From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> At 09:34 AM 2/28/2004 -0700 Michael Harney wrote: > >Children don't know where children come from until they are told, therefore, > >it is not the child's expectation, but yours. > > Nevertheless, we can reasonable deduce what a child capable of rational > thought would reasonably expect. After all, every child is produced by a > mother and a father. Can you even listen to yourself here? "we can reasonable deduce what a child capable of rational thought would reasonably expect" This very clearly shows that this is not the child's expectations, but your expectations for that child. That's the thing about children (young children anyway), they don't have expectations outside of their limited experience with life. If they have two dads or two moms, rather than a mom and a dad, they may wonder why their family is different from others, but to them, having two dads or two moms won't be outside their expectations. > >> Are stable homosexual parents better than abusive parents? Of course. > >> > >> But ceteris paribis, every child can reasonable expect to have a mother > >and > >> a father, and we should do our best to meet that expectation. > > > > > >Should we try to provide every child with a mother and father? Maybe, but > >should that effort neccessarily exclude the possibility of same sex parents > >when a good set of parents in with both genders is not available. > > As I have said previously, no, that possibility should be excluded. > > All I am arguing is that ceteris paribis, we should attempt to meet that > reasonable expectation of the child - and that attempt should guide the > incentives implemented by society. Again, your expectations for the child, not the child's expectations. > >Should we > >deny a child a good family simply because that family isn't everything that > >you think the child expects? The way you have stated your case, you have > >made it seem that no same sex couples should be able to adopt, ever. > > Again, I have previously rejected that in my post entitled "Federal > Marriage Amendment." > Ok, so you say it's ok for a same sex couple to adopt a child when it is the best option available to that child. If that is so, then why do you continue to insist that same sex couples have no reproductive or child raising potential? The two views are mutually exclusive. Moreover, if a good same sex couple is a better option for a child than a bad couple consisting of both genders or no parents at all, then why should a good same sex couple not recieve the same incentives that a good couple consisting of both genders recieves? Michael Harney [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
