Why gay adoption DOESN'T work
08/06/2007
I have read all sorts of convoluted arguments attempting to explain how homosexuality is somehow acceptable, or even 'normal'. Reading Caroline Stevens letter "Why Gay Adoption Works" (linked below), it seems we have now moved on to it being 'desirable'. The temptation to ask "When will it become compulsory ?" arises more from despair than any inclination to be facetious.
The presence of the same devient behaviour in the animal world no more implies that it is 'functional' there (or here) than does the similar existance of rape, cannibalism, albinism or a whole variety of other physical or mental abnormalities. Aberrant conduct will sometimes warrant preventative measures from society, and at other times merely pity, depending on a variety of factors: but it is still aberrant, and cannot be otherwise.
It is taking desperation to find some form of biological justification for homosexuality to truly nonsensical lengths, to suggest that the way "gay creatures fluff and preen and parade ... stimulates reproductive behaviour" in heterosexuals. Certainly within the human species the latter conduct serves only to arouse feelings of amused contempt amongst those for whom freakishness has a humorous aspect, and pity mixed with revulsion among the rest.
To suggest that it benefits animals by creating non-reproductive couples able to take over the parenting of orphaned young ignores the fact that the species still only produces one litter per two couples : exactly the same as if both couples had been productive, and one litter had not survived; while in the human species with its greater reliance on reason over instinct, the unnatural environment faced by a vulnerable child handed to a pair of co-habiting homosexuals can only serve to distort his or her outlook on life, and perhaps create another perverted individual.
M McGregor