Maybe you should investigate and find out where this child would be if she hadn’t been adopted.
The problem with that argument is it is a 100% pure appeal to emotion. It is also begging the question.
This is not about whether the child is better off. I will ask you the same question I have asked others. How would you feel if this were two (or one) homosexual men who did the adopting? Certainly the child is better off being raised by to flaming liberal gay men than where she was right? What about all the illegal alien kids here in America. They are clearly better off no?
It is exactly the “its for the children” argument that is one of the biggest evils of liberalism and has gotten us into so much trouble.
Look, I’m sorry, but as a man and a father I have seen the role of fatherhood and a strong male in the family marginalized to the point of meaninglessness in our society. Laura CLAIMED she too saw this problem..and said that it was a problem...a major problem..and then she went out and validated the choice! can you not see how one could see this as cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy?
I am a man and a father. I see this woman making a statement to the whole world that in the successful raising of this child no man is required. No father figure is necessary.
So one more question, if I may - how can anyone ever again take her comments on fathers in society seriously?