The Evil of Adoption in Same-Sex Marriages

One of the insidious rationalizations used to permit same-sex married couples to adopt children argues that life in a home, rather than an institution, serves the best interests of orphans. While the adopted child in these situations may enjoy a quality of life that rescues him from poverty and homelessness and receive the benefits of proper food, housing, education and medical care, he does not experience a normal, natural family life. If the child is a boy adopted by two men, he does not learn how a husband appreciates, honors, pleases and sacrifices for his wife. The boy has no ideal or model of husband and father for imitation as he grows into manhood, and he never acquires an understanding of chivalry, the willingness of a man to serve a woman he loves. He receives no prior education for marriage and learns nothing about a boy’s relationship with his mother. To have no experiential knowledge of a mother or maternal figure desensitizes a man and does not acquaint him with a woman’s sensibility—an important area of knowledge in preparation for marriage. If a boy cannot please or love his mother or understand her female nature, he lacks an important introduction to married life.

Picture - Schall Article 091313If the child is a girl adopted by two women, a similar dilemma presents itself. She never sees the interaction between a husband and wife or learns to appreciate their complementary nature. Just as the boy never discovers the virtues of a motherly, caring, sensitive woman, the girl never encounters the virtues of a devoted, providing, generous father who lives, works, and sacrifices for his family. The child in these abnormal situations does not experience the balance of love and discipline, mercy and justice, unconditional and conditional love that a mother and father provide. Fathers by nature are more prone to punish and discipline children, mothers by nature more inclined to forgive and be lenient. The traditional wisdom of the world acknowledges the balance of both of these virtues to cultivate in the young both strength and gentleness: will power, perseverance, and discipline on the one hand and kindness, compassion, and graciousness on the other hand.

Boys, of course, learn masculinity from their fathers and girls femininity from mothers. This ideal of masculinity involves not only learning the virtues of fatherly men but also respecting, idealizing and honoring the wife and mother of the family. The ideal of masculinity that boys see in devoted fathers naturally inspires them to imitate the virtues of generosity, dutifulness, responsibility, and care of all who depend upon them. Boys who grow up in large families are naturally inclined to follow in their father’s footsteps to be generous with life. Likewise, the ideal of femininity involves not only the tenderness of caring for children and the management of a home but also honoring, cherishing, and admiring the husband and father of the family. This ideal of womanhood that girls see in good mothers naturally influences their own view of marriage, family, and children. Children learn their roles, their obligations, and the norms and ideals expected of them as they interact with a mother and a father who teach them, directly or indirectly, the virtues of a good father and a good mother—human wisdom that one generation passes on to the next.

Same sex marriages that adopt children cannot duplicate this tradition of human wisdom transmitted from families to children. Children by nature imitate and learn from their parents. What will children in these abnormal situations learn? They will not learn the meaning of a traditional marriage inscribed in the language of nature (“And the two shall become one flesh”) and designed by God:”male and female he created them.” They will not learn to appreciate the goodness of both manhood and womanhood. Boys will not receive role models of how to love, honor, cherish, and care for a wife. Girls will not have examples of how to respect, please and love a husband. In other words, the children of same-sex marriages will have received no encouragement, inspiration, or incentive to love as men and women are intended to love, marry and found families. Without this transmission of human wisdom and moral norms from one generation to the next, the venerable traditions of civilization have no continuity from one generation to the next. Even for one generation to lose its inheritance from the past does irreparable damage to a culture’s normative way of life, as nations ruled by Communist ideology testify.

Just as holy, fruitful marriages inspire their children to follow this ideal and just as divorced parents influence their offspring to disregard the indissolubility of marriage from the example of their own family, same-sex marriages will encourage and model their own way of life—more same-sex marriages. This abnormal, disordered life will be foisted upon the young by way of indoctrination. Just as the plague of fatherless families has caused an increase of crime and violence and a disproportionate percentage of black youth in prison, another plague of dysfunctional young people will suffer the consequences of irresponsible adult decisions ignorant of the wisdom of the human race and oblivious of the damage inflicted upon the young. The meaning of marriage is to give love, the best that one has to offer to a spouse and to one’s children, not the worst. Marriage is meant to enrich them, not to impoverish them, deprive them of human norms, or introduce them to a way of life condemned throughout the ages and by all the religions in the world as a transgression against the natural law.

Look what divorce has done to children, reducing them to the status of “the poorest of the poor” as one archbishop has observed. Look what abortion has done to the young by its slaughtering of the innocents, the scourge of 60 million deaths just in America alone—a figure that resounds like the number of dead in a world war. Look what single-parenthood has done to children, reducing them to a life of welfare and a vicious cycle of delinquency. Look what same-sex marriages will also do to children, robbing them of their innocence, violating their purity, and despoiling them of a normal life. Respectable orphanages, while they cannot replace a father and mother, do not wantonly lead children into temptation or subject them to deliberate harm. The desire of same-sex couples to adopt children amounts to another ploy to legitimize and normalize disordered, immoral acts. It creates a false image of respectability, a disingenuous semblance to the ideal of marriage and family to neutralize and conceal the actual evil it causes.

Mitchell Kalpakgian, Ph.D. has completed fifty years of teaching beginning as a teaching assistant at the University of Kansas, continuing as a professor of English at Simpson College in Iowa for thirty-one years, and recently teaching part-time at various schools and college in New Hampshire. As well as contributing to a number of publications, he has published seven books: The Marvelous in Fielding’s Novels, The Mysteries of Life in Children’s Literature, The Lost Arts of Modern Civilization, An Armenian Family Reunion (a collection of short stories), Modern Manners: The Poetry of Conduct and The Virtue of Civility, and The Virtues We Need Again. He has designed homeschooling literature courses for Seton Home School, and he also teaches online courses for Queen of Heaven Academy and part-time for Northeast Catholic College.
Articles by Mitchell:

  • BobTrent

    What of “lesbian” female homosexual couples who adopt boys, or male homosexual couples who adopt girls?
    Child “Protective””Services” are being staffed by unmarried single women and some unmarried men. Many are homosexuals. Many of the women have had one or more abortions.
    I knew a young woman over 25 years ago who was a receptionist for a state CPS agency. She told me that ALL of the women, social workers and supervisors, were never married or divorced and that ALL of them had had abortions. She said that most of them were lesbians.
    If that was the case two decades ago, what can the situation be today? Surely there has been no improvement.
    Scandal after scandal erupts over deaths of children under the supervision of CPS agencies. Many of these deaths are murders committed by foster “parents.”
    Yet America yawns while watching trashy programs on the TV featuring “funny fags” and other degenerates and perverts.

  • Pingback: 5 Essentials for Discovering God’s Plan for You -

  • lucho gatica

    Marry Christmas old man and i said old not because of your age but because of your thinking: I already know many well adjusted well identified sons ad daughters of gay couples ….they grow up not in a bubble … many Christmas, your thinking is old but you will never change….so marry Christmas and we let you talk like the old drunk uncle in a Christmas party…and smile …marry Christmas , you are drunk with “your truth”

    • Up to Here

      Typical response from a goof-ball progressive. When confronted with an argument that they can’t defeat with logic, reason, or common sense, the navel gazing leftie will always resort to denial, deflection, and name calling.

  • Pingback: The Evil of Adoption in Same-Sex Marriages | Catholic Canada

  • john

    So help me understand. The writer is opposed to single parent adoptions (1/3 of all adoptions) as well?? I see no mention of that. The focus seems to be only on gay couples. Hmm. I wonder why.

  • Old Man River

    Just as widowed men and women must raise children alone, single parents who adopt children have the same dilemma and struggle. But it is essential that older women in the family and female friends play an instrumental role when single fathers must raise daughters, and the same holds true for single women who raise sons. It is Mother Nature’s design and God’s plan for children to be educated by mothers and fathers to be integrated as balanced human beings. This does take place when same-sex couples adopt children. The unnatural does produce the natural.

  • Veritas

    Much of these issues are obvious by common sense to be true…or bull… Depending on whose common sense you may access. Sociologists and psychologists could sort out the truth of these ideas, but like everything else involved in these issues, no,one will believe any study that contradicts their preconceived notions, and worse, all researchers are human so unbiased studies will be difficult to find. So we will get just louder yelling with children in the crossfire

  • nosidam

    Thank you. Well sadly I am a divorced Catholic woman. Also due to sin in the world my daughter is a single mom with 5 kids. I notice that instead of lifting single moms up higher and starting a movement to help them…..I seem to hear….the doom and gloom predictions. They will be poor, they have few opportunities etc.
    I am not for same sex marriages or adoptions but I can see how condemning people can be destructive.
    Instead of predicting the worst for all the unconventional families I think it is time to go do something to help them. Plus there are usually family members who can fill in the cracks.
    I am most distraught by labels. My family needs help too.
    How about loving people so they get on the right track and share what good you have to raise them higher and bring them out of where they are stuck!!!
    Stop quoting statistics and do something to change statistics please.

  • KarenJo12

    So you admit that there is no natural feminity or masculinity; boys and girls have to be instructed how to play the roles of tyrant and doormat assigned in traditional marriage.

    • Old Man River

      Karen Jo, where do you get the idea from the article about “tyrant” and “doormat”? I do not see your point. What do you mean about “no natural femininity or masculinity”? The article is based on those natural differences. I cannot follow your reasoning.

  • Gloria La Bella

    Thank you for this Truthful article. It take true courage to speak the Truth. God bless.

  • Aaron Browder

    The closest thing this article has to a justification for the beliefs presented is the “of course” in “Boys, of course, learn masculinity from their fathers and girls femininity from mothers.” It is symptomatic of conservatives to trust in conventional wisdom rather than looking at data from experiments. This is an easy thing to test. If boys learn masculinity from their fathers, then boys raised by single mothers (there are lots) should have no concept of masculinity. Show me a boy with no concept of masculinity and I’ll concede.