--- "Adam C. Lipscomb" wrote: <snip> > You've taken the classic boob's line, "God created > Adam and Eve, not > Adam and Steve!" and slapped a new coat of pain on > it, but it's still > bereft of real substance, and just as ridiculous. > While a man and a > woman are required for the initial act, it does not > necessarily follow > that both sexes are required for every step after > that.
And nowadays only the 'products' of a man and a woman are required to create a zygote, although a woman is still needed to carry the pregnancy to term. > I have yet to > see compelling evidence that gay adoptive parents, > screened to the > same degree as a heterosexual couple, are less fit > as parents. Agreed, although if I were counseling such a couple today I'd advise them to live in a supportive community such as one of the big port cities (New York, San Fran, New Orleans etc.) or other progressive places like Austin, to cut down on the bullying such children would be subjected to in, say, Pineville, Louisiana. Also, I think it is important to have role models of the opposite gender available* for the children (aunts, uncles, family friends etc.). *By this I mean that the children get to interact with them on at least a weekly basis. "Cameron and Cameron's reanalysis of published data in 2002 indicates children being raised in a home environment with at least one homosexual parent report some negative consequences. However, a closer look at the information presented suggests (especially in the absence of control groups) that the negative consequences documented do not constitute major psychological trauma. Rather, they are more in the nature of the teasing and bullying that plagues any child who comes from a home that may be atypical in any fashion." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12353800&dopt=Abstract Note: you can access the abstract that reports problems via the above link; I must point out that it is a small study (N=57), and produced by the Family Research Institute, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO -- a _very_ conservative group with a definite agenda. [Colorado Springs is the home of 'Focus on the Family' and other arch-conservative groups that IMO have a 1950's view of the world.] If you enter "homosexual parents" in the 'search' box, ~24 studies come up - nearly all of the ones that show a negative effect on the children are from this same group. Note also that adopted children do tend to have more psychological problems at baseline, so a proper study control for adopted children of gay parents would be adopted children of heterosexual parents, not biological children of straight parents. > I think that if someone can demonstrate that they're > able to care for > a child emotionally, physically and financially, > they should be allowed to adopt. Agreed. > If two adults capable of giving informed consent > want to make a commitment to care for each other > over the long term, > they should be allowed to....A Marriage Amendment to > the Constitution would, in the > long run, be a bigger mistake than prohibition > (although for different > reasons, and with different results). A Marriage > Amendment acts to > protect a few delicate sensibilities in the face of > a change that is > moving ever closer, and will be as effective in the > long run as Jim Crow and "Separate but equal". Similar arguments were made about interracial marriages, IIRC, and while I think that 2 decades ago it was difficult for biracial children WRT bullying etc., young people like Tiger Woods show that loving parents are more important an influence than a hostile culture, and indeed they help transform that culture to one that is more open and tolerant. Debbi __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
