Comment on the article ”Anger at ‘cheap gimmick’ of anti-gay

Essay by EssaySwap ContributorCollege, Undergraduate February 2008

download word file, 3 pages 0.0

Downloaded 605 times

Comment on the article "Anger at 'cheap gimmick' of anti-gay adoption card The article informs about a a card which is intended to be carried by parents in Great Britain. It states: "In the event of my death I do not want my children to be adopted by homosexuals" and is proposed by the Christian Institue.

The moment chosen for the publication is no coincidence: At the same time a vote on amendments to the "adoption and children"-bill is prepared by the peers.

It happens again and again: When there is a decision to be made about a sore point, several communities of interest bring their point of view before the public. In this case BAAF, the Christian Instititute and adoption campaigners are on collision course.

Referring to the amount of words the article's author, Lucy Ward, uses for the description of BAAF and the "Mori research"- result, the author's viewpoint seems to be clear: Against the donor-style card, and for the extension of the eligibility criteria for adoption, including gay and lesbian couples.

What I find interesting about the article is the information which gives me a special point of view of the problem "adoption by gay couples". In Austria we are far from solving problems like this, most of the Austrians still refuse to acknowledge in public even the fact that there exist other forms of sexuality than the heterosexual one. What surprises me is the "trick" (or "cheap gimmick", as the author of the article calls it) with the card. The donor style puts the question of adoption on the same level as the permission of using one person's kidney for organ donor. It attaches importance to something very personal, which is, to tell the truth, not really to be seen in connection with a sudden death: Normally parents know what should happen if their children really happen to be orphans suddenly. It has to be a very big (bad) coincidence if both parents die at the same time, like a car accident or plane crash. And even then there exists a family, there are relatives, who could take care of the children. The "danger" of adoption by any strangers is, therefore, very small.

The question of adoption by gay or unmarried couples is to be seen from an other point of view, as BAAF chief executive Felicity Collier' remark shows. The BAAF has to welcome every person or every couple that wants to give home and love to a child without family! The more children have the possibility of a "normal" family life, far away from orphanages and from the fate of becoming an institution child.

In my opinion a discussion on the subject "gay couples and adoption - yes or no" is an unmistakable sign of a lack of tolerance in our time. A defiency symptom we should not beproud of! The article cites the chief executive of the British Association of Adoption and Fostering, Felicity Collier. She is absolutely right when she talks about a "massive step backwards if the House of Lords votes to prevent unmarried couples (!), including same sex couples , from adopting a child" - I absolutely agree with her! What makes the difference between married and unmarried couples? In the first place the marriage certificate.

What does happiness depend on? Or, as a child: When do you have a sense of well-being, coming home? Only when you know that you are always welcome, when you can be sure to be loved.

How many times the physical parents refuse their own child, either because the mother got pregnant without wanting it, or because of a lack of money, or because there exist other problems (birth of a daughter, although a son was expected; difficulties between the parents; problems with the personality of the child….) There are so many reasons to accept and love a child, and so many reasons to do the opposite.

The Austrian laws have an expression which is very important: "Above all there is the well-being of the child!" Reading Lucy Ward's article I cannot help doubting the real reason of the "gay adoption"-discussion. The "Christian Institute" produced a card which is intended to be carried by parents. It states: "In the event of my death I do not want my children to be adopted by homosexuals." Is this really a Christian opinion? Looking at other countries it is interesting how others deal with the problem. South Africa's laws for instance forbid discrimination because of different sexual predilection. Adoption is no problem for gay or lesbian couples. In Sweden the situation is similar.

But perhaps it is only a matter of time. Great Britain is a conservative country. Sooner or later the "anti-gay adoption card" will be forgotten, and lots of orphans will find a new home.