you can't adopt if you're one

_________________________________________________

That's false, David. A single man or woman can adopt a child in our country. A friend of mine just did.

Christophe, Donald, seems that i was wrong about the possibility of a single parent adopting (even if it surprise me in France ? I'm gonna check).

But then, i have the same thing to say, for the same reason : single parent adoption is not suitable, because only one gender (men or woman) to raise a child.

(yeah, i know, widows dos that rigth)

Edit : just checked, that's rigth. I learn something today !
; )

••

Why not? That's how heterosexuality works!

2) My understanding is that science has often been perplexed by how homosexuality (if genetic) is maintained in the gene pool perpetually, as it obviously has no reproductive advantage. How does the genetic-exclusivity theory account for this?

__________________________________________________________

According to Richard Dawkins in "The Selfish Gene", homosexuals are often devoted uncles and ants and therefore help their nephews & nieces' genes to survive.I read that book a long time ago and I don't remember every detail, but basically the genes' only "purpose" is to survive and being a parent or a relative is about the same, since all relatives have a number of genes in common.

••

THAT'S most likely where "learned behavior" kicks in, at least as far as humans are concerned. As long as homosexuals are forced to stay in the closet and pretend to be straight, including marrying and having children, there is no chance for the gene to breed (or, more correctly, NOT breed) itself out of the system.

The whole matter of Gay couples wanting to adopt also reminds us of just how deeply ingrained in our genetic makeup is the drive to reproduce. (It is, after all, the only thing we're here to do, from an evolutionary viewpoint.) Some Gay couples elect to go the surrogate route, rather than adopting, with one or both of the male partners contributing sperm, and/or one or both of the female partners becoming pregnant. This, too, passes along the genes.

There is also the fact that, strictly from a genetic viewpoint, homosexuality can be viewed as a "birth defect" -- ie, the genes lining up in a manner other than the usual pattern. In this manner, homosexuality can be created spontaneously, without a genetic lineage to drive it.

But then, i have the same thing to say, for the same reason : single parent adoption is not suitable, because only one gender (men or woman) to raise a child.

_________________________________________________________

Same-sex parents have families, don't they? The child will also have uncles,ants, grandfathers and grandmothers.In case his parents are men, that doesn't mean he will never know any women.Your argument is very common, but in my opinion it's a fear reaction.

Fear of what ?

Sorry, but uncles and grand parents don't raise that child (even if they're part of his world, and will have influence).

Christophe, i suggest you read what i wrote instead of projecting homophobic things that i dont think neither wrote.

I never ment or say that a child, adopted by gays, will become gay. If so, that will mean that there are no gays, cause you know, a gay raised by hetero will be hetero. That is stupid.

All that i care is about what can be brougth to a child, from a male way AND a female way.
That's that easy. Nothing else.

"I found a little bit easy to say : you mean "what's good for the child" only because you can't say that gays are evil."

Of course "what's good for the child" is the correct criterion.  But I tried to show the circumstances and why I felt that at times it's being used as a vicarious argument. These people are saying that gays can't adopt because the children of gays will be teased and bullied, while they are one of the main reasons that gays and the children of gays are being teased and bullied.

Put in less charitable terms "If you let gays adopt, we will tease and bully their adopted children until suicide seems a reasonable option".  And the problem is that part of the process of combatting that type of behaviour has to be to accept gay adoptions.

Chinese and Korean babies adopted into white families are often teased and bullied just as mercilessly, yet no-one could in all seriousness propose banning the adoption of chinese or korean babies in order to appease a bunch of racists, could they?

The problem isn't gays adopting, it's bigots who are allowed to teach their own kids (whether they are aware of it or not) that it's okay to ttease or bully gay children or the children of gay parents.

David, you're going a bit too fast about my presumption.You claim that only his/her parents raise a child.Do you have children?Are you able to stay with them all the time? My wife and I have a 1-year-old daughter, and due to our work schedules, she is looked after by her grandmother three days a week. She sure isn't one of her parents, but she does participate in raising her.

If anyone can shed further light on the sources for homosexuality being entirely genetic in cause, I would be interested. Specifically, and with regard to homosexuality's having a strictly genetic determinant, I would be interested in knowing:

***

How about you just take my word for it?  I've ALWAYS been gay.  See how easy that was? 

David, you're going a bit too fast about my presumption.

Then i'm glad to be wrong, Christophe !
; )

Do you have children?

Next month  !!

Of course a lot of people participate in the raising of the child, from familly to nany, even the school teatcher or, worse, the TV. That's why i called it influence.
Fact is, parents are the direct influence, make choices about education, whatever, and represent autority. They're supposed to have the final word.

I guess that's why they're so important.