Citing “credible research” showing that children raised by Republican parents are more likely to be intolerant, State Sen. Bob Hagan sent out a spoof that seeks co-sponsors for a bill to ban registered Republicans from adopting children or serving as foster parents.
It follows a GOP-drafted bill - that’s not a spoof - to ban gays and lesbians from adopting or becoming foster parents.
In a memo to his Senate colleagues, the Youngstown Democrat notes that Republican-raised children tend to be “significantly wealthier than their Democrat-raised counterparts,” but “at risk for developing emotional problems, social stigmas, inflated egos, an alarming lack of tolerance for others they deem different than themselves and an air of overconfidence to mask their insecurities.”
Funny stuff as Ohio politicians get ready to vote on the serious bill.
Florida has had an anti-adoption law since 1977.
There are about 520,000 children in foster care, according to the North American Council on Adoptable Children in St. Paul. Of those, 120,000 are available for adoption, but only 50,000 find permanent homes each year.
I can’t be rational about laws this hateful. I’m a product of the system, did my time in an orphanage or two, some foster homes, and got adopted under less than optimal circumstances. But, I wonder where I’d be if I hadn’t been adopted, like any child I needed a home, a permanent place, people that were there to meet me.
To this day I have mixed feelings about my personal circumstances, my adoptive parents were ill-suited to raise kids. But, I’m grateful for what I had, I’ve no doubt I’d have been worse off without their decision to take me and my siblings in and raise us.
So when I see adoption be used almost as sense of punishment for who your parents are (or would chose to be) and as a political wedge issue, I get angry.
The spoof I believe quotes the views of Paul Cameron as head of the Family Research Institute. He is making a good living feeding religious rights groups his discredited research. Cameron has been disassociated and his research censored from key professional groups in his field; The American Psychological Association, The Nebraska Psychological Association and the American Sociological Association.
Published 2 years, 4 months ago
Search
Subscribe 
You are currently browsing the Bene Diction Blogs On weblog archives.
Related Entries
- Stepping out of our comfort zones Part II
- Contempory and Reformed Catholic blogs
- In quietness and confidence
- Hello Canada - World Vision needs your help
- Conservative Party of Canada Ad Campaign
- The Conservative Party of Canada buys into NASCAR
- Oh no, not again
- Huh? Google me this
- Trickle of religious bloggers sign up for second GodBlogCon
- Porcupine
For blog design, Wordpress or MovableType coding or blog consulting, see cre8d design.
That spoof should ruffle a few feathers — as it should. I was glad to read that this measure is unlikely to make it to law.
Why is this hateful when a family is between a husband and a wife and that marriage is between a man and woman as stated in the Bible?
I don’t believe that homosexuals are objectively bad parents. However, I don’t want children to be brought up thinking homosexuality is OK any more than I want kids brought up to believe that being a swinger is OK.
Correction: I realized that my comment could be taken to mean that I think the inclination to homosexuality is sinful. I don’t. Acting upon those impulses, however, is.
FD, loved both of your replies especially the latest :). Thanks for your insight. You worded it more perfectly than I could. I needed the correction.
What right have either of you to force your neanderthal values on people at the expense of children who just need caring homes? I would rather see a child brought up lovingly, whether by a single parent, same- or opposite-sex couples, than left in what are so often revealed to be inadequate or even abusive conditions in orphanages. And I would rather see a child brought up by a caring gay couple than by either of you two.
FD - to compare homosexuality to “swinging” is ignorant and offensive.
What’s neanderthal? FD, did state, unlike many other super fundo’s, that the inclination isn’t sinful and that objectivly they aren’t bad parents. Beth, I apologize, I didn’t read the “swinger part” fully. I would agree that analogy is harsh. I will say that many opposite couples are looking for children to adopt and to have them be adopted from other groups keeps them away from people who are husband and wife. At least FD gave a correction that needs to be taken into consideration and we shouldn’t be lumped in with those who are negative in every way toward homosexuality which is ungodly. I will say that those who say the inclinations are sin are in that category and are wrong. We must help people not hurt people. I think FD would agree with that.
Beth, your argument strikes me as throughly fallacious. First, you resort to ad hominem attack by calling your opponents neaderthals and insulting our parenting abilities. Second, you present a false dilemma. You imply that by not wanting children to be raised by active homosexuals, I do not want them to be raised in safe, loving homes. That’s quite a leap. Of course I want them to be raised in safe, loving homes. I believe, though, that part of loving children is raising them with good values.
Given the choice between an unsafe or unloving home and a safe and loving home with gay parents, I’d definitely go with the latter. Given the choice between married, but otherwise grossly immoral straight parents and gay parents who are otherwise morally upstanding, again, I’d go with the latter. Contemplating that choice, though, perpetuates your false dichotomy, though. The ideal would be a safe, loving, moral, and married stright couple. Comprimises have to be made in a prioritized order. Given what I’ve heard about how many couples desperate to adopt there are and how difficult the process is, I’d be very surprised if resorting to gay couples is even remotely necessary.
As for comparing gays to swingers, I could have picked a better analogy. How about polygamists?
Ack! My kingdom for a preview function…
BTW, kettle, my name’s pot. Insulting my worthiness to be a parent is certainly ignorant and offensive.
Agreed, FD. As a husband I too was offended.
Oh dear, you were offended, you poor little things? Now you have a tiny, infinitesimal sense of what it’s like for gay people each and every minute of their lives living in society with people like you. Your attitudes make me sick, because you really think you’re being so reasonable and Christian when you’re no better than the ignorant “fundos” from whom you try so hard to distance yourselves. I just hope your children manage to see past their upbringing to become open-minded and intellectually courageous people who do not oppress others with their ideas.
Cool it, Beth; your name calling isn’t helping.
Offended? Not exactly. I’m not offended these days by people foaming at the mouth and ranting like children. I just find it rather counterproductive. How can you ever hope to change any minds if you refuse to discuss things rationally?
I used the wrong term when I stated “offended” I appreciated FD address from Beth as being an “ad hominim attack”. I meant to agree with FD’s term when he used “insulting”. I too agree on the “discuss things rationally” part you said FD. Oppressing? I don’t see “helping people” as being “oppressing” but like FD says it is hard when you can’t discuss these things rationally. FD and Beth, if I contributed to the ranting that was not the intent. I don’t feel I did. I never thought disagreeing with someone as being offensive. I think that is how I can agree with FD on the “rational” part.
Have a look back at a similar thread on connexions - I have tried to put rational arguments, as have other people, but all I’ve found is that there is clearly no point arguing with homophobes. You will not even accept that your views are prejudiced and offensive, let alone that they are based on centuries-old ideas which have no application to today’s society. You may say that I rant like a child. I am perfectly capable of rational discussion when I choose to be. I have found it to be completely useless in dealing with people like dh, so I give myself at least the small pleasure of venting my spleen instead.
Tim - name calling? For one thing, I don’t believe I’ve used any “names”. And for another, I’m dealing with people who argue that homosexuals are second-class citizens and are responsible for AIDS (don’t believe me? Again pop back to connexions and read dh’s posts). So if I want to call them names, I will do so. It certainly helps me.
N.B. BeneD, is there something up with your stylesheet? The responses aren’t displaying properly in my browser…
dh - how much more clearly can I put it? YOU ARE NOT HELPING PEOPLE. You are making them feel unloved, despised, dirty, sinful, disgusting and depressed. That is what is offensive about your views. I hope God will forgive you, because I certainly can’t.
I’m leaving this thread. I think I’m giving up on god-blogs altogether. People like you are bad for my soul.
“I’m dealing with people who argue that homosexuals are second-class citizens and are responsible for AIDS”
I avoided that mess at connexions for a reason. Anyhow, I sincerely hope you don’t think I regard homosexuals as second-class citizens and/or responsible for AIDS.
“Baby don’ need no silver spoon,
don’ need to rub-a-dub-dub…
what apparent is a baby needs a parent who
can give that baby some love.” (Peter Alsop)
There are children - from babies to pre-teens -
in Canada, in Great Britan, in the U. S. of A… and right around this world God created -
who need the love that a parent - or parents - can give.
What does a parent’s same or opposite sex relationship have to do with their ability to parent that child? (Other than two people can (often) support each other in those moments when parenting makes one want to rip one’s hair out. *chuckle*)
My experience as a sibling to one who was adopted into our family, as an adoptive parent… and as a birth parent… says to me - in all of three of those cases - that what I desperately want is to make sure that the person being adopted is safe, healthy and loved - and has the chance to become the person that God calls them to be.
For me - if two people in a loving, covenanted relationship - be it two daddies, two mommies, or a mommy and a daddy - can offer that - then I’ll support their desire to parent.
Blessings and peace - Richard B.
(someday I’m going to learn how to spell)
Britain
*sigh*
Sorry Beth, the blog bunches up comments in IE. Try another browser or hit refresh. I’ll let my tech know.
Sorry I don’t have a preview FD.
Yeah, the swinger thing was a poor example. You’re forgiven.
I’ll fix the typo Richard. Thanks all for contributing.
Asexual, transexual, homosexual, hetrosexual, bi-sexual, ambiguous genitalia, intersex, sexual dysfunction and disorders. Unfit parents?
Beth: FYI - read the site policy for BDBO, okay? You are welcome - express yourself passionately - the policy only asks you be respectful to yourself and others. The readership here is extremely diverse, over 100 countries, media people use this as a source site, people come with various interests and from many cultures and not all are religious; some are of no faith or Muslim, Jewish, Hindu etc. and I don’t personally see courtesy in BDBO comment threads as an option.
My experience indicates DH can’t stop Beth, his obsession with homosexuality cuts off discussion and people have learned they can’t have conversations without DH reading things into what they are attempting to say - his preaching and crushing others leads even patient, emotionally readers to find difficult to remain civil.
He has indicated a willingness to read, but there is fixated ideation and I don’t know how to help him listen to others and show respect. He preaches at others here and at other blogs without listening - even none sexual topics. If I ask him to stop he blames other commenters, and they leave because they don’t need the hassle. I dont think DH grasps this blog is centrist and that mature and respectful disagreement is allowed.
DH, I don’t want to block you, but to come home to this - again - is depressing and I’m worn out. What do you think we can do to help you stop harming your position and others?
FD - I apologise for casting aspersions on your right to parent. It was a cheap shot and unworthy. The problem is, of course, that you were casting aspersions on other people’s right to parent, and I hope you can see how this explains my response, although of course it doesn’t justify it. I also apologise for lumping you together with dh in my responses. That was completely unfair.
BeneD - I’m afraid I can’t apologise for most of the remainder of what I’ve said here. I meant it quite literally when I said that such attitudes make me feel sick. But I do apologise that I have let my feelings get the better of me and that I have expressed myself in such a way as to upset people.
What did I say here on this site (not any other site) in light of FD that was different than FD. Can we seperate out the connexions blog conversastion from this one? That got down a track I never intended because of an initial harsh statement toward me by people who say thinking homosexuality is wrong is homophobic. I tried to explain how I’m different and it still doesn’t work. I even showed what I thought from CDC. I’m not fixated on the subject of homosexuality in that I addressed all forms of sexual sin in my response and how other sins are equal to that as well. I understand that many here think differently than myself but it does help in conversation to show how I agree and disagree and the rationale’s as well.
Beth, I too don’t want to upset people. We may be different but I still respect you as a person and have never thought any differently in every comment I have made. What I said didn’t relate the attitude I truly had behind the response and that is totally my fault and I take responsibility for it. May God forgive me for how I said what I said like Paul says about words “Keep reminding them of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen.” I never intended for people to quarrel about words but I do think people can speak what they think in love. I may think certain actions are sin but that doesn’t change my love for them. I’m reminded of the story I referenced between my Mom and certain members of the homosexual community. They in turn respected my mom and at the same time understood that my mom didn’t believe their actions were proper. I long for this type of attitude without the clouds around the subject. I appologize for contributing to those clouds. I try not to but we all fail just as Beth referenced as well “…I have expressed myself in such a way as to upset people.” However, I take the stronger blame for this. Beth, we may disagree but will you forgive me. We can come together on this withn our disagreement. I disagree strongly with you but I even more strongly respect you as a person.
May God bless you Beth and may you know God even more in the future. I definitely didn’t mean to make you feel sick. I appologize. Bene, I still feel a little singled out and am trying to figure otu what I said in this particular thread.
DH: I am singling you out.
There are over 2 thousand posts and over 58 hundred comments here at BDBO. Breaking that down further, there are nearly a thousand people I can quickly identify as commenting here. I want BDBO known as a safe place.
I’m frustrated with you DH.
I’ve never blocked anyone, but we’re getting close.
This post is about a bad law that punatively thwarts children and adults. I have written about adoption before, and I’ve written about Canadian laws. Go read Richard’s experience at his blog. This is not theoretical stuff.
There are 150 thousand children in the US that need parents. There are about 80 thousand in Canada.
Kids that need homes, need parents.
I couldn’t care less if you agree with me about the law, say so and move on. I couldn’t care less if my experience or Richard’s experience is meaningless to you, say so and move on. Agreeing is a none issue, disagree and move on.
I believe your apologies are sincere, I believe you don’t need to play the resident fundamentalist. I think you have the ability to listen and be part of an online community. I respect you for going to blogs from other countries to learn to communicate outside your experience.
But I’ve had it with this homosexual fixation of yours.
I’ve just about had it with the labels you put on people. I’ve been to the states enough to know that is your cultural reality, and I’ve tried to cut you slack.
I don’t know if I can anymore DH. We might be further ahead to keep your conversations at connexions where there are more eyes available to help you listen, hear what you are saying and how you are saying it without you feeling picked on. And more eyes that understand your culture and exercise patience. And eyes and ears that will help me not to fall into poor communication traps.
My frustration is cumulative DH, not limited to this thread and I honestly don’t know yet as owner of this blog what I need to do about it.
dh - yes, of course I forgive you. I’m sorry for having said otherwise in the heat of the moment. I have to try and remember that anyone who “offends” me is always already forgiven, and that it is my responsibility to reflect that forgiveness in what I say and do. So, again, I apologise.
I can see you truly believe you’re being rational in what you say. I don’t want to get into another long argument here, but I am simply going to explain the background to some things you have mentioned, which I hope will help you understand where a lot of this is coming from.
Firstly, homophobia is not just about thugs and skinheads, it’s about an institutional attitude that runs through many societies. Not hating gay people and not wanting violence towards them does not stop ideas about the wrongness of homosexuality being homophobic. Any views that consider homosexual people to have different rights, responsibilities or status because of their sexuality are homophobic. Just because an idea is based in a sincerely-held religious belief does not stop it being homophobic. It’s on this basis that I consider your views to be homophobic, and I don’t consider that to be a harsh judgement to have made.
Secondly, yes, you did cite CDC, but can’t you see that a big part of the problem is that you then refused to accept any statistics from other reputable sources which appeared to contradict what you said? Richard B (I think it was he?) and I offered figures from e.g. the Terrence Higgins Trust and the WHO, which you appeared not to want to accept. In this light, can you understand why people are frustrated and consider that you are incapable of listening to reasoned arguments? I accept the CDC statistics whilst a) seeing that they do not give the whole picture, even for the US, and certainly not worldwide, and b) not accepting that they say what you think they say about the dangers of homosexuality. But you apparently would not even accept the statistics offered in rebuttal. You certainly refused to deal with what they said about the correctness of your argument.
Thirdly, there are people on connexions and elsewhere who are very, very profound theological thinkers and who really know what they’re talking about as far as the Bible is concerned. I’m thinking primarily, of course, of Kim at connexions. But when such people make coherent arguments based on their own knowledge and understanding, you have a habit of rubbishing them in a single sentence, rather than engaging with what they’re saying and trying to show good theological reasons why they are wrong. If you don’t agree with them, that’s absolutely fine, but to me it seems that you do not accord their arguments any respect in your disagreement. This makes it look as though you are absolutely entrenched in your own ideas, to the exclusion of all rational argument and thought - as though even God himself coming down to tell you you’re wrong wouldn’t move you! Do you see my point?
I hope this goes some way towards explaining people’s (or at least my own) frustration with your style of argument.
All the best,
Beth
Beth, I appreciate your attitude on this. Your heart in this, while we may disagree strongly, is wonderful and I appreciate it and you.
I’m glad you accepted my appology and I know God forgave me as well “If we confess our sins He is Faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteuosness.” This takes responsibility on our part to confess our sins. So to enter into the forigiveness made available I needed to ask like I did in the previous post. Does that make sense? I still can’t get over being called homophobic. I consider it always in a negative light. I don’t appreciate the term toward people who love people who are homosexual but don’t approve of the behavior. It always appears that those who don’t approve of the behavior are lumped in together and that is a shame in light of the attitude of myself, FD and others who love homosexuals but don’t approve of the behavior in light of Scripture. I don’t believe they have a different status. They may be doing what I believe is sin but that doesn’t mean they are in a lower status for all of us sin. Does that make sense?
On the third paragraph. I respect Kim and Richard and believe they are very smart but I have made coherent theologic rebutalls but their lack of address towards the Scriptures I mentioned shows how the same concern you have towards me (even though I do look at their “rational arguments” and to suggest otherwise is a misconception even though the appearance may look otherwise). Does that make sense? I have given theological reason why they are wrong and the response I get is no response. I believe it is understandable because the Scripture says about itself that it is “the sword of the Spirit able to discern soul and morrow” (I say this with no harshness or attack but to give you insight into the discussions I have had with them and how it has played out.)
Beth, I don’t want you to get the idea that all of us that believe the acting upon homosexuality are so harsh. I understand many more harsh than me on the subject have given us who believe the action is sin a bad name. I hope you appreciate the posts where I have shown my strong disagreement with them. I know many who have tried to help homosexuals away from the behavior did so with wrong motives. I just think we shouldn’t characterize the entire ministry with regard to this subject. I felt the same harshness you felt toward me with your response toward those who have helped people (some have been hurt but to deny those that have been helped seemed irrational). I know the process for us to come together on this is hard and difficult but I do believe if we truly love Christ this is necessary. That doesn’t change my belief on the subject in anyway but it does give me respect for you as a person. As you know we have appologized and I believe we can move forward. I want to apologize again for not following my mothers lead on this by having an attitude different than hers on this. My goal is to love the person but disapprove of the action. When the accurate disapproval of the action is greater than the love for the person then the love is not love. I would add (you will disagree) that when love for the person is greater than the accurate disapproval of the action that too is not love for love is not the condoning of sin. We disagree strongly between us but as a person Beth (even though I don’t approve nor ever will approve of homosexual behavior) I totally respect you and have the love of the Lord for you. Does this make sense? Do you sense my care for you? Do you know that I want all of us to have attitudes of repentence including myself on anything God says is wrong, that goes for our sins combined? Lets move forward and not have conversations clouded by what we appologized for between us. May God bless you Beth.
…there’s a couple who have been coming to our local parish for a while…they have adopted a little guy, and are hoping for another…my kids play with their kid, & they go to Sunday School together…we swap parenting stories…we are on opposite ends of the theological spectrum on certain issues, and we know it…we meet at the altar rail for communion…
i’m just saying, that’s all:
nothing more, nothing less