|
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/phrozens/public_html/template.php:30) in /home/phrozens/public_html/WP/wp-rss2.php on line 8 However, there are times when I catch Mr. O’Reilly making statements that contradict his own logic. Bill O’Reilly has said on several occassions that children are better off being raised in straight, traditional homes. According to O’Reilly, traditional heterosexual homes provide “optimal” conditions for raising kids and kids who are products of heteorsexual couples are more likely to be “well adjusted” than kids raised by same-sex couples. However, O’Reilly does acknowledge that he would prefer a child with no family be adopted by a same-sex couple rather than not be adopted at all. He makes clear that gay adoption should be a “last-resort.” Mr. O’Reilly’s logic does not make sense for the following reasons: Let’s take a look at the types of children likely to have trouble getting adopted into a permanent home; The type of kids likely to be given to gay adoptive couples as a “last resort”: Mentally retarded, disabled children Adoption statistics show that the most sought after kids for adoptions are white babies with no known health, emotional, or mental problems. In fact, white couples will go as far away as Russia, Albania, and the Czech Republic to find a “perfect” white baby as opposed to adopting one of the many adorable minority babies available here in the States. As a “last resort,” some white couples will look for an Asian baby but rarely ever a Latino or Black baby. However, the kids likely to have trouble getting adopted all require some level of special attention not required by a single physically/emotionally/mentally fit white baby: Mentally retarded, disabled children (Additional patience, special schools, medical needs) What does NOT make sense is Mr. O’Reilly asserting that: 1. Gay parents are not “as good” and “not as ideal” as straight parents 2. Kids that require the MOST attention and the BEST care possible (and likely to be among the LAST adopted) should be given to (homosexual) parents that are not “as good” as other (straight) options available Logically speaking, if a kid requires MORE attention and care than most, wouldn’t it make sense to place that kid with the “most fit” parents possible (In O’Reilly’s estimate, straight parents)? In my opinion, what Mr. O’Reilly is REALLY saying is that 1. He doesn’t like the idea of gay adoption 2. However, gay adoptive parents should be allowed to take the left-overs, the kids none of the straight people wanted 3. Straight couples should get “first pickings” of available kids and have first access to the “cream of the crop” 4. Gay adoptive parents are useful only as a dumping ground for kids deemed undesirable by straight couples; Gay parents can be USED as a convenient way to “dispose of” “undesirable” kids stuck in the system and eliminate taxpayer burden
People who WANT a child bad enough will adopt any available child: Mr. O’Reilly knows this fact and exploits the desire of gay/lesbian couples to raise families by asserting that they should be used as a dumping grounds for otherwise “unwanted” children. ]]> |