Resolved: The US Federal government should legalize same - sex adoption

Pro's argument has a specific agenda, which is to generate an emotional response in this debate, similar to the questions in the surveys given to people on the matter of same-sex adoption. One such question reads: A child would be better off in a home with same-sex parents than no home at all. Yes or no This is all a part of the Acculturation of America. Homosexuals want us to feel sorry for them as an oppressed minority. Why do tricks like this work? It is every bit as studies of the human brain show: Neurons that fire together wire together: To oversimplify: Our brain cells communicate with one another via synaptic transmission"one brain cell releases a chemical (neurotransmitter) that the next brain cell absorbs. This communication process is known as "neuronal firing." When brain cells communicate frequently, the connection between them strengthens. Messages that travel the same pathway in the brain over & over begin to transmit faster & faster. With enough repetition, they become automatic. That"s why we practice things like hitting a golf ball"with enough practice, we can go on automatic pilot by Deann Ware, Ph.D. This is where we find the thick interwoven web of disadvantaged children, and a coercion effect to feel the same attitude towards homosexuals. Conduct versus Orientation Repeatedly we return to the emerging pattern of the key issue; Conduct versus Orientation. Should we treat homosexuals as an oppressed minority because they can not help being who they are? Or, are they merely normal people, who are engaged in deprivation? Depravity of mind refers to the state of mind which is contrary to justice, honesty or morality. Depravity of mind is a condition where there is a deviation or departure from the ordinary standards of honest, good morals, justice, or ethics as to be shocking to the moral sense of the society. Depravity of mind can also be described as an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which a person owes to another, or to a community. Seek the Truth SCIENTISTS are hard at work to try to find genetic causes for alcoholism, homosexuality, promiscuity, violence, other aberrant behavior, and even for death itself. Would it not be a relief to find that we are not responsible for our actions, but are merely victims of biology? It is human nature to blame someone or something else for our errors. Trying to pin the entire blame for our misconduct on our genes simply does not work. Rather than helping us to solve or overcome our problems, notes Psychology Today, doing so "may be teaching us a helplessness that is at the root of many of our problems. Instead of reducing the incidence of these problems, this seems to have fueled their growth." In fact, research attempting to link specific genes to human behavior has been unsuccessful. For instance, in Psychology Today, a report on efforts to find genetic causes for depression states: "Epidemiologic data on the major mental illnesses make it clear that they can't be reduced to purely genetic causes." The report gives an example: "Americans born before 1905 had a 1 percent rate of depression by age 75. Among Americans born a half century later, 6 percent become depressed by age 24!" It thus concludes that only external or social factors can bring about such dramatic changes in such a short time. What do these and numerous other studies tell us? While genes may play a role in shaping our personalities, there are clearly, other influences: A major factor is our environment, which has undergone radical changes in modern times. Concerning what today's youth are exposed to in popular entertainment, the book Boys Will Be Boys observes that it is unlikely that children will develop sound moral principles when they "grow up watching tens of thousands of hours of TV shows and films in which people are assaulted, shot, stabbed, disemboweled, chopped up, skinned, or dismembered, when children grow up listening to music which glorifies rape, suicide, drugs, alcohol, and bigotry. If being a homosexual is not natural then perhaps we need to consider that homosexuality is learned through empiricism. Empiricism is a theory that states that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience. Empiricism emphasizes the role of experience and evidence, especially sensory experience, in the formation of ideas, over the notion of innate ideas or traditions. Empiricists may argue, however, that traditions arise due to relations of previous sense experiences. Here is a quote from such a person who CHOSE not to practice homosexuality anymore. "When I was a young boy in boarding school, I got involved in homosexual practices, although I never thought of myself as being a homosexual. My parents were divorced, and I craved the parental affection that I never received. After finishing school, I did compulsory military service. There was a group of homosexuals in the barracks next to mine. I became envious of their lifestyle, so I started associating with them. After associating with them for a year, I began to think of myself as a homosexual. "This is the way I am," I reasoned, "and I can do nothing about it." Now, can you imagine this coming from children raised by homosexuals? Fostercare: Survey questions that are also asked about gay rights are; It is ok for gay couples to be foster parents. yes or no If a foster child wants to be adopted by his/her gay foster parents, we should award him/her that opportunity. yes or no Woe! Wait! Backup! Gay couples want to be foster parents? The foster system that has been demonized in this debate. Let us ponder over this thought; although both sides recognize that the foster system has problems, only one side attacks the foster parents. Pro has not given credit to the numerous benevolent families involved in foster care of minor children: "Foster parent adoptions account for more than half the adoptions of children from foster care. According to the national Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS), in FY 2010, 53 percent of children adopted from foster care were adopted by their foster parents" (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2011). 'A Brighter Day' even offers training for foster parents to enrich a child's life- "Making the decision to open up your home to a child in need is not an easy one " every day, foster children fight stigma and fear, but every day these children spend outside of a home is a day further from success." "We believe that when a child is given stability, love and compassion, they have a much higher chance of growing into contributing members of our society." "At A Brighter Day, our goal is to empower foster families for success in child placement. Love and passion are necessary for foster success, but alone they are not enough. The training we provide gives you the skill set to work with the trauma, so many foster children have faced and understand what it means for the child, for you, and for your family. The team at A Brighter Day will educate you for success, offering guidance and training along the way." Cross-Examination Pro agrees with my plan to keep children with their biological parents that want to keep their children. As long as a child is in foster care then the biological parent can get their children back. If we can eliminate the cause for losing a child, one way is to give a parent a fair trial which they lack, and stop rewarding the state monetarily for taking children. Those who support this plan can go to the website for the Family Civil Liberties Union. Pro's arguments only pose as if they are for the children's benefit. Ergo, in reality the solution is only tailored to the needs of the Gay community. Pro wants to base the safety of our children on mere conjectures. Pro sites the Liberal Dominated Mass Media as his resource "politifact" which is more like politi-fiction. Politifact is found on the watchdog journalism fact finders all the time for being inaccurate. This is hardly a credible source. The interviewers care more about "fund than fact." Pro relies on Studies which are limited to observation perspective, position, and bias. Studies which are not based on vivid portrayals of experience. In R3 Pro relies on the fallacy "Attacking the Evidence" which does not prove that Pro is correct. That is like telling someone; 'The vet can't give any reasonable explanation for how my dog died. See! See! That proves that you poisoned him! There's no other logical explanation!" When the standard for a child's best interest came up, Pro could only focus on the Source, that Canadians came up with my example, never mind what children need. Conclusion I ask our readers to observe how bias can really change how a person interprets evidence, because Pro failed to see how Promiscuity, domestic violence, and health conditions could be poor lifestyle choices which affect children's lives. Not to mention the infantile development found in children of gay parents, the escalation of crime (especially violent crimes), proliferation of sexual transmitted and other diseases, the escalation of mental illness, chronic substance abuse, and gender confusion. These are the results of citizens raised in unstable homes. Sources http://www.childwelfare.gov... http://www.survelum.com... https://answers.yahoo.com...;... http://abrighterdayfoster.com...