Who should be allowed to adopt?

[MrPirate]

I voted for all. the needs of the child come WAY before the desire of some to discriminate.

 

[HaloHope]

Sorry I cant see how I can agree with any of that. So presumably that would count Mother Theresa and Billy Graham out, or who did you have in mind as Christian extremists. As Jesus says we must give up everything to be able to make Him Lord of our lives, I fail to see how Christians could not be extremists.
But as a Christian I believe Jesus Christ is the truth, the way and the life, so I would expect Christians to believe religious belief does have a bearing on bringing up a child, especially preferring within a faithful man/woman union as God’s created purpose, (Gen 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Ephesians 5)

I wouldn't classify Mother Theresa as an "extremist" anymore than I would classify anyone who gives up their worldly possesions and lives their life in the way she did. She was a peaceful person.

Billy Graham I am rather torn on, I don't know enough about him as a person to say one way or another.

My definition of a "religious extremist" is someone who advocates hate of others through their faith. Like Muslim suicide bombers, like Fred Phelps.. etc..

Most of the Christians I know I would not call extremists at all, but rather normal loving people who have the happiness of Jesus in their lives, but don't let that spill over into being judgemental, hateful and harming others through their faith. The only way every Christian is going to fulfill the "give up everything rule" is if we all become monks or nuns now.

Not going to happen is it?

I must admit I am increasingly irritated by your "as a Christian" replies to peoples posts as it seems to insinuate a "Im such a better Christian than you!" stance. Please correct me if I am wrong on that.

Anyway "as a Christian" I believe love is what a child needs above everything else, and any loving family whatever the genders of those in it is a gift to any child in need of adoption. If love is there, I believe Jesus will find a way, the peoples faith is irrelevant to their child raising abilites.

 

[UberLutheran]

White, conservative Protestant, fundamentalist, upper-middle class Republicans should be allowed to adopt.

All those other people have

.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Halohope,

I wouldn't classify Mother Theresa as an "extremist" anymore than I would classify anyone who gives up their worldly possesions and lives their life in the way she did. She was a peaceful person.

No maybe not but I would class her as fundamentally Christian and probably extremist. So too Billy Graham, they dedicated their lives to their calling and ministry. I would also class Muslim suicide bombers as extremists, and perhaps Fred Phelps and LGCM probably as well. But my point is, it depends on whether we agree on what extremist means, and I it seems we dont

My definition of a "religious extremist" is someone who advocates hate of others through their faith.

Then if its hate I would say they were extreme but not of the Christian faith

I must admit I am increasingly irritated by your "as a Christian" replies to peoples posts as it seems to insinuate a "Im such a better Christian than you!" stance. Please correct me if I am wrong on that.

Well hard luck. I know who I am in Christ and I give you the evidence, and indeed Jesus Christ’s teaching shows us no-one is better than anyone else for we are all destined to perish but for His blood. If you mean I dont think some of your views are Christian, you are correct.

Anyway "as a Christian" I believe love is what a child needs above everything else, and any loving family whatever the genders of those in it is a gift to any child in need of adoption. If love is there, I believe Jesus will find a way, the peoples faith is irrelevant to their child raising abilites.

On what basis? Where does Jesus teach this?

 

[HaloHope]

Dear Halohope,
No maybe not but I would class her as fundamentally Christian and probably extremist. So too Billy Graham, they dedicated their lives to their calling and ministry. I would also class Muslim suicide bombers as extremists, and perhaps Fred Phelps and LGCM probably as well. But my point is, it depends on whether we agree on what extremist means, and I it seems we dont

I don't believe we agree on most things to be fair so this dosen't come as much of a surprise

Then if its hate I would say they were extreme but not of the Christian faith

I see a vast amount of hate perpetuated on these forums.

Well hard luck. I know who I am in Christ and I give you the evidence, and indeed Jesus Christ’s teaching shows us no-one is better than anyone else for we are all destined to perish but for His blood. If you mean I dont think some of your views are Christian, you are correct.

I am glad you have put "think" instead of know here at least . For the record I know who I am in Christ too.

On what basis? Where does Jesus teach this?
[/FONT]

Y'Know.. like well the whole central message of the Bible for me is "God is Love". Jesus constantly reinforces how important it is to love in many many verses. Thus I can only rationally conclude (as love is not dependant on a persons sexuality or religious beleifs) that any loving family is good for a child. I intend to make a great mum for an adopted child one day, and the fact that the child I adopt will have two mothers shall be completely irrelevant in terms of the amount of love and support the child recieves.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Halohope,

I see a vast amount of hate perpetuated on these forums

I know you do but I se you reacting to the word of God as hate because you find it so.

Y'Know.. like well the whole central message of the Bible for me is "God is Love". Jesus constantly reinforces how important it is to love in many many verses. Thus I can only rationally conclude (as love is not dependant on a persons sexuality or religious beleifs) that any loving family is good for a child. I intend to make a great mum for an adopted child one day, and the fact that the child I adopt will have two mothers shall be completely irrelevant in terms of the amount of love and support the child receives.

Ah but I also see that God is love and that if we obey Jesus teaching we love Him and love God and God loves us. So therefore I asked you where is Jesus teaching that a child needs any loving family whatever the genders? As far as I can see Jesus teaches a faithful man/woman union including where it comes to children.

 

[HaloHope]

Dear Halohope,
I know you do but I se you reacting to the word of God as hate because you find it so.
Ah but I also see that God is love and that if we obey Jesus teaching we love Him and love God and God loves us. So therefore I asked you where is Jesus teaching that a child needs any loving family whatever the genders? As far as I can see Jesus teaches a faithful man/woman union including where it comes to children.

You are talking in circles.

I do not find the word of God hate, fortunately I never see any of the hatred spewed here by certain posters as being in the Bible. Yay!

The details of adoption aren't really mentioned in the Bible as funnily enough they had no adoption processes then.

I dont believe the Bible condemns same-sex relationships.

As the Bible in my view dosent condemn same-sex relationships and dosent really mention adoption which in its current form is a very modern legal concept, and the Bible praises love which same-sex couples have. I can only reach the conclusion that a gay couple is just as competant to look after a child as a man and a woman. There isn't any proof otherwise either.

Take for example an abusive hetrosexual couple who have hurt their child physically. The child is sent to an orphanage or foster home. Would jesus send that child to a loving gay couple who could give that child a wonderful life. I can only think "OF COURSE HE WOULD!"

That is my explanation.

 

[david_x]

Miss vote. I meant to hit hetero- but I hit homo-, very sorry.

 

[MrPirate]

Miss vote. I meant to hit hetero- but I hit homo-, very sorry.

Do you have a reason other than your own personal prejudice as to why same sex couples should not adopt?

 

[irateional]

Confused parents raise up confused children.

I'm for all.

I don't think you're thinking. Homosexuality is just as much a sin as lying, as getting angry, as being judgemental. When you can live prefectly, and not sin EVER again, then feel free to tell the rest of us sinners what we can't and can do. But until then, spend some time among us sinners. Maybe you'd realize that we're all sinners, and that we shouldn't be judgemental.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Halohope,

I do not find the word of God hate, fortunately I never see any of the hatred spewed here by certain posters as being in the Bible. Yay!

Ok there may be, but I personally haven’t seen any hatred being spewed, However the passages and teachings in the Bible that condemn same-sex sex or exclude it aren’t recognised by some and as soon as they are cited there seems to me to be allegations of hate. I would say if the passages are not believed then it disbelief.

The details of adoption aren't really mentioned in the Bible as funnily enough they had no adoption processes then.

On the contrary there are examples of adoption in the Bible so I disagree with you, and the Bible is primarily for us to know the revelation of God, not what processes humans had or didn’t have in place.
But we both believe God is love but you said that a child needs any loving family whatever the genders? As far as I can see Jesus teaches a faithful man/woman union including where it comes to children. So still where is your evidence for any gender?

I dont believe the Bible condemns same-sex relationships.

Ok I do, Gen 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Ephesians 5, 1 Cor 5-7, Gen 19, Lev 18 & 20, Judges 19,
Romans 1, 1 Tim 1, 2 Peter 2 and Jude 1, so I would say you are a non-believer on this issue if you don’t believe all the passages.

Take for example an abusive hetrosexual couple who have hurt their child physically. The child is sent to an orphanage or foster home. Would jesus send that child to a loving gay couple who could give that child a wonderful life. I can only think "OF COURSE HE WOULD!"

Christians follow Christ, which includes looking after orphans and not being polluted by the world which includes fleeing form sexual immorality. You are suggesting Jesus would do things contrary to what Jesus has revealed.

 

[ALiberalTeen]

Miss vote. I meant to hit hetero- but I hit homo-, very sorry.

*gives hug*

Thanks David for supporting gay rights!

 

[HaloHope]

Dear Halohope,

Ok there may be, but I personally haven’t seen any hatred being spewed, However the passages and teachings in the Bible that condemn same-sex sex or exclude it aren’t recognised by some and as soon as they are cited there seems to me to be allegations of hate. I would say if the passages are not believed then it disbelief.

I would say it is not at all a case of disbelief, just different interpretation.

On the contrary there are examples of adoption in the Bible so I disagree with you, and the Bible is primarily for us to know the revelation of God, not what processes humans had or didn’t have in place.

*Gasp* you mean the Bible doesnt explain every single little thing for us? I was under the impression most fundamentalists thought it did. The Bible leaves guidance for us in all things I am sure, but sometimes we have to actually think for ourselves with our God given brains as to what Jesus would do in a situation not covered in the Bible.

But we both believe God is love but you said that a child needs any loving family whatever the genders? As far as I can see Jesus teaches a faithful man/woman union including where it comes to children. So still where is your evidence for any gender?

I have covered this multiple times.. . See my previous post.

Ok I do, Gen 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Ephesians 5, 1 Cor 5-7, Gen 19, Lev 18 & 20, Judges 19,
Romans 1, 1 Tim 1, 2 Peter 2 and Jude 1, so I would say you are a non-believer on this issue if you don’t believe all the passages.

I would say you were a mis-interpreter on this issue as I don't believe you see the passages in context. (I wouldn't call you a non-believer you see because, y'know I'm not God)

Christians follow Christ, which includes looking after orphans and not being polluted by the world which includes fleeing form sexual immorality. You are suggesting Jesus would do things contrary to what Jesus has revealed.

I am saying Jesus would do things out of love which he very much did reveal.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Halohope,

I would say it is not at all a case of disbelief, just different interpretation.

Well I wouldn’t as I would say the Bible still says what it says once we have interpreted it in context and its clear. So I think its disbelief on the part of those who don’t think same-sex sex is a sin.

*Gasp* you mean the Bible doesnt explain every single little thing for us?

The Bible doesn’t explain everything single little thing, but it explains what we need to know as a rule and standard of faith and on this issue it tells us how we should live and includes instructions to look after orphans, so we adopt as we live out our lives as Jesus taught. Therefore same-sex couples are not part of that living to then go on and adopt.

I have covered this multiple times.. . See my previous post.

Yes but without any evidence and with ideas that contradict what Jesus taught about how we should live. Gender is your idea, no mention of it and it would be against what Jesus affirms as God’s purposes.

I would say you were a mis-interpreter on this issue

Thats ok, but I would say you are a disbeliever.as to what Gen 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Ephesians 5, 1 Cor 5-7, Gen 19, Lev 18 & 20, Judges 19, Romans 1, 1 Tim 1, 2 Peter 2 and Jude 1, clearly says and means.
I would also say you are a disbeliever especially as you have no scriptural evidence to support your view.

as I don't believe you see the passages in context. (I wouldn't call you a non-believer you see because, y'know I'm not God)

As I believe God has spoken clearly I am trusting in God.

I am saying Jesus would do things out of love which he very much did reveal.

But then I would suggest you don’t know what the love He revealed is. Jesus said we love Him and the Father and He land His Father love us when we obey His teachings. If we are following two opposites, one of them cant be love. Besides Jesus taught that we offer our bodies as a living sacrifice not concepts, Jesus taught that the Father loved Him because He laid down His life. .

 

[Ohioprof]

I'm for all.

I don't think you're thinking. Homosexuality is just as much a sin as lying, as getting angry, as being judgemental. When you can live prefectly, and not sin EVER again, then feel free to tell the rest of us sinners what we can't and can do. But until then, spend some time among us sinners. Maybe you'd realize that we're all sinners, and that we shouldn't be judgemental.

"Homosexuality" is not a sin at all.

 

[Ohioprof]

I am a gay, single adoptive parent. I adopted my daughter 5 years ago. She is lovely and loving, smart and funny and fun. She has a beautiful smile, and she has a charming personality. Everyone likes her. She is very happy! Yesterday she said, "Mom, you are the greatest mom in the world!" (Sometimes she says otherwise, like when I don't buy her everything in sight.)

My daughter will start kindergarten in a couple of weeks.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Ohioprof,

Homosexuality" is not a sin at all.

Neither is heterosexuality, but I think we were talking about homosexual practice, otherwise on that basis it implies adultery and any heterosexual practice is ok as well.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Halohope,

As the Bible in my view dosent condemn same-sex relationships and dosent really mention adoption which in its current form is a very modern legal concept, and the Bible praises love which same-sex couples have. I can only reach the conclusion that a gay couple is just as competant to look after a child as a man and a woman. There isn't any proof otherwise either.

Yes there is proof, scientific studies have shown that where a father or mother is missing the child is 75% more likely to underachive at school or be invloved in drugs, alcohol, crime, poverty, unwanted pregancy abortion etc. (Breakdown Britain report this year.
I think its common sense anyway without the figures to support it being common sense.
Furthemore I have quoted the Bible passages so whatever Bible you have it doesnt matter what it says to you as far as i can see... but the danger of ignoring what the Bible says leads to false views, Fred Phelps is no worse, he has missed cruical aspects as well as you.

 

[Ohioprof]

Dear Ohioprof,
Neither is heterosexuality, but I think we were talking about homosexual practice, otherwise on that basis it implies adultery and any heterosexual practice is ok as well.

Saying that same-sex relationships are not sin is different from saying that any sexual practices are okay. Of course adultery is not okay. Of course rape is not okay. Of course sex with children is not okay. You have to look at the specific sexual practice involved. Expressions of intimacy within a monogamous same-sex relationship are no different from expressions of intimacy within a monogamous opposite-sex marriage. If and when gay people have the right to marry legally everywhere, our marital relationships and vows will be no different from those of heterosexual marital relationships and vows.

 

[Ohioprof]

Dear Halohope,
Yes there is proof, scientific studies have shown that where a father or mother is missing the child is 75% more likely to underachive at school or be invloved in drugs, alcohol, crime, poverty, unwanted pregancy abortion etc. (Breakdown Britain report this year.
I think its common sense anyway without the figures to support it being common sense.
Furthemore I have quoted the Bible passages so whatever Bible you have it doesnt matter what it says to you as far as i can see... but the danger of ignoring what the Bible says leads to false views, Fred Phelps is no worse, he has missed cruical aspects as well as you.

Your argument is flawed. ALL of the peer-reviewed studies of children raised by same-sex couples indicate that they do just as well as children raised by opposite-sex couples. You appear to be relying on studies of single-parent, mostly poor families, NOT studies of two-parent same-sex families. You have to use studies of what you are actually talking about, not studies of a different kind of family form. And one can make a strong argument that the problems in single-parent families result more from poverty and divorce, not from the fact that there is just one parent.