Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Could your kids be given to 'gay' parents?
WND ^ | July 1, 2004 | Stephen Baskerville

Posted on 07/01/2004 5:02:35 AM PDT by joesnuffy

Thursday, July 1, 2004

Could your kids be given to 'gay' parents?

Posted: July 1, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Stephen Baskerville

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

In the debate over gay marriage, strikingly little attention has been paid to the impact on children. Some question the wisdom of having children raised by two homosexuals, but the best they can seem to argue is that serious flaws vitiate the literature defending it.

Almost no attention has been devoted to what may be the more serious political question of who will supply the children of gay "parents," since obviously they cannot produce children themselves. A few will come from sperm donors and surrogate mothers, but very few. The vast majority will come, because they already do come, from pre-existing heterosexual families. In Massachusetts, "Forty percent of the children adopted have gone to gay and lesbian families," according to Democratic state Sen. Therese Murphy.

Sen. Murphy seems totally oblivious to the implications. "Will you deny them their rights?" she asks. With some 3 percent of the population, gay couples already seem to enjoy a marked advantage over straight ones in the allocation of supposedly superfluous children.

But whose rights are being denied depends on how deeply we probe and what questions we ask. Granting gay couples the "right" to have children by definition means giving them the right to have someone else's children, and the question arises whether the original parent or parents ever agreed to part with them.

Not necessarily. Governments that kind-heartedly bestow other people's children on homosexual couples also have both the power and the motivation to confiscate those children from their original parents, even when the parents have done nothing to warrant losing them.

Sen. Murphy formulaically asks us to take pity on "children who have been neglected, abandoned, abused by their own families." But this is far from the whole picture.

Ever since the federal government became involved in the child-abuse business some 30 years ago, governments nationwide have had the means and the incentive to seize children from their parents with no due process finding that the parents have actually abused their children. The 1974 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA, also known as the Mondale Act) provides generous financial incentives to states to remove people's children under the guise of protecting them. In the aftermath of CAPTA, the foster-care rolls exploded, as children were torn from their parents and federal funds poured into state coffers and foster-care providers. According to the Child Welfare League of America, "There were many instances then, as now, of children being removed unnecessarily from families." Many foster homes were far more abusive than the families from which the children had been removed.

But the federal government, ever ready to create a new program to address the problems created by its existing programs, had a solution. The 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act provided more federal money to transfer children from foster care into adoption, enlarging the client base of stakeholders with a vested financial interest in available children. Gay marriage expands this client base still further.

Among the states that have taken fullest advantage of this gravy train is Massachusetts. A typical case is that of Neil and Heidi Howard, whose children were seized by the state's Department of Social Services (DSS) with no charge of abuse against either parent and no evidentiary hearing. DSS tried to put the children up for adoption and were prevented only by lengthy court proceedings and extensive publicity in the Massachusetts News. Other families are not so fortunate.

This traffic in children has been in full flow since well before gay marriage. Belchertown attorney Gregory Hession alleges a "child protection racket" rife with "baby stealing and baby selling." Hession describes courts where the hallways are clogged with parents and children being adopted. "You could hardly walk. You had never seen such mass adoptions before." Reporter Nev Moore of the News describes the auction blocks for children operated by DSS:

If you prefer to actually be able to kick tires instead of just looking at pictures you could attend one of DSS's quaint "Adoption Fairs," where live children are put on display and you can walk around and browse. Like a flea market to sell kids. If one of them begs you to take him home you can always say, "Sorry. Just looking."

This is the bureaucratic milieu – largely hidden from all but those who must endure it – into which gay marriage advocates want to inject millions of new couples in search of children to adopt.

The number of truly abused children cannot begin to fill this demand without government help. We know that statistically child abuse in intact two-parent families is rare, and two-thirds of reports are never substantiated. Yet even in those instances of confirmed abuse, a little digging reveals the pernicious hand of the government generating business (and children) for itself.

Child abuse is overwhelmingly a phenomenon of single-parent homes. Government and feminist propaganda suggest that single-parent homes result from paternal abandonment. In fact, they are usually created by family court judges, who have close ties to the social service agencies that need children. By forcibly removing fathers from the home through unilateral or "no-fault" divorce, family courts create the environment most conducive to child abuse and initiate the process that leads to removal of the children from the mother, foster care, and adoption. Gay adoption is simply the logical culmination in the process of turning children into political instruments for government officials.

What this demonstrates is that same-sex marriage cannot be effectively challenged in isolation. Opponents must bite the bullet and confront the two evils that pose a far more serious and direct threat to the family than gay marriage: the child protection gestapo and the even more formidable "no-fault" divorce machine.

Failure to grasp this nettle will leave social conservatives exposed to ever more contempt from a public that is crying out for leadership to rescue the family but which has been led to view social conservatives, however unjustly, as puritanical bigots who want to deny equal rights to homosexuals – rights that entail powers of totalitarian dimensions, undreamed of before the sexual revolution.

Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D., is Charlotte and Walter Kohler Fellow at the Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society and president of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children. The views expressed are his own.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abomination; aclu; atheistnation; childabuse; childcustody; childrensrights; christiannation; definemarriage; democrats; deptofsocialservice; divorce; dss; familycourt; familyrights; federalgovernment; femanazis; femanistsagenda; gay; gaydemands; gayextortion; gaymarriage; gayrights; globalistagenda; godinamerica; godlessamerica; government; homosexualagenda; liberals; marriageprotection; pagannation; republicans; safefamilyact; socialcircuses; socialistagenda; socialservices; socialworkers; sodomiteadoption; stalin; stephenbaskerville; theyreherequeer; thirdway
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 07/01/2004 5:02:38 AM PDT by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
Can they? I suppose...but ONLY OVER MY DEAD BODY!

For my children and grand-children I hope and pray that thesis is never tested...but for me, that is what it would come to.

2 posted on 07/01/2004 5:16:56 AM PDT by Jeff Head (The fervent effectual prayer of the rightous availeth much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
Failure to grasp this nettle will leave social conservatives exposed to ever more contempt from a public that is crying out for leadership to rescue the family but which has been led to view social conservatives, however unjustly, as puritanical bigots who want to deny equal rights to homosexuals – rights that entail powers of totalitarian dimensions, undreamed of before the sexual revolution.

And in the more liberal areas of the country, like Mass., a corrupt government could take the children of conservatives and Christians to prevent them from being raised in bigoted, hateful homes and be given to gays so the kids will learn acceptance of the sodomite lifestyle and to reject religion and family values. Can't have a society with those evil traits.

3 posted on 07/01/2004 5:18:45 AM PDT by doc30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
America is great because it is good. And when America ceases to be good, it will no longer be great.

This article could lead one to question how long our time of greatness will survive. I begin to wonder.

4 posted on 07/01/2004 5:27:37 AM PDT by neutrino (Against stupidity the very Gods themselves contend in vain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
Opponents must bite the bullet and confront the two evils that pose a far more serious and direct threat to the family than gay marriage: the child protection gestapo and the even more formidable "no-fault" divorce machine.

Bump.

5 posted on 07/01/2004 5:32:05 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Tautologies are the only horses I bet on. -- Old Professer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
Thank you for this post.

Best regards,

6 posted on 07/01/2004 5:42:40 AM PDT by Copernicus (A Constitutional Republic revolves around Sovereign Citizens, not citizens around government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: little jeremiah

Ping!


LJ, if we want more support for the Marriage Amendment, this will get it!
8 posted on 07/01/2004 10:27:39 AM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy; shaggy eel; Indie; longtermmemmory
Ping!
9 posted on 07/01/2004 10:43:50 AM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy

BTTT!


10 posted on 07/01/2004 10:44:24 AM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy

Mulitple studies have shown that children flourish best in a home with a mommy and daddy in a loving, committed relationship. If that is available, even if they don't have as much money as the gay couple, the kid should go there.


11 posted on 07/01/2004 10:45:45 AM PDT by MEGoody (Kerry - isn't that a girl's name? (Conan O'Brian))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop; little jeremiah; RogerFGay
This thread is the first thread for this article. There's a duplicate here.
12 posted on 07/01/2004 1:55:09 PM PDT by scripter (Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
Governments that kind-heartedly bestow other people's children on homosexual couples also have both the power and the motivation to confiscate those children from their original parents, even when the parents have done nothing to warrant losing them.

That's incredible. I need to research the Neil and Heidi Howard story.

13 posted on 07/01/2004 2:01:32 PM PDT by scripter (Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
...governments nationwide have had the means and the incentive to seize children from their parents with no due process finding that the parents have actually abused their children.

What I don't understand is how can there be no due process? Why hasn't anyone changed this or challenged it?

14 posted on 07/01/2004 2:22:07 PM PDT by TruthConquers (Dominus illuminatio mea)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *Homosexual Agenda; EdReform; scripter; GrandMoM; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; ...

Homosexual Agenda Ping. Excellent, excellent article. Every single English speaking person on the planet should read this article. I am not kidding.

If someone reads this and isn't very disgusted and angered, it means they must be on the dark side.

Homosexuals and their minions are after OUR children.

Hedonism and selfish immoral sexuality are part of a continuum, the extreme end of which is homosexuality/pederasty and pedophilia. (They're also a little continuum all by themselves.)

Those of you who email articles to relatives and friends, or make copies for groups, SEND OR COPY THIS ONE. People need to see where "gay" marriage is going.

Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.


15 posted on 07/01/2004 2:30:01 PM PDT by little jeremiah (http://www.mikegabbard.com - a REAL conservative running for Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers
"What I don't understand is how can there be no due process? Why hasn't anyone changed this or challenged it?"

...because people of the radical left infiltrated conservative groups a very long time ago, then resumed their business of trying to ruin our Republican Party from within again a little over three decades ago.

When we few fathers' rights advocates have tried to stop it over the past decade or so, we've been overwhelmed by tearful, anecdotal stories to our Congress about how mean and cruel all fathers are. Thus, even Republican congressmen helped to pass the unconstitutional laws in favor of imprisonments by accusation only, debtors' prisons, etc.

They tossed about half of the dads out here out of their families and homes after extended campaigns to vilify men. Now they are going after the children of single mothers who divorced their husbands. Feminism is a tool of socialism.

"Then it will be plain that the first condition for the liberation of the wife is to bring the whole female sex back into public industry, and that this in turn demands the abolition of the monogamous family as the economic unit of society" (Frederick Engels, "Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State").

Feminists carried Mao's Little Red Book in the late 1960s (SDS and other first feminist groups) and early 1970s in the USA, Britain and other western culture countries. Some of those feminists have attended Republican meetings in every locale ever since. Socialism, you see, seeks to push its policies in its gradualist manner within its opposition.

Mao's Little Red Book on Women
http://www.paulnoll.com/China/Documents/Mao-31-Women.html

And one of NOWs main issues is homosexual advocacy for breaking the family. Other feminist organizations do the same but with a lower profile (the infiltration thing). Some even pretend to be pro-life (while actually lobbying to pass divorce bills like the VAWA and so-called "Child Support Act")

Singles are more likely than parents to vote Democrat.

They need socialism very much to support their anti-family habits. Without the huge bureaucracy we presently have for family destruction (and the government funding they receive--the unconstitutional VAWA, for example), their efforts cannot survive.
16 posted on 07/01/2004 4:22:05 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: All

Maybe it would be a good deed to let James Farah know that we appreciate him telling the truth about the homosexual agenda on his website - what do you think? WND is just a click away.


(I just did.)


17 posted on 07/01/2004 5:09:24 PM PDT by little jeremiah (http://www.mikegabbard.com - a REAL conservative running for Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: familyop
I have known about the ability of Child Protection(gag) Services to remove children from homes with no due process since I began looking into homeschooling many years ago. It was one of my biggest fears.

I was not aware of this other dimension of attack at the family.

Opponents must bite the bullet and confront the two evils that pose a far more serious and direct threat to the family than gay marriage: the child protection gestapo and the even more formidable "no-fault" divorce machine.

Bears repeating

18 posted on 07/01/2004 5:16:32 PM PDT by TruthConquers (Dominus illuminatio mea)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy

How totally ridiculous!!!! Beyond contempt for lack of any logic or reason.


19 posted on 07/01/2004 5:19:36 PM PDT by familyofman (and the first animal is jettisoned - legs furiously pumping)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
Ping!

If the piece behind the last ping didn't quite make sense, this one will make it more clear. It's published at WorldNetDaily.

"Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D., is Charlotte and Walter Kohler Fellow at the Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society and president of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children."
20 posted on 07/01/2004 5:24:41 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson