If you're going to quote a passage from my post, then be sure to include the entirety of the message: Did you not read the part where I wrote that conduct is only immoral if there is a victim? And are you not aware that children molested by adults of any sexual orientation are victims? Are you consciously choosing to be obtuse or were you born that way?
Are you even aware that you just changed your own argument? Perhaps you should go back and read your original post.
Suppose we had a youth (for this example I'll choose a girl) and the girl is unsure of her sexuality and may be bisexual or prefers girls. Suppose she loses both parents to an accident (prior to this her parents knew her behavior and disapproved of it) and now is available for adoption. She gets to pick her parents and chooses a lesbian couple. Now this seems to be a good match. The girl needs support and tolerance for her "questioning" sexuality. Months go by and now this young girl has decided she loves men and decides to date boys. The lesbian adopted parents now are reacting exactly as this young girls birth parents did and find her behaviour rebellious and disapprove and encourage her to rethink her views. The adoption is undone and the girl wishes to be adopted by a normal family.
I'm wondering, what are the odds a loving ss couple will raise their children improperly vs. the odds a loving mf couple will? Perhaps higher, but a lot of definitional work and research would have to be done to be certain. What are the odds for an unadopted child, growing up on the foster home merry-go-round? I think I'd rather see a child raised by the ss couple, than by foster homes. In fact, I know I would--foster kids were half of the inmates at the jail where I used to work.
You can cut the ignorance here with a knife. Trying to debate some of you people is akin to debating someone who believes the earth is flat...in the end, it is probably just better to walk away from the stupidity and ignorance. So I will leave you with this: Gay Teen Worried He Might Be Christian
I'd be willing to bet the underlying reason would be: 1) Poor decisions of family court judge(s). 2) County lack of funds to provide services.
You can't debate these people. Many of the more vocal homophobes around here are closet fence-sitters who can't handle the fact that they're attracted to men. Lashing out is how they deal with their feelings. "The Natural Order of Life"... I loved that one. What a pathetic fucking joke. As if providing a child whose parents are gone with a stable home and support system has anything to do with "natural order". These religious extremists are all the same. And make no mistake. Scratch one of these homophobes (aside from the latency cases) and you'll see the bright glint of the Believer just underneath. Only the faithful could hold such disgusting views.
They are foster kids because of court decisions?? No, they are foster kids because they have no parents. In this instance it would be provincial funds, but anyway the money is there, it's spent on "group homes" which are possibly even worse than foster homes. In case anyone is wondering about the other half of the inmates, they typically had a parent, sometimes two, but most of the time those parents included a violent drunk and/or molestor. Sadly, many of those inmates also had FAS or FAE. I think it's safe to say from my own observations that only 1 in 50 inmates came from what society would call a "normal" family.