bisexual. For them, homosexuality is not an issue. »

Boeckman observes social advantages to the free expression of homosexual behaviour and adds :

« It has been observed that the homosexual couple are often better at raising the young than heterosexual couples. »

http://pactiss.org/2011/11/17/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality/

Religion historically regards homosexual sex acts as sinful, based essentially on an erroneous understanding of "natural law" (the law of nature) as shown by the results of the zoological research mentioned by Petter Boeckman.

Religious dogma is constantly proven wrong in its interpretation of nature by scientific research.

There is a perfume of "déjà vu" regarding the current debate on homosexual marriage, e.g., Galileo's condemnation for heresy when he declared in 1610 that the earth revolves around the sun.

Homosexual behaviour has never been noted to be a possible cause of the diminution or disappearance of any animal or plant species :

http://www.webofcreation.org/Earth%20Problems/species.htm

There is no objective reason to discriminate against either heterosexual or homosexual behaviour as regards the adoption and raising of children.

The role of the State should be limited to the public - not the private – sphere, as per Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, “Right to respect for private and family life” :

http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/Convention_ENG.pdf

.

//Girls and boys also learn sex roles - that is, the roles they
are expected to play as adult females or males - by identifying
with the parent of their sex. With a same sex couple -
this may become a problem.//

But it could never be a problem when kids are raised by a single parent. Basically the equations go like this:

Mum + Dad = Good
Dad = Good
Mum = Good
Dad X 2 = Bad
Mum X 2 = Bad

Why are twice as many dads/mums worse than half as many? Buggered if I know. But apparently they are.

If it makes you feel better, Foxy, don't think of it as two men/women raising a child: think of it as one man/woman raising a child - which is commonplace and socially accepted - with a backup unit in case the primary unit is incapacitated due to illness or misadventure.