Thursday, November 1, 2012

Gay Adoption is GOOD!!!!!



http://www.trbimg.com/img-551e951d/turbine/sfl-should-gay-adoption-be-difficult-20150403 




**


"Gay Adoption: an Ideal Option for Foster Children despite Social Persecution"

By Jordan Adorno

     When it comes to the question of where to place orphaned children left in the dilemma of foster care, adoption of each child into suitable families whom, after having been willingly scrutinized, are waiting to adopt their own sons and daughters is always the most ideal goal. With over 500,000 children existing as unresolved burdens in the system throughout their childhood years, it appears transparent that new methods of integrating these children into healthy, deserving families must be pertinently evaluated (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2009). However, though it seems logical that homosexuals would be considered a highly marketable demographic for adoption,gays wishing to become parents are still victims of slow-to-progress, prejudicial legal complexes,as well as the adoption agencies conveniently hiding behind said complexes to fit their homophobic bias, too. Illogically, however, even after positive results from countless studies have sufficiently demonstrated that children of gay parents are under no greater hazard whatsoever (later discussed), homophobia in many parts of the USA still disallows gays from potentially decreasing the percentage of children in foster care by substantial margins.

     It is preliminarily necessary to any Pro-Gay argument to address the many myths which have rampantly fueled an inaccurate perception of gays and lesbians as deviant dangers to society. Because of the rabid efforts by Christianity – the religion which roughly 75 % of America identifies as – homophobia heavily misleads the nation with lies about gay people, which then makes it extremely difficult to accurately restructure society’s consequentially perpetuated discrimination. In terms of intellectual, objective research, though, the rabid organizations seeking to prevent gays from receiving equal rights are unfounded because for decades world-renowned credible institutions like the American Psychological Association, the largest body of mental research nationally, have concluded that gays are as normal as straights. (For further detail, see "Lesbian & Gay Parents & Their Children: Summary Of Research Findings".) In an article entitled “Sexual Orientation, Parents, & Children”, the APA details their resolution after carefully analyzing and asserting dozens of research studies’ specific findings; questioning the APA and its passionate, urgent opposing of all cases regarding legal and social discrimination against gays would be absurd in itself, but nevertheless the APA exceedingly compiled an expansion of empirical research data dating from the early 1970s to the article’s publication year, 2004 (American Psychological Association Council, 2004).


      If a “concern" of anti-gay Americans is to scrutinize the research’s relevance, it is well-rebutted by numerous other, most namely research institutions, too, referenced within the American Psychological Association article. The Department of Children and Families, who deal with helping abused children in all kinds of disturbed situations by, quite frequently, relocating them to foster homes, is one great example of this (APA Council, 2004). Foster parents are chosen very scrupulously by state-approved professionals,so DCF is obviously very credible. Research compiled by J. Stacey and T.J. Biblarz, contributors to American Sociological Review respectively, correlatively found that gays and lesbians are NOT any less competent, and thereby no more dysfunctional, as parents than straights are, as detailed in "Does sexual orientation of parents matter?" very informatively (Biblarz & Stacey; 2001). The same opinion was voiced from the American Civil Liberties Union in the late nineties - itself one of the most powerful machines on human rights whose power has been useful in many legal interventions – and rightfully they have stepped in on excessive cases of homophobia on many specific occasions, too (American Civil Liberties Union, 1999). Slow-to-change lawmakers should accept the ethical, renownedly respectable research from these prestigious institutions and even be keen to help correct ignorance in America concerning homophobia, as opposed to perpetuating baseless, archaic prejudices.

    The culmination of this small selection of compelling facts should be weighed in the context of how powerful the presence of homophobia is in American culture. All of these empirically-based research organizations on mental health, human rights, child welfare and so forth are having their research, all of which have concluded in favor of gays and lesbians, mysteriously neglected, and why? Curiously, as noted previously all of this isn’t new or “cutting-edge” research as some of these positive correlations existed in the 1970s! Hence, it is too ironic how the agenda of antigay activists has less to do with concern based on fact and far more to do with concern based on reprehensible hate, and therefore should be discarded. In a culture that has made strong turnarounds from slavery and the patriarchal ownership of women, it’s hardly a respectable statement that America should continue to accept evil when hundreds of thousands of parentless children are at risk. It is a human instinct in most beings to pass on their identities by creating families, to appreciate the beauty of children, and America should extend that right to ALL contributing members of society regardless of sexual orientation!


References

American Civil Liberties Union, Initials. (06, April 1999). Fact sheet:

Overview of lesbian and gay parenting, adoption and foster care. Retrieved from
American Psychological Association Council. (2004, July 30). Sexual Orientation,
Parents, and Children. Retrieved from
Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2009). Foster Care statistics. Retrieved from
Stacey, J. & Biblarz, T.J. (2001). (How) Does sexual orientation of parents matter?
American Sociological Review, 65, 159-183.

**


  


  

No comments:

Post a Comment