Blocking Gay Adoptions Hurts Kids

WSJ ^ | 3/21/2002 | AL HUNT

[mombonn]

Imagine breaking up families and sentencing thousands of kids to perpetual foster care. Yet, under the guise of family values, that's exactly what some social conservatives would do.

Groups like the Family Research Council, and the Traditional Values Coalition, headed by renowned hate monger Lou Sheldon, want to deny gays and lesbians the right to adopt children. Unfortunately this put-these-kids-last posture has the backing of both President Bush and his brother, Florida Governor Jeb Bush.

[mombonn]

How he can compare gay adoption to transracial adoption is beyond me. But, he has to find some way to praise clintbilly, and bash Bush.

[FreeTally]

I had to stop reading when the author used "hate-mongerer" in the second paragraph. Im surprised it took so long for that phrase to come out.

[mombonn]

the author used "hate-mongerer"

Al Hunt need only look in the mirror to see the real "hate-monger".

[American in Israel]

Imagine breaking up families and sentencing thousands of kids to perpetual foster care. Yet, under the guise of family values, that's exactly what some social conservatives would do.

What a bunch of horse pucky. With the long lines for adoptions this is a non starter. Gays and liberals whine a lot alike. Where is the BARF Alert!

[harpseal]

Obviously Mr. hunt has never been through teh adoption agency nightmare. The law may say it is permissible to have interracial adoption but just try to get one through the system. In states such as Connecticut there is a preference for homosexual adoptive parents and for homosexual foster parents. I have a question for Mr. Hunt "If there is such a dearth of heterosexual adoptive parents why are the waiting lists for a child so damn long?" No there are not long waiting lists for children who have aids or some other disease that means a parent knows up front that they are adopting a child under sentence of death. My late wife and knew some people that did adopt such a child but not everyone has that high a ration of sainthood.

The children going to homosexual adoptive parents are the ones for whom the waiting lists are in place. Homosexual adoptive parents do not have to wait. This is the affirmitive action nightmare that is harming little ones.

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

[mombonn]

Where is the BARF Alert!

AL HUNT = BARF ALERT!

[HamiltonJay]

There is little doubt a child is better off in a loving environment than when not in one. The question however is not whether these children should be in this environment but whether the state will allow the adoption of these children by their caregivers. The state is not taking children from homosexual foster parents... it is not denying these homes from being foster parents.... it is however not allowing them to be formal and legal parents. This is a very important distinction.

Present me with reason adoption should be legalized and we can talk, presenting me with these are good people is not one. I do not doubt these adults love for the children in their care, and the state is recognizing that these individuals are indeed providing good care for these children by allowing them to live and continue to live with them.... what they are not doing is allowing them to be legally the parents of these children. They are "foster" parents, but not parents at least legally... o(f course I don't think any state agency can tell you who truly you feel your parents are if you are the child in this situation you are going to bond and love as parents those you choose with or without the states ok or permission)... so what is the legal requirement of definition of being a parent? Don't throw the emotion at me, the true legal requirement and definition.... then once that is known a true debate can be made.

This article is about emotion, and it is next to impossible to keep emotion out when you are talking about children without parents I know.

[Psalm 73]

Groups like the Family Research Council, and the Traditional Values Coalition, headed by renowned hate monger Lou Sheldon

Of course, anyone who doesn't think the way Al Hunt thinks is a hate monger - this is the maddening part of liberals' hypocrisy.
Just the act of calling someone a "hate monger" is intolerant.
Like when they refer to (real) conservatives as "Nazi's" - that is such a slanderous and derogatory term, but they toss it about like...well, don't get me started on that...

[Antoninus]

Al Hunt is an idiot. Gays make no better parents than they do priests. For the government to consign a defenseless child into the care of individuals with a mental disorder (SSAD) is an disgraceful act of political capitulation. What's next? Adoption by unrepentant alcoholics who show up to the interview 3 sheets to the wind? How about psychotics? They can provide a 'loving' household as well, I'm sure.

The NYTimes has lost any claim to rationality.

[L.N. Smithee]

With the work of Bill Clinton, America's most pro-adoption president,

Uh...which president was "anti-adoption?"

[T'wit]

Already, all the trained seals like Al Hunt are barking in unison. It's the new liberal line, folks -- if you prohibit gay adoption, the kids will be sent to foster families. And you know how those are! Every morning the wicked foster mother will force them to eat gruel before they are sent to toil for fourteen hours in the coal mines!

Two glaring flaws with their theory, for starters. One: normal couples are waiting in line to adopt. There are loads of good homes for those kids. Two: Foster parenting is under government supervision and works pretty well. It is not a replacement for adoption but a way to take care of kids -- usually temporarily -- when there are legal, medical or other valid reasons that rule out adoption. There is not the faintest showing that the kids would be better off with gay adoptive parents. On the contrary, there are good reasons to think a foster home would be markedly healthier.

Note that this liberal braying is really a left-handed way to promote gay marriage as "legitimage" (and to raid employee pension and insurance benefits that were collected for spouses).

[Always Right]

With the work of Bill Clinton, America's most pro-adoption president

How can you be both the Pro-abortion President and America's most pro-adoption President?

[Clint N. Suhks]

There is little doubt a child is better off in a loving environment than when not in one.

Oh really? We should have to grant equal access for adoption to those who openly practice incest and bestiality; they too can offer a loving environment. What about their needs? I guess they’d be better off as long as it’s a loving, committed and consensual relationship, right?

Putting children in households where perversion is practiced is child abuse.

[SouthCarolinaKit]

This lockstep DNC jacka__ is never worth readying. What he should say is that 'allowing' gay adoptions hurts kids because it deprives them of having normal parents: a married couple with one male, daddy, and one female, mommy! Lots of such couples are available for each adoptee and it's tragic to allow them to go to anyone else!

[Gargantua]

Imagine breaking up families and sentencing thousands of kids to parental homosexual indoctrination.

[log_cabin_gop_boy]

Putting children in households where perversion is practiced is child abuse.

My partner and I adopted two siblings 15 years ago after their bio parents were convicted on multiple counts of injury to a child, indecency with a child and drug related charges. At the time of the adoption, the boys had physically recovered from their injuries but emotional scarring took years to overcome. My partner and I worked hard, spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on medical care, psychiatric care and private schools but more than any thing provided them with love and support. Today both are at the University of Texas earning 4.0 GPA's while majoring in chemical engineering and architecture. If we had not stepped in and adopted our boys they would either be dead, in jail or would have been raised by the State of California on your tax dollars and very likely would not be a successful and well rounded as they are today.

Before you question my perversion you may want to ask a child that was adopted by gay parents what they are thankful that they were adopted. However, if you are totally opposed to gay parents adopting children you should adopt children of your own.

[Mr. Thorne]

c'mon there, mombonn. Al Hunt? Where's the Barf Alert!?

That'll be fifty lashes with a wet noodle...

You should know better!

[HamiltonJay]

Why don't you read my entire post before you reply, might help you keep from putting your foot in your mouth.

[log_cabin_gop_boy]

How many children have you adopted?

[Clint N. Suhks]

God bless you and your success in raising what appears to be wonderful children. My point is that your situation is not the “ideal” for children to be permanently and legally assigned to and to do so knowingly is abuse, hard cases make poor law. You may think these children would have not turned out as well as they did without you, and perhaps they may not have, but you prevented the opportunity for the “ideal” family to have that happen. I’ll pray for you and your partner to find reparation.