And all I was saying was that you’re wrong. There are many, many older children who have not been adopted, including ones old enough to have hit puberty. Barring some sort of disability, it’s usually easy to find placements for babies. But a lot of kids don’t even enter the foster care system until they’re well past infancy. Most potential adoptive parents have no interest in adopting older kids, so these kids get older and older in the foster care system with ever decreasing odds of being adopted.
I’ve just come across this thread and need to comment on Homebrew’s comment.
I responded to this question on Monday (5 July). (It’s message #289 on p.6 of the link provided by HB.)
‘Homebrew, I support the right of you and your ex to bring up your own kid(s). Sorry not to make that clear earlier.’
My views on the subject have already been made known on that thread, plus perhaps one or two others. Note that I am open to the idea of homosexual adoption (where that refers to the sexuality of the parents, not the kid). I just don’t support it at present, in the best interests of the prospective adopted.
Since this thread has done very well without me, and since I have a suspicion that its original placing in The Pit had to do with the word ‘bodswood’, I’ll bow out now and leave you to it.
97% percent of the time, that results in a divorce. And what about when the wife gets a sex change?
:rolleyes:
If you actually read what I posted, I said that if a parent broke up the marriage by coming out/going gay, - all else being equal, the straight parent should have an edge in a custody dispute. IF a parent broke up the marriage by having a straight adulterous affair, and the other parent came out/went gay, then- all else being equal, I might just give the edge to the gay parent.
cutting your high horse off at the knees
Thanks, but don’t ya know that anything said against the gay agenda (I love that term) merits any kind of histrionics
First, anything reservations I have about gay & single-parent adoptions are really reserved for state-agency handled adoptions, I do believe private adoptions should only be regulated to prevent abuse & “baby-selling” & the like. Thus, a birth mother’s decision to adopt her child to a single parent or a gay couple would not be outlawed.
That said, I think public-agency adoptions should primarily be to married couples,
On one hand, there are accounts of gays who have struggled to “be straight”, but late in life decide to be honest with themselves about their true gay nature.
On the other hand, there are also accounts (I’ve only read & heard those of women, but I suppose some men may experience this) of people who, having had straight feelings & relationships all their lives, find themselves attracted to someone of the same gender. My long-term female friend from college (since 1982) who has always been straight, and in fact looked askance at homosexuality (tho she just thought gays were odd, not bad or evil or to be discriminated against) last fall had a gay one-nighter & a month later settled into a relationship with another woman.
That’s how one “goes gay” (at least behaviorally, tho technically, she may more have gone bi).
Sure, because we all know that marriages are stable, rarely lead to divorce, and are much healthier than other relationships. Or is it because ONLY STRAIGHT COUPLES can get married?
:dubious:
As a trained child custody evaluator, I will not state that the sexual orientation of the parents is irrelevant. It might be, especially if the child has been raised heretofore in an environment where he or she could not easily relate to a gay parent. However, absent unusual circumstances the sexual orientation of a parent alone creates no bias for or against that parent.
In many states, it is illegal to bias for or against a parent on the basis of his or her sexual orientation. I was trained in Indiana, the law of which states that being homosexual alone is not grounds for disqualification, but that the court may consider the sexual orientation of the parents in determining what arrangement best serves the best interests of the child (the overriding consideration in all child custody matters). In general, and in my experience, categorical rules, such as those exposited by FriarTed, tend to work against the best interest of the child; they tie the hands of the court without actually helping children. I support categorical rules only when they serve to address systemic abuses of discretion by judges.
How egalitarian of you.
spectrum may be histrionic, but you are quite biased in a way that comes off as bigoted. Further, you seem in denial of your bigotry and have a resistance to actual education.
Your understanding of human sexuality is woefully behind the times and use of terms like ‘go gay’ just illustrate that further.
Not only do you not know what you’re talking about, you don’t care to learn. There are countless threads with accurate information that could send some light into the dark and dank corners of your mind. Instead of illumination, you spout off authoritatively with crap as if it was true.
First of all, no one can “go gay.” It isn’t possible. You are either gay from day 1, or not. That you even infer that that is possible indicates a deep and unabiding hatred of all gay people everywhere.
Second, why should coming out strip parents of their custody? Why should we punish them for being honest and decent enough to stop living a lie? People who come out are brave and good people – it’s those who stay in the closet who are liars, cowards and unfit parents.
If we are going to get the usual hysterical shit from spectrum and his like, maybe this should be moved back to the Pit.
Regards,
Shodan
No, it indicates ignorance.
Like, ouch.
That is a pretty damn hostile thing to say, Spectrum. Many people stay in the closet for damn good reasons - not because they are afraid of themselves, but because they are agfraid for their family. You should know how hard it can be to come out. A major relief, yes, but it can destroy people’s lives, families, friendships. You’re right, it does take a lot of courage to come out, but staying in doesn’t make you a coward and unfit parent.
My father is a transexual who stayed in the closet until recently, after my sister graduated from college. He did it so the family would stay together, and it made his life hell for 25 years, living the lie. When he did, my sister screamed at him and told him to move to Alaska. I’m pretty open about being bisexual, but I haven’t told my family. I don’t think they need to know. Given my father’s recent coming out and my sister’s reaction, I don’t think I’ll be telling them any time soon.
But don’t let your anger at gay bashers cross over to being angry at people in the closet. Many have damn good reasons.
No, FriarGayHater has been informed many times about the reality of homosexuality, but like our filthy, evil president he instead chooses to continue bashing gays and infer that they are unfit to parent.
It probably came off more hostile than was intended. But the point is that a person who is in the closet is a liar, and is building a life around a lie. He (I’m just gonna use he for the sake of ease-of-writing) is selfishly setting up everyone in his family to suffer from his lie, and that is despicable. If he truly loved his family, he has to be honest with them.
This doesn’t just apply to the closeted, but to anyone who lies about something fundamental to their family and builds their life around that lie. Such deception is unacceptable, on any level, for any reason.
The family still deserves to know the truth. They are being misled and lied to, and that is not right. That is evil. There’s no such thing as a harmless lie when that lie is the foundation for the entire familial relationship.
Staying in the closet is a difficult thing for a lot of people to do, and it can very easily be the right choice to make at a given time.
It is not for you to say, spectrum, whether it is right or wrong for any particular gay person to be in the closet. And I think you err, and err profoundly, when you declare that being in the closet makes one an unfit parent.