Monday, 12 January 2009

Homosexual parenting

As the impact of the government's Homosexual Orientations legislation takes full effect on Catholic Adoption Agencies (and I note the bishop of Lancs is the one taking the lead in terms of a truly Christian and pastoral response) , readers may be interested in this:


Anonymous said...

I haven't actually read the book myself but it looks very interesting.

A more thorough presentation of the book is available here Out From Under.

From the reading I have done, there is just not enough evidence to confirm that same sex parenting is damaging to children. Although testimonies like this certainly confirm our worst fears.

madame evangelista said...

Oh dear. Apologies for the long comment - I'm not setting out to gainsay everything (or write boring long comments...) but I had a look at the link earlier, and (without having read the book but going by the publicity copy) it strikes me that the problem in that particular instance was not that the writer was brought up by gay parents, but that she was brought up by promiscuous adults, at least one of whom had serious issues from his own childhood. I don't want to carp on or state the blindingly obvious but there is a difference!

As for adoption - adoption procedures are rigorous, children don't just get farmed out to anyone, couples have to demonstrate their ability to provide a stable home, in far more demanding ways than any natural parents have to.

I'm not saying church teaching can change (it won't), but my gut reaction (ok, not necessarily the most reliable) is that experiences like this say as much about gay parenting as church sex scandals say about good priests.

madame evangelista said...

In thanks for your patience, I'm giving you the 'Superior Scribbler' Award... details are on Leutgeb's blog

beetlebabee said...

I think the anecdotal nature of this book makes it easy to shoot down as "just a story", but the teeth of the story comes when the research actually backs up her experiences.

Studies show that homosexual relationships are statistically significantly more unstable in exactly the ways she describes. Her account of how it affected her is profound.

It attacks the assumption that gay relationships are truly equal. People are equal, choices are not.

By Dr. Laura A. Haynes, Psychologist, Tustin, California 2008

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the link there Liberty Belle. There's a lot of reading in it.

People really are equal, yes but there choices are not.

madame evangelista said...

Hi Liberty Belle, I wasn't shooting it down - that would be a stupid and offensive thing to do about someone's childhood. I was just pointing out, as you do, that it is anecdotal evidence.

Ben Trovato said...

Thanks for the Award, Mme E - I will get to that later...


In terms of evidence, I think C S Lewis raises an interesting point somewhere when he points out that it is no use appealing to the evidence until we have settled, as well as we can, the philosophical issues.

His point, as I understand it, is very much what Cardinal Newman said: we can believe whatever we want to believe, but we are responsible for what we choose to believe.

To put it another way, we are adept at interpreting evidence to fit in with our view of reality: thus the pro-gay lobby can claim biblical support just as easily as I can cite biblical teaching against homosexuality (naturally I think their interpretations strained, but then I would, wouldn't I),

Which is why I rely on the authority of Christ and His Church as my guide, and then try to make sense of things taking that as a given.

George Carmody said...


Just a note to congratulate you on having the courage to discuss a subject that has become taboo in our aggressively secular culture. Refreshing too that a civilised discussion was had. If "homophobia" is the fear or hatred of homosexuals, what should we call the fear or hatred of debate about homosexuals and homosexuality, because PC folk are suffering from it!

beetlebabee said...

I think it's eye opening that the entire conversation nationally is attempting to argue that SSA and SSM are *not worse* than traditional relationships. There is no argument that it is better, or that it is good and right of it's own accord. It's only argued that it is acceptable in light of failings of traditional marriage and family.

I have to ask, if it is so great, why isn't the evidence obvious?

Just a trailing thought....