Just curious about how atheist and agnotics feel about the religious faction and their propensity for oppression and descrimination.

Florida voted into law that single people cannot adopt. This was not what Florida really wanted. They, and some other states watching from the side lines, really wanted to ban gays and lesbians from adopting. They have been trying to do this for a long time. They came up against legal issues so great, their ban would not succeed.

Issues such as parental rights in divorce and of course the one overwhelming discrimination that a group was denied a right based on nothing more than prejudice.

So the wording was changed to "single parents". Obviously, gays and lesbians are not permitted to be married, thereby illiminating them from ever having the right to adopt.

Does anyone else see the fundamentalist religions lack of logic in creating such laws? These same poeple who are agains abortion, who are against divorce and who have apparently turned a blind eye to the number of single parents already raising children?

How can this be a logical solution to anything. What could such thinking attempt to solve? Furthermore, how can so many be so blind?

The ignorance of fundamental values never cease to amaze me. I am a single parent and feel that their stance is ridiculous. Since when does the gov't have the right to decide who is to become a parent.

Well, I'm neither atheist or agnostic

But I have to say that this law is ridiculous.

If I'm not married and get a child, who is going to tell me I have to give it away. So why shouldn't I be able in the same situation to adopt a child?

The United States is turning into a crapshoot. Religion rules this country and it's sickening. It's sad we have that so called "freedom of religion" but yet, religion tells us what we can and can't do.

If two guys, or two girls wanna marry each other...LET THEM! It's not anyone else business to tell someone that the person that makes them happy they can't legally marry. I'd personally like to see a overthrow of our government. Rebuild it on what the people want and need, not on what religion wants or what the bible says!!

Hi everyone, Invisible always so nice to see you.



Freedom of religion is a civil right and I would not take it away. What I would ask, is that those who are supposed to be the ELITE of this country, who have had priveledged lives and top educations and are chosen and elected to serve as lawmakers and upholders of the Constitution, to use their intellect to explain to the masses, and fight against the religious right. To fight against any unethical law or attemt to bring such a law to bear.

I posted this thread because with the changing of the guard in the White House there will likely be MANY more such battles with regards to marriage laws, adoptions, many other civil rights issues and as always a request to revisit the abortion issue. It's likely that stem research will again hit the forfront.

All of these have one basic opponent, the fundamental realigious right. Be aware and watch for the proposals as they come up in your state and in federal referendum and remember the power of your voice, of your vote.

We lagging behind other countries instead of leading them. We are behind because there are so many who don't feel affected by what's going on. You will be, if certain factions are not put in their place.

But is it not so that you have to hit rock bottom before it can go up again?
In my experience, when you are on the way down, there are only very few, and at that, very feeble safety nets.

Tis' True. The right's of the damning, will always
be greater than the right's of the damned. This is the fall of the American Empire, a financial Apocalyps, which sent droves of Christmas and Easter christians back to church and hence back to polls, thus safeguarding the religious Rights' dominion over morality. Seperation of church and state: Bah! What an infantile dream.

To have a truly enlightened society, we must first get rid of fear. Fear is the only thing these aspiring autocrats have to control us.

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Give someone power over others and someone will be unhappy.

As freethinkers we will always be in the minority.
Whether we are gay/straight, black/white, American/European.

We will always be subjected to the moral majority. It happens that America uses religion as a tool. Not for religious subjugation, but as a political weapon to control the minority.

Im in a muslim country, and yesterday I witnessed a man praying on the beach.

The Qur'an decrees praying five times a day (where possible)

This is not unusual, except this man had been a taxi driver until an accident had given him severe mental and physical handicaps.
He now begs (quite aggressively) on the streets off the tourists and locals.

But I found it interesting that his indoctrination was so deeply rooted that he was compelled to go through his prayer cycle, even though his faculties were severely impaired.

The xtian/islamic religious extreme fascists have their indoctrination so deeply in their psyche that they will force their beliefs upon everyone even to the extent of removing other's civil liberties.

They are a danger to society on the whole, and unfortunately the US has a huge population of fundies.
This is also dangerous as the US has the power to subjugate the West by political and military might.

In answer to your question ...

I would say that adoption is a bit of a lottery. The best the authorities can do is look at the suitability of the prospective parent (PP) and evaluate it on the needs of the child.

The prospective parent (I use the single form on purpose) would be financially stable, emotionally mature and most importantly, had the time to dedicate to the needs of the child (And not get a nanny) then there should be no reason why that person should not be a PP.
Sexual orientation should not be guideline to suitability and neither should relationship status or religious leanings.

But I am not in a position of power to abuse it toward this bent, and therefore I am only able to state my opinion.

I still say that any major religious faction that tells its members how to vote is influencing political agendas and therefore no longer religions but special interest groups. Bye bye tax exemption! How often that goes overlooked and it drives me insane. Especially like recently with Proposition 8 in California, I was so insanely pissed off throughout the whole duration.

As for child adoption, I don't know why they're so afraid. I imagine certain guidelines should be made for "single" people who are trying to adopt, such as income and general stability, but it makes more sense to put a kid in a loving stable home than to shift them from center to center, foster care to foster care. There are a lot of people out there with children they had naturally who are now in loving same-sex relationships, but the government isn't taking their kids away.

OfTheLake hit on the head though - it's all motivated by fear, fear which stems from ignorance and a lack of education and understanding. So many choose to just take to heart what their religious leaders say instead of discovering for themselves, because they're also taught to not question what their leaders say. Unbelievable.

The topic of GLB adoption is actually an interesting one in terms of scientific research, that is, as far from partisan leanings as possible. In unequivocal terms, the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Child Welfare League of America have published well conducted studies supporting the validity and qualification of GLB as adoptive parents. If we just do away with phony studies published by organizations having strong ties with institutional religion's groups (or even hate groups), I dare say that up to a few months ago the standard American research shedding light on the matter was the Williams and Urban Institutes from California and Washington DC, respectively, in association with the UCLA School of Law, released in March 2007. Aside from mentioning that about half a million children endure foster care in the United States, this paper showed several key findings that are indeed hard to swallow by the opponents of GLB adoption rights. Some of them include:

* There are about two million GLB individuals willing to adopt in the US. The report does not bring up the question of transgender adoption.

* Gay and lesbian parents are raising more than four per cent of adopted children and three per cent of foster children in the US.

* Most same-sex couples raising adopted children are older, more educated and with more economical resources than their straight counterparts.

Of course, data and methodology are impeccable, and the references and bibliography are a treasure in themselves. However, an even more recent study (Expanding Resources for Waiting Children II: Eliminating Legal & Practice Barriers To Gay & Lesbian Adoption From Foster Care, by Jeanne Howard & Madelyn Freundlich, from the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, New York, September 2008)explicitly states that gay and lesbian adoptive parents fare as proficiently as heterosexual ones (Breways, Ponjaert, Van Hall, & Golombok, 1997; Chan, Raboy & Patterson, 1998; Golombok, Perry, Burston, Murray, Mooney-Sommer, Stevens, & Golding, 2003; Wainwright, Russell & Patterson, 2004), listing thirteen professional organizations that have issued formal statements supporting adoption by gays and lesbians.

On the other side, what is it that we stumble upon? Feeble paragraphs that have been tampered with and are methodologically as consistent as 1984's doublespeak, prejudice and appeals to biased opinions instead of facts supported by scientific research.

From the psychological, sociological and pedagogical viewpoints, the matter is sufficiently settled. It is in the urgent interest of those children awaiting a warm embrace that the legal and political perspectives surrounding the issue finally come to terms with scientific reality, too.

Paul

This is a group of very intelligent people !!!

cheers !!!

I agree with all of you !

I feel refreshed to hear others who are soo open minded !

If a parent shows he or she is able to take care of a child until adulthood then it shouldn't matter what race, nationality, what kind of relationship they choose, or what have you.

Raising a child is showing compassion, love, and being able to care for her or him with the intent to help them be able to live a comfortable life in this world when they reach adulthood.

The United States is still a few years behind with this. I hope the younger generation will change laws to allow everyone to live a comfortable life without discrimination, racism, and hatred.

I have met some of the most well adjusted kids coming from single family homes, and from homes with one or two gay parents. The fear of it is ignorant frankly but as long as religion is the cause of the prejudice in the first place it won't change any time soon.

But I have a feeling that young people today will change things.

What's sad is that most gays, myself included will not work or socialize around children, period, unless it's family or my good friends kids... The last thing a gay person needs is to be accused of impropriety with someones kids.

Sad paranoid world we live in. And I would have to be gay and an atheist. Geesh... I must say that the bible thumping women here look more like lesbians than I do, so unless they ask and I tell, they have no clue.

I have had lots of friends over time, and though being gay, 99 percent of my friends are straight and open minded. so just thought I would add that there are a lot more open minded than the Right might have us think.

Do we outnumber fundies? I don't really know, but our biggest problem is the Internet being added to the many ways in which fundies can recruit more youth and the vulnerable for indoctrination, further adding to the ignorance and instability of the world.

I have seen very large groups of young people in SanFran, there because some radical Christian right figure told them to target the gays in SanFran...

We might think that the world is more enlightened but we are fighting a group determined to bring back the Messiah... I have no clue how anyone can fight that......

Wait now, we have been told that no nonbeliever will ever become president. Besides the powers that be work very well among the christian right, and many in washington would convert if they thought it could get them something worthwhile.

How many in Washington would have the bloody guts to go against the christian right on this issue or the gay marriage issue? Just asking.

I don't think even Obama would admit he is for gay marriage even if he actually was, for political reasons alone. You must have also watched the primaries when each contender was asked if they supported gay marriage, talk about dancing around the issue.

And just between you and me and the light post, I personally don't believe that Obama is all that christian either, but he wouldn't deny it because he can't. No president that wants to be president will be with out catering to the religious right... am I wrong?

I do think we will eventually have an atheist president, if the nation survives another 50 or 100 years. But these days, yeah, the prejudice against atheists is to great.

Regarding the OP, I think this is just silly. They are even fighting against heterosexual single people who might want to adopt, in their desire to prevent homosexuals from adopting.

I look forward to voting in the next gay-marriage ballot initiative in califonia, whenever that may be.

Very interesting, but it does not exclude gays, lesbians and single men and women from adopting, if you quoted the law correctly.

They will be stopped from adopting a second time around, though.

So if you are a gay or lesbian couple, or you are truly so ugly that nobody is willing to live with you, but you want tree or more children, you must adopt them all at once.

The reason is that before you, a childless person, adopt, you're not a parent. Therefore the restriction that's placed on people who are single parents does not apply to you.

and who pays for it?

the children that are getting tossed from foster-home to foster-home or living in orphanages...unwanted and unloved out of some unrealistic ideology that only straight married people can make decent parents.

sooo...no home as opposed to a loving gay one. go figure.

religion does not even come close to ruling this country. indeed, religion exerts less dominance as the decades pass. we're winning the fight against religion as i see it. the christian conservative right is in shambles hense the liberally dominated government we have today. but gays have been denied their rights far to long and the fact that marraige laws are changing in the state legislatures in their favor is indicative of the fact that the moral "majority" is losing out.

having said that and back to the topic, gays, singles and heterosexuals have rights and those rights allow them to adobt. but i firmly believe that the protecting/providing genetic traits of a male and the nurturing care of a female make the ideal parents.