The Instigator
libertarian
Pro (for)
Winning
28 Points
The Contender
uj0320
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Each state should allow same sex couples to adopt children.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/15/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,572 times Debate No: 4695
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (9)

 

libertarian

Pro

1. The United States Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 states, "no state shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Not offering equal protection to gays under marriage laws is unconstitutional.

2. The Declaration of Independence said "all men are created equal." And on the front of the Supreme Court building the words are etched in "Equal Justice Under Law." Equality is a basic American principle that should be respected.

3. The American Psychological Association and all respectable, unbiased psychological organizations agree that gay couples are just as good parents as straight couples.

4. A child is happier when the child has a family. Many children are tormented without loving families in underfunded, loveless foster care centers. These children could be rescued by loving couples if all states would allow it.
uj0320

Con

It is overly optimistic view that children would want to be adopted regardless of who their parents are going to be. Most of children will want to stay where they were if it is anticipated that their new family is going to be different from other families. The children will have a biased view about gay people because of the pressure that their surrounding environtment gives them, such as ridicules and comments from their friends or neighbors. It is a selfish act for gay people to adopt childeren for their own satisfaction, disregarding the children's opinions, or overlooking the obstacles that their adopted children will get through entire their lives.
Debate Round No. 1
libertarian

Pro

My Points______________________________________________________________________
"1. The United States Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 states, "no state shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Not offering equal protection to gays under marriage laws is unconstitutional."

Constitutionality is the highest law in the land. Denying gays from adoption is directly unconstitutional and if you cannot rebut it, then I will inevitably win this debate. You cannot just ignore the Constitution.

2. The Declaration of Independence said "all men are created equal." And on the front of the Supreme Court building the words are etched in "Equal Justice Under Law." Equality is a basic American principle that should be respected.

Equality is a basic American principle. How can you just ignore it?

3. The American Psychological Association and all respectable, unbiased psychological organizations agree that gay couples are just as good parents as straight couples.

You did not respond to the fact that psychologists agree that children are not psychologically effected or any less well off if they have two parents of the same sex.

Foster care systems have a high chance of abuse and neglect. It is almost impossible to be successful inan abusive environment absent of love. These abuses can also be permanently traumatic. Psychologists agree that having gay parents is not traumatic, while abuse and neglect is permanently traumatic, often. It is in the best interest of these children to allow them to adopted any chance they can.

Rebuttals______________________________________________________________________

uj0320-Con>>> "It is overly optimistic view that children would want to be adopted regardless of who their parents are going to be."

+++ It is not an optimistic view. The fact is that the American foster care system is oppressive. It involves no love and rarely ever gifts even on holidays.

+++ Often children are neglected and abused. Foster care is dramatically less safe and less happy than parental care. In the state of Texas alone it is learned that 48 foster children died in the state's care. Compared to the general population, a child is 4 times more likely to die in their foster care system than in a loving household. And the only way we got these statistics is because Texas is one of the few states who takes action and tries to help these children as much as possible. Many states are less effective, less caring, and more neglegent than Texas. Foster care is unsafe. In 2004, almost 100 children were treated for poisoning; 63 were treated for rape that happened while in state care; and 142 children gave birth. In Missouri, they found that 57% of foster children were likely to be abused and neglected. Foster care is dramatically less safe than parental care. Children with the oppurtunity to escape with a loving family should be allowed to do so.
[http://www.window.state.tx.us...]
[http://en.wikipedia.org...]

uj0320-Con>>> "Most of children will want to stay where they were if it is anticipated that their new family is going to be different from other families."

+++ These children will not want to stay where they are. The foster care system is traumatic. Many are abused verbally, physically, and sexually.

+++ These children will be in direct danger. And in the best interest of the children, they should be rescued into a gay family to escape from sexual abuse and other abuses.

uj0320-Con>>> "The children will have a biased view about gay people because of the pressure that their surrounding environtment gives them, such as ridicules and comments from their friends or neighbors. It is a selfish act for gay people to adopt childeren for their own satisfaction, disregarding the children's opinions, or overlooking the obstacles that their adopted children will get through entire their lives."

+++ Many older, more mature foster children (who will have more than likely experienced abuses) will certainly want to go with the gay family to escape the abusive and neglectful foster care system.

+++ Discrimination is certainly not a reason to ban children from leaving foster care. The state could not and would not restrict blacks from adopting in racist areas. It is illegal and unconstitutional.

+++ It is also arrogant and just incorrect for you to presume that all children will be prejudiced against gays. Many children will want to live in the gay household to avoid the abuses of foster care and experience a loving family for the first time in their life.

+++ It is selfish for anti-gay individuals to deny children (especially accepting children) a loving family and pit them into abuses in the foster care system just to reinforce their own prejudices against gays.

_______________________________________________________________________________

I've responded to all of your points. It is only fair that you respond to all of mine. Constitutionality is the biggest point I have and is the highest law in the land. You must respond to it if you are to win the debate.

-- Thank you for reading and voting.
uj0320

Con

The main purpose of adoption is not for the satisfaction of a couple, regardless of homosexual or heterosexual, but is for the well-being of the adopted child.

My opponent points out the Constitutional statement that states, "no state shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." However, the "any person" does not include same sex couples because the concept of homosexual was not present in the past when this consitutional statement was written in the Constitution. Therefore, my opponent will have to come up with a new statement that was written after the concept of gay couple had been represented in the society.

Thomas Jefferson too, was unaware of the concept of homosexual in his time; therefore, "all men" does not refer to gay couple who were actually created differently, having different sexual orientation from other men, who were referred by the Declaration of Independence.

My opponent another point, "The American Psychological Association and all respectable, unbiased psychological organizations agree that gay couples are just as good parents as straight couples." is a false statement;

" portion of respectable, unbiased experts also have stated that "singles have better likelihood of a successful adoption over same sex couples, with more successful single female adoptions over single male adoptions."

"There has been stronger acceptance for adoptions by unmarried individuals over the past years. However, unmarried individuals still don't share the same treatment or preference when it comes to traditional married couples. For instance, it is almost impossible for a single individual to adopt a new born infant. This is because heterosexual married couples are still given priority when pairing off infants to parents for adoption. "

[http://www.associatedcontent.com...]

Furthermore, the problems of foster care system cannot be the reason that the adoption for gay couple should be constitutional. It is another issue that should be treated with other solutions, such as supporting the foster care system with more funding, and with more care. The soltuions to foster care system should be discussed in other subjects rather than "is adoption for gay couple constitutional?"

I am still doubtful that children will want to be rather adopted to gay family to escape from the bad conditions of foster care system. My opponent did not provide any source that confirms his hypothesis, which states every orphan want to be rather adopted by gay family than staying. The biased view of anti-gay people can be harshier for children than the bad conditions of foster care system, because children are more vulnerable to psychological insults than physical abuses.

In the present Constitution, marriage is in the United States only consists of the union of a man and a woman. Since marriage is the issue that can not be separated from the issue of adoption, adoption for homosexual couples is unconstitutional. [This version of the amendment was introduced during the 108th Congress in the Senate as SJ 16 and in the House as HJ 56:]

"Neither this Constitution, nor the Constitution of any State, nor State or Federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."

This amendment directly states that it is not constitutional for the gay people to have the right to marry, which means that it is also unconstitutional for them to adopt children, that adoption needs marriage beforehand in order to provide the adopted child a better environment to live, and more promissing commitment for the child.

At last, the mal conditions of foster care system cannot be the reason that gay people's adoption should be constitutional, and homosexuals are not protected by neither the The United States Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 nor The Declaration of Independence, in the matter of the right of adopting children.
Debate Round No. 2
libertarian

Pro

Opponent>>> "The main purpose of adoption is not for the satisfaction of a couple, regardless of homosexual or heterosexual, but is for the well-being of the adopted child."

Me>>> This is certainly true and much respected. I have proven that foster care is a home that often comes with child abuse, child neglect, and child molestation and rape. A government is not better parents than actual loving parents, obviously. All studies show that gay and straight parents do an equal job at raising children. Studies also show that foster care does a significantly worse job at raising children than gay or straight parents.
[http://www.window.state.tx.us...]
[http://en.wikipedia.org...]
[http://www.apa.org...]

Opponent>>> "My opponent points out the Constitutional statement that states, "no state shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." However, the "any person" does not include same sex couples because the concept of homosexual was not present in the past when this consitutional statement was written in the Constitution. Therefore, my opponent will have to come up with a new statement that was written after the concept of gay couple had been represented in the society."

Me>>> My opponent says that gay people do not count as people because the concept of homosexuality was not existent in 1868 when the amendment was ratified. Well, this is stupid. Homosexuality has been around for as long as heterosexuality. There is no official date known for the first homosexual person, but we are quite certain that homosexuality existed before 1868. To prove this I have found on the Internet a gay couple from 1868: Eduard van der N´┐Żll (1812-1868) and August Sicard von Sicardsburg (1813-1868). There homosexuals existed before 1868...
[http://www.gaytravelnews.com...] The first anti-sodomy laws were established in the 1600s during colonial times. Homosexuality is older than 1868. [http://www.planetout.com...]

>>> Even if homosexuals popped up somehow post-1868, the Constitution would still have to recognize them. There is no place in the Constitution that states that the Constitution only applies to things that are known during and before the ratification of the amendment. There are many new things that the Supreme Court has to look into. Courts are obviously not limited to things that happened during or before the amendment ratification.

Opponent>>> "Thomas Jefferson too, was unaware of the concept of homosexual in his time; therefore, "all men" does not refer to gay couple who were actually created differently, having different sexual orientation from other men, who were referred by the Declaration of Independence.

Me>>> This is a just simply incorrect. I'm quite certain that Jefferson knew that homosexuality existed. The thought that homosexuality was created post-Jefferson is incorrect. The first anti-sodomy laws were established in the 1600s during colonial times. [http://www.planetout.com...] Homosexuality is older than Thomas Jefferson.

>>> These are the words Thomas Jefferson, who I believe would support gay adoption, said from the Virginia "Bill of Establishing Religious Freedom": "Our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics or geometry."

Opponent>>> "The American Psychological Association and all respectable, unbiased psychological organizations agree that gay couples are just as good parents as straight couples." is a false statement;

Me>>> This is a true statement. These are a few links to back it up.
American Academy of Pschiatrics=[http://aappolicy.aappublications.org...]

American Psychological Association=
[http://www.apa.org...]

American Psychiatric Association=
[www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/lgparenting.pdf]

Opponent>>> 'Gays are given lower priority of adoption to married couples and single indivudals.' [http://www.associatedcontent.com......]

Me>>> This may be true in some prejudicial areas, but this proves nothing except that people are hesitant of gay adoption. This does not prove that gays are less adequate in any way. Studies prove they are equally adequate to raise children.

>>> This is also from an unreliable source called The Associated Content, which is a group of bloggers' opinions. The individual who authored this piece is Steve Tucker who has absolutely no credentials which would equip him to write this piece.

Opponent>>> "Furthermore, the problems of foster care system cannot be the reason that the adoption for gay couple should be constitutional."

Me>>> It is not. The reason is that the 14th Amendment says, 'no state can deny equal protection under the laws." That makes anti-gay adoption laws unconstitutional.

Opponent>>> "It is another issue that should be treated with other solutions, such as supporting the foster care system with more funding, and with more care."

Me>>> This has been tried. The fact is that the individuals who raise these children only have a motivation from a low salary. Parents actually love their children and care. Parents have been proven to do a better job.

Opponent>>> "My opponent did not provide any source that confirms his hypothesis, which states every orphan want to be rather adopted by gay family than staying."

Me>>> I'm not saying that every orphan would prefer gay parents over abusive foster care. I'm saying that the vast majority would prefer this and should be allowed it. Also, I do not need a source because this is common sense.
[http://community.pflag.org...]

Opponent>>> "The biased view of anti-gay people can be harshier for children than the bad conditions of foster care system, because children are more vulnerable to psychological insults than physical abuses."

Me>>> It is obvious that foster care's sexual and physical abuses are far worse mentally, physically, and permanently than gay adoption's potential and occasional verbal remarks.

Opponent>>> In the present Constitution, marriage is in the United States only consists of the union of a man and a woman.

Me>>> Marriage is never in the Constitution.

Opponent>>> "Since marriage is the issue that can not be separated from the issue of adoption.
"Neither this Constitution, nor the Constitution of any State, nor State or Federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."
This amendment directly states that it is not constitutional for the gay people to have the right to marry, which means that it is also unconstitutional for them to adopt children, that adoption needs marriage beforehand in order to provide the adopted child a better environment to live, and more promissing commitment for the child."

Me>>> This amendment never passed Congress. Even many Republicans voted against it. Therefore, it does not apply to the Constitution. You should know what the Constitution says as an American citizen. [http://www.govtrack.us...]

Opponent>>> At last, the mal conditions of foster care system cannot be the reason that gay people's adoption should be constitutional, and homosexuals are not protected by neither the The Constitution's 14th Amendment, nor The Declaration of Independence, in the matter of the right of adopting children

Me>>> The reason that anti-gay adoption legislation is unconstitutional is because ofthe 14th Amendment not the bad foster care system.

I have proven that foster care is dangerous, unloving, abusive and neglectufl. Gay adoption has been proven to work. The Constitution forces gay adoption (14th Amendment). Vote PRO.
uj0320

Con

uj0320 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by libertarian 8 years ago
libertarian
There's just no logical reason for gays not to be allowed to adopt except discrimination.
Posted by uj0320 8 years ago
uj0320
I'm embarassed!
I will try to come up with better arguments next time and improve my debating skill.
Posted by Xera 8 years ago
Xera
"Thomas Jefferson too, was unaware of the concept of homosexual in his time"

I laughed. It felt good. Thank you.
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
:D No problem then. Good arguments so far.
Posted by libertarian 8 years ago
libertarian
I'm agreeing with you, Puck. I guess "actually" came off as condescending. I was agreeing with you with a sort of "did you know."
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
Perhaps you misunderstood me, libertarian. I was not indicating that same sex couples were less than able. The comment was in regards to "that gay couples are just as good parents as straight couples. is a false statement"
Posted by libertarian 8 years ago
libertarian
Actually, Puck, there are certainly studies that show that indivudals fair better with both parents, but these are studies on single parents, not gay parents. Studies on gay parents show that there are no negative effects associated with gay parents as opposed to straight parents.
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
Non sequiter

" portion of respectable, unbiased experts also have stated that "singles have better likelihood of a successful adoption over same sex couples, with more successful single female adoptions over single male adoptions."

That, my friend, is in no way an indicator of the ability of the parents. It is more likely to be an indicator of policy in regards to homosexual couples itself.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
libertarianuj0320Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Sweatingjojo 8 years ago
Sweatingjojo
libertarianuj0320Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by indianajones644 8 years ago
indianajones644
libertarianuj0320Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Killer542 8 years ago
Killer542
libertarianuj0320Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Kandie_Kane 8 years ago
Kandie_Kane
libertarianuj0320Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by oboeman 8 years ago
oboeman
libertarianuj0320Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
libertarianuj0320Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Xera 8 years ago
Xera
libertarianuj0320Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by libertarian 8 years ago
libertarian
libertarianuj0320Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30