sighyoung wrote:Which, to me, is tantamount to saying that a governmental foster care system is preferable for many children than private homes.
I would agree with that statement, actually. These kids have been dealt a bad plot in life and likely have already developed issues and they need to be in an environment that will help them deal with that. Why do people adopt foster children? There's not many reasons:
1) Salt of the earth, light of the world type people do it out of the kindness of their heart to help children that are truly in an atrocious and horrible situation. Not to say cohabitating and gay couples can't be this way.
2) For evil. Be it simply greed or lust, the kids are there for a reason and are not getting the love and nurturing they deserve.
IMO, in case #2, they are better off in a state system. And, while not all the people banned from adopting or hosting foster children by any means are like that, I think this law does a lot to get rid of those types of people.
Would you care to explain the logic your using to reach this conclusion?
Married couples I would say are less likely to adopt children with the intent of sexually abusing them. Maybe not.
Yeah I'd say that's a pretty baseless assumption.
I think it's important to note that the Arkansas law does not prohibit single people who live alone to adopt. Only unmarried cohabitants.
heyzeus wrote:Every state does as much vetting and background/reference checking as possible before allowing a couple to adopt. I don't see why it matters whether the couple is gay, married, or unmarried. The same factors can be investigated to determine if this is a good home environment or not.
This has been my experience--that a great deal of vetting is done before a child is placed in an adoptive or foster home.
sighyoung wrote:Which, to me, is tantamount to saying that a governmental foster care system is preferable for many children than private homes.
I would agree with that statement, actually. These kids have been dealt a bad plot in life and likely have already developed issues and they need to be in an environment that will help them deal with that. Why do people adopt foster children? There's not many reasons:
1) Salt of the earth, light of the world type people do it out of the kindness of their heart to help children that are truly in an atrocious and horrible situation. Not to say cohabitating and gay couples can't be this way.
2) For evil. Be it simply greed or lust, the kids are there for a reason and are not getting the love and nurturing they deserve.
IMO, in case #2, they are better off in a state system. And, while not all the people banned from adopting or hosting foster children by any means are like that, I think this law does a lot to get rid of those types of people.
Would you care to explain the logic your using to reach this conclusion?
Married couples I would say are less likely to adopt children with the intent of sexually abusing them. Maybe not.
sighyoung wrote:Which, to me, is tantamount to saying that a governmental foster care system is preferable for many children than private homes.
I would agree with that statement, actually. These kids have been dealt a bad plot in life and likely have already developed issues and they need to be in an environment that will help them deal with that. Why do people adopt foster children? There's not many reasons:
1) Salt of the earth, light of the world type people do it out of the kindness of their heart to help children that are truly in an atrocious and horrible situation. Not to say cohabitating and gay couples can't be this way.
2) For evil. Be it simply greed or lust, the kids are there for a reason and are not getting the love and nurturing they deserve.
IMO, in case #2, they are better off in a state system. And, while not all the people banned from adopting or hosting foster children by any means are like that, I think this law does a lot to get rid of those types of people.
Would you care to explain the logic your using to reach this conclusion?
Married couples I would say are less likely to adopt children with the intent of sexually abusing them. Maybe not.
Yeah I'd say that's a pretty baseless assumption.
Yeah, I'd say it more than makes sense.
Well that's why I asked you to explain it,... which you still haven't done.
sighyoung wrote:Which, to me, is tantamount to saying that a governmental foster care system is preferable for many children than private homes.
I would agree with that statement, actually. These kids have been dealt a bad plot in life and likely have already developed issues and they need to be in an environment that will help them deal with that. Why do people adopt foster children? There's not many reasons:
1) Salt of the earth, light of the world type people do it out of the kindness of their heart to help children that are truly in an atrocious and horrible situation. Not to say cohabitating and gay couples can't be this way.
2) For evil. Be it simply greed or lust, the kids are there for a reason and are not getting the love and nurturing they deserve.
IMO, in case #2, they are better off in a state system. And, while not all the people banned from adopting or hosting foster children by any means are like that, I think this law does a lot to get rid of those types of people.
Would you care to explain the logic your using to reach this conclusion?
Married couples I would say are less likely to adopt children with the intent of sexually abusing them. Maybe not.
Yeah I'd say that's a pretty baseless assumption.
Yeah, I'd say it more than makes sense.
How so? Almost every story I hear about sexual abuse happens at the hands of a married man. Usually a stepfather.
EDIT: Except priests of course, who maybe wouldn't have the problems that they do if they were allowed to marry in the first place.
Last edited by Popeye_Card on November 6 08, 10:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:Plus, I don't see how anyone is going to argue that a family isn't better suited to raise a child than a non-family.
And what exactly is a family? And what's a non-family? Single people can still adopt in Arkansas. The only people who cannot are people who are living like a family but are not married - which of course for the main people targeted by this legislation is not an option anyway.
sighyoung wrote:Which, to me, is tantamount to saying that a governmental foster care system is preferable for many children than private homes.
I would agree with that statement, actually. These kids have been dealt a bad plot in life and likely have already developed issues and they need to be in an environment that will help them deal with that. Why do people adopt foster children? There's not many reasons:
1) Salt of the earth, light of the world type people do it out of the kindness of their heart to help children that are truly in an atrocious and horrible situation. Not to say cohabitating and gay couples can't be this way.
2) For evil. Be it simply greed or lust, the kids are there for a reason and are not getting the love and nurturing they deserve.
IMO, in case #2, they are better off in a state system. And, while not all the people banned from adopting or hosting foster children by any means are like that, I think this law does a lot to get rid of those types of people.
Would you care to explain the logic your using to reach this conclusion?
Married couples I would say are less likely to adopt children with the intent of sexually abusing them. Maybe not.
Yeah I'd say that's a pretty baseless assumption.
Yeah, I'd say it more than makes sense.
Well that's why I asked you to explain it,... which you still haven't done.
Sex is one of our basic needs. If you're in a marriage, you're getting that need fulfilled or at least have a healthy place to get it. to me, it boils down to this, would you rather go into a lions den where they have been fed a wildabeast every day for a year or would you rather go into a lions den where they haven't been fed in a couple weeks? Your call.
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:
Sex is one of our basic needs. If you're in a marriage, you're getting that need fulfilled or at least have a healthy place to get it. to me, it boils down to this, would you rather go into a lions den where they have been fed a wildabeast every day for a year or would you rather go into a lions den where they haven't been fed in a couple weeks? Your call.
Have you never watched a sitcom? Single people and unwed cohabitants get laid way more often than married people.
