‘Quartet of Truth’: adult ‘kids’ of gay ‘parents’ speak out

"When we institutionalize same-sex marriage... we move from permitting citizens the freedom to live as they choose, to promoting same-sex headed households. Now we are normalizing a family structure where a child will always be deprived daily of one gender influence and the relationship with at least one natural parent. Our cultural narrative becomes one that, in essence, tells children that they have no right to the natural family structure or their biological parents, but that children simply exist for the satisfaction of adult desires." -Katy Faust

(New Orleans, LA, Jan 13th 2015) - As the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals considers whether to strike down laws in three states banning same-sex "marriage," four adult children of homosexual parents have filed court briefings arguing that government-sanctioned homosexual unions could lead to disaster for thousands of kids.

Katy Faust, Dawn Stefanowicz, B.N. Klein, and Robert Oscar Lopez, who were all raised by homosexual parents, each submitted briefs to the 5th Circuit opposing the legalization of same-sex "marriage." Recounting childhood memories of households made deeply dysfunctional by their parents' sexual appetites and the radical subculture that went along with their "gay" identities, all four argued that redefining marriage to include homosexual couples will likely lead to the exploitation and abuse of countless children for political and personal gain.

"I grew up with a parent and her partner[s] in an atmosphere in which gay ideology was used as a tool of repression, retribution and abuse," wrote B. N. Klein of her lesbian mother and her series of live-in lovers.

"While I do not believe all gays would be de facto bad parents, I know that the gay community has never in my lifetime put children first as anything other than a piece of property, a past mistake or a political tool to be dressed up and taken out as part of a dog-and-pony show to impress the well-meaning," Klein wrote. She added that as a child of a lesbian mother, she was pressured to pay "constant homage and attention" to her mother's gay identity, taught that "some Jews and most Christians were stupid and hated gays and were violent," and told that homosexuals were "much more creative and artistic because they were not repressed and were naturally more ‘feeling.'"

While Klein classified her upbringing as abusive, Robert Oscar Lopez told the court that his own childhood upbringing by his mother and her longtime partner represented the "best possible conditions for a child raised by a same-sex couple." Even so, Lopez testified that the lack of a father figure in his life, combined with the influence of the radical gay culture in which he was raised, gave rise to a devastating confusion about his own sexuality and ultimately led to his becoming a homosexual prostitute in his teen years in order to fulfill his craving for acceptance and love from older men.

"Had I been formally studied by same-sex parenting ‘experts' in 1985, I would have confirmed their rosiest estimations of LGBT family life," Lopez wore. "[But] behind these façades of a happy ‘outcome' lay many problems."

"I experienced a great deal of sexual confusion," Lopez wrote. "I had an inexplicable compulsion to have sex with older males … and wanted to have sex with older men who were my father's age, though at the time I could scarcely understand what I was doing."

Lopez said that he has spoken to dozens of other adult children of homosexuals, and that many of them have similar stories of pain and damage inflicted by the absence of a biological parent and the unwanted "step-parent" type relationship demanded by their homosexual parents' lovers. Lopez included testimonies from nine of them in his brief, but said there were many more who were afraid to speak out for fear that the homosexual lobby would target them for harassment like they have Lopez himself.

"Children raised by same-sex couples face a gauntlet if they break the silence about the ‘no disadvantages' consensus," Lopez wrote, after recounting how homosexual activists harassed his employers and spread lies about him on the internet after he first came forward about his own childhood experiences as the son of a lesbian. "In such a climate, I must conclude that placing children in same-sex couples' homes is dangerous, because they have no space or latitude to express negative feelings about losing a mom or dad, and in fact they have much to fear if they do."

Katy Faust also [wrote], "Some adult children with gay parents shy away from making their thoughts about marriage public because we do not want to jeopardize our relationships with those to whom our hearts are tethered. Unfortunately, many gay-marriage lobbyists have made gay marriage the sole badge of loyalty to our LGBT family and friends."

"The label of bigot or hater has become very powerful and effective tools to silence those of us who choose not to endorse the marriage platform of many gay lobbyists," Faust continued. "For much of my adult life I was content to keep my opinions on the subject of marriage to myself. I was (and still am) sickened by the accusation that I was bigoted and anti-gay for my belief in natural marriage."

"For many years those devices kept me quiet," admitted Faust. "I didn't seek a venue where I could share my views. But I have come to realize that my silence, and the silence of others, has allowed for the conversation to be dominated by those who claim that only animus, ignorance, or indoctrination could lead one to oppose ‘marriage equality.'"

Faust said that her outspokenness against same-sex "marriage" stems from her belief that every child has a right to a relationship with his or her mother and father.

“When we institutionalize same-sex marriage … we move from permitting citizens the freedom to live as they choose, to promoting same-sex headed households,” Faust wrote. “Now we are normalizing a family structure where a child will always be deprived daily of one gender influence and the relationship with at least one natural parent. Our cultural narrative becomes one that, in essence, tells children that they have no right to the natural family structure or their biological parents, but that children simply exist for the satisfaction of adult desires.”

Dawn Stefanowicz echoed the sentiments of the other three, in a frank and graphic testimony of her childhood with a promiscuous homosexual father who later died of AIDS.

“It is quite difficult to discuss the implications of growing up in a gay household until later in adulthood when we have developed a measure of personal identity and independence apart from our GLBT parent, partners and the subcultures,” Stefanowicz wrote. “We are often forced to approve and tolerate all forms of expressed sexuality, including various sexual and gender identity preferences.”

“As children, we are not allowed to express our disagreement, pain and confusion,” wrote Stefanowicz. “Most adult children from gay households do not feel safe or free to publicly express their stories and life-long challenges; they fear losing professional licenses, not obtaining employment in their chosen field, being cut off from some family members or losing whatever relationship they have with their gay parent(s). Some gay parents have threatened to leave no inheritance, if the children don’t accept their parent’s partner du jour.”

“The special-interest GLBT groups and so-called support groups for kids sometimes act, or function, as fronts for a far darker side that silences, intimidates and threatens the children who want to share the truth, allowing only a politically-correct version of our childhoods to be heard,” Stefanowicz continued. “These special-interest groups support political and legal objectives toward same-sex marriage, ignoring the horrendous inequality, permanent losses and prejudice to children in the name of adult sexual rights. Children lose forever their rights to know and be raised by their married biological father and mother.”

A three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit heard oral arguments (audio here) regarding the legality of state bans on same-sex “marriage” last Friday. However, it could be months before they issue an opinion.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to review a lower court decision upholding Louisiana’s ban on same-sex “marriage.” The high court is still considering whether to hear arguments concerning bans in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee.

Original report of these four adults' testimonies HERE

Share Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow us Facebooktwitterrssyoutube

32 Responses

  1. Hi,

    Thank you for raising some important issues to consider in the debate regarding homosexual marriage. In reading this article it concerns me that children may be exposed to the’politics’ of gay life and have views forced on them by homosexual parents that seek to promote their lifestyle as superior to others.

    Having said that, it also concerns me that some children of same sex parents write that the gay community have not had real regard for children beyond being ‘property’. That simply is a sad observation that I do not believe adequately represents reality.

    Yes we absolutely should discuss the rights of children in the context of gay marriage. However, as a gay man it is extremely offensive and a very dangerous generalisation to suggest ALL gay parents have innapropriate motives when it comes to raising children. It shows a lack of understanding of the complexity of people, sexuality and relationships.

    I personally find it difficult to support same sex couples having children – even though I am gay, and I have children from a heterosexual marriage.

    I can see why children deserve both a mother and a father. I agree with this and wish that this was always possible – yet I also know of many cases where heterosexual marriages have damaged children in a far greater way than same sex parents.

    Unfortunately, parents in many cases come to understand their homosexuality long after having created children in a loving heterosexual union. In these cases marriages often fail and children are exposed to new partners and split parenting and homosexual relationships. In my experience, there has been no ‘political’ or inappropriate motives and the children were absolutely put first.

    Let’s have the debate, but let’s also have it without terrible generalisations that are derogatory to many kind hearted and wonderful people that have found themselves in very challenging and difficult circumstances. Sexuality is not something easily understood, or controlled when it comes to identity. My stance is the same for the supporters of same sex parenting – keep the propaganda out, be objective, and avoid generalisations that do not progress the topic and polarise the debate.

    The issues are so complex – some want full equality and with that the right to have children. yet many simply want the ability to marry – they can’t biologically have children, and there are separate laws regarding that. So I ask this forum, which rightly brings children into the debate, why can’t the issues you are bring together be separated ? Do you object to gay marriage where no children will be involved ?

    • admin

      Andy, that is a beautiful and wise comment, thank you.

      Please don’t think there is any “generalisation” on the part of AMF “to suggest ALL gay parents have inappropriate motives when it comes to raising children”. We don’t even suggest that any gay parents have inappropriate motives. We just suggest, as you seem to appreciate, that a EVERY child should have the possibility, on entering existence, of that bond with both mother and father that we all hold dear. That possibility may fail, through tragedy such as the death or desertion of a parent – but we should not have government deliberately creating an institution that will deprive a child, from the start, of that possibility.

      Very interesting re “Do you object to gay marriage where no children will be involved?” but unfortunately that is a legally incoherent question. Marriage, after all, is a compound right under international law: “the right to marry and found a family” (Article 16, Universal Declaration of Human Rights). You cannot, in law, separate the right to marry from the right to form a family – meaning the equal right for gay couples to adopt and create a child by surrogacy.

      Think of Sir Elton John and his ‘married’ partner David Furnish, who created baby Zach through surrogacy using an anonymous egg donor in India. That child is absolutely cut off from any knowledge of his mother, simply because, as the rock star put it, “I wanted someone to love into my old age”.

      What we are objecting to is the idea of a government policy, ‘same-sex marriage’, that deliberately creates an institution where it is impossible for a child to have both a mother and a father, right from the start. That’s what a law for same-sex marriage would do, because it carries the right to same-sex adoption and surrogacy.

      We really appreciated your comment, Andy. That is what makes a discussion forum worthwhile.

      AMF

    • All children deserve to be raised by their parents. Obviously things go wrong in families but to sanction a relationship as a marriage that has as its first option a 3rd party arrangement in order to have children, whether now or later changes the nature of a child from being a gift to a right, a chattel made to order, to be traded and ultimately, abused.
      Fix marriages that are broken, don’t broaden the definition to include a relationship that adds nothing to marriage other than to relatavise it.

    • What your saying is let’s have a debate but leave the facts out of it because you find it offensive.

  2. The stories and testimonies of these adults about their childhood are valid and I have empathy for them. However I am sure they were brought up by parents that were not married so what difference would it make if they were married? Gay marriage is something that would not see more children raised in society by same sex parents because two females or two males cannot produce children. They would have to go through the same expensive, time consuming & taxing avenues as they can already legally do right now. Where is the argument here?

    I agree that the best case scenario for children is to be brought up in, is a family that has two parents, male and female, that child has siblings, that has love and kindness shown, parents that show no bias, that encourages open mindedness, social awareness, lawfulness, responsibility and does not encourage discrimination against race, creed, colour, sexuality etc., and I could go on and on. Now tell me what is the percentage of children being brought up in that sort of environment? What is the reason for the degeneration of societies values, attitudes, respect etc.? It is certainly not because Gay people are getting married and all of a sudden there is anarchy on our streets.

    The Gay marriage debate is not about more children being reared in that environment as I can’t see how that could possibly change the present situation. I see Gay marriage as equal rights, equal opportunities, and no discrimination against any person or group on the grounds of sexuality, religion, race or colour. It was 1912 when women were given the right to vote and the arguments on this subject would have been similar to those opposed to that back then. The arguments are totally on the grounds that somebody does not like it because that is not what they are used to, or that they have been taught by some prejudiced person or people that it is “just not right”. I see in the community that there are many people that teach hatred, prejudice, discrimination and as a consequence there are people out there acting out on these teachings. Lets stop this and encourage, fairness, equal opportunities for everyone, love and compassion. We are all human, we all bleed and we all want love and happiness in our lives.

    • admin

      Thanks Michael.
      Re the idea that gay marriage “would not see more children raised… by same-sex parents”, I think that is incorrect. Same-sex marriage is not merely symbolic: it contains the right, under international law, to “found a family” (Art 16 UDHR) and therefore a federal gay marriage law will over-rule those states which do not allow same-sex adoption or surrogacy. Gay marriage law will be the definitive violation of a child’s fundamental right to have, where possible, both a mother and a father. We must stop it happening – and also repeal any laws allowing single people or same-sex couples to adopt or create a child by surrogacy. Only then will our policy be consistent in opposing ANY law that deliberately deprives a child of their mother or their father – whether surrogacy and adoption for same-sex couples OR for single people.

      Re the observation that some parents are not loving and kind, so therefore why not let kind and loving gay parents bring up kids? We know that some parents are unloving, even a danger to their children. That is not right for kids. But because a child in one house is being badly treated by his parents does not make it ‘right’ that another child in another house should be forced – by our laws – to have no mother or no father. Neither option is right for a child. We need to restrain and retrain parents who harm their children; we also need to restrain governments who would create laws that deprive, in a premeditated way, a child of their natural right to their biological mother or father.

  3. “Now we are normalizing a family structure where a child will always be deprived daily of one gender influence and the relationship with at least one natural parent.” The idea that the nuclear family of two adults of different sexes and a collection of full siblings is ‘normal’ is a very very new concept, only a few generations old. People have been raised in all sorts of varieties of households across the cultures and across the ages – mostly as circumstances dictate. Extended families are far more the norm than nuclear ones. The high death rate in Western culture until last century saw lots of children raised outside of the nuclear family. Plenty of children dont have a daily relationship with at least one natural parent – while being raised by straight/married partners. We call them step parents and dont worry about it – unless its the parenting thats the problem, not the biology. Yes, some children of gay parents have had bad experiences with how they were raised. So have many children of their married, heterosexual, biological parents. No one blames the fact that the parents are straight, together and married as the reason for the bad parenting – they look for the other factors. To be ‘deprived daily of one gender influence’ says more about the disconnection in our culture than anything else. To assume that the only adult interactions a child has are with the ones they live with is very sad and very limiting. That’s a failure of community, not of the gender makeup of individual households. A child’s ‘natural right to a biological mother and father’ rules out all adoptions, all assisted pregnancies where one or both partners has fertility issues and so donor sperm and/or eggs are used, all step parents, all grandparents, all foster parents. Its particular definition excludes a lot of currently very functioning households that to date, no one has had any issue with. Will these households also be part of the exclusion zone used to deny gay partners the rights to marry and raise children – because by that definition they should be.

    • Thank you! Exactly what I was going to say.

    • AJ

      Based on the the testimonies of the children of gay and bisexual parents I think there is enough evidence that someting is seriously wrong here. What kind of a woman gives away her child for money. This is child tourism. This might be misuse of the woman because of her low social status – like the women in the war that were raped just to keep their lives. The studies show that the sexual identity is easily lost by the children of gay couples and the strong gay lobbying is significantly making the hetero children even more unsure about their sexuality. The evedence of APA is presented but many of the very top level APA experts have also accepted torture. They changed their minds. APA is not the Good. If the goverment accepts the gay marriage and consequently surrogation freely in all situations, there will be even more gay people in the world due to distorted genes. We will se an explosion of gay marriages and children with inherited homogenes. The whole concept of surrogation is relatively new and clearly has the power to fullfill the individual selfish needs of adult gay people that take away the right of the child to have both the mother and the father and see the roles models that have existed for millions of years. Why do the gay people completely neglect this fact? This order has existed for millions of years – why should we suddenly take away someting that naturally belongs to the child? This does not need to be resolved politically. Even if the politics wonn due to democracy your children gays and lesbos will have this unpleasant position in the society forever. In the marriage there is no democracy – there are two equal persons. Don’t use the democracy as a tool – listen to the testimonies of the children of gay parents. The population of gays have been limited in the past naturally for millions of years because they could not be genetically reproduced. Why should we now suddenly allow in large scale surrogation an army of of gay people who systematically can not support the resulting heterosexual developmet of hetero children which is an overwhelmingly largest part of the population? This is dangerous and very risky experiment for the society. Why can’t the gay peole develop their own legislation because they are different? The goverment should not on purpose create even more genetical gays than has been the case before.

  4. The parenting arrangements you list: grand parents, step parents etc are societies way of making the best of a situation where the parents began in good faith to raise a family. This is a far cry from legalising as its first and only option the 3rd party creation of a family by same couples.

    • But “making the best of things” is what many, many heterosexual parents do in the first place. A lot of them are young couples who both have to work or even study and don’t necessarily have the means to provide the best environment for their child – but they make do with what they have. And that’s saying nothing of monoparental families!

      All of this is perfectly legal at the moment, even if it’s not the best arrangement for a child and may actually cause issues (children of very poor households tend to struggle to keep up academically, for example). Are you saying that it should be made illegal?
      If not, why should the creation of homosexual families be banned but not the creation of these other ‘risky’ familial situations?

      • Thank you so much for your misogyny. Yes, mothers who have to work outside home are evil. Thank you in the name of all women in the world.

  5. The whole LGBT Agenda is bringing our whole society even further into moral decay. The eroding of values is at a peak. If in God’s eyes he was ok with the Gays, then there would not be AIDS. However, most in the LGBT Agenda are not into God so will not look at what is written in the Bible especially in the old testament. Everybody these days just wants to live their life however they want. There will be a cost to humanity in the future and I think that cost will come sooner rather than later.

    • I’m sorry but AIDS is a Sexually transmitted disease spread by people of any sexuality, it is not a homosexual disease and people need to realise this. What about all the other sexual diseases? Do they mean that God doesn’t approve of heterosexual people? You cannot use God as an example for why it is bad, especially if you get facts wrong about your own religion. I used to believe in God, but now I am not so sure. If everyone just accepts the LGBT community then there will be no “cost to humanity” the only way humanity will suffer is from people being stubborn enough to suggest that we do not belong and therefore it is you people who will erode values and bring our society into moral decay.

    • Moral decline will continue until end of days. The world is turning into a disgusting filth ridden quagmire. Homosexual agendas are just contributing to the eventual end of our species.

  6. The articles by Marks and Regnerus have completely changed the playing field for debates about homosexual parents, “gay families,” and same-sex “marriage.” The myths that children of homosexual parents are “no different” from other children and suffer “no harm” from being raised by homosexual parents have been shattered forever.

    Children of lesbian mothers:
    Are more likely to be currently cohabiting
    Are almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance
    Are less likely to be currently employed full-time
    Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
    Are nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual
    Are 3 times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting
    Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been “touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver.”
    Are nearly 4 times as likely to have been “physically forced” to have sex against their will
    Are more likely to have “attachment” problems related to the ability to depend on others
    Use marijuana more frequently
    Smoke more frequently
    Watch TV for long periods more frequently
    Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense

    (small except)

  7. Hello
    I understand what you’re saying, but I’d like to say a few things.

    1) The ideology of children not being able to express their ideas without fear of jeopardising their relationship with their parents is not solely bound to same-sex parents. Myself as a member of the LGBT community, can not express my ideas either, to my straight, Christian parents. Because of their firm-held beliefs, I cannot express what I believe to be correct without the constant fear of dejection. Just realise that this argument is rather invalid, as it can go both ways.

    2) What about single mothers/fathers? What about the lack of a mother/father influence on a child’s life? Sure, you could respond that a single parent could remarry, but this is usually done once the child has reached maturity. Furthermore, you could say that other men/women are an influence on them as the role of the other parent without being them biological mother/father, but the same could be applied to a same-sex parenthood.

    3) It should also be noted that you are making a summary of all same-sex parents and the results of their children by the outcomes of only a few. There are more, and I’ll admit that not all gay relationships are monogamous, but neither are straight relationships. Also, what you’re saying could be interpreted in a way that suggests that a same-sex parenthood is just as successful, if not less successful than a parenthood that consists of a mother and father that don’t look after their child.

    4) You talk about the LGBT community raising children as if it is just an adult desire. If someone wants a child, they do it because they want to help a small person grow into a greater person with a lot of potential. How could you call that an adult desire, as if it’s sexually driven? As for myself, I probably wish to raise children some day – not because I simply want a child, but I want to have that feeling of being bound as a loving family. I’d raise my children with love and meekness; with kindness and compassion. I want to help them through life. I want the best for them. I want them to achieve so much, and if I could provide that to an orphaned child, I would do it. Wouldn’t you, if you could? What I’m saying is that anyone can. There’s nothing wrong with the parenting. It’s how the child perceives it. Sure, there may be extremist same sex parents that drill into their kids that gay is okay, and that’s cool. They have a good intention. But not all parents are like that. I’d have a similar motto, except it would be more generalised as ‘Love and tolerate everyone and their differences.’

    I’m not trying to change your opinion. As long as we’re online, that’ll never ever happen, because for some reason on social media, everyone is sent into this mode of adamant frenzy. I just want you to consider these points. Personally, a lot of your arguments offended me. It seemed as if you were trying to make me feel bad about wanting to give an orphan the opportunity to become a great person with potential. Just consider what I’ve said. You’ll find they’re true, no matter how much you deny it.

    Sorry to rant, but I’m passionate about this stuff. Have a nice day, Godspeed (:

    Allecyn.

    • admin

      Thanks for sharing your thoughts here, Allecyn. Your honesty and passion is appreciated. I’ll do my best to respond to each of your comments. 1) Open, honest, respectful conversation on this issue is required from everyone involved. No one should be shouted down or be made to feel ‘dejected,’ whichever side of the argument they’re on.
      2) The absolute best case scenario we can offer children is to grow up with their biological parents. Not all biological parents get it right, or stay together – this is tragic. It shouldn’t be where we set the bar. Intentionally denying a child of one biological parent before the child is even born, is not ideal.
      3) I think I’ve covered this in 2).
      4) Many people in the LGBT community (and single parents, too) are doing a wonderful job at parenting but the fact remains that 2 mums cannot replace 1 dad and 2 dads cannot replace 1 mum, whatever their good intentions might be.

  8. The LGBT community needs to show that they genuinely care about children by listening to and valuing the feelings and insights of those raised in their community. To deflect attention onto the fact that not all heterosexual relationships are successful does not change the fact that same sex couples cannot provide the biological elements required for a family unit. Marriage will always be about family and children will always be a crucial part of that model. Children need both a mother and father to understand their identity. We see the need to understand ones biological history from the many adopted children who at some point in their lives go searching for their birth mother and father to understand their identity more fully. The LGBT community need to recognise that a child being raised with both biological parents wherever humanly possible is a valid human right for children. I applaud those who have been raised in the LGBT community having the courage to speak about their experiences and their belief that traditional marriage is the best way to protect children’s rights. The sexual confusion experienced by children raised in LGBT communities and the disadvantage of being robbed of either a father or mother are issues that cannot be overlooked. The abuse these grown children have suffered because they have a different viewpoint from gay activists is shameful. I also do not support IVF or surrogacy services being provided to single people as it automatically denies a child their human rights from birth and puts that child at greater disadvantage. Children are the most vulnerable people in our society and we must do all we can the protect their rights. As Jimmy Carter rightly said, ‘The measure of a society is found in how they treat their weakest and most helpless citizens’.

  9. Hello before I get into my arguments (although I am not particularly fond of that word as it tends to be rather aggressive.) I would like to inform you that I am a biological female who although has attractions to both males and females I prefer girls and yes I am fairly young too and also whenever I show my views on this sort of topic to someone with the opposite view I have never experienced a time when I am unable to rebut what they argue (in other words I have never “lost” a debate, but I don’t believe in winning or losing debates) I always either find that the other person can not rebut what I have said or we continue rebutting with no end in sight. But I’m open minded and always up to be shut up haha

    Anyway sorry for the long introduction. Here are some things I have thought of on the subject.
    1) the whole denying a child of a father or mother figure is quite interesting. Do you know of masculinity and femininity? Many homosexual men and women are quite masculine, many of them are feminine, same goes with heterosexual men and women, many are masculine and many are feminine. Some couples consist of a masculine mother and a feminine father, some couples have both mother and father as masculine or feminine. So if I am correct, this whole father/mother figure is based upon genitals. So if there was a family where there was a very masculine mother and a very feminine mother that the child is simply missing out because they do not have a parent that has a different set of sex organs? That is just what it seems. Although you may say that a father is the masculine figure for a child and the mother is the feminine figure, the thing is not every man is going to be masculine and not every woman is going to be feminine. I am not sure if you understand where I am going with this as I can complicate my words sometimes.

    2.) I’m also intrigued by how you say that children have the right to a natural family structure which means you are suggesting that in nature all offspring are raised by the biological mother and father which is absolutely incorrect. In nature there are many different family type structures in which young can be brought up, so who are we to suggest that being with a mother and father is the natural structure? It is simply the normal structure, not natural. And by normal I mean it is what is considered “right” because it is so common. You forget that humans are highly social animals, we feel the need to belong to society and how do we fit in? By following everyone else regardless of how we feel about it. A reason why some children being raised by same sex couples do not feel too great about it would be because of society. Basically living in a different family structure that is often shamed upon and not too common is obviously not going to help how they feel. But that is only now, if people legalise same sex marriage and give same sex couples the right to raise a family then in a way you are accepting them into society, and so society starts to change and therefore both family structures are deemed normal. However there may always be the odd one or two children who still may crave to have the mother Or father that they are not with, and yes I believe they have the right to find that kind of figure if it makes them happy. But in actual fact a new born child does not know what a “natural family structure” is and so you are not denying them from it, however if they do grow up to really crave that kind of family then no their same sex parents should not keep them from that nor make the child feel scared to express themselves. But like others have previously said, heterosexual couples can do the same, for example I live with a Christian mother and her parents are Christian and I could not express myself to her, she ridicules my friends who are gay which makes me afraid to express how I feel. So the feeling goes both ways so no matter what you say, the argument that same sex couples make the child afraid to express a different opinion and such is completely invalid since it occurs in both structures.

    3.) also what does it matter to you? Another person’s family is none of your business and is not relevant to your own life unless you make it. Of course in saying that if there is real danger in any family whether it is heterosexual or homosexual then it can be relevant and you could maybe try doing something about it if you can and stuff. So yeah a happy loving homosexual couple raising happy children who are free to express their feelings.

    4.) it was also stated that by legalising it and depriving a child of one gender influence is saying that children only exist for the satisfaction of adult desires, well then why do children exist? You must have the desire to raise children in order to raise them. So that makes absolutely no sense because if you think about it children exist to satisfy our need to raise a family, what other reason would we have children for? But the way it has been stated does make it sound like you are saying that same sex couples consider children as their property, like objects that do not possess individuality, their own thoughts and rights, which is absolutely wrong, you may not have intended it to mean this but that is what it seems to mean. I can not see any reason why the gender of two people affects their ability to raise children and their natural desire to raise children. It simply doesn’t make sense. For me, since I am female, that means I get to experience the pregnancy and birth of the child of me and my partner, and of course I would want the child to be biologically hers instead of mine because then I get to raise a child that is part of my partner and raise them with my partner by my side and be able to watch them grow and learn and I cannot think of anything more beautiful than that (although being able to have a child that is biologically mine and hers would be even more magical) I know that the day she does bring that child of ours into the world I will break down in tears of joy, as any straight couple would know that the birth of their child is such a magical thing. If I did have a child with my girlfriend, it shouldn’t be “deprived of a father figure” because I would be that figure, I’d much prefer to be the father of a child rather than a mother, being a father appeals to me more. I also read often in the article of a child dealing with its parent’s multiple partners, as if saying that same sex couples simply can’t last, that we need to change partners often, which is true for some homosexual AND heterosexual individuals. I for one can not imagine myself constantly changing partners, one of my fears is that my partner may lose interest and leave me for another, which is something that happens in both homosexual and heterosexual worlds. I would prefer to find someone to stay with for their entire life. Of course you have provided some little bits of evidence for all this but no where near enough to suggest that all this is true for most same sex couples.

    5.) just to maybe add a few things, don’t use any arguments against paragraph 2 that use the common saying that we are not animals. I understand many people fail to realise that we are in fact animals, mostly because of things such as religion, my grandparents and my mother do not believe that we are animals when we are. I am atheist because things that are said in religions (mostly Christianity) simply don’t make sense to me. By that I mean I was raised to be a Christian, and I believed that I was until I started realising how far fetched some things sound. Do not consider me a disbeliever or whatever as i am not saying that God is not real, I am saying that the idea that he is real sounds a bit far fetched and therefore I am not going to place all my hope into that belief, but I believe in the possibility of these things being true. Anyway obviously my statement that we are animals is of course science based, but it honestly makes the most sense, if we are not animals then what are we? We have everything that other animals have, the only difference is that we have higher intelligence and are very self aware, which are things that do not suggest that we are not animals. If you know what I mean, just to clear that up if you were considering using that argument. Also, this may just be me, but reading the article makes me feel like you were talking about homosexual people as if they are sex crazed people, that they are addicted to sex, which makes no sense. But anyway I’m very curious to see if you have something to say in a response to, in short, shut me up haha but I seem to have quite elaborate views? Or something but anyway it’ll be interesting haha.

  10. Such an interesting take on the issue of marriage equality and same-sex parenting. In a society that is continually changing and developing due to a change in values and ideals it is con suing as why marriage has not yet been legalised in Australia. We are a multicultural country that is built on accepting those who are from all spectrums of life and embrace them into a community that values the idea of uniqueness and dissimilarity. But for some reason when it comes to marriage equality and parenting this is not the case. I feel however that if marriage were to be legalised in Australia than a sense of equality would be enveloped by the LGBT community and barriers such as parenting and its legal recognition would slowly disappear. Yes, thee is now a legal recognition for same-sex couples in the adoption system in certain parts of Australia, but laws to me do not seal that deal that everything is now ok. As a country we must accept that the LGBT community is no different to anyone else, we must equalise them with everyone and understand that their roles are parents and care-givers to there children is exactly the same as any heterosexual couple. Once we grasp this we will be able to move forward as a nation and accept the notion of equality amongst all.

    • Thank you! I agree with this comment. I have seen the good effects of Gay couples. As my youngest brother has two dads. I still see him, and he is the happiest he has ever been. My mum still see’s him as well.

  11. I am currently working on an argumentive speech on Why gays SHOULD have equal gay rights. I feel as if the article lacked in some way. It didn’t give any data information on what profesionals and scientist have tested. You know, percentages with numbers. I am disappointed because you have only taken on personal opions to prove your point and not scienticic results on the matter. I do emitfie with those people, sometimes things happen. I am not angry because every one is subject to there own opion. I feel as if Gay marriage should be legalized, not kept to “NATURAL MARRIEGE” Natural marriage is between a man and a woman that are both BAPTIZED. So if two catholic woman, both baptized were to be married it is still conzided natural marriage. It said nothing about it not being between a man and a man or a two woman. Just a man and a woman baptized. My younger brother has and still is being raised by a gay couple because of my mothers illness and he has not suffered any abuse. He is well contained and does not think that straight or gays are better. He is only upset when his friends laugh at him when he says that his parents are Gay. I have met them my self and they are some of the loviest people in the world. Not every Gay person is horrible. I feel as if you sereotyped us Gay people. I am a Gay person myself and think nothing of Gay being higher then straights. I look the same as everyone else. Should it matter. Please don’t stereotype the Gay community. Its not nice. I am also getting baptized in a couple of months and Gay. I see no problem. I am fine, some of my best friends are gay, so please don’t put us in box as they did when we first came to Australia. We put the indigounas in a box, called them red necks, sterotyped them and put them in a box. Not all Gay people are like this. “I dream of the day that black men and woman are judged by there character and not by the colour of there skin” Martin Luther king.

  12. I agree with the whole article whole heartedly. This atmosphere of equality doesn’t make sense. It’s an atmosphere of unequaility in reality. As a Christian, I feel a massive pressure not to act and express my belief that homosexuality goes against God and the created order. I fear for my job, and as a result, for my family. I fear for the day that to express dissent would invite persecution, and in my experience, that has already come. In fact my family rejects me for my held belief, and for me it’s heart wrenching.

    The idea of equality is not being upheld. Marriage is not witheld from anyone, you just need to meet the criteria, be 1 man and 1 woman. No one is denied it. A passport to a particular country can’t just be handed out, you need to meet the criteria. It is already equal. In the end, what I have read from the LGBT side can be summarised thus: they feel condemned and inwardly guilty. They don’t like to feel guilt. To remove guilt you need to remove the sin or the power of those to bring the sin before them. They want acceptance, and are forcing us to accept. I believe to express dissent soon will become illegal. Thus what they have achieved is to put Christians in a “closet” of thei making to silence us. In my books this is as unequal as it gets.

    Lastly as a Christian, I want to say that I love all humanity. My concern is their salvation. The Bible clearly teachers that no liar, thief, murderer, adulterer, fornicator or homosexual will inherit the kingdom of God. We all fall short of the glory of God, and all should repent, myself included. Everyone will bow down before God and declare him Lord. It’s either now while there is still light or on judgement day. I hope for your sake it’s now. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the Living God. Christ died for us while we were yet sinners that we might (as a gift from God) have everlasting life. He died in our place taking the punishment we deserved, and it’s free. All you need to do is submit to Christ and His Word.

    • Nk

      Best write up so far… thanks

  13. Is there a survey of the satisfaction of children with gay parents?

  14. Gay people cannot adopt internationally without lying. One has to say one is single and straight and then once the child is home “re-adopt” in the US with your partner named as co parent. This has happened for years but it feels bad. Jews have had to do the same (pretend to be Christians) to adopt from probably more than half to domestic and foreign agencies. Recently I spoke to my new neighbor same sex couple. They have a 1 year daughter. Very well-mannered girl. They used surrogacy in Ukrainian clinic biotex. Fortunately one of them has a girlfriend from Kiev, so they are married and after used service of that clinic. To my wonder why exactly Ukraine like there are bunch of clinic in USA. They told about high level service and much lower prices compare to America or Canada. I think it isn’t fair that such good people have to challenge so much to gain desirable child. I think clinics should not refused couples basing on their sex but on idk some kind of test on wellness and psychological test. To me the adoption system is critically broken as well.

  15. Gay marriage is mental illness. The end.

    Gay adoption, fostering, surrogacy will cause mental illness in the children unfortunate to be caught up in it. We need to ban it outright and compensate
    the children affected. Otherwise we will decay as a society.

  16. If you cant have them, you cant have them, simple..!!!

  17. I am 48 years old and was raised in a lesbian household. Many years ago when it sort of started to become a bit more acceptable for people to come out as “gay’ made me think “nobody seems to want to know how these kids are doing”. I was all alone. No siblings, no aunt or uncle, nobody to bounce ideas off. I just figured it out as I went along.

    I’m probably the first of the lot at 48. My mother left my father when I was an infant. My mother had a very unhappy childhood and from what I know had a mother (my stinking grandmother) sell her to men. That child abuse led her to be a lesbian. She was always a lesbian. She met her partner “Marge” and I was raised by them both until I moved out of home at around 21.

    Some myths and facts that were my experience:

    There was a lot of love in the house. No one disputes that a child will not be loved and wanted. I have no issue with marriage. What I do have an issue with is having children. My own relationships with men is probably disfunctional or I have a fear of commitment. Who was my role model where I liked boys but my mother didn’t? Don’t they say its how a man treats his children’s mother will be the yardstick of who the daughter chooses as her own partner? I have no history to recall on. This might be a whole different experience for young people today. Again, this was my experience.

    I do think any ‘parents’ is best served with a man and a woman. Yes, it would be ideal and everyone would live happily ever after but the world has changed. Its not about marriage. If you want to get married. Knock yourself out. I don’t care either way. I’m sure there are lots of dysfunctional families of the so called ‘normal variety and same sex couples will have their own challenges
    I am completly hetrosexual.
    I was never ‘abused’ there were no drugs.
    There was no flaunting of homosexual love because it wasn’t accepted. Would I have been embarrassed? Probably. Remember this is the 70s in Brisbane. Just not the done thing.
    I kept my secret hidden in the playground. See point above.
    As I got older in high school I had only a few close girlfriends at my home. They got what was happening but said very little out of respect for me. But even in the 80s I certainly didn’t shout it from the rooftops.

    I so would have wanted my opionion to be heard because I know nobody my own age who went through this and might be quite different to the children of today. Decay of society etc is an appalling thing to say and those religious shitheads should be ashamed. Thank you for letting me say what has been in my head for 40 years.

  18. As a 43 year old female who lost her father because my mum alienated us from him when they separated i can not tell you the damaged it has done to me and the impact it has on the next generation. I blocked off my emotions and stop trusting the world. I have only 30 years later reconnected with my father and im only seeing now the full impact it has had on me. I felt i was unloveable and did not have a voice and because of this i got into an abusive relationship, i couldn’t hold a job not because i was a bad worker, it was because i believed i was such a bad person and that no one would like me. It’s bad enough this happens in this day and age but to think about how much damged this will do to more children because people can’t put children first.

  19. So because we already have step parents and it happens ( not that it is the ideal) let’s create that environment purposely by allowing same sex gender to marry and form a family. The ideal is a loving father and mother. The problem is us, not genetics. We love ourselves so much we don’t stop and think about others. We have children to easily. We don’t commit. We divorce. We deprive them from a natural environment. We. Or I. Always I. I am the problem but I can be the solution. But it’s too much so we govern our body by desires and not allowing reason in. So if we give a spider egg to two black widows (what will be the outcome) it’s just an example of something that in nature does not occur.

Leave a comment