Bryan Fischer
Homosexual adoptions victimize children
By Bryan Fischer
Follow me on Twitter: @BryanJFischer, on Facebook at "Focal Point"
The pages of the New York Times this morning are all aflutter with a story extolling the skyrocketing increase in the number of gay couples who are adopting children.
This is a social disaster, a social tragedy of the first order, and is something no society that cares for its youngest and most vulnerable citizens would do.
Every homosexual adoption places a child in a home with a missing mother or father. No society that loves children and places their welfare ahead of the desires of narcissistic adults would ever do this.
Children need both a mom and a dad. Divorce tragically can rob a child of either a mother or father presence in the home, and this vacuum has a devastating impact on the child. To intentionally and deliberately and knowingly place vulnerable young children in a home with a missing parent is inexcusably bad public policy.
We know without any shadow of doubt that it is bad for children to grow up fatherless. Even secular experts agree. Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School — hardly a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy — says, "From deep within their biological and psychological being, children need to connect to fathers...to live life whole."
My heart breaks for boys and girls who are deprived, by malicious design, of even having the opportunity to experience a father's presence, strength, character, example and moral leadership in life. It is not an exaggeration to call this a form of child victimization.
Further, the non-partisan research group Child Trends says this about the importance of natural families:
"Research clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and the family structure that helps the most is a family headed by two biological parents who are in a low-conflict marriage."
A 1996 study by an Australian sociologist found, in nine of 13 academic and social categories measured, that children of heterosexual married couples did the best and children of homosexual couples did the worst.
There is an additional complication. Even the pro-homosexual Gay & Lesbian Medical Association admits that gay men have higher rates of substance abuse, alcohol abuse, depression and anxiety than the general population.
Placing children in settings that even homosexuals admit are inherently unstable and even dangerous is obviously a terrible, terrible idea.
While the trend line for gay adoptions is "absolutely straight up," according to Adam Pertman of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, Gary Gates of the Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law at UCLA estimates that only four percent of the adopted population lives in gay-headed homes.
That means it's not too late to halt and reverse this devastating trend. Vulnerable young children, who have no choice in these matters, deserve no less from the adults in the room. Family, after all, is about optimal nurturing environments for children, not about self-centered adults getting what they want.
(Unless otherwise noted, the opinions expressed are the author's and do not necessarily reflect the views of the American Family Association or American Family Radio.)
© Bryan Fischer
June 16, 2011
Follow me on Twitter: @BryanJFischer, on Facebook at "Focal Point"
The pages of the New York Times this morning are all aflutter with a story extolling the skyrocketing increase in the number of gay couples who are adopting children.
This is a social disaster, a social tragedy of the first order, and is something no society that cares for its youngest and most vulnerable citizens would do.
Every homosexual adoption places a child in a home with a missing mother or father. No society that loves children and places their welfare ahead of the desires of narcissistic adults would ever do this.
Children need both a mom and a dad. Divorce tragically can rob a child of either a mother or father presence in the home, and this vacuum has a devastating impact on the child. To intentionally and deliberately and knowingly place vulnerable young children in a home with a missing parent is inexcusably bad public policy.
We know without any shadow of doubt that it is bad for children to grow up fatherless. Even secular experts agree. Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School — hardly a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy — says, "From deep within their biological and psychological being, children need to connect to fathers...to live life whole."
My heart breaks for boys and girls who are deprived, by malicious design, of even having the opportunity to experience a father's presence, strength, character, example and moral leadership in life. It is not an exaggeration to call this a form of child victimization.
Further, the non-partisan research group Child Trends says this about the importance of natural families:
"Research clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and the family structure that helps the most is a family headed by two biological parents who are in a low-conflict marriage."
A 1996 study by an Australian sociologist found, in nine of 13 academic and social categories measured, that children of heterosexual married couples did the best and children of homosexual couples did the worst.
There is an additional complication. Even the pro-homosexual Gay & Lesbian Medical Association admits that gay men have higher rates of substance abuse, alcohol abuse, depression and anxiety than the general population.
Placing children in settings that even homosexuals admit are inherently unstable and even dangerous is obviously a terrible, terrible idea.
While the trend line for gay adoptions is "absolutely straight up," according to Adam Pertman of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, Gary Gates of the Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law at UCLA estimates that only four percent of the adopted population lives in gay-headed homes.
That means it's not too late to halt and reverse this devastating trend. Vulnerable young children, who have no choice in these matters, deserve no less from the adults in the room. Family, after all, is about optimal nurturing environments for children, not about self-centered adults getting what they want.
(Unless otherwise noted, the opinions expressed are the author's and do not necessarily reflect the views of the American Family Association or American Family Radio.)
© Bryan Fischer
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
