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

As international law expert Dr. Richard Stith says,

I don’t understand why I never hear or read of the simple argument that even if homosexual parents would be the best role models for genetically-predestined homosexual kids, if there are any such children, gay adoptive parents still would not be the best role models for the heterosexual kids whom EVERYONE concedes to be the vast majority of kids. Since we cannot at this time test orphans for some incredibly powerful gay gene, we should do what will work out best in that vast majority of cases, i.e. seek first of all to place them with straight parents.

In other words, if we place an infant (of necessarily unknown tendencies) with homosexual parents, even the most radical gay activist must concede that there is at least a 90% chance that the child’s parental sex-role models will not match his or her inner sexual tendency.

All by itself, the above argument seems to me a sufficient reason for people of every ideological persuasion to reject putting adoption of children by homosexuals on a par with adoption by heterosexuals.

Richard Stith

Valparaiso University School of Law

656 South Greenwich

Valparaiso, IN 46383-6493

Tel. 219-465-7871

Fax 219-465-7872

1 posted on 01/19/2006 4:09:36 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Pyro7480; murphE; Salvation; Aquinasfan; Campion; NYer; ninenot; Frank Sheed; dsc; ...


2 posted on 01/19/2006 4:12:00 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o (Veritatis Gender.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Only problem is you can not even prove that being Gay is genetic. Seems more like a recruitment tool than anything else.
3 posted on 01/19/2006 4:15:09 PM PST by MPJackal ("If you are not with us, you are against us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

"Hey Dad, when is dad coming home?"

Ewww.....


4 posted on 01/19/2006 4:17:13 PM PST by proud_yank (Aspiring CEO of a multinational corporation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Just say "NO!" to perversion.


5 posted on 01/19/2006 4:19:22 PM PST by DoNotDivide (Ask the Lord to make Himself real to you and receive His love today, while you still can!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Interesting read; thanks for the post.


6 posted on 01/19/2006 4:21:54 PM PST by andyk (Fear my strategery of misunderestimation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I am shocked that the American College of Pediatricians would state this position. The various Medical associations have always aligned with the most radical interest groups. Perhaps the pedaitricians really are on the side of the child.


7 posted on 01/19/2006 4:27:09 PM PST by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Policymakers, social scientists, the media, and even physician organizations1,

the usual suspects.................


9 posted on 01/19/2006 4:30:09 PM PST by PeterPrinciple (Seeking the truth here folks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Homosexual Parenting: Is It Time For Change?

Romans 1 (New King James Version)

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,[c] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,[d] unmerciful;
32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

BibleGateway.com

10 posted on 01/19/2006 4:31:10 PM PST by winston2 (In matters of necessity let there be unity, in matters of doubt liberty, and in all things charity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

".....there is sound evidence that children exposed to the homosexual lifestyle may be at increased risk for emotional, mental, and even physical harm."

The unfortunate kids with 2 daddies or mommys are immersed in it, not merely "exposed", by the way.


12 posted on 01/19/2006 4:32:53 PM PST by Vn_survivor_67-68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o
As international law expert Dr. Richard Stith says

Only a Stith deals in Absolutes.

Ooops. Sorry. Wrong thread.

13 posted on 01/19/2006 4:34:27 PM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

The media will always compare the "best" gay parents with the most pathetic regular parents they can scrape up.


22 posted on 01/19/2006 4:57:16 PM PST by Callahan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o
What I have noticed from quotations appearing in articles favoring homosexual adoptions is that such children seem to be sexualized WAY too early. From their own comments, very young kids raised by homosexuals are apparently often clearly aware of, and seemingly blase about (though one wonders) sexual practices which I believe they are just too young to be exposed to. Do these kids get much of a childhood? I fear not.

My own niece, during her teenage years, lived for a couple of years with her Dad's first cousin and her lesbian lover. She could not get along with her parents, was very rebellious, and they were at their wits end, so ended up sending her to live with the cousin whom she had admired and been very close to for years. The lesbian relationship was one of exploitation, domination, and conflict (some of it racial), and the episode was not a happy living situation. It ended only with the girl's graduation from high school. I don't think it did my niece any good at all. The cousin has since decided that she is NOT a lesbian and is now married with a child. Go figure! Just FYI, my niece married an on-again, off-again substance abuser who is on his second try at residential rehab and cannot hold a job, and she has three small children whom her parents help support. Her parents are still at their wits end.

23 posted on 01/19/2006 4:59:15 PM PST by Irene Adler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

-Policymakers, social scientists, the media, and even physician organizations1, however, are now asserting that prohibitions on parenting by homosexual couples should be lifted.-

The MEDIA? OK, I can see the other 3 putting their two cents in, no matter how wrong they clearly are, but what are the qualifications of the media? Non-existent, that's what.


29 posted on 01/19/2006 5:15:38 PM PST by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Do the kids end up talking with a lisp?


32 posted on 01/19/2006 5:20:25 PM PST by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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