The other day I came across three references to the debate over the right’s of homosexuals to adopt. My opinion is and always will be that this is not in the best interest of the child and therefore not something I will support. I have several reasons to back up this claim too, I’m not just “intolerant.” I’ll follow up on this later.
But I never came across this defense against gay adoption, until today. Im still trying to decide if it is as strong of an argument as I first thought, but regardless it did make me think about confronting the issue in yet another way to get a message across. Tell me what you think….It it might be this little analogy was always obvious to everyone but me.
by Gregory Koukl
The line of reasoning that justifies homosexuality because it is a “natural” desire for those born that way annihilates the argument for adoption rights by homosexuals. If homosexuality is right because it’s natural, then adoption must be wrong because it’s unnatural. If nature dictates morality, and the natural consequence for homosexuals is to be childless, then it’s unnatural—and therefore immoral—for homosexuals to raise children. Artificial insemination of lesbians or adoptions by homosexual couples would be wrong by their own reasoning. The same principle governs both issues.
© Gregory Koukl. Reproduction permitted for non-commercial use only.
I'm just a girl with a story
Very interesting argument. I too am against the idea of gay’s adopting children..however I had never heard this argument. My initial thought would be that you have to come back to where you are going to get your foundation for truth. Are we going to base it off of whats natural or unatural or off scripture etc. Either way there needs to be a basic foundation everyone starts on to guide them when the issue of anything dealing with a moral nature comes up. Unless you start with that base almost anything can be made reasonable.