JDG poured an a$$load of gasoline on the fire by writing: > I disagree. Since every child is produced by a mother and a father, I > think that our ideal goal should be to place every child up for adoption > with a very good mother and father.
With all due respect, I think you're way out of touch with reality. You've taken the classic boob's line, "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!" and slapped a new coat of pain on it, but it's still bereft of real substance, and just as ridiculous. While a man and a woman are required for the initial act, it does not necessarily follow that both sexes are required for every step after that. I have yet to see compelling evidence that gay adoptive parents, screened to the same degree as a heterosexual couple, are less fit as parents. I think that if someone can demonstrate that they're able to care for a child emotionally, physically and financially, they should be allowed to adopt. If two adults capable of giving informed consent want to make a commitment to care for each other over the long term, they should be allowed to. Heck, if two or more adults capable of giving informed consent want to make that commitment, they should be allowed to. A Marriage Amendment to the Constitution would, in the long run, be a bigger mistake than prohibition (although for different reasons, and with different results). A Marriage Amendment acts to protect a few delicate sensibilities in the face of a change that is moving ever closer, and will be as effective in the long run as Jim Crow and "Separate but equal". Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Read the blog. Love the blog. http://aclipscomb.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
