Texas House Bill Bars Gay Foster Parents

Well, I disagree Nimh.

I believe that an optimal family would provide a balanced parentage where the child can be embraced by both male and female attention and love. two women can not give a child a fathers love just as two men can not give a mothers love.

I am asking for optimal, not satisfactory.

0 Replies

Of course, re: the topic of the thread the question of "optimal" is a bit pie in the sky in any case. There's an acute shortage of loving foster homes. "Satisfactory" will well do. The net result of the Texas law is taking away "satisfactory" foster homes, unless you believe two gay parents could not make a satisfactory home.

0 Replies

I was just curious if any of the typical liberals here could ever agree that having male and female parents would be optimal in raising a child. My question was answered.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Of course, re: the topic of the thread the question of "optimal" is a bit pie in the sky in any case. There's an acute shortage of loving foster homes. "Satisfactory" will well do. The net result of the Texas law is taking away "satisfactory" foster homes, unless you believe two gay parents could not make a satisfactory home.

Love doesn't equal a good inviroment. Children need balance and that balance isn't met with same sex couples. It has been proven that children excel when there are 2 parents in the home. No it isn't always perfect, but that doesn't mean it should be scrapped for something new and for a political agenda.

I already agreed that I don't have an issue with gay couples trying to adopt, but I think the children should go to a normal family first and then if no one is available, gay couples and single people would be next.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

The options are:

No parents
a single female mother
a single male father
a female mother & male father (married)
a female mother & male father (divorced)
2 female parents
2 male parents
a village

So, which would be the optimal group to raise a child?

All of the above, as long as the child's needs are taken care of
and the child is loved. As I said before: Everything else is secondary!

0 Replies

CalamityJane wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

The options are:

No parents
a single female mother
a single male father
a female mother & male father (married)
a female mother & male father (divorced)
2 female parents
2 male parents
a village

So, which would be the optimal group to raise a child?

All of the above, as long as the child's needs are taken care of
and the child is loved. As I said before: Everything else is secondary!

And anyone who disagrees with this kind of lgic IMO is not normal.

0 Replies

blueveinedthrobber wrote:

and if a child is currently residing with gay foster parents, no matter how long they've had them, they're to be removed from the home.

Good idea. Children need that kind of stability.

Stupid f**ks.

With statements like that, you just might get someone more than upset. In fact., some may actually consider it a slur.Please give facts, not opinions of why gays should not be allowed as foster parents.

Would you take a child out of a home that has one or more loving adults to care for it? Would yu take a child away fromo a siingle mother that works and takes care of her child, no matter how long, for any reasons other than abuse and neglect? If so, would you be willing to become the foster or adopted parent of that child and raise it in a manner that would show love, affection, care for the physical , emotional, educational and psychological needs of this child? IMHO, I don't think so.

I've been offered the opportunity to not only foster but adopt children, this while I was single and not in any relationship. However, I was totally "out" and was still given this offer, which still stands. Just last year,the guardian of two young children offered Sam and I the chance to adopt them. Unfortunately, we're not in any position to adopt a child due to lack of space in our small house. We have talked about it and are considering it, once we get the remodeling and expansion done

I find it interesting that the state, any state, would consider such denial to those offering to share their home, love and care, providing the individuals have nothing that would bar them from foster care or adoption...except being gay. I personally know a gay couple that have adopted two young boys, ages 13 and 14 I believe, four years ago. These boys are in the hardest age group to place, yet they now have loving caring adults to call their dads. They are both happy, healthy and well appreciated. Are they gay? No, the dads don't what to influence their choices in that area, only make them aware that the choice belongs to the boys, not the dads.The former governor of that state isn't just a friend of the dads, but has spent time with that happy family. I've seen the pictures that show them all on a boat, enjoying a summer's day.

That said, I ask for proof that gay couples don't make good parents. If you really want to make my day, tell me that you've gone out and are in the process to provide care for these children, are doing so or have done so. Please give me studies or clinical evidence, not emotional outbursts, sermons or epitaphs.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Just out of curiosity, would any of you agree that an optimal family would include a male father and female mother?

Not me.

McGentrix wrote:

So, which would be the optimal group to raise a child?

Speaking as a brother of two wonderful sisters, it would certainly have to include at least two siblings.

McGentrix wrote:

I believe that an optimal family would provide a balanced parentage where the child can be embraced by both male and female attention and love.

1) Why do you think it's a good idea that the state of Texas impose this belief on millions of people who disagree with it?

2) What relevance does anyone's concept of "an optimal family" have when the alternative usually is between a shelter and a family (optimal or not), or between two non-optimal families, but not between an optimal family and a non-optimal family?

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Just out of curiosity, would any of you agree that an optimal family would include a male father and female mother?

I'm curious that you need to specify "male father" and "female mother". Somewhat redundant, no?

I believe that an optimal... (note: use of the word optimal)... family would be.

1) A male rolemodel.
2) A female rolemodel.
3) An example of a loving relationship (sexual composition irrelevant).
4) An elderly person.
5) Companions of similar ages.
6) A companion of slightly older age.
7) A companion of slightly younger age.
8) A pet.
9) Sufficient resources for all of the above.
10) An absence of hostility, abuse and hatred in all of the above.

Note: The order was as I thought of them and doesn't have any special meaning.

Not all families will be like this, but for preference I believe that they should be.

EDIT: Extra info added.

Don't think I established that this could easily be...

1) A gay male.
2) His lesbian sister.
3) The gay man's boyfriend and the sister's girlfriend (2 loving relationships here, bonus points)
4) The sister's girlfriend's elderly mother.
5) A group of adopted kids.
6) An older foreign exchange student.
7) A younger sperm donor child of one of the gay men and one of the gay women.

So long as 9 and 10 are met, this would still be optimal.

0 Replies

Baldimo wrote:

Love doesn't equal a good inviroment. Children need balance and that balance isn't met with same sex couples. It has been proven that children excel when there are 2 parents in the home.

1) Were the studies containing this proof published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, or are they conservative think tank jobs? In general, I am not persuadable by think tank publications.

2) If the evidence comes from peer-reviewed scientific publications, how did their authors measure if children did or did not get the "balance" they needed? And what parental arrangements did the studies compare? "Children excel when there are two parents in the home" sounds as if families traditional heterosexual foster parents could have been compared against single-parent families. If so, the findings would not surprise me; but they would tell us little about the issue at hand, which is how same-sex couples compare with couples of different sexes.

0 Replies

Also I should mention...

Let's imagine a hypothetical example.

Joshua Iiga and Tobias Redstone are a gay unmarried couple who have adopted three kids. The eldest (16) has been with the couple for ten years and the youngest two have been there for most of their lives. They know that Josh and Toby aren't their real parents but have had a loving stable home for most of their lives.

Suddenly they are ripped away from this environment by the Child Protective Services and put in an orphanage whilst awaiting foster care. Eventually they are placed in a home with a female rolemodel as well as a male rolemodel.

There are people out there who think this would be good for the children's psychological health! What's worse they're in government. I hope I'm not the only one who is scared.

An ex-partner of mine grew up in foster homes (and was seriously screwed up because of it). Judging from his experiences, unless abuse is occuring (and this should be carefully monitored in all cases), they should be kept with one situation as much as possible.

You know, I could forgive the "don't place children with gay parents from now on" part. I don't agree, and there isn't a big enough pool of prospective parents to do this but it not especially bad. But the part of the bill that says CPS is to take children away from any gay couples is inexusably callous to the children's wellbeing. I honestly believe that this is cruelty to children, and despite my normal moral relativism stance, cruelty to children makes my adrenaline levels go through the roof.

Honestly, I'm not unbiased on this issue (I'm bisexual myself, though I currently have no plans to ever start a family either by adoption or reproduction). Yet I find the concept of taking children away from their home to be abuse, an abuse that is only to be accepted if it saves them from even worse abuse. I am horrified by that part of the bill.

Outlaw gay marriage: I don't agree but okay.
Outlaw gay sex: I don't agree, I'm personally inconvenienced but still... only mildly annoyed.
Take children from their homes without REALLY F***King good reason: Now I'm pissed off!

0 Replies

Wiyaka wrote:

blueveinedthrobber wrote:
and if a child is currently residing with gay foster parents, no matter how long they've had them, they're to be removed from the home.

Good idea. Children need that kind of stability.

Stupid f**ks.

With statements like that, you just might get someone more than upset. In fact., some may actually consider it a slur.Please give facts, not opinions of why gays should not be allowed as foster parents.

Would you take a child out of a home that has one or more loving adults to care for it? Would yu take a child away fromo a siingle mother that works and takes care of her child, no matter how long, for any reasons other than abuse and neglect? If so, would you be willing to become the foster or adopted parent of that child and raise it in a manner that would show love, affection, care for the physical , emotional, educational and psychological needs of this child? IMHO, I don't think so.

I've been offered the opportunity to not only foster but adopt children, this while I was single and not in any relationship. However, I was totally "out" and was still given this offer, which still stands. Just last year,the guardian of two young children offered Sam and I the chance to adopt them. Unfortunately, we're not in any position to adopt a child due to lack of space in our small house. We have talked about it and are considering it, once we get the remodeling and expansion done

I find it interesting that the state, any state, would consider such denial to those offering to share their home, love and care, providing the individuals have nothing that would bar them from foster care or adoption...except being gay. I personally know a gay couple that have adopted two young boys, ages 13 and 14 I believe, four years ago. These boys are in the hardest age group to place, yet they now have loving caring adults to call their dads. They are both happy, healthy and well appreciated. Are they gay? No, the dads don't what to influence their choices in that area, only make them aware that the choice belongs to the boys, not the dads.The former governor of that state isn't just a friend of the dads, but has spent time with that happy family. I've seen the pictures that show them all on a boat, enjoying a summer's day.

That said, I ask for proof that gay couples don't make good parents. If you really want to make my day, tell me that you've gone out and are in the process to provide care for these children, are doing so or have done so. Please give me studies or clinical evidence, not emotional outbursts, sermons or epitaphs.

Wiyaka, I'm shocked. My post was completely lost on you. Sarcasm friend, sarcasm. The stupid f**ks I refer to are the people that would remove a child from the home of gay foster parents that they had been in for a long time and disrupt them further. Take it easy.

An ideal family, in the absence of a childs real biological parents providing a stable and loving environment is ANY couple or single parent
gay or straight that will provide love, care, stability and guidance.
As far as "normal" what the hell that's supposed to mean I have no idea.

This is no longer even an "normal" country.

I still can't believe you misconstrued my post so thoroughly. Shocked

0 Replies

I'm with guidedog, only I'm a bit more bothered across the board han he comes off as being. Abducting children from perfectly good homes is an atrocity though, worse by an order of magnitude than the standard bigotry.

Will gay fosterparents be given a time to flee Texas? Can Texas have them extradicted if they do? How is this going to play out?

0 Replies

au1929, quoting AP in this thread's initial post, wrote:

The ban is part of a bill to revamp the state's Child Protective Services agency. It passed 135-6 with two abstentions and now heads to the Senate.

136-6? Where were the Democrats when this bill was passed?

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

au1929, quoting AP in this thread's initial post, wrote:
The ban is part of a bill to revamp the state's Child Protective Services agency. It passed 135-6 with two abstentions and now heads to the Senate.

136-6? Where were the Democrats when this bill was passed?

these aren't democrats Thomas, these are Texas democrats. Laughing

0 Replies

I have no idea where the democrats were. However, there is no doubt about where the bigots are.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

136-6? Where were the Democrats when this bill was passed?

There are Democrats in Texas?

0 Replies

Einherjar wrote:

There are Democrats in Texas?

In fairness to the Democrats, there do appear to be six of them. Plus maybe two inside-the-closet Democrats who abstained.

0 Replies

I thought those were the only-slightly-extreme republicans, and the lazy republicans.

0 Replies

Texas Democrats are conservative, and long had a lock on their congressional and state house seats. This wasn't a problem until Tom Delay came along, and wanted to pack the Congressional delegation from Tejas with Republicans. So that was the origin of the big bruhaha a couple of years ago, at which time the Democrats in the Texas House left the state to prevent a quorum which would allow passage of a redistricting bill. The Republicans, but particularly Delay, have alienated many conservative Texans from rural districts who were gerimandered into districts with urban areas likely to vote for the Republican. They are conservatives, too, and they liked their Democratic representatives. Whether or not this will ever come home to roost for the Tejas Republicans remains to be seen.

0 Replies

Texas House Bill Bars Gay Foster Parents

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know