According solely based on love because of their

According to in 2015 there was an
estimated population of 427,910 foster care children in the U.S. That is
427,910 children that are lacking, love, care, and opportunity. The denial of
same-sex couples adopting children is morally and ethically incorrect. Whether
they are allowed or not to adopt a child should not be governed by their sexual
preferences but solely based on the content of their character and actions.
Same sex couples have just as much rights to adopt and parent children as heterosexual
couples. My reasoning is that the denial to grant adoption rights to LGBT
individuals omits their humanity, LGBT couples have more stable relationships
compared to heterosexual couples, and adoption is economically beneficial to

To deny an individual the ability to offer a child a
home with an environment solely based on love because of their sexual
preferences is morally incorrect and omits that individual’s humanity.
According to Suzanne M. Marks in a print source titled “Global Recognition of
Human Rights for Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, and Transgender People” Marks states
“Human rights are indivisible and inalienable rights due to all people.
Articles 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 and 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) address, respectfully, the rights to equality; freedom from
discrimination; life liberty and personal security; freedom from torture and
degrading treatment; recognition as a person before the law; and the rights to
marry and have a family” (Marks 2015). These rights were given to all humans,
and the denial of any of these rights is a dismissal of their humanity. In the
UDHR it doesn’t state that you have the right to equality; freedom from
discrimination; life liberty and personal security; freedom from torture and
degrading treatment recognition as a
person before the law and the rights to marry and have a family; only if you
are heterosexual and reflect the beliefs of modern society. In the bill of
rights all U.S citizens are entitled to the freedom of religion, press, and
expression. So if an individual chooses to freely express themselves by being a
part of the LGBT community that should not limit their right to marry their
partners, and adopt or parent children under a same-sex household.

Sexual preference does not interpret an individual’s
parental skills. The fact that someone’s preferences is different from societal
norms shouldn’t take away their option to adopt a child in need of love, care,
affection and opportunity with their partners. Societal norms have made the
adoption process of children by homosexual couples a difficult one. Society’s
beliefs that a traditional home with different gender parents is a more
suitable environment for the well-being of children. Many people who live by
traditional rules fear what they do not understand. The LGBT community has been
over-sexualized and this has caused society to interpret the lives of this
community as unsuitable for young impressionable minds. Same-sex couples have
trouble adopting children because there are these predominant narratives that
circulate within American society that homosexuals are exclusively sexual
beings. The LGBT community is then reduced to one dimensional creatures.  According to Timothy E. Lin’s article “Social
Norms and Judicial Decision-making: Examining the Role of Narratives in
Same-Sex Adoption Cases”, Lin states “This situation raises problems for
lesbians and gays because American society is extremely uneasy where the topics
of children and sex interact. This leads to harmful and faulty decisions” (Lin
1999). This comes with the belief that because a child is brought up in a LGBT
home that they will in return also become confused and become gay, but this is
not always the case. There have been many studies that show the outcome of gay
parented households where the child did not become gay. This theory is invalid
because how does this explain the situations where heterosexual parented
households resulted in a gay child. In Author Melanie C. Steffens journal entry
titled “Putting prejudice into perspective” she makes a point to refer back to
a court case where LGBT couples were not granted adoption rights. Steffens (2006)
states “Clarke (2001) pointed out heterosexuals two main fears when objecting
to gay or lesbian parenting: homosexual parents will turn the children homosexual,
or the child may grow to be confused about his or her gender. In numerous decisions
the courts did not award custody to the homosexual partner because it was
assumed that homosexuals were incapable of parental bonding with their children,
and that a homosexual parent may be mentally instable”. Steffens also conducted
an experiment that studied prejudice in the adoption process. Three experiments
were conducted members of the general population rate the suitability of gay or
lesbian donors, gender, and social economic status. Steffens states “Data
suggest that adoption decisions were less favorable for gay couples because
participants worried more about the child that in a heterosexual family. Moreover,
the findings of experiments 1a-b indicate that it is less important whether
applicants are gay or lesbian than whether they are rich or poor” (Steffens 2006)
This experiment was revolutionary because it not only showed how closed minded
the general public is but it also proved that sexual preference is less
important in comparison to social economic status. This proves that individuals
who are financially able to care for children is more important than sexual preference.

LGBT adoption is an economic advantage. It’s reported
that there are 594,000 same sex couple households. At the beginning of the
paper it’s stated that there is a population of 427,910 foster care children in
the U.S… If all 594,000 couples are making the decision to adopt in need
children that would leave a home for all 427,910 children with 166,090 LGBT
homes to spare. Imagine if the acceptance of adoption by LGBT couples was
approved. These children would no longer have to be in the system and this
would also decrease the probability of crime. Crime is known to be directly
linked to poverty. When the poverty stricken children are placed in homes where
the LGBT couples are financially prepared children will be able to have better
opportunities for education which will promote economic growth.

 In 2015, a Utah
couple’s adopted child was removed from the home. The court believed that they
were doing what was in the best interest of the child. The judge made a point
to say that the child needs to be placed in a traditional home. According to
Josh Sanburn’s article “Utah Judge May Have Violated Ethics Code in Blocking
Same-Sex Adoption” A Utah judge who ordered a child to be removed from a
lesbian couple may have violated the state’s ethical code of conduct, according
to a top gay rights lawyer. Many same-sex couples who are petitioning to adopt
a child experience much bias from judges. The traditional household of course
consists of both man and woman. Giving the child male and female models.
American society believes that without both man and woman in the house hold the
child will be disadvantaged. So long as the child interact and create
connections with man or woman outside of the house hold they won’t be lacking
in this field. It also does not matter if the child receives nurture from a man
or a woman, just as long as they are being cared for properly.

LGBT parenting does not take away the fact that a man
and a woman are needed to conceive children. In fact this is well-respected by
LGBT couples who are chosen by the biological parent of children who are
choosing to offer their child a life with better opportunity. In heterosexual
relationships they are at risk of pregnancy without preparedness. By homosexual
couples not being able to have children together they are able to go at their
own pace and make the decision to become parents on their own time by adoption
or in vitro procedures with donors. Homosexual couples are usually financially,
and mentally prepared to care for a child. It is no mistake when they want to
be parents. LGBT couples usually make the decision to become parents because
they want a family with their partners. With there being so many children
awaiting homes, what’s the problem with placing them into same sex parented homes?
Same-sex couples are not able to create children with each other. Which makes
their decision to adopt a child a carefully thought out decision. These couples
have chosen to become parents. They want nothing more, than to care for a
child. Gays and lesbians rarely become parents on accident, compared with an
almost 50% accidental pregnancy rate among heterosexual couples. This translates
to greater commitment, financial stability, and mental preparedness from
same-sex couples. It is important that we remember that stability does not come
from the sexual orientation of parents. Meaning just because a couple may be
opposite sex that does not mean that the home is mentally, or financially
stable for the child.  According to
Stephanie Pappos “Gay Parents Better Than Straight Parents? What Research Says”
“Gay parents tend to be more motivated, more committed than heterosexual
parent’s on average” (Pappos 2012). Point is we want these children to be
placed in safe homes. That is the main goal here. Whether that is in a
homosexual home or heterosexual home, the only things that matters is the
development of the child. Children of same-sex homes show few differences in
achievement, mental health, and social functioning than children brought up in
traditional homes. But children of same-sex homes greatest advantage over the
others is their open-mindedness and tolerance.

Although Same-sex couple adoption is becoming more
accepted they still face issues in the court system. Many times LGBT couples
find trouble in both receiving recognition as the parent of the adopted child. In
cases where one of the couples are the biological parents, even though the
couples may be married they still do not receive automatic guardianship the way
that heterosexual couples do. In an article titled “The Nature of Parenthood”
author Douglas NeJaime states “Excluded from marriage, same-sex couples inhabited
a no marital percentage regime that mostly turned on biological connections.
Since only one of the women would have biological connections to the child, the
other found herself a legal stranger upon the child’s birth. For many years,
courts in most states refused to provide comprehensive legal recognition to the
non-biological mother. ” (NeJaime 2017). In an article titled “Paths to the
recognition of homo-parental adoptive rights in the EU-27” written by Pablo
Jose Castillo, Castillo states “According to the international Lesbian and Gay
Association reports, just before the recent accession of Croatia, 17 Member
states of the EU still did not recognize any type of adoptive rights for
homosexual couples. Only 10 Member states allowed some form of homo-parental
adoption” (Ortiz 2015). It’s unfair for
only the biological parent in a LGBT couple to receive legal recognition in the
court. Both partners went through the process of choosing a sperm or egg donor
to conceive their child, they both raised and supported the child and split
parental responsibilities. If it ever came to a situation where the biological
parent of the child lost their life the child could in the end be removed from
the home because the other parent is not the legal parent of the child.

I want to make a point to say that my purpose isn’t to
make it seem like homosexual parenting is better than traditional homes. The
denial of same-sex couples adopting children is morally and ethically
incorrect. Whether they are allowed or not to adopt a child should not be
governed by their sexual preferences but solely based on the content of their
character and actions. My purpose is to get others to understand that the
sexual preference of parents it not what governs the rise or fail of a child. The
denial to allow same-sex couples to adopt a child is morally incorrect and
defies society’s beliefs. The belief that we will do all things necessary to
give children the tools and teaching that aids in their success.  And the refusal to allow gay couples to
parent is going against this belief. Who is to say that the LGBT community does
not possess these very traits? The 427,910 children that don’t have homes are
being deprived of the opportunity to be placed in stable homes where the
parents are set, and are ready to develop them successfully. It just so happens
that theses stable homes have same-sex parents.