Discussion Should homosexual couples adopt children?

[DoNotLet2]

Hello
This is a discussion about homosexual people adopting children but I may slightly (or heavily) astray from the topic. And of course those are just my views so please don't be offended. Is this topic controversial? I think people here are mostly left-winged so it should be okay.

tl;dr arguments against homosexual adoption can be broken down quite easily with logic.

So in Poland my country people are still not convinced that homosexual couples are just fine. We are more a right-winged country. Of course not everybody is crazy there are many mildly right-winged people. And I don't understand they are cool guys why are they against single sex marriages and homosexual adoption?
I found a few arguments that I decided to break. If you have another arguments against say them so we can break them down.

1. "LGBTQ+ people are weird and they go on rampage and they destroy our precious churches." My counterargument is yes there are fucking idiots among LGBTQ+ but most of LGBTQ+ are fine. And I don't think all LGBTQ+ should suffer only because they have a few idiots inside.

2. "Because God said it's bad." But you can't even prove the God's existence... Law shouldn't be based on religion. Just look at the countries where it's based.

3. "Now we agree to the homosexual marriages and then we will have to agree to some bad things they will want us to do." Look at point one. Of course some people want to rule the world but it's not everybody.

4. "Children raised by homosexual couples are raised worse than those raised by heterosexual couples." First of all please show my links to studies that unambiguously prove so. One guy said that "children raised without a father have a way harder life" without showing any links. But "being raised without a father" mostly means "single mother" who is way different from "two mothers". So yeah some right-winged people manipulate because they try to sound smart.
Ok so that's where my opinion starts. They say "a child has to have patterns of both genders". First of all if your child has a disability should you have a disability too? Children with disabilities need patterns with disability. You know there is a solution. INTERNET. If two mothers have a son they can show him an influencer who is a man and who can be a good pattern. Second of all dear right-winged people since when have you started to give a fuck about children's mental health needs? It's kinda hypocrisy. Like they never cared and now they started to? Third and last but not least of all if they care for real... THEY SHOULDN'T SEND CHILDREN TO SCHOOL. School is very very harmful when it comes to raising children. A child isn't raised at all and is breaking everything around them? No school can't kick them out. The teacher is mentally sick and needs help? No he won't be send to a psychiatrist instead they will assure his way of thinking is right so he will continue to shout at children (of course that includes female teachers and non binary teachers).

Ok so those are the arguments I for sure forgot about something be sure to remind me!

 

[Deleted member 23374]

I think children need guardians who are committed to their well being and will raise them to be committed guardians to the well being of their children.
I think the above statement will always be overridden by bigoted foolishness.
Amen.

 

[Bauhaus]

I agree with re_pete_x, children should be raised in a secure environment, with love and affection.
Who cares if it's by a hetero, gay or lebian couple ?
However I have my doubts regarding bi couples, becos they typically have a lot of relationships and it might be more of a problem to provide kids with a stable upbringing.

 

[dropdeadfred]

First of all: of course they should if they want to.

However I have my doubts regarding bi couples, becos they typically have a lot of relationships and it might be more of a problem to provide kids with a stable upbringing.

Not asking in an offensive way... I just have to know what makes you think that bisexuals tend to have more relationships than the other LGBTQ+ orientations. You state it like it's truth. Also, multiple relationships doesn't necessarily point to problems in the stability of a child's upbringing. There are several types of relationships to consider, too: monogamous, non-monogamous, polyamorous, polygyny, polyandry, etc. Depending on culture, it can be typical for children to be part of households as such.

 

[foxdie]

I would say of course. There's no difference between loving homosexual or heterosexual parents. Also I don't see all these homophobes lining up to adopt orphaned children so they should step up or shut up.

 

[Bauhaus]

Not asking in an offensive way... I just have to know what makes you think that bisexuals tend to have more relationships than the other LGBTQ+ orientations. You state it like it's truth. Also, multiple relationships doesn't necessarily point to problems in the stability of a child's upbringing. There are several types of relationships to consider, too: monogamous, non-monogamous, polyamorous, polygyny, polyandry, etc. Depending on culture, it can be typical for children to be part of households as such.

Well yes, they're bisexual after all and are more promiscuous. On another forum there's a girl who has a boy/girlfriend like every six months and she also has a second girlfriend (for sex, her - then - boyfriend doesn't care about it). How do you explain this to your kids ?
It just makes too overly complicated, like how do you divide time for everytning ?
You need to share time for every person in this polygamous relationship, you need time for the kids, for you jobs, hobbies, etc....
And when you end the realionship then who gets custody of the kidds ?
it's already difficult for only 2 parents to share enough time between them and between their kids, let alone when there are extra "uncles" and "aunts" if you can call them that.
Maybe I'm just oldfashioned but I think one couple to raise kids suffice.
And for the record, I have nothing against bi, everyone can have as much sex or relationships with others, as long there's mutual consent.
But when it comes to raise kidds I think you need a responsibility towards your kidds and provide them with a stable environment.

 

[these_days9]

Well yes, they're bisexual after all and are more promiscuous.

um what? Bisexual just means that someone is attracted to men and women...that has nothing to do with promiscuity...

 

[Deleted member 23374]

um what? Bisexual just means that someone is attracted to men and women...that has nothing to do with promiscuity...

Not necessarily, that's true. I admit it my "bi" days i was a total slut. So it's not true across the board but it pegged me pretty accurately at that time.

 

[Sprite_Geist]

What matters is whether or not they will care for and help to nurture their child - sexuality should be irrelevant.

Some will use the argument that homosexual couples might harm their children in some way, but there are many heterosexual couples who are abusive and dysfunctional toward their offspring too; by this logic: should heterosexual couples not be allowed to have children either?

It is interesting that there are many heterosexuals who have very active sex lives and it is considered "normal", but when a member of the LGBTQ+ community has a lot of sex they are labelled as "promiscuous" and "immoral". It is a double standard.

 

[DoNotLet2]

I think children need guardians who are committed to their well being and will raise them to be committed guardians to the well being of their children.

I think it ends the discussion. What more can you say? If parents love, care for their children and they can afford to raise them then what's more?

However I have my doubts regarding bi couples, becos they typically have a lot of relationships and it might be more of a problem to provide kids with a stable upbringing.

I know nothing but I don't think bi people are more wanton than the rest? Isn't it simply like that they are okay with having a partner of either gender? That the partner can be male, female and they will still want to have sex with them?
I don't want to reply to the entire discussion of "are bi too wanton" because I know shit.

Some will use the argument that homosexual couples might harm their children in some way, but there are many heterosexual couples who are abusive and dysfunctional toward their offspring too; by this logic: should heterosexual couples not be allowed to have children either?

It is interesting that there are many heterosexuals who have very active sex lives and it is considered "normal", but when a member of the LGBTQ+ community has a lot of sex they are labelled as "promiscuous" and "immoral". It is a double standard.

Dude you're right. Or when a female has had too many partners it's wanton but if a man has had a lot of partners it's "masculine".

I would say of course. There's no difference between loving homosexual or heterosexual parents. Also I don't see all these homophobes lining up to adopt orphaned children so they should step up or shut up.

Yes that's what I forgot about. Orphanages aren't good to raise children either they are really bad. I wasn't there but yeah.

 

[netrezven]

If i ask the question - "why not?" i get myself exactly the same answers as for other couples. If they can threat good and rise a kid, they should have the oportunity for this. And the most important - oportunity is actually for the kids themselfs, to have a chance for better life. And if i get cold and go on with statiscs about other people's lifes (witch i never do, but most do), well they can't go wrong as much as "normal" couples already did to most people on this site and maybie me too.

 

[DoNotLet2]

well they can't go wrong as much as "normal" couples already did to most people on this site and maybie me too.

Yes! Statistics are greatly against heterosexual couples but people have their biases against homosexuals because homosexuality isn't default.

 

[greebo6]

Yes ,of course.
Its not as if heterosexual couples are perfect parents or always get it right. Sexuality has no bearing on how well an individual can parent.

 

[hoping to lose hope]

Am I allowed to post controversial opinions?

 

[Deleted member 24006]

IMHO - I'd take an alternate lifestyle set of parents any day if I were a kid being shuffled around to different foster care centers or parents.

 

[Good4Nothing]

Haven't read the thread, but in answer to the question posed by the title, it's none of my damn business. If I were homosexual, I might have an opinion, but as a heterosexual, I don't. It's just none of my business.

 

[demuic]

Well yes, they're bisexual after all and are more promiscuous. On another forum there's a girl who has a boy/girlfriend like every six months and she also has a second girlfriend (for sex, her - then - boyfriend doesn't care about it). How do you explain this to your kids ?
It just makes too overly complicated, like how do you divide time for everytning ?
You need to share time for every person in this polygamous relationship, you need time for the kids, for you jobs, hobbies, etc....
And when you end the realionship then who gets custody of the kidds ?
it's already difficult for only 2 parents to share enough time between them and between their kids, let alone when there are extra "uncles" and "aunts" if you can call them that.
Maybe I'm just oldfashioned but I think one couple to raise kids suffice.
And for the record, I have nothing against bi, everyone can have as much sex or relationships with others, as long there's mutual consent.
But when it comes to raise kidds I think you need a responsibility towards your kidds and provide them with a stable environment.

I think those are good points, but it's not just bisexuals who engage in polygamous relationships. Those would be problems in any "poly" relationship, no matter the sexualities. I do agree kids need a stable environment.

 

[Niftypoint124]

Well yes, they're bisexual after all and are more promiscuous. On another forum there's a girl who has a boy/girlfriend like every six months and she also has a second girlfriend (for sex, her - then - boyfriend doesn't care about it). How do you explain this to your kids ?
It just makes too overly complicated, like how do you divide time for everytning ?
You need to share time for every person in this polygamous relationship, you need time for the kids, for you jobs, hobbies, etc....
And when you end the realionship then who gets custody of the kidds ?
it's already difficult for only 2 parents to share enough time between them and between their kids, let alone when there are extra "uncles" and "aunts" if you can call them that.
Maybe I'm just oldfashioned but I think one couple to raise kids suffice.
And for the record, I have nothing against bi, everyone can have as much sex or relationships with others, as long there's mutual consent.
But when it comes to raise kidds I think you need a responsibility towards your kidds and provide them with a stable environment.

Got a source for all those assumptions you're bandying about, or...?

 

[DoNotLet2]

If I don't reply then I'm sorry but I don't have anything to add.

Am I allowed to post controversial opinions?

I believe that yes if it's not against the Rules. Just stating without anything bad should be ok.

IMHO - I'd take an alternate lifestyle set of parents any day if I were a kid being shuffled around to different foster care centers or parents.

Sorry I don't understand.

Got a source for all those assumptions you're bandying about, or...?

Yes please. I want the source too.

 

[hoping to lose hope]

There have only been two studies I have read regarding the topic of outcomes for children raised by homosexuals and both conflicted so they are of no use.
What we do know is that foster care is not ideal and does leave children with issues and in my mind it leads me to think ideally homosexuals should adopt as even with homosexual mensover representation of abusing children sexually foster care is worse.
My personal opinion is we should not infringe on anyones freedom so if gays want to have babies let them.
In a perfect world everyone would agree not to reproduce and we would exterminate all life on earth as the ultimate humane act.
FYI I can barely function at the moment and would like to have a critical discussion later on in the week where we can examine everything if you do wish to do so.
Sorry OP I thought I would share an opinion regardless of not backing it up but if you like I can seek to show the sources and reasoning which leads to such a position at a later date.
I usually keep out of debates when I am foggy brained

 

[Nymph]

They should be able to if they want to, it doesn't matter what gender the parents are. What children need is loving parents that will take care of them and give them affection. There's so many fucked up children who's parents weren't homosexual. I wish more children could have loving parents and not be corrupted.

 

[Iloveyouall]

I don't care if homosexuals want kids or not. As long as kids are in a caring and good environment I guess that's enough to answer the question.
What I am more concerned about is why they want kids or more what are they are going to do to have that kid ? I understand that most people want to have babies to raise their kids from the start, to give them the better chances. Growing in orphanages is not easy and some kids there can end up with traumas or lack basic affection in their early age and that can leave marks. It doesn't change the fact that those kids need caring parents and a safe environment as well as a baby.

What I don't want to see (even if it already exist unfortunately) is worldspread baby factories like it was a normal thing. The matter is not just about homosexual parenting, heterosexual couples pay for those factories as well as a simple service like they would buy a fucking car. I'm counscious I'm out of the question here but who are the most subject to buy those services ? Homosexual couples for obvious reasons. Ok women can do whatever they want with their body and have douzens of infants that they then sell to various couples. Ok you can pay a clinic to inseminate a woman in India and the clinic will give her healthcare during the pregnancy and pay her a year of salary (based on Indian salary of course). You know you can pay to inseminate two women as a guarantee because there is always a risk something goes wrong during a pregnancy. "Come on, we're not going to wait 9 more month to have our little Billy, the room is already painted and we already booked a place in a very well reputable day nursery."
You know you can give a little bonus under the table to the doctor so he can change the baby eye color to match with your wallpaper or your car paint too.

So this debate actually brings me way more question that may not be related but that actually are. Homosexuals are as fucked up as heterosexuals, they don't have any more ethic than the others.
Not even talking about the fact that most people have kids and say "it's an awesome experience, it's so cool, my baby is so cute.", oh yeah ? Ask those same people in 5 years, ask them in 10, ask them in 15 years and see their answers...

So yeah, homosexuals and heterosexuals can raise kids but there need to be an absolute priority to the kids who are already in orphanages. Sorry if I kinda hijacked the topic.

 

[DoNotLet2]

Sorry if I don't reply to everything but many of your arguments are the same/similar.

There have only been two studies I have read regarding the topic of outcomes for children raised by homosexuals and both conflicted so they are of no use.
What we do know is that foster care is not ideal and does leave children with issues and in my mind it leads me to think ideally homosexuals should adopt as even with homosexual mensover representation of abusing children sexually foster care is worse.
My personal opinion is we should not infringe on anyones freedom so if gays want to have babies let them.
In a perfect world everyone would agree not to reproduce and we would exterminate all life on earth as the ultimate humane act.
FYI I can barely function at the moment and would like to have a critical discussion later on in the week where we can examine everything if you do wish to do so.
Sorry OP I thought I would share an opinion regardless of not backing it up but if you like I can seek to show the sources and reasoning which leads to such a position at a later date.
I usually keep out of debates when I am foggy brained

No, it's okay I'm also not fine when it's not weekend.
Sorry but what's here controversial? I think you share opinion with many people above your post and I agree. It's way better to be in a normal homosexual family rather than in a foster care.

What I don't want to see (even if it already exist unfortunately) is worldspread baby factories like it was a normal thing. The matter is not just about homosexual parenting, heterosexual couples pay for those factories as well as a simple service like they would buy a fucking car. I'm counscious I'm out of the question here but who are the most subject to buy those services ? Homosexual couples for obvious reasons. Ok women can do whatever they want with their body and have douzens of infants that they then sell to various couples. Ok you can pay a clinic to inseminate a woman in India and the clinic will give her healthcare during the pregnancy and pay her a year of salary (based on Indian salary of course). You know you can pay to inseminate two women as a guarantee because there is always a risk something goes wrong during a pregnancy. "Come on, we're not going to wait 9 more month to have our little Billy, the room is already painted and we already booked a place in a very well reputable day nursery."
You know you can give a little bonus under the table to the doctor so he can change the baby eye color to match with your wallpaper or your car paint too.

Tbh you are actually the one who didn't off topic but I didn't want to be rude xD I wanted to see right-winged arguments being broken and you are the only one who said an argument against.
Ok so if I understand well you're afraid of people mass producing babies in a way that those babies would be perfect.

First of all why is producing perfect babies bad at all? Imagine you have bad genes but you want a healthy kid. You don't want/can't adopt. What would you do? Make an ill child who won't make it to its 18th or would you rather manipulate child's genes in order to make them healthy? I mean you can't program your child to think the way you want. I don't think that would be ever possible. So you can change just the physical traits.

Second of all this isn't cheap. And the wealthy don't face the limitations anyway. I doubt it will be ever possible for not affluent people to mass produce babies. Ok maybe one. But not a lot. Unless we find a way to make it inexpensive but developing such technology will take much time.

Third of all I don't want to discriminate everybody but I think we all value our western culture. I'm not saying non western cultures are bad but we want to preserve ourselves it's normal. And they bear more children than we. Much more. What if they overtake us all? Because there will be too few of us that the western culture will simply die out? Maybe mass producing babies is actually good so we won't die out?

Fourth of all about orphanages. Idk how it's in other countries but I have heard that in my country (Poland) many children from orphanages cannot be adopted because of their legal status. So for example both "parents" are abusive and cannot afford basic needs but they still want the rights and the child. So the matter goes to the court and it takes years because if such person pretends to care about a child it's an argument not to deplete them from the rights fully. So you visit your child twice a year and they can't cut you out... So it's not like those children are not wanted. But maybe it's just here and of course I know nothing.

 

[Iloveyouall]

Sorry if I don't reply to everything but many of your arguments are the same/similar.


No, it's okay I'm also not fine when it's not weekend.
Sorry but what's here controversial? I think you share opinion with many people above your post and I agree. It's way better to be in a normal homosexual family rather than in a foster care.


Tbh you are actually the one who didn't off topic but I didn't want to be rude xD I wanted to see right-winged arguments being broken and you are the only one who said an argument against.
Ok so if I understand well you're afraid of people mass producing babies in a way that those babies would be perfect.

First of all why is producing perfect babies bad at all? Imagine you have bad genes but you want a healthy kid. You don't want/can't adopt. What would you do? Make an ill child who won't make it to its 18th or would you rather manipulate child's genes in order to make them healthy? I mean you can't program your child to think the way you want. I don't think that would be ever possible. So you can change just the physical traits.

Second of all this isn't cheap. And the wealthy don't face the limitations anyway. I doubt it will be ever possible for not affluent people to mass produce babies. Ok maybe one. But not a lot. Unless we find a way to make it inexpensive but developing such technology will take much time.

Third of all I don't want to discriminate everybody but I think we all value our western culture. I'm not saying non western cultures are bad but we want to preserve ourselves it's normal. And they bear more children than we. Much more. What if they overtake us all? Because there will be too few of us that the western culture will simply die out? Maybe mass producing babies is actually good so we won't die out?

Fourth of all about orphanages. Idk how it's in other countries but I have heard that in my country (Poland) many children from orphanages cannot be adopted because of their legal status. So for example both "parents" are abusive and cannot afford basic needs but they still want the rights and the child. So the matter goes to the court and it takes years because if such person pretends to care about a child it's an argument not to deplete them from the rights fully. So you visit your child twice a year and they can't cut you out... So it's not like those children are not wanted. But maybe it's just here and of course I know nothing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against homosexual couples raising kids, I have no problem with that. I just say that homosexual couples are more subject to use those services of baby factories because they can't biologicaly have kids but heterosexual couples use those services as well too but on a lesser extent.
I'm afraid that these baby factories will become a more and more big businesses in the future.

If we had a way to fix or prevent misformations directly in the genetic code, of course we should use those techniques to make kids who have a chance to live "normal" lives. Thing is we are not there yet technologically. Probably in the near future we will be able to do it but we're not there yet. Of course we need to start somewhere so I guess being able to change skin or eye color is a start at least.

All of this isn't cheap, you're right but as the business is growing, the costs of such services will reduce as more and more companies will compete on that market. So in a near future, don't worry, the costs will reduce a lot.

I understand your concern about the "great replacement" as some rightist theorise it too but those other cultures become more and more western everyday already. Western culture win on every level because the base of this culture is individualism and autodetermination or more simply said "FREEDOM". And people love freedom, no matter their cultures. All cultures mutate everyday and even in traditional countries we see more and more "civil rights" movements growing slowly. There is a worldwide aspiration for freedom and by extent capitalism and no countries can really fight against that. On the long run, more and more traditional cultures will just cease to exist because they just won't be able to produce enough Money.

Orphanages are kinda the same in a lot of countries. It's known that it's actually easier to buy a kid in a third world country or via a baby factory than to adopt a child. That's a big problem that participate in the growth of the baby factory business or even the child trafficking. Governments don't give a shit about kids, they cost money and don't vote so why would they care ? So yeah that's part of the issue. There need to be a more easy and efficient way to place those kids in "good" families and governments should work on changing the orphanage systems obviously.

My concern is more about how our modern societies consider kids and what it is to raise a kid. Nowaday I feel it's like just buying a new car or a new home and I'm disgusted by that. Thing is it doesn't seem like it's changing in the good way. Kids are more and more considered as consumer goods as well as human body. Well, capitalism, "we live in a society" blah blah blah

 

[Acopia]

As a Christian, I would've always said no.

However, I have many friends who were raised in foster care and someone once said to me:
"What would be better: a child being raised in foster care with no stability and being bounced from house to house, or that child being raised within one loving household by a homosexual couple who loved them?"

When I considered this, my instincts changed dramatically. Plus, I know many homosexual couples who would provide a more stable environment than some heterosexual couples.

End of the day, if an adult or adults can provide a loving, safe home for a child, who am I to say that's wrong? God would be all for children being raised in loving environments regardless of sexuality!

- Acopia

 

[Deleted member 23374]

As a Christian, I would've always said no.

However, I have many friends who were raised in foster care and someone once said to me:
"What would be better: a child being raised in foster care with no stability and being bounced from house to house, or that child being raised within one loving household by a homosexual couple who loved them?"

When I considered this, my instincts changed dramatically. Plus, I know many homosexual couples who would provide a more stable environment than some heterosexual couples.

End of the day, if an adult or adults can provide a loving, safe home for a child, who am I to say that's wrong? God would be all for children being raised in loving environments regardless of sexuality!

- Acopia

Thank you.

 

[NodusTollens]

Yes! Statistics are greatly against heterosexual couples but people have their biases against homosexuals because homosexuality isn't default.

People tend to fear what's different, sadly.

 

[SuicidallyCurious]

My view is that its not the best. As someone who has homosexual tendencies I think the traditional family setting creates the best outcome for children and that is born out in medical literature, the children that come out of that setup tend to thrive better on a lot of common metrics most of us would call "good". However I don't think it should be illegal, i Just think it is not ideal and there is a massive surplus of unwanted children in the world so its better than nothing.

 

[Antigonish]

I would like to think, if I dont CTB, that i might one day get married and adopt children.

 

[Bauhaus]

I gave it some thought regarding bi-people and I might indeed have exaggerated the polygamous part.
Out of curiosity I typed "bisexuals having kids" in Google:
Here's a thread about it on Quora: What is it like to be bisexual and have kids?
So it seems less a problem for the kids than I thought.