“Children are entitled…to be reared by a father and a mother…”
Given current trends in how society thinks and what some have made into laws, I’d like to clarify my thoughts on adoption.
Adoption ought to be a wonderful thing. It helps ease the inevitable imperfection of life that not all children have loving parents. Some have parents who were killed, some have parents who abuse them, some are the result of rape, and so on. Ideally, all of these children should be adopted into families with parents who will nurture them and provide for their needs.
Unfortunately, there are not as many families willing and ready to adopt as there are children in need. For this reason, society has responded with the concept of a foster home. The goal of foster homes is (or ought to be) to simulate as closely as possible what a real home would be like. It does so to contribute to the development and happiness of the children living there as much as possible until they can be adopted or come of age.
Recently, society has proposed a new solution to this problem. Rather than sustain an institution that is not intended to permanently replace the traditional family (as in an ideal world all those in a foster home would be adopted into families), society has opted for a permanent replacement of the traditional family in some cases by allowing gay and lesbian partnerships to adopt children.
This is a faulty solution for many reasons. Homosexual relationships were never meant to be the foundation for a family and public endorsement of such an idea is harmful. Children who are adopted have little or no choice over whether they are adopted by both a mother and father, as when they are minors all important decisions are usually made for them by adults. Adoptions are largely permanent, and such an adoption removes most if not all hope that the child will someday be part of a real family.
THE FAMILY is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.
Since before the beginning of time, the family was, is, and has always meant to be defined by a marriage between a man and a woman. This family can be expanded by the birth and adoption of children. It is absolutely, fundamentally essential that children have both a mother and a father to lead them, guide them, and be examples for them. It is the way that God has instituted, and if children are raised by parents who are not married or who are of the same sex the resulting construct falls short of what can properly be considered a family.
Federal, state, and local laws have no effect on God’s laws. People cannot just will their actions to be acceptable and moral. Legalizing the adoption of children by gay and lesbian partnerships will simply lead society to further deceive itself and break down even further its most fundamental unit: the family.
The most important right of children treated here has already been declared: “Children are entitled…to be reared by a father and a mother…” Needless to say, this right is not always fulfilled. Ideally there should be no fatherless or motherless children. However, when addressing this problem, it is essential to avoid creating additional problems with faulty solutions. The answer to declining company profits isn’t to use fraud. Incapability to meet expectations is not rationale to consciously violate moral laws.
Individuals and organizations have resources to address problems such as these. However, care should be taken to address such problems in an appropriate manner.
A brief analogy may be considered: a hungry young woman in desperate need of meal has just two options: plain rice, or a prepared meal containing foods to which she is allergic. The plain rice is like a foster home—it will help you survive but isn’t ideal. The prepared meal with allergy inducing foods is like a homosexual partnership—it looks appealing and even mimics the ideal but in reality can be harmful. The young woman chooses to eat the plain rice trusting that better meals will someday come her way.
The analogy may be strengthened if the young woman is actually a young girl about four years of age. The child may not understand that eating allergy-inducing foods will cause her pain and suffering. It is up to her knowledgable caretakers to provide for her the best they can given their limited options. They should not compromise due to her persuasions or because they disregard what they know to be true.
This is understandably a difficult topic. Children are among the most precious people in this world, and we ought to do all we can to help them to learn and grow and feel love and belonging. It may be hard to turn away from a proposed solution that seems so appealing. However, God’s timeless morals should not be trodden underfoot in order to implement a quick solution to a problem that needs much more attention. Sexual sins, including participating in homosexual activity, are among the worst people can commit. As hard as it may be to accept, it is better that children be raised and given the best care available in a foster home than it is for them to be raised by a homosexual couple. Only by staying true to the standard God has set can we prove that we are willing to make the sacrifice required to avoid endorsing heinous sin.