Gay adoption

[Jess]

What are your thoughts on gay/lesbian couples adopting?


I am all for it. I see no harm in it (an abusive couple is another thing entirely. Some couples can be abusive, no matter what sexuality). There are many children waiting to be adopted.

Some opponents think that a child(ren) will be damaged apparently if s/he's adopted by two men or women. That's utterly ridiculous. A gay/lesbian couple can just be loving as a straight couple. Just because the parents are the same gender doesn't mean they'll abuse their adopted children. I can see the issue with the child being bullied for having two moms and or two dads, but that is the bullies' problems and hopefully the child will learn that there's nothing wrong with having two moms or two dads.

It's also a way for them to have children, if they want to. As they cannot have biological children (unless for women, an egg is planted? Uh, what is that called? Forgot -_-), adoption is a good idea.

[Stronger]

I'm all for it too, I see no wrong or problem with gay/lesbian couples adopting.

[Gigablue]

A child should be raised by loving parents. Who cares whether the parents are the same or opposite genders. I think that same sex couples should have the exact same process to adopt as opposite sex couples do.

[Censorious]

I think it's totally fine. If a couple wants to adopt, who cares?

[Sir Suomi]

I see no problem with it, seeing as I was raised with just a mother, and I've turned out good. Hell, she probably taught me more about football than an average Dad does :P


It's also a way for them to have children, if they want to. As they cannot have biological children (unless for women, an egg is planted? Uh, what is that called? Forgot -_-), adoption is a good idea.

I think it's called surrogacy, if I'm correct, with a surrogate mother and a male donor(This is after a long process however, which is also somewhat expensive)

[Horizon]

Obviously I am all for it, I want children one day, and a loving husband to take care of them with me!

[PinkFloyd]

I don't see any possible harm other than the kid getting picked on at school by other kids simply for being raised be different people...

[Skyline]

I'm all for it! Not only do they get to experience raising a child, but the child gets to experience what it feels like to really be part of a family. Who is anyone to deprive the child or the couple from experiencing that?!?

[IAMWILL]

Well I'm going to break the trend here. I not necessarily against it, because I haven't thought about it too much, but I doesn't seem right to me, for a few reasons.

A) A child needs a mother and a father, because each one brings something different to the table. I think all of us know there are ways a mother can connect with her daughter or a father can connect with his son, or vice versa, in ways that cannot be accomplished by the other. I can't imagine two fathers being very successful at comforting their daughter when she has her first period, or two mothers being able to relate to their teenage son who is insecure about his body or behavior. This isn't a matter of love, its a matter of the ability to raise a child.

B) Its unfair for the child. Now of course everyone should be accepting that the child has parents of the same sex, but that simply does not and will not happen. There are a lot (I'm not sure if its the majority of US citizens, but its close) that are opposed to gay marriage, and I guarantee 99.9% of those opposed to gay marriage oppose gay adoption. I would think more people are opposed to gay adoption than gay marriage too. No matter what, the child and his family are going to be looked down upon, discriminated against, or possibly worse, and that is not fair for the child. Even in California, one of the most liberal states in the US, gay marriage barely passed as legal (even though currently its not). The child would definitely feel different too, not having the same type of family as most likely all of his friends. I don't think that's fair at all.

[Sugaree]

Well I'm going to break the trend here. I not necessarily against it, because I haven't thought about it too much, but I doesn't seem right to me, for a few reasons.

A) A child needs a mother and a father, because each one brings something different to the table. I think all of us know there are ways a mother can connect with her daughter or a father can connect with his son, or vice versa, in ways that cannot be accomplished by the other. I can't imagine two fathers being very successful at comforting their daughter when she has her first period, or two mothers being able to relate to their teenage son who is insecure about his body or behavior. This isn't a matter of love, its a matter of the ability to raise a child.

B) Its unfair for the child. Now of course everyone should be accepting that the child has parents of the same sex, but that simply does not and will not happen. There are a lot (I'm not sure if its the majority of US citizens, but its close) that are opposed to gay marriage, a I guarantee 99.9% of those opposed to gay marriage oppose gay adoption. I would think more people are opposed to gay adoption than gay marriage too. No matter what, the child and his family are going to be looked down upon, discriminated against, or possibly worse, and that is not fair for the child. Even in California, one of the most liberal states in the US, gay marriage barely passed as legal (even though currently its not). The child would definitely feel different too, not having the same type of family as most likely all of his friends. I don't think that's fair at all.

These are my reasons. Good job Will.

Also, let's stop having gay threads in ROTW. Think of something else to discuss please.

[Cicero]

Well I'm going to break the trend here. I not necessarily against it, because I haven't thought about it too much, but I doesn't seem right to me, for a few reasons.

A) A child needs a mother and a father, because each one brings something different to the table. I think all of us know there are ways a mother can connect with her daughter or a father can connect with his son, or vice versa, in ways that cannot be accomplished by the other. I can't imagine two fathers being very successful at comforting their daughter when she has her first period, or two mothers being able to relate to their teenage son who is insecure about his body or behavior. This isn't a matter of love, its a matter of the ability to raise a child.

B) Its unfair for the child. Now of course everyone should be accepting that the child has parents of the same sex, but that simply does not and will not happen. There are a lot (I'm not sure if its the majority of US citizens, but its close) that are opposed to gay marriage, a I guarantee 99.9% of those opposed to gay marriage oppose gay adoption. I would think more people are opposed to gay adoption than gay marriage too. No matter what, the child and his family are going to be looked down upon, discriminated against, or possibly worse, and that is not fair for the child. Even in California, one of the most liberal states in the US, gay marriage barely passed as legal (even though currently its not). The child would definitely feel different too, not having the same type of family as most likely all of his friends. I don't think that's fair at all.

I also agree.

I think adoption is great, but it can be very hard on the child having two mothers or two fathers. A mother and a father are very, very important roles in a child's development. Love is very important, and I'm sure that gay couples love their kids as much as straight couples, but having both male and female parents are crucial.

Although I do believe gay couples should be able to adopt. The only possible risk is the child's psychological health.

Well I'm going to break the trend here. I not necessarily against it, because I haven't thought about it too much, but I doesn't seem right to me, for a few reasons.

A) A child needs a mother and a father, because each one brings something different to the table. I think all of us know there are ways a mother can connect with her daughter or a father can connect with his son, or vice versa, in ways that cannot be accomplished by the other. I can't imagine two fathers being very successful at comforting their daughter when she has her first period, or two mothers being able to relate to their teenage son who is insecure about his body or behavior. This isn't a matter of love, its a matter of the ability to raise a child.

B) Its unfair for the child. Now of course everyone should be accepting that the child has parents of the same sex, but that simply does not and will not happen. There are a lot (I'm not sure if its the majority of US citizens, but its close) that are opposed to gay marriage, a I guarantee 99.9% of those opposed to gay marriage oppose gay adoption. I would think more people are opposed to gay adoption than gay marriage too. No matter what, the child and his family are going to be looked down upon, discriminated against, or possibly worse, and that is not fair for the child. Even in California, one of the most liberal states in the US, gay marriage barely passed as legal (even though currently its not). The child would definitely feel different too, not having the same type of family as most likely all of his friends. I don't think that's fair at all.

I see no problem with it, seeing as I was raised with just a mother, and I've turned out good. Hell, she probably taught me more about football than an average Dad does :P



I think it's called surrogacy, if I'm correct, with a surrogate mother and a male donor(This is after a long process however, which is also somewhat expensive)

About $18,000 for a one time go, if it fails. Get ready to dish out another $18,000 lol

Please use the multi-quote instead of double posting ~TheMatrix

[Twilly F. Sniper]

I'm all for it, in fact, I might do it later in life too :)

[Gigablue]

A) A child needs a mother and a father, because each one brings something different to the table. I think all of us know there are ways a mother can connect with her daughter or a father can connect with his son, or vice versa, in ways that cannot be accomplished by the other. I can't imagine two fathers being very successful at comforting their daughter when she has her first period, or two mothers being able to relate to their teenage son who is insecure about his body or behavior. This isn't a matter of love, its a matter of the ability to raise a child.

What about single parents? Are they unable to raise children? Parents can still relate to their children even if they have different genders.

Just because you cannot imagine two men or two women being able to comfort their child doesn't mean it's impossible. Sure, there might be some difficulties involved, but nothing that can't be overcome.

B) Its unfair for the child. Now of course everyone should be accepting that the child has parents of the same sex, but that simply does not and will not happen. There are a lot (I'm not sure if its the majority of US citizens, but its close) that are opposed to gay marriage, and I guarantee 99.9% of those opposed to gay marriage oppose gay adoption. I would think more people are opposed to gay adoption than gay marriage too. No matter what, the child and his family are going to be looked down upon, discriminated against, or possibly worse, and that is not fair for the child. Even in California, one of the most liberal states in the US, gay marriage barely passed as legal (even though currently its not). The child would definitely feel different too, not having the same type of family as most likely all of his friends. I don't think that's fair at all.

There are some people who are opposed to interracial marriage, should we ban interracial couples from having or adopting children because their children might be looked down upon? What you are saying is that the law should discriminate against same sex couples because many people don't like them. This would be a horrible step backwards for human rights.

[stev]

No in my family is gay and I'm not and I see no problem in it I don't get why the media makes such a big deal out of it .

[Cicero]

What about single parents? Are they unable to raise children? Parents can still relate to their children even if they have different genders.

Just because you cannot imagine two men or two women being able to comfort their child doesn't mean it's impossible. Sure, there might be some difficulties involved, but nothing that can't be overcome.



There are some people who are opposed to interracial marriage, should we ban interracial couples from having or adopting children because their children might be looked down upon? What you are saying is that the law should discriminate against same sex couples because many people don't like them. This would be a horrible step backwards for human rights.

Having a single parent is hard on a child too. Those kids too, might wish they had a father/mother. There are a few kids who always say on FB how they wish their dad lived. It's not about getting looked down upon, it's having the male and female figure in their lives. Inter racial couples have both male and female parents.
It's also not imagining having two parents of the same sex, it's about the effects it has on the child.

[Thanatos]

I think he entire adoption process in the US is messed up, as evidenced by the increase in overseas adoptions. What it really should come down to is the ability of the couple to raise the child in a loving, caring, and provided for household.

[IAMWILL]

What about single parents? Are they unable to raise children? Parents can still relate to their children even if they have different genders.

Just because you cannot imagine two men or two women being able to comfort their child doesn't mean it's impossible. Sure, there might be some difficulties involved, but nothing that can't be overcome.



There are some people who are opposed to interracial marriage, should we ban interracial couples from having or adopting children because their children might be looked down upon? What you are saying is that the law should discriminate against same sex couples because many people don't like them. This would be a horrible step backwards for human rights.

I have a single parent, and you better believe I wish I had a mom. I will openly admit that I would have been raised better with a mom and a dad active in my life, and so would every other kid with a single parent in America. Having two parents is always better than 1, but having two parents of the same sex is effectively the same as having 1 parent.

And secondly, where the heck did I say that it should be lawful to discriminate? I think you pulled that out of thin air. I even said it shouldn't happen, but it will. That's called life, and its not fair. And interracial marriage is very different, it still involves a man and a women. That really doesn't pertain to this conversation at all.

[Cognizant]

Also, let's stop having gay threads in ROTW. Think of something else to discuss please.

No.


I'm just curious, is it really a bad thing? Sure, the children are affected. You're labeling it as a bad thing, though. What if it's positive? What if the children are supporting there parents? That's affecting them (they are accepting that their environment is different from the nuclear family), but it's being labeled as bad. What's wrong with being supportive of differences?


Having two parents is always better than 1, but having two parents of the same sex is effectively the same as having 1 parent.
How? Are you saying it's impossible for a male to play "the mother figure," or a female to play "the father figure?"

My parents are divorced, and personally, I don't think it's the gender roles (my mom was doing a horrible job at being a mom) that matter most, as long as the child feels loved. I've lived with my dad solely for almost a year now, and I've had no problems in that context.

[Edawg]

I have a single parent, and you better believe I wish I had a mom. I will openly admit that I would have been raised better with a mom and a dad active in my life, and so would every other kid with a single parent in America. Having two parents is always better than 1, but having two parents of the same sex is effectively the same as having 1 parent.

And secondly, where the heck did I say that it should be lawful to discriminate? I think you pulled that out of thin air. I even said it shouldn't happen, but it will. That's called life, and its not fair. And interracial marriage is very different, it still involves a man and a women. That really doesn't pertain to this conversation at all.

Fight 'em Will! Totally understandable, I had both parents, but my father was always away when I was growing up. I hated it so much. I wished he had been there, so we could have done father son things like fishing and hunting. There are things kids will miss out on if the are adopted by two guys or two ladies.

[Gigablue]

I have a single parent, and you better believe I wish I had a mom. I will openly admit that I would have been raised better with a mom and a dad active in my life, and so would every other kid with a single parent in America. Having two parents is always better than 1, but having two parents of the same sex is effectively the same as having 1 parent.

I don't really see why the gender of the parents matters. Two parents are obviously better than one. But if you have two parents who love their child, who cares what their genders are?

People seem to think that boys relate better to their fathers, and need a male role model and girls relate better to their mothers. This isn't always the case. Personally, I have much more in common with my mother, and find her easier to relate to. I don't think that women can't relate to their sons or that men can't relate to their daughters.

And secondly, where the heck did I say that it should be lawful to discriminate? I think you pulled that out of thin air. I even said it shouldn't happen, but it will. That's called life, and its not fair. And interracial marriage is very different, it still involves a man and a women. That really doesn't pertain to this conversation at all.

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood you. My main point is that society needs to work harder to fight discrimination, instead of just accepting it as inevitable.

My analogy to interracial marriage was just to say that interracial marriage used to be heavily stigmatized, and now no one cares. Saying children of same sex parents would face discrimination, and thus same sex marriage is a bad thing is like someone several decades ago saying children of interracial parents would face discrimination and thus interracial marriage is bad. The fact that something is unfairly stigmatized is all the more reason to fight against discrimination.

[IAMWILL]

How? Are you saying it's impossible for a male to play "the mother figure," or a female to play "the father figure?"

My parents are divorced, and personally, I don't think it's the gender roles (my mom was doing a horrible job at being a mom) that matter most, as long as the child feels loved. I've lived with my dad solely for almost a year now, and I've had no problems in that context.

Yes, I do not believe father can effectively play a mothers role and vice versa.

I want to clear something up. What I am not saying is that a child cannot be raised by a gay couple. Of course it is possible, and may turn out just fine. But I do not support it because I think it is unfair for the child. I believe this because I believe the child/the family would be unfairly discriminated against (discriminating being used very broadly) and the child would not receive the proper "life lessons" and teachings that can only come from a mother and a father.

[Gigablue]

Yes, I do not believe father can effectively play a mothers role and vice versa.

I want to clear something up. What I am not saying is that a child cannot be raised by a gay couple. Of course it is possible, and may turn out just fine. But I do not support it because I think it is unfair for the child. I believe this because I believe the child/the family would be unfairly discriminated against (discriminating being used very broadly) and the child would not receive the proper "life lessons" and teachings that can only come from a mother and a father.

What exactly are the roles of the mother and the father? More specifically, who even said they had different roles? They both have to love and care for their child, but why must they have gender specific roles?

[IAMWILL]

What exactly are the roles of the mother and the father? More specifically, who even said they had different roles? They both have to love and care for their child, but why must they have gender specific roles?

I cannot define the roles of each parent, every family is different. Do they have different roles? I think they are very similar in the ways you pointed out, but as I said previously, there are certain things each parent can supply that the other sex cannot. I previously gave examples such as a teen guy or girl going through puberty, and I hold strong in my opinions there. No matter how much one can learn about a subject, unless they have been through it themselves, the support and advice they can offer is not the same. My main reason for opposition though is again the discrimination that the child would have to endure. Maybe some day it will come to be something widely accepted, and maybe it never will be, but as of now it is not something seen by the majority of Americans as acceptable.

[ImCoolBeans]

Yes, I do not believe father can effectively play a mothers role and vice versa.



I go to school with a girl who has two lesbian mothers. They adopted her after birth and have raised her throughout her entire life. She's been raised fine and hasn't been majorly discriminated against in school whatsoever. She has been raised by two very loving parents -- yes she missed out on being "daddy's little girl" -- but that shouldn't make a difference and did not make a difference considering the love in her home which was given by both of her mothers.

[WalkingOnDisaster]

if they fixed the way the adoptions took place I wouldn't care. But the adoption system, at least where I live, is shrewed up.

[IAMWILL]

I go to school with a girl who has two lesbian mothers. They adopted her after birth and have raised her throughout her entire life. She's been raised fine and hasn't been majorly discriminated against in school whatsoever. She has been raised by two very loving parents -- yes she missed out on being "daddy's little girl" -- but that shouldn't make a difference and did not make a difference considering the love in her home which was given by both of her mothers.

I'm glad to hear that worked out for her. Look, I think in some scenarios, such as the one Mike described, it could work, and if so I will not fight against it. But I don't think the nation as a whole, and definitely more conservative areas, is ready to accept it. I still am not supportive of it, and almost certainly won't change my beliefs on it, as it is not morally right to me and in my beliefs system, but as long as the child is raised well and treated fairly I am accepting of it.

PS: everyone in their response to me kept bringing up the main point that the child needed a loving, caring environment. I never argued that, so if you think I was saying gay parents cannot love as normal parents would, you are wrong.

[workingatperfect]

I'm entirely for gay adoption. I don't see anything wrong with it. My cousin is a lesbian and has two kids, a boy and girl. She had them with her ex husband, before she started dating girls. She's married to a woman, and the kids' dad has been dead for years, and before that he wasn't around. Both the girl AND boy are very well adjusted. they have plenty of friends and don't get bullied about having two moms.

So yes, having both a mother and father is nice, but it's not the only way to raise kids. Kids of single parents turn out just fine a lot of the time. And you said it's unfair to the kids, but think about how many more kids will grow up without any family if gays weren't allowed to adopt. Too many kids grow up in orphanages as it is. Gay parents are a hell of a lot better than no parents, are they not? And finally, it's not fair to gay couples. They deserve to be parents just as much as straight people. Denying them parenthood just because the kids might face a little bullying is horrible. Kids get/used to get bullied for having interracial parents as well, let's just ban that. But they aren't as looked down on anymore. Why is that? Because we allowed it to happen, and society adapted. Like Gigablue said, the fact that it's unfair is all the more reason to fight it.

Besides, just like with a lot of kids of single parents, the kid could have an uncle or close family friend or something to look up to as their male or female role model that they're missing. It doesn't automatically mean that kid won't have both parent roles in their life.

[xmojox]

The only way for it to become acceptable, as it should be, is for enough people to do it. I so agree that it's preferable to have two moms or two dads than to not have any parents at all. The argument that it's unfair to the kids because they might be picked on or discriminated against doesn't hold hold water, either. Anyone who's ever gone to a public school knows that if a bully decides to pick on you, that bully will find a "reason".

There are too many people raising kids nowadays who have absolutely no business doing so for us to deny anyone who wants to provide a stable and loving home for a kid to do so.

[dontfiguremeout]

Honestly I don't see why not! Aren't they people too?! Everyone makes gays/lesbiens like they are completely different life form. They should have the rights to adopt kids to raise them! I think the point of raising kids with your spouse is to not only raise our next generation, but also to have an experience to bring each other closer than ever, because raising kids is not easy. And every couple that want kids should have the option of raising one of their own weather they are gay or not. I'm straight and I see nothing wrong with this. My mom's hair dresser has a boyfriend and they are raising a girl who is in the 1 or 2 grade, and they all seem to have the happiest life together!

[RedViper]

The only potential issue I see is the fact that the child Is likely to be bullied for having homosexual parents

[Ryhanna]

I'm pro-gay adoption. But I'm not going to lie, the previously made point that males and females can bring different strengths and perspectives to parenting is completely valid. I'd imagine that it would be tough for two men to raise a daughter when she hits puberty, as they do not have first-hand experience with female problems and development, and vice-versa.

Will these issues have much bearing on their parenting overall, though? I don't think so. Gay couples can still provide and care for their child, even if there are things that they are unable to give them. Single parents manage.

[Harry Smith]

the way I see it is that the most unstable of couples can choose to have a baby, say for example the mother could be drug addict and the father could be a criminal. However the are free to have that child, but if a stable gay couple want to adopt a child everyone questions weather they will be able to raise them.

I just hope that in the case of adoption people will soon realise how old fashioned they are being. A same sex couple should have the same rights- Full stop.

[Gwen]

I doubt it matter what sexuality the parents are, the only real issue towards adoption is abusive or down right shitty parents whatever their sexuality is doesn't matter.

[Naue]

I honestly don't see any problem with it.

Homosexuality is seen to be largely due to genetic factors now. Recently, Scientist were able to modify a gene in rats that made them exhibit homosexual behaviours. I.e. being attracted to animals of the same sex and attempting to reproduce with them...

So I don't see how having gay parents could make a child gay, even so, who says that's a bad thing?

[TapDancer]

I understand and agree that, a child having a mother and a father, would be psychologically good, because the relationship of a mother and father are different. However, as a gay man, I want kids. Now, I know many gay people who have very feminine attitudes, so, for me, I am not overly worried about not having a female role model. Now, I understand, for two gay dads to have a daughter, things like the sex talk can be awkward and stuff, but, it does not matter, as, you can find other females in your life to associate with the child. For example, should I have a female child, when she needs a "girls shoulder", I would have no problem calling my sister. A same sex family is different to a heterosexual orientated family. But, I believe gay people can be fabulous parents, and while their style of parenting will be a bit different, it should not be a problem, as, nobody's style of parenting is ever the same as someone else's. Oh my goodness, I forgot to mention kids up for adoption! I mean, Isn't it better to have two daddies or mummies than none at all? Lastly, I just want to say, to all gay people wanting to have kids, you shouldn't ever deny yourself that, but you need to think. The area in which I live is less progressive than other parts. In ten years, it will be different. But, you must think, when the child enters school, what will be the social factors of that child. If your area will not support it, you need to consider whether you should find a place deems appropriate to start your family. Peace guys :)

[Sir Suomi]

I'll just throw this out here, as I am both an only child and a fatherless child. I've grown up with my mother, always wondering why I didn't have a father while all my friends had them. I've always kind of had a nagging sense that it was my fault, that somehow I screwed up somewhere, making my father abandon me. My mother has worked very hard, and my uncles have stepped in as a father role for me throughout my years, yet I still feel a empty place in my heart that should belong to my father. Basically, what I'm trying to say is although my mother and my uncles did try their best, I still feel as though I'm missing something.

[Sugaree]

No.

So there is literally nothing more important than subjects dealing with gay people to you.

[Cognizant]

So there is literally nothing more important than subjects dealing with gay people to you.

No. Where did I say that?

[Sugaree]

No. Where did I say that?

You certainly implied that we can't talk about anything else in this forsaken forum. The only things that get major attention in ROTW are gays, abortion, and maybe something slightly interesting. Ergo, I ask that we lower the amount of threads about gay people and then get told "no" certainly implies that no one wants to talk about anything substantial.

[Cognizant]

You certainly implied that we can't talk about anything else in this forsaken forum. The only things that get major attention in ROTW are gays, abortion, and maybe something slightly interesting. Ergo, I ask that we lower the amount of threads about gay people and then get told "no" certainly implies that no one wants to talk about anything substantial.

Ah, but I'm just me. I'm not in charge here, I'm just a member that feels it's inappropriate to shut down people's thread ideas (which, you implied, because topics on the gay community is boring to you). I can't stop you, certainly. What's there to stop you from introducing new topics? Exactly! Nada! So go ahead and introduce a new topic and let's [both] stop derailing this thread! :)

[workingatperfect]

I'll just throw this out here, as I am both an only child and a fatherless child. I've grown up with my mother, always wondering why I didn't have a father while all my friends had them. I've always kind of had a nagging sense that it was my fault, that somehow I screwed up somewhere, making my father abandon me. My mother has worked very hard, and my uncles have stepped in as a father role for me throughout my years, yet I still feel a empty place in my heart that should belong to my father. Basically, what I'm trying to say is although my mother and my uncles did try their best, I still feel as though I'm missing something.

Yes, but there's a difference between not having a father because he bailed and not having a father because you have two loving parents who just happen to both be female. You can't really compare experiences because they're entirely different, as I think I pointed out in my last comment.

[AbbaZabba]

Perfectly fine to me, as I wrote on some other post, it is their life, who am I to tell them how to live it.

[crepesuzette]

nothing against it. all of the polemics that people are uttering against it will eventually blow over because just like there used to be racism, now more than half of the world don't believe in it. or at least that's what I think.

[irishguy123]

this should be allowed. which is better, a child with drinking and drug taking parents who neglect a young child or for the child to be in a loving home? for me it is an obvious choice.

[Swagamemmnon]

Well I'm going to break the trend here. I not necessarily against it, because I haven't thought about it too much, but I doesn't seem right to me, for a few reasons.

A) A child needs a mother and a father, because each one brings something different to the table. I think all of us know there are ways a mother can connect with her daughter or a father can connect with his son, or vice versa, in ways that cannot be accomplished by the other. I can't imagine two fathers being very successful at comforting their daughter when she has her first period, or two mothers being able to relate to their teenage son who is insecure about his body or behavior. This isn't a matter of love, its a matter of the ability to raise a child.

B) Its unfair for the child. Now of course everyone should be accepting that the child has parents of the same sex, but that simply does not and will not happen. There are a lot (I'm not sure if its the majority of US citizens, but its close) that are opposed to gay marriage, and I guarantee 99.9% of those opposed to gay marriage oppose gay adoption. I would think more people are opposed to gay adoption than gay marriage too. No matter what, the child and his family are going to be looked down upon, discriminated against, or possibly worse, and that is not fair for the child. Even in California, one of the most liberal states in the US, gay marriage barely passed as legal (even though currently its not). The child would definitely feel different too, not having the same type of family as most likely all of his friends. I don't think that's fair at all.

A) A series of studies showed that children raised by same-sex parents showed no difference in psychological development.

B) Move somewhere else.

Besides, in many cases of straight children, its more fair than usual. Every child brought into a gay household is carefully planned for and expected. In a straight household you can have your condom break and then whoops, suddenly you got a baby.

[IAMWILL]

A) A series of studies showed that children raised by same-sex parents showed no difference in psychological development.

B) Move somewhere else.

Besides, in many cases of straight children, its more fair than usual. Every child brought into a gay household is carefully planned for and expected. In a straight household you can have your condom break and then whoops, suddenly you got a baby.

A) I'd appreciate a source.

B) Of course, because that is a totally viable option for every family. Don't like a place? Just move! Life isn't that simple, and there isn't a corner of the US where everyone (or even the majority) is pro-gay adoption. The last Gallup poll I saw said between 52 and 55% of people supported gay adoption, out of 1000 surveyed. That there was a majority surprised me a tiny bit, last time I checked it was around 45%, but 52-55% is still barely majority.

I agree with half of your third point. What I disagree on is the statement about having a condom break and then "whoops a baby." If a couple doesn't want another child, they are very likely to get an abortion or take emergency contraceptives, most of which act as abortifacients (if you accept the scientific fact that life begins at conception). Your scenario is only realistic in a family that doesn't believe in (and acts according to their beliefs) any form of abortion, but most families that will refuse to have an abortion are probably using Natural Family Planning anyway, which according to a 2007 study (http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2007/02/20/humrep.dem003.full.pdf), found that NFP has a lower rate of failure than the best contraceptives. The scenario you presented is relatively unlikely in that case.
I also suggest you read my other responses in this thread, and not just my first one.

[Naue]

I don't see a problem, if two people are in a strong relationship that is seen to be reliable and capable of raising children, I see absolutely no issue what so ever.

Gay people are just as good at raising children as straight people.

[sparkles]

A) I'd appreciate a source.

B) Of course, because that is a totally viable option for every family. Don't like a place? Just move! Life isn't that simple, and there isn't a corner of the US where everyone (or even the majority) is pro-gay adoption. The last Gallup poll I saw said between 52 and 55% of people supported gay adoption, out of 1000 surveyed. That there was a majority surprised me a tiny bit, last time I checked it was around 45%, but 52-55% is still barely majority.

I agree with half of your third point. What I disagree on is the statement about having a condom break and then "whoops a baby." If a couple doesn't want another child, they are very likely to get an abortion or take emergency contraceptives, most of which act as abortifacients (if you accept the scientific fact that life begins at conception). Your scenario is only realistic in a family that doesn't believe in (and acts according to their beliefs) any form of abortion, but most families that will refuse to have an abortion are probably using Natural Family Planning anyway, which according to a 2007 study (http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2007/02/20/humrep.dem003.full.pdf), found that NFP has a lower rate of failure than the best contraceptives. The scenario you presented is relatively unlikely in that case.
I also suggest you read my other responses in this thread, and not just my first one.

There are quite a few holes in your logic in responses to many of these arguments and points that have been presented and I will address what I believe to be the most egregious:

1. The Mother and Father are best argument. I am not even going to address this. It will take us nowhere. However, let's at least agree that in the vast majority of cases the children being adopted are doing so because they have been abused, neglected, etc and that 2 loving parents regardless of sexual orientation are in most cases better than 1 or no parents.

2. I am still quite lost as to the role that opinion polls have within this issue. You earlier incorrectly mentioned that California "approved" of gay marriage, in fact it is quite the opposite. California passed a constitutional amendment that I am sure you have heard of (prop 8) that makes it AGAINST the state constitution for anyone but one man and one woman to marry. This has already been struck down as against the equality and equal protection clauses of the state constitution but the merits of that are too lengthy to go into discussion of now.

3. I am aware that many people (and I am going to assume that you are a part of this as well) base their own personal beliefs on the beliefs of the faith system that they adhere to (which and correct me if I am wrong, is Roman Catholicism, a faith that I share with you). There is obviously merit in this. Where things get a little more confusing is where people want to force their beliefs on others (which is not me saying that you have done this, because to the best of my skimming of this thread you have not).

4. Just as with slavery (and I guess this really goes with number 2 above) or with chauvinism or any number of other issues, just because a majority support something does not make it right. To try and not beat a dead horse here but Hitler had popular support within Germany (and I will admit that the reverse also holds true, just because a minority support something also does not mean that it is true).

5. In the end the best for children is to be in a loving home that supports them and loves them whether that is one parent or two parents regardless of gender and that there are many children who go every year without this.

and as an add on......(as far as the contraception argument, I'm sure we can all agree that the only 100% guaranteed way of preventing pregnancy is abstinence).

And as a final point, I think that having honest open dialog between parties, even if they disagree makes us all better. And I look forward to discussing the philosophical arguments of this issue further.

*edited to correct a spelling error: the changed to they

[Swagamemmnon]

A) I'd appreciate a source.

B) Of course, because that is a totally viable option for every family. Don't like a place? Just move! Life isn't that simple, and there isn't a corner of the US where everyone (or even the majority) is pro-gay adoption. The last Gallup poll I saw said between 52 and 55% of people supported gay adoption, out of 1000 surveyed. That there was a majority surprised me a tiny bit, last time I checked it was around 45%, but 52-55% is still barely majority.

I agree with half of your third point. What I disagree on is the statement about having a condom break and then "whoops a baby." If a couple doesn't want another child, they are very likely to get an abortion or take emergency contraceptives, most of which act as abortifacients (if you accept the scientific fact that life begins at conception). Your scenario is only realistic in a family that doesn't believe in (and acts according to their beliefs) any form of abortion, but most families that will refuse to have an abortion are probably using Natural Family Planning anyway, which according to a 2007 study (http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2007/02/20/humrep.dem003.full.pdf), found that NFP has a lower rate of failure than the best contraceptives. The scenario you presented is relatively unlikely in that case.
I also suggest you read my other responses in this thread, and not just my first one.

Meh, I'm much too sleepy to read this entire thread immediately, but I may give it a shot later. For A), I'll get your source, as soon as I find it. B), I didn't say all gay couples should move. Just that if you want children (and you're gay) then maybe you shouldn't be living somewhere where they can be discriminated against. I mean that would be really poor planning.