Gay

Happy to think with you today. There are a number of moderately false statements made in your initial claims. You haven't supported any of your claims with sources, Which I hope you will do in R2. As such, I'll make counterclaims here and wait until R2 to give sources as well so that you can have the first word with sources. For the purposes of this debate, In order to have a pro and a con side you must establish a question or statement that you are either on the "pro" side of or the "con" side of. The question "What's wrong with same-sex couples having children by adopting children? " Is not a question of pro or con. As such, I will reword the question in a way I presume you will agree with to be as follows: "There is something wrong with same-sex couples adopting children. " You are Pro. I am Con. Alternatively, "Same-sex adoptions are inferior to opposite-sex adoptions. " Many of the arguments you have here are not related to this question. 1. You claim a child *should* be raised by their biological parents. This means that there is nowhere in society that the child could be that would be better for them than with their biological parents in all circumstances. This is false. No matter how good any given child's parents are, There are likely a set of parents that could lead them to better outcomes. 2. You claim children are healthier when raised by their biological mother and father. This is also false. The statistics you'd need to support this would be stats on children's health when raised by their biological mother and father and stats where the children who didn't know their parents weren't their biological parents. If you don't have these stats then you have insufficient evidence to make this claim. If you have stats on when children DID know their parents were not their biological ones, That would be interesting, But wouldn't prove your point. Any differences in "health" could be due to the knowledge of their parents not being biological parents and the stress that may cause. Now we get to the claims that more pertain to the subject you have put up for debate. 3. You claim children raised by married opposite-sex couples have better outcomes to same sex couples or single-parent households. The single parent claim is true. The opposite-sex claim is shown by no research data that is peer-reviewed and accepted, And is not corroborated throughout the set of data that we have. Some data shows statistical significance that same-sex couples are superior in certain ways. Some shows statistical significance they are inferior in certain ways. An overall analysis of all studies by professionals in these fields show no significant difference between children adopted by same-sex or opposite-sex families. 4. You claim that mothers and fathers parent differently. That gender determines one's parenting techniques. You will have to elaborate, As this is false. Children learn different lessons from two moms or two dads as well as individuals are unique. One has to show evidence that gender determines one's parenting techniques or that there are lessons only females or males can teach. I submit that you have no such data and can not state one thing a female could teach that a male could not. Any lessons a female could teach through empathy as opposed to sympathy are not lessons that it is necessary for a parent specifically to teach. If they were, Why would 2 female parents not be superior for a female child than 1 female and 1 male parent? Why would 2 male parents not be superior to 1 male 1 female pairs at raising a male? 5. You claim that same-sex partner's surrogate children would be worse off still because studies show that biological parents have a leg up on one biological parent and one step parent. This is a false equivocation. The two are not equal. You need studies specific to surrogate children of same sex couples versus opposite sex parents. 6. You cite numerous "testimonies. " Anecdotal evidence is sometimes worse than no evidence. You need statistics to support claims relating to larger numbers of people. All your anecdote proves is that there is probably at least one person who felt they could've done better in a home with a father, And that isn't even proof her outcome was objectively worse, Just that she felt that she missed her father. 7. All your claims are not comparing like versus like. If we are debating the legitimacy of same-sex couples adopting children, The group you need to compare them with is opposite-sex couples adopting children. Whether or not same-sex couples lead to better outcomes for the children than biological parents, Single parents, Or step-parent+biological parent pairs are irrelevant to the discussion. Those are your claims. When you supply evidence for any of them, I will explain the errors of your evidence, Or accept their points accordingly. My claims are as follows: 1. There is no statistical proof that adopted children raised by same-sex couples fare worse than adopted children of opposite-sex couples. There are studies that show same-sex is slightly superior in some ways and others that show same-sex is slightly inferior in some ways. This is what we would expect to see if they are the same. 2. Insofar as studies have shown different results, The studies largely do not take other factors into consideration. Most will not analyze differences in family structure, Support systems, Or financial stability. It is also difficult to measure the impact bigotry against their adoptive parents leads to a change in their lifestyles. 3. If my opponent claims that same-sex couples ought not to be allowed to adopt, It is not even a question of whether or not opposite sex couples are better. It is a question of do same-sex adoptive parents lead to better outcomes than foster care, Or do same-sex adoptive parents lead to better outcomes than a single-parent adoptive family? If my opponent wishes to take on this challenge he must first answer those questions, None of which he will be able to do to his argument's benefit. 4. At best, If there was statistical evidence that opposite-sex adoptive parents led to better outcomes than same-sex adoptive parents, They should get priority, Not outlaw same-sex entirely. There are plenty of kids who need to be adopted. Any household that meets the criterion of our adoptive agencies should be allowed to adopt. The argument that it is either-or is a false dichotomy. Lastly, We need to agree on metrics to analyze outcomes if we are to reach agreement either way. What outcomes are we looking at specifically? If you supply me your list and reasons, I will supply you mine. I will support my arguments with sources in R2, As I hope my opponent shall. May your thoughts be clear, -Thoht