The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Should gay couples be allowed to adopt children?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/15/2010 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,423 times Debate No: 13669
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




1) Society is changing, and the traditional idea of the nuclear family with married mother and father is no longer the only acceptable alternative. The reason that many countries are beginning to award legal rights to gay couples is because the stability of such relationships is now recognised. There is no reason, therefore, why such couples cannot provide a stable and loving upbringing for children.

2) There is no legal reason why gays and lesbians should be denied the right to adopt children. The law only hurts children waiting to be adopted and deprives loving parents who would care for these children.

3) There is no evidence to suggest that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents.

4) Good parenting is not influenced by sexual orientation. Rather, it is influenced most profoundly by a parent's ability to create a loving and nurturing home -- an ability that does not depend on whether a parent is gay or straight.

5)The children of lesbian and gay parents grow up as happy, healthy and well-adjusted as the children of heterosexual parents.



Firstly, from my [1] source, homosexuals are prone to having a reduced lifespan, depression, and domestic violence. Additionally, Lesbians have three times more of a chance at obtaining breast cancer versus heterosexual females. Would you not agree this causes instability and an environment that isn't safe for the adopted children? Also, the domestic violence point completely counters your statement of "stability of gay couples' relationships" as this clearly shows instability.


My opponent makes it seem as if the number of same-sex couples is a significant number. For example, take the United States. In 2007 there were 777,000 same-sex couples and only 20% of them actually raised children [3]. To go even further, from 2002 there were 7.3 million women and their partners who couldn't give birth to children due to infertility [4]. Clearly, there are a large number of parents that can adopt with same-sex couples left out of the equation.


As I've proved in my refutation of your first point, gay couples are prone to more problems than their heterosexual counterparts. This causes an unsafe environment for their adopted children which could have negative impacts on them. Additionally, you can read a quote from my first source stating the benefits of having a mother and a father.


My opponent goes on to say that sexual orientation does not have an impact on raising a child. However, like I've just stated, gay-couples are prone to do more negative things that could harm the development of child into becoming a mature adult.



Thanks for the interesting debate PRO and by the way, 2,000 characters is a little small.
Debate Round No. 1


Firstly any of these negative parts to a gay person could happen to a strait person.

My opponents argument ageist mine seems cruel. Why make a child suffer in an orphanage just because we do not want gays to adopt? It makes no sense to me. Gays cannot make their own children together. [1] Studies indicate that gays and lesbians do not abuse their children more than heterosexual parents (in fact, some studies suggest that heterosexual biological fathers and stepfathers are more likely to be abusive than gay fathers)

On to gays are unfit. Well his point is invalid because this does not make them UNFIT. This just means they have more problems then the normal family. That is no reason to not let them adopt. Plus any of these things can happen to a normal married couple! [2] There are 1 million lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender parents raising about 2 million children in the U.S., according to figures analyzed by UCLA's Williams Institute. Good parents are good parents, no matter their sexual orientation.

Big surprise, not every single child has a perfect life. It's certainly no-where near as bad for the child as having neither a mother or a father. In fact, there's plenty of research that shows that children of gay parents turn out just fine.

[1] This suggestion is often made by people who object to homosexuality in general. However, all evidence runs counter to the notion that gay and lesbian parents somehow seek to transform their children into homosexuals. Also, most gays and lesbians point out that they were born and raised by heterosexual parents.



Thanks for the fast response PRO.

Firstly, to begin, my opponent says how my arguments seem cruel. His reasoning behind this implies that children suffer while in an orphanage. Despite the fact that he does not back this up, I will take the liberty of providing evidence that orphanages do not make children suffer: "Contrary to conventional wisdom, the researchers found that children raised in orphanages by non family members were no worse in their health, emotional and cognitive functioning, and physical growth than those cared for in their communities by relatives. More important, the orphanage-reared children performed better than their counterparts cared for by community strangers, which is commonly the case in foster-care programs." [1] In my arguments, I went on to say that the pool of adopting gay-couples is so small and it would not make a difference. On the contrary, there is a much larger pool of infertile couples that can adopt.

Next, I don't recall saying anything about abuse to children, however I do remember saying things about domestic violence towards their partners, which causes instability in the household.

Additionally, my opponent admits gay-couples have more problems than heterosexuals. Even though this doesn't literally makes them "unfit" to be parents, it still provides a less suitable environment than that of heterosexuals. Next, my opponent says these things happen to normal married couples. Well, this claim is too general and unspecific, that's like me saying "gays can murder people." How many people? How many gays?

Next, how are your statistics from your second source showing that gay couples are good parents Also, I never said that gay couples seek to transform their children into homosexuals.

Debate Round No. 2


debatefreak22 forfeited this round.


My opponent has forfeited the round so my arguments still stand. Please vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by BlackVoid 5 years ago
Was going to vote pro but he drops so it all goes to con.
Posted by Yurlene 5 years ago
Also, Dr. Byrd is the president of NARTH.
His taking on the study of Stacey and Biblarz is quite atrocious. Recanting to his reference of the so called study, "found some evidence that children in gay households are more likely to buck stereotypical male-female behavior. For example, boys raised by lesbians appear to be less aggressive and more nurturing than boys raised in heterosexual families. Daughters of lesbians are more likely to aspire to become doctors, lawyers, engineers and astronauts.
Posted by Yurlene 5 years ago
I just want to point out to "TheLaw" that your first source/reference is to NARTH, National Assocation for Research & THerapy of Homosexuality, which clearly shows that studies on these sites will be skewed more on the "anti-gay" stance.
Secondly, the sources usually used by NARTH stems from a so called researcher, Paul Cameron. He has skewered his research to his liking. I wouldn't say surveying 23 people considers to be a thorough and an actual study at any point.
Posted by debatefreak22 5 years ago
Good Luck!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:07