Don't tell ME it isn't a deviancy! . . . Catholics only, please.

[Wolseley]

And Catholic Charities is under fire in Massachusetts for refusing to adopt children to homosexuals.

Words fail me. They utterly fail me.

http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=128&fArticleId=3171828

 

[Ave Maria]

Wolseley, did you link to the wrong article? You linked to the article about the child who was killed because he refused to call his lesbian parent "daddy". I think that is utterly disgusting and evil personally but I am not sure how this is related to Catholic Charities in Massachusetts being under fire for not adopting out to homosexuals. Is this the article you are thinking of?

http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=86571

 

[Look Homeward Anglican]

I think he means that this is a very good example of the kind of chaos and confusion being adopted out to homosexual parents would cause a child. Think of the psychological damage -- and in this case, actual murder. Granted, this may not be a typical result of gay adoptions, but if one child has had to die for refusing to call some woman "daddy" then that is too many.

 

[kimber1]

this is a tragic and unusual case. i only hope it's not used as ammo against the gay community. i'm sure there are many loving gay couples who wish to adopt who want nothing more than to provide a safe and loving home.

 

[Miss Shelby]

There are certain things that we know instinctively to be right and wrong. The little boy, God rest his precious soul, knew instintintively calling the woman daddy was against what he knew in his heart to be right.

I understand that this is an extreme case, but the point to me, that I think Wolsleley is making--is that it DOES demonstrate how the moral law is with all of us.

Michelle

 

[QuantaCura]

There are certain things that we know instinctively to be right and wrong. The little boy, God rest his precious soul, knew instintintively calling the woman daddy was against what he knew in his heart to be right.

I understand that this is an extreme case, but the point to me, that I think Wolsleley is making--is that it DOES demonstrate how the moral law is with all of us.

Michelle

I agree. The murder and violence are an abberration that are committed by heterosexual parents too. But, take away the violence and murder for a moment and we have a very common confusion and dissonance that pits the child's parents against his natural conscience when a child is raised by a practicing homosexual couple.

 

[Ave Maria]

this is a tragic and unusual case. i only hope it's not used as ammo against the gay community. i'm sure there are many loving gay couples who wish to adopt who want nothing more than to provide a safe and loving home.

Well they shouldn't be allowed to adopt regardless of how "loving" they are. Children are not meant to be raised by two gay people. They are meant to be raised by a husband and a wife (meaning man and woman who are married to each other).

 

[kimber1]

Well they shouldn't be allowed to adopt regardless of how "loving" they are. Children are not meant to be raised by two gay people. They are meant to be raised by a husband and a wife (meaning man and woman who are married to each other).

that's your opinion and you're entitled to it however there are many children needing loving homes and who are we to deny them that?

 

[zhilan]

And in the case of the article, it sounds like the child wasn't adopted, but the mothers biological child.

 

[marciadietrich]

that's your opinion and you're entitled to it however there are many children needing loving homes and who are we to deny them that?

I believe that Catholic Charities are within their rights to make this decision for their adoptions. Certainly they should not be made to do so against their will.

I do believe there are cases where a child would be better off with a gay couple than to languish in the foster care and ophanage system. Children who are not sought out for adoption due to being "too old," problematic or having disabilities. Without regard to any moral questions, I don't believe it would be fair to place an infant with a gay couple over a regular couple who had gone through years and possibly thousands of dollars, not to mention a lot of heartache, attempting to conceive without success.

Marcia

 

[WarriorAngel]

There are certain things that we know instinctively to be right and wrong. The little boy, God rest his precious soul, knew instintintively calling the woman daddy was against what he knew in his heart to be right.

I understand that this is an extreme case, but the point to me, that I think Wolsleley is making--is that it DOES demonstrate how the moral law is with all of us.

Michelle

A child is innately innocent, and should NOT be put into homes like this against their wills.
Because they are forced to accept the lifestyle and have no other options, doesnt mean they like it.
In the end they may accept it, but never like it.

The brutal teasings, the strange queezy tummy feelings that something is wrong, the fact they are silenced due to society and signed papers...doesnt mean they should be forced to accept this fate.

I have yet to meet a child that is totally innocent and very young look at two of the same sex 'together' and find it WITHOUT HESITATION....COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE.
They stare and they are frightened.

Those who act immoral have NO rights in the arena of teaching children that same immorality.

If they prefer their lifestyle...why not just keep it low key so everyone else is NOT forced to accept the unacceptable.

PS....I guess you could 'think' I am homophobe... BUT my gut instinct as a child taught me to cringe.....not the roles of society...but a child who didnt know about such thngs...who's stomach lurched at this.

Still does.
AND we know the Lord works instinct into children.
FOR the Kingdom is made of such as these!!

My friends son hid behind her when he saw his aunt and another woman kissing and stuff. He said it scared him. EVEN if a kid hides how they feel...they do not like it.

KIDS are not prejudiced...they JUST KNOW.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I want to add something else...
Disordered lust is not love.

So if they love, and truly love the child, they should abstain from this lust and then that would be love....otherwsie it is just 'coveting' a role that could be quite normal IF they choose to be in a normal and very healthy lifestyle of being a spouse to the opposite sex.

JUST because a child is getting old...doesnt mean they should be forced to accept anyone who comes along, especially in light of the immorality of the issue.

Homosexuality is a sin, that is and always was God's decision...and the Catholic Church is the keeper of salvation from living in sin....this issue of gays being allowed to adopt goes against God's orderly desires for society, and against His Church who is opposed to this on His behalf.


Therefore...the state should keep there nose OUT!

 

[CaDan]

I have yet to meet a child that is totally innocent and very young look at two of the same sex 'together' and find it WITHOUT HESITATION....COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE.
They stare and they are frightened.

*raises hand*

You haven't been looking very hard, then, I'm afraid.

God rest my Uncle Tommy and my Uncle Ben.

 

[seebs]

Hi, I don't wish to engage in a debate, but something occurred to me from my own experience as a child:

I did not look at straight couples and find them "totally acceptable" without hesitation. I thought that ALL sex and romance was gross and icky. I don't recall seeing this as a distinction; I just didn't like that people kissed.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Well they shouldn't be allowed to adopt regardless of how "loving" they are. Children are not meant to be raised by two gay people. They are meant to be raised by a husband and a wife (meaning man and woman who are married to each other).

And if this isn't possible?

 

[Protinus]

*raises hand*

You haven't been looking very hard, then, I'm afraid.

God rest my Uncle Tommy and my Uncle Ben.

Do you mean that you had uncles that loved and cared about you, that you weren't traumatized by their living together? Did you have any alcoholsim in your family where a wife experienced abuse from a husband like my extended family?

 

[CaDan]

They were just my uncles. That's all I knew.

I learned many years later that my grandmother had put her foot down and declared that Ben was a member of the family and that was that.

What Nanna declared was law.

 

[Skripper]

Do you mean that you had uncles that loved and cared about you, that you weren't traumatized by their living together? Did you have any alcoholsim in your family where a wife experienced abuse from a husband like my extended family?

Actually, I think he means that there were two men, one of which may have been an actual uncle, and one was his uncle's male lover, who was also referred to as "uncle," even though he was not. And that both were capable of being kind and loving towards him. (Though the fact that homosexuals are as capable as anyone else in being loving, this should not be contrued as an affirmation of homosexual relations/relationships).

 

[ps139]

that's your opinion and you're entitled to it however there are many children needing loving homes and who are we to deny them that?

The well being of the child must always be put first in these cases.

The Church is pretty clear that by allowing homosexual couples to adopt the child, no matter how nice or loving they are, is "doing violence" to the child.

Who are we to do violence to children? We do not have that right.

Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in [homosexual] unions would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development. This is gravely immoral ......

from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons


http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

 

[faerieevaH]

I'm not here to debate wether or not gay adoption is a good or a bad thing. I only wanted to say that the situation described in the article has nothing to do with being 'gay'. I deal weekly with children in heterosexual families going through the same deal: refusing to call the new man in their mothers life 'daddy'. Or children being abused by their biological, married-to-eachother, parents.

Abuse is abuse. Hetero or homosexual has nothing to do with it. Argueing against homosexual adoption is within each Catholics rights. But we should take great care to use the right arguments. A case of abuse because of a refusal to call a woman daddy is not a right argument, because we see the same things happening within heterosexual couples, and we most certainly don't want to give another argument to the abortion liga against adoption.