I would rather be raised by wolves.
I feel a banning coming on…
Well, that’s your choice. Why should your opinion on this matter limit the options available to children who desperately need homes?
Poly,
There is a shortage of certain types of kids available for adoption. Are you suggesting that gays be allowed to adopt what Dan Savage calls “damaged goods” kids - for which there certainly is a shortage of families, but that healthy white babies only be placed with (healthy)(white)(rich)(married)(Christian)(traditional SAHM) straight people?
MrVisible…now that the dust has settled on our previous exchange…can I just ask a specific and genuine question. Are you looking to adopt a boy or a girl?
Either, or both.
And how do you rate your chances at this stage?
Pretty slim. For one thing, Nick and I have only been together about a year and a half; we’re thinking that if we have a couple of more years together before we start the application process, it’s going to vouch for our stability as a couple better. That’ll also give us the time to buy the house we’re currently living in. We have some support around here, friends and my family, but we’re in the process of debating moving closer to his family, because of the incredible amount of caring support that they provide. Also, I’ve been laid off from my job at the local University, and I’m in the process of finding another job in a difficult economy.
So, it’s going to be a couple of years before we’re ready to be the kind of parents that we’d like to be.
Ok, thanks. Well, on a SDMB-personal level, I wish you all the best. And good luck in finding a new and satisfying job.
Rider wrote:
Why for having an opinion that isn’t PC. That would be pretty weak don’t you think?
May I ask why you were asking?
Visible wrote;
Well it’s not my opinion that matters for the most part it’s what a majority of polititians and legislators care about that matters. If it’s so important you can vote for people who are gay freindly. Seriously though I don’t care what two consenting adults do in their own home but a kid should not have to put up with the ridicule they will subject to in allowing this to happen IMO.
“May I ask why you were asking?”
Me? I was just curious really. I think that my argumants about bullying at school and so on probably wouldn’t apply to a girl so much.
“Why for having an opinion that isn’t PC. That would be pretty weak don’t you think?”
Yes, but someone has already been banned for voicing your opinion in a more wordy way. I’m not saing that you should be banned, just that I can see it coming if you continue with your current line of approach.
Apologies for all my spelling mistakes, but it is 2003 here already!
And if morons didn’t tease and pick on these kids, then your argument would be moot. Wouldn’t the better solution be parents and schools taking steps to eliminate the bullying and teasing?
Homebrew…Parents and schools will never eliminate bullying and teasing, because, sadly, it is in children’s nature and a part of them finding their feet as potential adults. As I said in an earlier post, these are not morons (or “scum” as I think was the earlier term), but just kids being kids. Have you read Lord of the Flies?
You’d rather have kids stay in the foster home/institution system than have to put up with some ridicule about their parents?
Have you even read this thread? I mean, all the posts, all the way through? You might find that everything you’ve said has been addressed, multiple times.
Homebrew,
Kids will be kids. They already are so PC in our public school system it makes me want to puke. In my godson’s school if a kid comes and punches him in the face and he strikes him back he is expelled from that school. Kids don’t just see other kids at school either. What about the kids in the neighborhood and throughout the community. What are you going to do about that propose a bunch of “nice” legislation. We already have WAY, WAY, WAY too many laws IMO.
Okay, but how do we establish a set of appropriate criteria for evaluating pack stability in order to place you with the right wolves?
OTOH, anyone teasing a child raised by wolves would probably get his/her throat torn out, so there would be a consequent reduction in school bullying, a definite benefit…
Dangerosa, absolutely not, and I don’t see where you got that from my post. IMHO, every child needing a home should be ideally placed with the family that best suits his or her needs and can best provide for him/her. In many cases, that will be a whitebread straight nuclear family; in others, a single person seeking to be an adoptive parent. In one case already brought up, that of a gay teen without a home, I’d be inclined to think a stable gay couple who know what he or she has gone through would be the ideal family. I know that Barb and I would give such a kid our best efforts, but (as was mentioned for the hypothetical case of the girl being brought up by two men), we would not immediately have the “been there” gut empathy that Mr. Visible would, and that IMHO makes a serious difference.
Strangely enough, we agree here, Big Daddy. However, I think that your solution to the problem is in discouraging or prohibiting gay couples from adoption, while mine would be in educating the little brats who are so nasty as to pick on their classmates/neighbors for who their parents happen to be as to how to behave in a civilized society.
And if you really feel that you “would rather be raised by wolves,” aren’t you lucky that you ended up with a set of parents that meets your criteria, rather than a couple of men who love each other and want to make a good home for a child that happens to be the younger, orphaned you? If that had happened and they had given raising you their best shot, would you still “have rather been raised by wolves”?