Duggar scandal

[MarysLittleFlower]

​Then that wasn't a healthy home for that child to be in anyway. How do you not see the difference?

Franciscanheart what I disagree with is the idea that placing a child with a gay couple is ever good. Even if they are the "best example" ever presented in the media.... Its still placing a child in a situation harmful to their salvation because its going to affect their view of morality and what a family is and what relationships are. I mean the moral and spiritual side.

[MarysLittleFlower]

As Catholics we can and should affirm our belief that marriage is sacred and between one man and one woman.

The problem comes when we try to use pseudo-science and sketchy anecdotal evidence to try and claim that there are major medical or psychological reasons behind the belief. I see people doing this most often with abortion. They make the argument that women who have abortions are more likely to develop mental health problems afterwards. That's objectively not true. The reason we oppose abortion is because it's the taking of a human life, but people seem determined to make psychological claims about it that just don't hold up - as though the ethical argument against not killing people becomes stronger if they can give it a medical basis somehow. A similar thing is happening here.

MLF, there are people who were raised by gay couples who have nothing but good things to say about the parenting they received, but you wouldn't accept same-sex parenting as legitimate just because you read a few articles that described positive nurturing experiences. Yet this is the quality of evidence on which you're basing your arguments against gay adoption. It's a lot more complicated than that. Kids who end up in the foster care system have usually come out of terrible situations to start with, and consequently it is very difficult to point at any one aspect of their foster care placement and say "This caused them to have XYZ problems" - they are likely to arrive in the placement with significant difficulties as it is. As I mentioned in an earlier post, long-term fostering and adoption by same-sex couples is not a common thing. The concern about it happening is wildly disproportionate to the frequency with which it actually happens, and suggesting that people might be justifiably reluctant to report child abuse to the authorities for fear that the child might be taken from the family and rehoused with gay people goes beyond disproportionate to the simply bizarre. In short, I don't think it's your idea that parenting should be done by a man and a woman that franciscanheart is taking issue with, it's the reasoning behind that idea.

Beatitude, I brought up those points because it was mentioned how much better it could be for a child in this situation.

The main reason I'm against these arrangements is not anecdotal evidence but simply the fact that Our Lord and the Church teach that the relationships are sinful. My main problem is moral. It would not help the children with their salvation to be taught that "these are families too" and what they are typically taught. What would the response of these children be to Christianity when they learn that the Church doesn't agree with what they've been brought up to think is normal and even good?

[Maggyie]

I think the point is that children are entitled to a mother and a father. Entitled. Period. 

I've spent a lot of time in adoption land and the groupings of "perfectly nice people who are way better than an abusive household" and "people who should foster and adopt" do NOT totally overlap. At all. 

For the same reason that single people with an active sex life are not the ideal foster or adoptive parent, gay couples are not the ideal either. No matter how stable they will never be able to give the healing child what they are ENTITLED to, which is the experience of having a healthy mom and dad. 

[MarysLittleFlower]

​I think the assumption that homosexual couples are detrimental to child development is on par with some of the worst racist stereotypes.

I guess Id just like to point out that before homosexuals could adopt or have families, homosexual children were "sexually confused" while being brought up by straight people. Its not really a factor of who is raising the child that leads them to become homosexual, its a factor of genetics, self realization, and being in an atmosphere where they are not afraid to truly understand what they are feeling without pressure or suppression.

Developmental psychology is a complex thing and Ill note that I am not an expert. But I think we do a huge disservice to so many people when we assume and hold extremely negative and detrimental stereotypes over peoples heads. 

It really doesn't matter to me if I'm labelled in some way because of what I said. Its more important to ask what is the truth? Regardless of how society sees it. Being in a family with a mom and dad or where theres an understanding that a marriage is a man and a woman, would not *in itself* make a child confused even if they get affected by something else. Putting a child in a situation that is basically taught by the Church to go against natural law and God's Law? Why would that be ok? I guess if you don't believe its a sin then we disagree. But I'm speaking from the perspective of Christ's teachings where its described as a sin. Perhaps we can start thinking how it contradicts natural law. How is a relationship between a man and woman different? Isn't the procreative aspect pretty central in what makes it unique?

[MarysLittleFlower]

hmmm I don't think this is about gay parents not being able to raise healthy, well-adjusted children. I don't think  that's the debate here. I just don't think that being healthy and well-adjusted is going to save your soul. That's the crux of the issue isn't it? I don't know if mary'slittleflower is saying children of gay parents can't be emotionally balanced, contributing members of society. If that's what she is saying then yes it's problematic. But if she's saying that it's a major impediment to the salvation of the child, then as a Catholic wouldn't you have to agree? Does abuse endanger the salvation of children. Undoubtedly yes and it endangers them in other ways too. So it's a tough situation.

Yes I mean primarily salvation. Of course it would also affect the views of what a family is etc. Abuse is dangerous too. But I wouldn't put children from one danger to another. It just won't help them. Our primary duty is salvation.

[tinytherese]

I think we're getting somewhat off topic here and should start a thread on the debate table.

[franciscanheart]

As Catholics we can and should affirm our belief that marriage is sacred and between one man and one woman.

The problem comes when we try to use pseudo-science and sketchy anecdotal evidence to try and claim that there are major medical or psychological reasons behind the belief. I see people doing this most often with abortion. They make the argument that women who have abortions are more likely to develop mental health problems afterwards. That's objectively not true. The reason we oppose abortion is because it's the taking of a human life, but people seem determined to make psychological claims about it that just don't hold up - as though the ethical argument against not killing people becomes stronger if they can give it a medical basis somehow. A similar thing is happening here.

MLF, there are people who were raised by gay couples who have nothing but good things to say about the parenting they received, but you wouldn't accept same-sex parenting as legitimate just because you read a few articles that described positive nurturing experiences. Yet this is the quality of evidence on which you're basing your arguments against gay adoption. It's a lot more complicated than that. Kids who end up in the foster care system have usually come out of terrible situations to start with, and consequently it is very difficult to point at any one aspect of their foster care placement and say "This caused them to have XYZ problems" - they are likely to arrive in the placement with significant difficulties as it is. As I mentioned in an earlier post, long-term fostering and adoption by same-sex couples is not a common thing. The concern about it happening is wildly disproportionate to the frequency with which it actually happens, and suggesting that people might be justifiably reluctant to report child abuse to the authorities for fear that the child might be taken from the family and rehoused with gay people goes beyond disproportionate to the simply bizarre. In short, I don't think it's your idea that parenting should be done by a man and a woman that franciscanheart is taking issue with, it's the reasoning behind that idea.

This.

[CrossCuT]

Im sorry but I'm very surprised that on a Catholic board , I have to defend the view that homosexual couples are not beneficial for children to be living with. I don't really care if in the world this is seen as homophobic etc because its not based on any "hatred" of homosexuals but is derived from Catholic moral teaching. 

The Catholic Church teaches that homosexuals should live chastely as everyone else. For them this is expressed as living celibately. Claiming anything else is false compassion for them because love and truth must go together. Saying that its not a big deal for any person to harm their souls, risk their salvation, and offend God, is not helping them. 

Since being in a homosexual relationship is not chaste and is therefore sinful, and since our society has lost the idea of what a family truly is the way God made it, it makes no sense to put children in this situation.

I never said children should be left in abusive situation. I said that they should not go from that to this, but to a family that is loving and structured as a family... The Catholic definition of one. Not the modern view.

As for how often this happens, I went to a talk put on by my parish and a lawyer said it happens. There are places where its hard for strong pro life Christian families to adopt because of their views, and easy for homosexuals to adopt. I have heard various things about Quebec in Canada for example and this is where our society may be headed.

Our Lord had very firm words to say about leading His little ones astray. Teaching them that homosexual relationships are "okay", is an example of leading them astray because its not a moral truth. A child living in this would be taught that. So I can't support it. No I don't want children to stay in abusive situations. I also don't want them going from physical to moral or emotional abuse. Because this is what it is when people teach children that wrong is right. 

I really don't care if people see me as homophobic or whatever. Our duty is to follow God and the Church not the world. Its not hateful to believe certain actions are wrong and should not be promoted. It is the Catholic view and always has been..

​I guess Id like to point out my issues with the broader sentiments and the inconsistencies I see as a non Catholic with what you said. It seems like people obsess so heavily over homosexuality in all its social contexts but never hold the same accountability for other "sins" or "Catholic moral teaching". Children grow up in homes with unwed parents, broken families, single mothers, etc etc etc. All of these people are completely fit to care for the needs of a child, but your argument is that they cant foster a moral upbringing as dictated by the church for the salvation of their soul. Would that extend to non Catholic families as well since a false faith wouldnt be able to save them as much as the one true faith?

And are you equally against unmarried heterosexual couples, single mothers, or single fathers adopting? Since in both instances they either lack a mother or a father or they lack the fundamental moral aspect of a real marriage? I just find it very inconsistent when these things pop up and I really dont feel inclined to go out of my way to have empathy towards your plight when you only hold a minority group accountable. Honestly, homosexuals are really just the hated group flavor of the century. I am sure once things cool down we will accept them as much as all those heinous single mothers who have sex out of wedlock. People have NO issues with them. Im just waiting till this blows over too.

[franciscanheart]

​I guess Id like to point out my issues with the broader sentiments and the inconsistencies I see as a non Catholic with what you said. It seems like people obsess so heavily over homosexuality in all its social contexts but never hold the same accountability for other "sins" or "Catholic moral teaching". Children grow up in homes with unwed parents, broken families, single mothers, etc etc etc. All of these people are completely fit to care for the needs of a child, but your argument is that they cant foster a moral upbringing as dictated by the church for the salvation of their soul. Would that extend to non Catholic families as well since a false faith wouldnt be able to save them as much as the one true faith?

And are you equally against unmarried heterosexual couples, single mothers, or single fathers adopting? Since in both instances they either lack a mother or a father or they lack the fundamental moral aspect of a real marriage? I just find it very inconsistent when these things pop up and I really dont feel inclined to go out of my way to have empathy towards your plight when you only hold a minority group accountable. Honestly, homosexuals are really just the hated group flavor of the century. I am sure once things cool down we will accept them as much as all those heinous single mothers who have sex out of wedlock. People have NO issues with them. Im just waiting till this blows over too.

​This grates my nerves, too. If I saw even half as much fuss over other blatant and obvious sinful "lifestyles", I don't think it would irritate me so much that you're attempting, MLF, to argue a point with weak (untrue) "evidence".

[Guest]

There's this guy on my Facebook who post Bible verses 24 7 and is always going on and on about the sin of homosexuality. Just recently him and his wife divorced and he's already with another girl (his best friends ex) and his best friend is with his ex wife. And they all live together in the same house. Obviously this guy doesn't represent all Christians but just reading this thread makes his hypocrisy and ignorance that more appalling. He's anti Catholic somewhat too. To be fair most of the Catholics I've interacted with aren't obnoxious like him with their Bible thumping. One poster called him out recently saying Jesus had a lot more to say about adultery and divorse then he did about the sin of homosexuality. I used to be like him too so hopefully he comes around. Although I don't support gay marriage my opinion on all of this has flipped upside down in the last 5 years. Mainly by meeting gay people in the real world and seeing they're nice people (the ones I met) just trying to live their life. Are they going to hell? I don't know. Am I going to hell? I don't know. We're all flawed messed up people no matter how hard we try to convince others we're not.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Guest

[Nihil Obstat]

Just to tease that out a bit more, what other lifestyles and sorts of public sin would also exclude someone from adopting, if we assume a partnered homosexual relationship does? Single mothers and non Catholics were mentioned... Well in a just society I do not think it would be wrong to exclude or discourage such people in a general sense. The adopted child's moral and spiritual development are as important as providing for him physically, so yes I think there should be a strong preference towards upstanding Catholic families who are strong in the faith.

[CrossCuT]

Just to tease that out a bit more, what other lifestyles and sorts of public sin would also exclude someone from adopting, if we assume a partnered homosexual relationship does? Single mothers and non Catholics were mentioned... Well in a just society I do not think it would be wrong to exclude or discourage such people in a general sense. The adopted child's moral and spiritual development are as important as providing for him physically, so yes I think there should be a strong preference towards  upstanding Catholic families who are strong in the faith.

​In my list I had:

1. Homosexual couples
2. Single parents
3. Unmarried heterosexual couples
4. Non- Catholic couples 

This of course assumes the general rules already in place that cover mental illness, abuse, etc etc.

[Guest]

I was raised in a somewhat "upstanding Catholic family" until I was about 12 and parents divorced. At the end of the day I pray Jesus and Mary have a ton of mercy on all of humanity. Because we are all pretty messed up. I don't doubt there are some really really realllllly good upstanding Catholic families out there. I know a few but then there's the rest of us. Flawed messed up people trying their best (well some of us) but failing miserably. And then you have the people that really get under my skin. The people pretending they are the "upstanding" but in reality they are no better then the miserable people like myself. Yet they go about everyday life living and believing their self righteous delusion. I pity these people.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Guest

[puellapaschalis]

​And are you equally against unmarried heterosexual couples, single mothers, or single fathers adopting? 

I'm not the person you asked this of, but yes, I am against those groups adopting. An adopted child, being for whatever reason deprived of his right to be brought up by his biological parents, should not be deprived of the rest (e.g. a mother and father, etc).

[CrossCuT]

I was raised in a somewhat "upstanding Catholic family" until I was about 12 and parents divorced. At the end of the day I pray Jesus and Mary have a ton of mercy on all of humanity. Because we are all pretty messed up. I don't doubt there are some really really realllllly good upstanding Catholic families out there. I know a few but then there's the rest of us. Flawed messed up people trying their best (well some of us) but failing miserably. And then you have the people that really get under my skin. The people pretending they are the "upstanding" but in reality they are no better then the miserable people like myself. Yet they go about everyday life living and believing their self righteous delusion. I pity these people.

​People are all flawed and we are all suffering with our own issues. Try not to judge, you are not privy to where people are at in their life. Just know we are all trying to do the best with the hand we are dealt.