Comment: Mostly agree

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: sin vs. crime (see in situ)

Mostly agree


I "mostly" agree with your comments, but (as with most rules) there are exceptions. I have a friend, college professor, who is gay with three triplet daughters from his previous marriage. His former wife on many occasions has shown herself to be an unfit mother. Now the girls reside with my friend and his partner in a very loving and caring home.

I absolutely agree that the "ideal" is for a child or children to be raised in a home with two LOVING, CARING, INVOLVED parents that are "ideally" straight for purposes of better gender clarification and identity. However, at the end of the day, those three capitalized qualifications still are more important to me than the genders or orientations of the caregivers. I worked for years in the field of preventing child exploitation and the stories of little girls who told me about their dad, stepdad, grandfather, etc physically and/or sexually abusing them FAR outweighed the stories of same-sex abuse (and I trained over 250,000 kids and teens). NO ONE has a corner on "love," plain and simple. You ask me for the ideal and I will agree with your hypothesis, but in reality for the CHILD I will gladly welcome acceptable substitutes in a home where "love prevails."

I don't care to redefine the "home," but I don't think anyone can property define it in today's society of single parents anyway. Personally, preserving the Judeo-Christian culture is not even a concern of mine, if put at odds of giving children the kind of care they need and deserve.

As I've told many friends over the years who want to wage war with the gay community over gay marriage stating how "pro-family" they are, "When you are committed enough to lobby for legistation that will ban 'divorce' then talk to me about banning gay marriage." Of the two, it is obvious which poses the most threat to "the family" and which can scar the lives of the children involved. And by the way, "divorce" is something that Jesus did address whereas same-sex relations he did not.

Again, I agree with you in the "ideal" just not in the "absolute."