We just saw on Strollerderby that John McCain, an adoptive father himself, recently said the following, as quoted in the New York Times, "I think that we've proven that both parents are important in the success of a family so, no, I don't believe in gay adoption." Strollerderby goes into all the reasons why this is ludicrous, and how gay adoption has been shown again and again to produce kids just as happy and healthy as those in straight adoptive homes. If you want to humanize this topic, just check out this amazingly great blog by two men who are foster parents to a toddler.
But it reminded us of something John Edwards (remember him?) said back in the day.
In that seminal debate discussion of gay rights led by Tim Russert, Edwards said:
I suspect my two younger children, Emma Claire, who's 9, and Jack, who's 7, will reach the same conclusion that my daughter Cate, who's 25, has reached, which is she doesn't understand why her dad is not in favor of same-sex marriage. And she says her generation will be the generation that brings about the great change in America on that issue.
He may be right. Because it's not just Democratic kids who don't have a problem with gay marriage; plenty of Republican children are as socially liberal as foxy Meghan McCain (heck, she even watches bisexual dating show A Shot at Love, as GQ discovered).
We'd be willing to bet that in another generation or two gay marriage will not only be legal, but also that people will look back and wonder what all the fuss was about.
Reader Comments ( Page 7 of 30)
91. My partner and I will be able to offer much more to our adoptive child than many heterosexual couples could possibly offer. Regardless of whether or not one is "repulsed" and in spite of some of the ardent protests; gay couples will continue to adopt.
Anthony at 10:42PM on Jul 18th 2008
92. Sex is so much more than genital/genital contact. Learn this, you may see an improvement in your love life.
mac at 5:50PM on Jul 18th 2008
xxxx
it's in the bible too.
Clif Kuplen at 12:15AM on Jul 19th 2008
93. Gays can make great parents? My lazy a** gay ex-husband has had our 17 year old daughter for 15 days this summer and has taken no days off while she is there visiting him. He comes home after work and he is there on the weekend. He gave her the reason that he "Just got a promotion and can't take time off."
Cindy at 1:46AM on Jul 19th 2008
94.
Don't you just hate it when those lazy ass gays won't take a day off work, Cindy?
?(93 makes no sense, lazy folks don't work)?
mac at 3:10AM on Jul 19th 2008
95. I am whole-heartedly in favor of gay adoption. I mean, all the stereotypical and thinly veiled bigoted comments aside, let's discuss what's best for the kids. A stable home and good parents, be it one, two, twenty, gay, straight or any combination of the above, is always better than a dysfunctional or abusive home with bad parents, hetero or otherwise. So long as the household is stable, the kid is loved and provided for and knows no wanting for love, attention or support, who cares whether the parents are gay, straight, single or mixed race? A person is a person, no matter what, and every person should have the same rights to love, marriage and children. Simple as that.
As far as gay couples and their activities behind closed doors, as someone pointed out, it was pretty gross to imagine any two parents having sex, so why should it be about gay or straight? Parents having sex is gross, bottom line. And children will learn what they are taught. If they are taught love, they learn love, if they are taught bigotry, they learn bigotry. If they grow up with two dads, aside from learning acceptance, they will learn to ignore stupid people. People catch hell for being a different color, different nationality, religion or different period. Stupid, narrow-minded people will always find a reason to make you miserable. You can either learn to adapt, or let the idiots drag you down to their level and beat you with their experience. *gets down off soap box* Thank you.
Sketch at 4:41AM on Jul 19th 2008
96. A heterosexual marriage is the best environment in which to raise children--when it's working, just as total abstenance from sexual intercourse is the best method of preventing pregnancy--when it works. The problem lies in the fact that, by conservative estimates, one has a failure rate of over forty-five percent, and the other has a failure rate of over seventy-five percent, and when heterosexual marriage and abstenance fail, they are the worst methods to accomplish their objectives. This birth control method is cited here as an analogy, and because those who tout the heterosexual-marriage-only method of raising children are the same ones who promote the abstenance-only method of birth control. They are wrongheaded on both subjects.
Most of us were raised, at least for some period, outside the marriage of our birth parents. Some of us have had parents that were never married, or were divorced or separated. Some have had a parent or parents die. Some children are abandoned by birth parents, and while many are subsequently adopted, some are not. Some children are fortunate enough to have a caring step-parent assist in their upbringing, but some step-parents have indifferent, poor, or abusive relationships with their children or step-children. There are children being raised by grandparents, other relatives, foster parents, or same-sex couples. In addition to unsuccessful marriages, there are many ailing marriages which have not yet failed, but are contributing to dysfunctional families. Having a family is only incidental to most people's desire for an emotional and sexual relationship with another person, and those lifetime commitments are often abbreviated.
Clearly then, many children are raised in less than ideal situations just because their parents have not succeeded at marriage. Only a shrinking minority of children are raised in that elusive family of "family values" fame or notoriety. Couples don't choose matrimony primarily because they want to raise children. There are no convincing arguments why same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry or to raise children, either by adoption or by virtue of one being a birth parent. There are no ethics of conscience or reason which prohibit any couple from realizing their desire for a monogomous emotional and sexual relationship and lifetime commitment. Only the ethics of control developed by belief systems which allow believers to assume privilege over others, can lay claim to that prohibition.
Natural Puppy at 5:28AM on Jul 19th 2008
97. I am the single mother of an adopted son. He came home when he was 7 days old. He was addicted to heroin and crack. He had no prenatal care, his biological mother was homeless and a prostitute and had alreay lost custody of one child due to abuse and neglect. My son's story is not the worst I have heard. There are many married, heterosexual families who adopt, which is wonderful for these children who needs homes, but there are just not enough of them. At the time of son's birth and emergency placement (the hospital needed to discharge him and no one from his biological family wanted him) the county had to choose a family for this child based on the ones that were available. They go through a process and select what they believe is best for the particular child in need. I do not know the facts of the families that were available but I know these two things: there were no 2 parent heterosexual families interested/available in him and I was deemed the best fit for him. Does John McCain assume that because I do not provide a father for my son that he would be better off with his homeless, single biological mother, or that he should sit in a group home somewhere until a heterosexual couple is ready to adopt him?
By the way, my son is doing amazingly well. He was just tested and is gifted. He is such a happy little boy and as his mother I take partial credit for the fun, stimulating and happy childhood environment I have provided for him.
Bridget at 7:35AM on Jul 19th 2008
98. Sorry folks, the Bible does say that men laying down with men is an abomination before the Lord. If that doesn't set well, it also says in the last days, good would be regarded as evil and evil as good. I'd say we are there based on so call Christian quotes. We are permitted to judge that which God has judged as wrong. If that isn't so, then you would have to throw out our entire legal system that was based on the 10 commandments. Homosexual marriage and adoption is therefore, something I won't accept. I agree with John McCain. Just because the crowd says something is ok doesn't make it so. Last I looked, our constitution allows free speech. Those who disagree can (but should do so respectifully). As to many comments I have read, there is plenty of judging going on on both sides. But it is judging of persons making comments. I have stated my opinion. You can agree to disagree but it won't change it. Thank you.
Heidi at 8:39AM on Jul 19th 2008
99. Sorry, but it is not in the best interest of the children to be put in an abnormal situation. There
is a long line of 2 parent - husband and wife - family's waiting to adopt. The gays are being selfish and not putting the best interest of the children in front of their own selfish desires.
Like it or not, there is a large portion of the population who will never accept their lifestyle and the children will be subject to ridicule and pain.
DONNA at 9:02AM on Jul 19th 2008
100. There are so many ignorant so called Christians who just want to judge others and preach to them in their own narrow world view. I have met and have known gay parents, and in my estimation the ones that I have known make wonderful, caring parents. Funny how these so called "Christans" (and there is nothing Christlike about them) would rather see these children languishing in our horrid foster care system than be with people who love them and really care about them. They are also the ones who say if you don't want an abortion, than put the fetus up for adoption once it's born, but if everyone did that, there wouldn't be enough straight couples to adopt (and look at all of the foster children who would be waiting for adoption too) we know that while these types talk the talk, they don't walk the walk and that these so called "Christians" wouldn't be willing to get off of their soapbox and adopt these children. So what happens to them? Put them in orphanages until a straight, Christian couple comes along? They would be waiting forever. I mean, if these "Christians" were actually raising these kids, (and actually,it isn't such a bad thing that they don't when you think about it) who would picket the abortion clinics and be wasting all of their time trying to keep loving couples from marrying and adopting? It shows that these so called Christians want to judge and ridicule people who are different from them, and do not want to have any part in the solutuion to the problem of unwanted children, they just want to yap and torture people whose are not living their lives the way that they are. Silly, stupid people who want to create problems to which they won't help with the solutions for. A sad, demented bunch, who if there is a Satan and a hell, will surely find out that they were on the wrong side of things when they die if there is a truly just God.
Jan at 10:27AM on Jul 19th 2008
101. Yes, there are many heterosexual christian couples waiting to adopt healthy INFANTS. But where are they when it comes to the children over the age of 6 and those who have been abused, molested and exposed to drugs in utero? Sure, there will always be good people out there to welcome these children into their families, but there are simply not enough heterosexual married couples to do so.
According to the Bible Jesus said to care for the orphans and widows. He also said to take the plank out of your own eye before judging others. While your sin of choice may be judging, lying, looking lustfully at someone of the other sex to whom you are not married, it is no different, according to the Bible, than a man lying down with another man. Sin is sin. We're all called to care for the orphans and widows regardless of which sins we ALL commit EVERYDAY.
Don't talk yourself into thinking you are somewhere more blamess, that is dangerous ground, especially for christians who will be judged by the same measure they judge others.
Bridget at 10:24AM on Jul 19th 2008
102. Help me understand
Those who claim to be wholly religious, Christian mostly, don't use condoms when committing "sexual sinful pleasures." (I guess condoms are more sinful than the sexual act)
Then they don't have abortions because they too are sinful
Then they give up their babies for adoption, refusing to take responsibility for their actions.
Then they object when a loving homosexual couple is willing to adopt their unwanted child? Tell me, how is this beneficial for a society who really does nothing for these unwanted children's most valuable need, LOVE?
goddess1prevail at 10:26AM on Jul 19th 2008
103. In these blogs heterosexual individuals indicate they are supportive of gay adoption but also indicate the best, preferred situation would be to place children with heterosexual couples. Who says? My partner and I can provide our child with those things in life that far exceed what most heterosexual couples could only dream of providing their children financially. We also can provide our child with a stable, loving home and raise happy and healthy children. Heterosexuals are hardly in a position to lecture the gay community on child rearing and marriage-most heterosexuals have failed miserably at both. Honestly, my hope is that my community will stop believing the crap that so many heterosexuals spew. From what I have seen in these blogs, the more I am coming to realize that many heterosexuals are largely inferior to homosexuals in most areas of life.
Anthony at 10:28AM on Jul 19th 2008
104. With yor essay in mind, one could argue that all rapists, murderers, child molesters, thieves, should all get free passes because "God loves everyone." Sorry, but you revisionists need to eat a little of your own crow pie. Each one of them can present the case that their "God's children, and shouldn't be persecuted. No matter how long you stay in someone's face or "act up," 'gayism' will never be considered a natural/normal act. Eighty percent of the rest of the world can't all be wrong when it scorns homoosexual conduct.
Lizard
How is it that you liken the consensual acts of adults (same sex or otherwise) with those who would commit acts of violence? Really. I would like to know.
Tim Martin at 12:38PM on Jul 19th 2008
105. Anthony:
Just because one makes room in their argumnts for other points of view does not make them spewers of crap or inferior.
Bridget at 11:06AM on Jul 19th 2008