Again Josh brings up one of the biggest fallacies of this debate: that we must choose between forcing children to remain orphans or adopting them out to loving homosexual couples. And since compassionate people hate to think that some children will never enjoy being part of a family, they prefer option 2 over option 1, of course.

Stop ignoring the fact that every baby or child either placed for adoption or in foster care has the opportunity to be adopted by a married heterosexual couple. There are even couples who specifically request babies and/or children with physical, developmental, or emotional disabilities because they have the love and patience to raise them. There's simply a lot of red tape involved in adoption, as it takes time screen prospective parents for competency.

I don't care what politically correct definition of marriage you managed to find, but TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE = one man + one woman 4-ever. And it has only been proven to be the ideal and best form of marriage for thousands of years, across all religions, ethnicities, and cultures.

You ask, > Well, to answer your question, a child can have 2 moms or 2 dads, and some children do, but it does matter because every child has the right to have a MOTHER AND A FATHER, and with same-sex adoption, you are denying these children their right to have both for the rest of their lives. Even Rosie O’Donnel’s little boy told her, “I want to have a daddy.”—as she herself explained in an interview on NBC’s “The Colin Quinn Show”. If she really loved her son more than she loved herself, then she wouldn’t have been selfish enough to place her own desires of parenthood above that little boy’s RIGHT to have a father. And that is essentially what’s going on here: Adults selfishly wanting to be parents enough to deny children their RIGHTS to be raised by a mom and a dad.

Well, I think if a child is in need of a "family" and a homosexual couple has the ability to financially support the child while loving it who are we to say thats not a family. According to the dictonary a "family" is- 1fam·i·ly Pronunciation: \?fam-l?, ?fa-m?-\ Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural fam·i·lies Etymology: Middle English familie, from Latin familia household (including servants as well as kin of the householder), from famulus servant Date: 15th century 1: a group of individuals living under one roof and usually under one head : household 2 a: a group of persons of common ancestry : clan b: a people or group of peoples regarded as deriving from a common stock : race 3 a: a group of people united by certain convictions or a common affiliation : fellowship b: the staff of a high official (as the President) 4: a group of things related by common characteristics: as a: a closely related series of elements or chemical compounds b: a group of soils with similar chemical and physical properties (as texture, pH, and mineral content) that comprise a category ranking above the series and below the subgroup in soil classification c: a group of related languages descended from a single ancestral language 5 a: the basic unit in society traditionally consisting of two parents rearing their children ; also : any of various social units differing from but regarded as equivalent to the traditional family b: spouse and children 6 a: a group of related plants or animals forming a category ranking above a genus and below an order and usually comprising several to many genera bin livestock breeding (1): the descendants or line of a particular individual especially of some outstanding female (2): an identifiable strain within a breed 7: a set of curves or surfaces whose equations differ only in parameters 8: a unit of a crime syndicate (as the Mafia) operating within a geographic area

I dont see anywhere where is say A MOM & DAD and children!! Why can a child not have 2 moms or 2 dads..lets get real, If they are loved and cared for and provided a good home does it matter if it is a man and woman or two of each and why should one situation have the right to be favored over the other?? The real question here might be WWJD? Leave the kid in foster care or put them in a loving home full of possibilites??

The "religious right" folks were probably waiting their turn to adopt a baby. Currently there are on average 8 heterosexual married couples who have gone through all of the red tape, paid all of the fees necessary, and been certified as eligible to adopt a baby for each baby who is placed for adoption. Couples sometimes have to wait years depending on if they are chosen by the birth mother during an open adoption, or simply for their turn in line, as there are far fewer babies placed for adoption than there are willing couples ready to adopt.

So what you happened to hear about the religious right is simply untrue. Their concern for life does predate most other peoples' concern, and it continues through all stages of life. It also makes the phrase "unwanted baby" an oxymoron, as ALL babies are wanted by capable, loving, married couples despite whether or not they are wanted by both of their birthparents.

I know from experience on both sides, as I almost chose to give up my baby for adoption when I was surprised to learn that I was pregnant, and my ex-boyfriend got scared and left. I also have close friends who have fostered and adopted both babies and older children, and I have an aunt who placed her baby for adoption.

So dig a little deeper, and don't believe the lies that you hear.

The FPC and ADF know what most of us know: That every child deserves the right to have both a mother and a father, and that depriving a child of one or the other for their entire life is not only just not ideal—it’s selfish. It's not like we only have 2 choices: between babies growing up as orphans or being fostered or adopted by a homosexual couple. There are more than enough married, heterosexual couples ready and willing to adopt every child in need. It simply takes time to cut through all of the bureaucracy.

So where were all the anti-gay folks when this poor little baby was born and needed loving, caring help?

I guess it's true what everyone says about the religious right: Their concern for life begins at conception and ends at birth ... unless the infant has a chance for a good life with loving parents who happen not to satisfy the judgment of the Family Policy Council and the Alliance Defense Fund.