What do you do?

[Bini]

Yesterday I was asked about this and I thought what a great topic to discuss. I am unaware of any doctrine addressing this subject but I'm interested in what your personal thoughts are. Hopefully we can remain on topic.

Bottom line: Should a child be denied a home because of their potential adoptive parents' sexual orientation?

Now, let's place the ball in your court where your opinion could make the difference: Your child (son or daughter) is in a loving same-sex marriage. While you have expressed your belief that this lifestyle is not what God intended, the love for your child is unconditional and he remains a welcomed part of the family. In addition, your child is in a good career field, is financially stable and independent, and despite the unfavourable circumstance, his spouse is good to him. When asked how you feel about your child's lifestyle, you reply, "While I do not agree with it, I love my son and I know that he's a good man." One day, your son and his spouse approach you. They want to adopt a child, and would like you to be a personal reference, vouching for their ability to love and support a child. They need X amount of references to be considered candidates, and yours could make the difference. What do you do?

[Guest]

I hug him, express my love, and let him know that I still stand behind what is said in the Proclamation to the World.

[Finrock]

Hi Bini! I hope you are having a great day. :)

Yesterday I was asked about this and I thought what a great topic to discuss. I am unaware of any doctrine addressing this subject..."

The Family: A Proclamation To The World is one source of doctrine that addresses this subject without ambiguity.

"The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity" (emphasis added).

Regards,

Finrock

[friedmann]

I deny, stating that there are plenty of traditional married couples who are for some reason unable to bear children themselves, who should always be preferred in an adoption scenario. Living in a homosexual relationship includes the decision not to have kids in the first place, and everyone deciding on living in such a partnership should be aware of that biological consequence.

Although one could with every right mention the Family Proclamation in this context, I don't even think that it would be necessary to support my claim religiously. It's just common sense to me and I would say that my decison would be driven by it for the most part.

Other than that, I wouldn't be aware of any meaningful additional scripture references about adoption (except for Moses, given you want to call it an adoption), just about adultery. I think those are clear enough though.

[Bini]

Thanks for your thoughts.

In your opinion, does vouching that someone has the ability to love and support a child, go against A Proclamation To The World? The purpose of being a reference would be to certify just that -- their character as individuals and not what you think about their sexual orientation.

[Misshalfway]

Well, this is an interesting and complicated question. I'm not sure what I would do without the benefit of prayer and circumstances to guide me, but here are some of my thoughts.

I'm reminded of the admonition to honor our parents. I know that I've been given many examples over the years of children who "honored" their non-believing parents in one way or another.

I guess I'm wondering about how that looks like with our children as the messy-ness of life plays out.

When I think about the issues and realities surrounding adoption, I've argued in my head that while I believe all children deserve mothering and fathering in an intact, nurturing family unit, very few children actually get that. When a child has the choice of having no family, or a potentially harmful foster experience, I have considered the possibility that maybe they could be better off with gay parents. At the very least, they'd have someone to attach to who is invested in their happiness and care. The truth is that many of these "available" hetero parents aren't interested in adopting older children.

As I look at the way bishops help people. They deal with the basic temporal needs first. Then they start working on the spiritual. In thinking about better case scenarios for these older orphaned or abandoned children, I would consider "out of the box" ideas.

[Guest]

I believe that man and woman are not interchangeable. Both genders are required in the rearing of children. This is not a matter of character on the parents or the amount of love given by the parents. If man was interchanegeable with woman, then there wouldn't be a need to have "parents". Are there families that have parental challenges? Of course. Single parents are abundant in America. In the Philippines, single parents are not as much of a problem as grandparents/uncles and aunts/etc are more likely to take over the primary responsibility of raising children.

Therefore, I may love my son very much and acknowledge that he has a happy household but I will not be party to him adopting a child into same-sex parents.

Would I rather have the child end up in another non-perfect household? Well, in my opinion, one non-perfect household is not reason for me to move the child to another non-perfect household. The solution is always to increase the number of better household environements or reduce the number of abandoned children.

You know, I've applied to adopt dogs a jillion times. Denied - at all times. My household is not ideal for dogs. I know I can take care of a dog just fine. But yes, there are households with better living conditions for dogs than mine so I support the rescue's decision to deny my application. The consideration is always the welfare of the dog - not the desire of the adopters. I would like to believe that adoption agencies consider their human charges more carefuly than dog rescues with their dogs...

Edited August 3, 2012 by anatess

[Bini]

You know, I've applied to adopt dogs a jillion times. Denied - at all times. My household is not ideal for dogs. I know I can take care of a dog just fine. But yes, there are households with better living conditions for dogs than mine so I support the rescue's decision to deny my application. The consideration is always the welfare of the dog - not the desire of the adopters. I would like to believe that adoption agencies consider their human charges more carefuly than dog rescues with their dogs...

Let's say that these "better living conditions" are as follows:

- Must have fenced yard

- No children under 12

- No cats

Despite KNOWING that you can take care of a dog just fine -- you do not meet the requirements. I am talking about a homosexual couple that DOES meet all specified requirements. I believe it is in the best interest for agencies to qualify potential parents based on character versus sexual orientation. So if a couple (regardless of sexual orientation) meets the expectations for adoption -- the child should not be denied a home.

[Bini]

Pulling this back onto topic..

The adoption agency has no quarrels with the couples' sexual orientation. They are only interested in references vouching that this couple has the ability to love and support a child. In your opinion (directed to everyone), does acknowledging that a homosexual couple has the ability to love and support a child, violate the Family Proclamation To The World?

[Misshalfway]

If my gay child adopts a child of his/her own, the little person becomes my grandchild. If the issue over whether or not I write a recommendation becomes a wedge between us, how can that be good for the child? the one that is coming whether I like it or not?

[Bini]

If my gay child adopts a child of his/her own, the little person becomes my grandchild. If the issue over whether or not I write a recommendation becomes a wedge between us, how can that be good for the child? the one that is coming whether I like it or not?

Misshalfway, you're following what I'm getting at.

I need to throw in some more of my own thoughts.. Before everyone thinks I'm condoning SS marriage -- I don't. But when this question was asked the other day, I tried to think outside of myself, and outside of my judgment and condemnation. What is in the best interest of this unwanted child? I would think it is a home that can provide both love and support, regardless, of sexual orientation.

[Finrock]

We are talking about Heavenly Father's children and He (God) has decreed that his children are entitled to be born and raised in homes to a mother and a father who are lawfully married. He also wants all of his children to know, accept, and live the great Plan of Happiness he has created for us. We are here because of that plan and because of that plan only.

If a child is entitled to be born and raised in a home with a mother and a father who are lawfully married then the character of the homosexual couple becomes irrelevant. The child is always going to be better served if they are raised in a family where there is a loving mother and a loving father who are lawfully married and who live the gospel of Jesus Christ. I could not in good conscious be party to a scenario where my actions might deny a child this opportunity. I would not vouche for them because it doesn't fit God's pattern, the moral character of the couple notwithstanding.

The Plan of Salvation is the only plan approved by Heavenly Father. It is the only way. The homosexual couple does not have the ability to love and support the child the way God wants the child to be loved and supported because the homosexual couple is living a plan/pattern that is not sanctioned by God. What the adoption agency believes, feels or thinks that is contrary to God's plan in this matter is irrelevant.

Regards,

Finrock

[Guest]

Let's say that these "better living conditions" are as follows:

- Must have fenced yard

- No children under 12

- No cats

Despite KNOWING that you can take care of a dog just fine -- you do not meet the requirements. I am talking about a homosexual couple that DOES meet all specified requirements. I believe it is in the best interest for agencies to qualify potential parents based on character versus sexual orientation. So if a couple (regardless of sexual orientation) meets the expectations for adoption -- the child should not be denied a home.

They DO NOT meet the requirements. Remember what I said about male and female not being interchangeable. So, one requirement is male AND female parents. So no, I won't support adoption of a child to a single parent either, no matter how loving and of good character the single person is.

[Guest]

Misshalfway, you're following what I'm getting at.

I need to throw in some more of my own thoughts.. Before everyone thinks I'm condoning SS marriage -- I don't. But when this question was asked the other day, I tried to think outside of myself, and outside of my judgment and condemnation. What is in the best interest of this unwanted child? I would think it is a home that can provide both love and support, regardless, of sexual orientation.

Having a viewpoint that follows the Family Structure with the proven formula for joy as outlined in scripture does not make you judgemental nor condemning. The best interest of the unwanted child is to give him every opportunity to have that Family Structure. Sexual orientation is an integral part of that formula. It is not whimsy that can be omitted.

So, you say you're not condoning SS marriage... now I have to ask you... WHY? The main reason SS is not condoned by gospel standards is because it is NOT God's environment for progeny.

You're not supposed to have sex outside of marriage... WHY? The main reason is because it is NOT God's environment for progeny.

Everything else follows from that.

[Bini]

We are talking about Heavenly Father's children and He (God) has decreed that his children are entitled to be born and raised in homes to a mother and a father who are lawfully married. He also wants all of his children to know, accept, and live the great Plan of Happiness he has created for us. We are here because of that plan and because of that plan only.

If a child is entitled to be born and raised in a home with a mother and a father who are lawfully married then the character of the homosexual couple becomes irrelevant. The child is always going to be better served if they are raised in a family where there is a loving mother and a loving father who are lawfully married and who live the gospel of Jesus Christ. I could not in good conscious be party to a scenario where my actions might deny a child this opportunity. I would not vouche for them because it doesn't fit God's pattern, the moral character of the couple notwithstanding.

The Plan of Salvation is the only plan approved by Heavenly Father. It is the only way. The homosexual couple does not have the ability to love and support the child the way God wants the child to be loved and supported because the homosexual couple is living a plan/pattern that is not sanctioned by God. What the adoption agency believes, feels or thinks that is contrary to God's plan in this matter is irrelevant.

Regards,

Finrock

Finrock, thanks for your opinion.

Do you maintain this position in a rephrased scenario: Your written recommendation/signature would make the difference between a child growing up in a well rounded same-sex marriage household, versus growing up in a state/government program crowded with other unwanted children, and without any parental roles to love, rear and raise?

[Finrock]

Finrock, thanks for your opinion.

You're welcome.

Do you maintain this position in a rephrased scenario: Your written recommendation/signature would make the difference between a child growing up in a well rounded same-sex marriage household, versus growing up in a state/government program crowded with other unwanted children, and without any parental roles to love, rear and raise?

I reject the dichotomy. There are always other options. Broken secular systems do not invalidate God's plan.

Regards,

Finrock

[Bini]

Finrock and Anatess, thanks for clarifying your viewpoints.

Where I disagree is here.. I believe homosexuals can equally love (nurture) and support (financially) a child as heterosexuals can. I don't agree with the claim that one sexual orientation is more capable than another in this regards. Taking the child out of the equation, if someone were to ask me, "Does your son have the ability to love and support another human being?" -- I would say YES, absolutely. I don't think taking this stance wrongs the Family Proclamation because you're not commenting (one way or the other) on his sexual orientation -- only on who HE IS as a person.

[Guest]

But you're still essentially advocating for a scenario where a child is brought up in a home where they will never have a father, or a mother, depending on the gender of the gay couple.

[Bini]

But you're still essentially advocating for a scenario where a child is brought up in a home where they will never have a father, or a mother, depending on the gender of the gay couple.

For me, it would be a delicate situation. To deny that my son would make an excellent parent, when I know that he would, isn't right. If someone asked me, I would answer their question truthfully. Ultimately, it is up to the Lord to judge my son's life -- not me.

[Guest]

Finrock and Anatess, thanks for clarifying your viewpoints.

Where I disagree is here.. I believe homosexuals can equally love (nurture) and support (financially) a child as heterosexuals can. I don't agree with the claim that one sexual orientation is more capable than another in this regards.

Define capable. A child is more than just his emotional or his financial needs.

A single parent, for example can equally love, nurture, and support a child as anyone can. This doesn't make him/her a good environment for the raising of children. Do we have a lot of them? You bet. And America is just now seeing the tip of the iceberg on the results of this social culture. Children from divorce - same thing.

Taking the child out of the equation, if someone were to ask me, "Does your son have the ability to love and support another human being?" -- I would say YES, absolutely. I don't think taking this stance wrongs the Family Proclamation because you're not commenting (one way or the other) on his sexual orientation -- only on who HE IS as a person.

Taking the child out of the equation... sure! But like I said... the growth of a child is more than just "love and support".

Bini, okay... it really comes down to ONE thing. Why is SS marriage not condoned by God? By logic it solves more religious problems than it creates. There is a reason. And the reason centers around children.

[Finrock]

Finrock and Anatess, thanks for clarifying your viewpoints.

A pleasure. :)

Where I disagree is here.. I believe homosexuals can equally love (nurture) and support (financially) a child as heterosexuals can.

But that is not really the question or the real issue. The real question and the real issue is: Can a homosexual couple love and support a child the way God wants that child to be loved and supported? They cannot.

I don't agree with the claim that one sexual orientation is more capable than another in this regards.

This isn't my claim. My claim is that homosexual couples are incapable of loving and supporting a child the way God wants. What other criteria could possibly supersede what God wants? What else is more important in this life? Who has a better plan for his children? Who knows what is best for a child better than God does, the Father of us all?

No need to answer the questions for my sake as I'm not trying to condemn you or even necessarily to convince you. They are presented for you to ponder and think about. I respect your perspective and I understand what it is you are saying.

With Kindness,

Finrock

[Bini]

Rewinding a bit. I noticed that single parents were mentioned, and that for some, this is another case of incompetence for parenthood. I couldn't disagree more with this mindset. I think regardless of sexual orientation or unconventional family unit ("parent role" being single parent, grandparent, etc), children deserve the opportunity to a home life. And to deny a child this due to less than perfect arrangements is, personally, beyond me.

[Backroads]

In your opinion (directed to everyone), does acknowledging that a homosexual couple has the ability to love and support a child, violate the Family Proclamation To The World?

In my opinion... no.

My first reaction to your original question was "yes, I'd help". But then I had seconds thoughts about where I stand with the Procamation. I"d certainly have to do a lot of pondering and praying (not to mention get in the situation first).

But I believe the Proclamation's standards do not mean any other situation is horrible. The Proclamation tells the idea family situation of what God wants.

It does not say that all other family situations are nie unto abuse.

[Bini]

Finrock, I continue to appreciate your feedback :] I genuinely am interested in others viewpoints, and I too, don't intend to "convince" anyone. Just discussing.

This isn't my claim. My claim is that homosexual couples are incapable of loving and supporting a child the way God wants. What other criteria could possibly supersede what God wants? What else is more important in this life? Who has a better plan for his children? Who knows what is best for a child better than God does, the Father of us all?

How is the emotion of love shown any differently based on your sexual orientation? Love and compassion, is love and compassion. That is what God wants. My thoughts are that the Lord works in mysterious ways, and not always in the way which we envision. I can't imagine the Lord denying a child an opportunity to having a home and family, where otherwise, the child would have none.

[MichaelPAGuy]

In my opinion...I would rather have the child be placed with a loving and caring family, then stay un-adopted, regardless of the sexual orientation of the adoptive parents.