I know several gay couples w/kids (some male couples, some female couples) who struggle with the very same things that the rest of us who have traditional marriages with children. Where to live, who their kids are hanging out with, which church to attend, their kids teachers, balancing work with getting the kids in for their vaccines, which dog should we get if any? The kids have the same problems my kids have, in several cases fewer problems because their parents have greater resources or perhaps they have fewer mental health issues than my family has had. One gay family I know took on an autistic kid w/developmental delays. This child was never expected to get past the second grade. He sings in the youth choir at our church, is doing well in middle-school (no small task for those of you who have middle-schoolers), and is quite mannerly and friendly. Wow! How did this happen in a family that is gay?

Just as it was decades ago, when people tried to ascribe certain attributes to African-Americans, it is so with gay people. They feel the same joy, pain, love the rest of us do. They are humans.

I think if a parent of a child is given custody by the court and the parent is gay that is one thing, but for two persons of the same sex to come together, obtain a child by adoption, in vitro, or whatever, this is not proper. This idea that a child cannot be raised properly without a loving and caring mother and a father as an ideal is what is best for any child. You can find policies and so on that will justify and rationalize anything, so any justification in and of itself is not necessarily sufficient. I know there are a number of people who read this stuff and don't like hearing it, but there is a God in heaven and He has a plan, and within that plan is for each child to be raised by a mother and father, male and female respectively, knowing ahead that there will be times of divorce, death, and so on where one parent might bear the burden of raising a child... but this pattern of expectation does not to me justify gay couples raising children that are not biologically their own, meaning conceived between a man and a woman.

I believe that man+man or woman+woman does not equal "marriage". Let them do what they will with all the same legal rights regarding, property, insurance, etc but don't call it marriage because it is not and everyone should not be forced to change the legal definition of a word just for the minority. The APA has recently stated there is no concrete evidence of a so-called gay-gene that it is more evident to be nurture than nature. And if so it definitely should not be included as part of the curriculum to teach young children even as young as 5 to model themselves after this behavior which is not science-based; and this does not even include religion which may be charged with hate-speech for simply not agreeing with the practice if it is made legal. Meaning even if they preach it is a 'sin' as they have for centuries. But back to nature versus nurture issue why raise a child into a so-called illusion of a 'marriage' of what is actually not scientifically sound and has been proven to be the most unstable of all relationships despite the few exceptions noted by same-sex advocates. Some valid questions as well.

I think the question Erin Stewart thinks is a relevant one is just as silly as the ones she thinks are silly. Single parents do not have both gender role models in the home any more than gay couples, yet no one frets over whether children are worse off with them--and more importantly, no one is suggesting making single parent families illegal.

Sure, the mama-papa traditional family is the ideal, but so what? Few things in life are ideal. I think children that enjoy a loving family environment from whatever kind of parent(s) they have are head-over-heels better off than kids without that loving environment, even if there is a mama and a papa in that home.

A man and a woman living under the same roof is no guarantee that a healthy family environment lives there too.

I really think its to early to tell, besides why dont you ask the kids raised by them, Not just a few many many of them and make a real pole and stop guessing

having been raise for a time in a single parent family then by adoptivive parents I can say that it is much better to have a mother and a father in the home. like wise in raising my own children there are thing that my children have learned from their mother that they could never get from me, and also as great and cearative and intelligent as my wife is there are thing that she could never teach our children that they learned from me. so I think the best is for a male female couple to raise children.

I was actually raise by a pack of wolves. Also loving parents, especially the alpha male. The wolves could provide me with plenty of bothers and sisters, plus a secure home. They could tell my needs from my wants. It's not always good to give into childish wants, some need to be suppressed. Adults often have childish wants.

The main point really isn't the couple's sexual orientation, so much as their capacity to provide the love and caring a child requires. For example, if a child is in a heterosexual household that is abusive and is taken out by child services, would it be better if that child was adopted by a homosexual couple that was willing to provide the love and caring the child requires? In terms of fairness for the child, yes. While it is true that a father or mother can only provide for certain things, father figures or mother figures are just as well suited to a parenting role. Therefore, it is both unfair and unjust to make laws etc. based on the parenting ability of a sexual orientation. Conversely, it make more sense to base laws on the child, which is the recipient of the parenting, than the parents, as that factor is not a quantity that can be easily measured.

I'm female and was raised by my widowed father. He is a fantastic parent and I turned out happy and successful. That being said, I do think there are, simply put, things only a mother can give a daughter, a father a son. Regardless of same-sex role models in someone's life, there is no replacement for a same-sex parent raising a child.

Does this mean I think homosexual couples shouldn't adopt? Absolutely not, for two reasons. First, gay parents aren't the ideal, but if we're to base laws on what is and is not the perfect parenting scenario, then neither gays, singles, alcoholics, adulterers, porn addicts (the list could go on and on) should be allowed to raise their biological children or adopt. (Sorry for putting gays and singles on a list anywhere near the rest--only did it to make a point).

Second, although not the perfect situation, it can still be a great situation if parents are loving and committed. Comparing LOVING homosexual parents to LOVING straight parents is like comparing Wonderful and More Wonderful. Both have the potential to be great.

In fact, shouldn't the parenting question be more about loyalty and love, than sexual orientation?

I'm not very informed on this subject, but I can say that bringing up individual cases of horrible heterosexual parents is irrelevant. Unless you think that homosexual couples are generally better at parenting than traditional couples, you will see problems on both sides. Case studies do not a trend make.

I resist the logic of comments which state that a dysfunctional hetero couple is less preferable to a stable homo couple, because many of these comments assume that there is a higher percentage of heteros with problems. Both types of couples have problems.

I agree - interesting discussion, stupid title. Obviously ANY loving parents are better than one or none. My "vote" is that quality Mom and Dad are the BEST or ideal option because of the balance of male and female perspective and experience.

But "unwanted" children should be with caring adults who love them and are willing to provide the support and parental relationships these children need. Orphans, abused and neglected children and others needing new families should not be denied any parents willing to adopt them for the best reasons.

Beware any individual or couple who want children for selfish reasons or merely to fulfill their own needs and wants.

Even as a single mother raising my children I know and understand that children need both a mother and a father in raising them. I cannot provide the learning that they get from a father, nor can a father give the same learning that a child learns from a mother. All children deserve a loving home, but we need to remember we cannot remove the male nor the female from a healthy child's life. They need both.

Kids deserve a Mom and a Dad. If you can't provide for their needs you shouldn't be reproducing.

If children are loved and cared for, then it doesn't matter if their parents are gay or straight.

sexual perverts should not be around children, let alone parenting them.

I grew up the oldest child of a heterosexual marriage and believe me, they were the most screwed up people anyone could have been unlucky to have met...I thank them for my life, but that's it....

the ideal home enviroment is where there are STABLE parents that actually care about their kids, especially their education. these parents can take many forms, biological, adopted, same-sex couples, grandparents, etcetera.

to: Fight the divorce rate

Just so you know, same sex couples raising children really is different. It's not a label. it's a simple fact.

to: 2 is better than one

Who is to say that a homosexual couple is more likely to stay together than a heterosexual couple? You are not even making sense.

I completely agree with Interesting discussion at 10:42.

I was raised by a mother who married and divorced three times during my childhood, and I can honestly say, a family with two lving parents, no matter the gender, would be so much better than that atrocity.

"if for instance a daughter is raised by gay men, isn't she inherantly going to hate her femaleness, because obviously her dads don't like it?"

Nope. Gay doesn't mean disliking the opposite sex. Quite the contrary. Most gay men have Moms, sisters, and other women in their lives that they love. I think having a strong desire to have a child is the most important factor in having a child. Without that strong desire, it doesn't matter what sexual orientation you are. With that strong desire, you will do whatever it takes to raise a healthy, happy child.

There are no advantages. The disadvantage is growing up being taught that having a homosexual relationship is moral. No, I don't think homosexual couples should be adopting children.

I think society does more damage to these children by not recognizing their families as 'families'. A family takes many different forms. Labeling same-sex couple families as 'different' is what makes them stand out. The fact that there are two parents (of any gender) in the home is what is most important. One parent has a hard time doing it all, two people are better suited to handle kids and give each other support. The article says children of same-sex couples are more physiologically damaged than those of straight couples. How could they be more damaged than a child whose hetero mother or father abandons them (which happens a lot)? It seems to me that if we want to protect families maybe we ought to make it harder to obtain a marriage license and subsequently a divorce. We should be fighting against divorce more than we are fighting against gay couples that want to be married. It's not gays that are threatening the sanctity of marriage, it's people like Britney Spears and others that rush into marriage in a drunken state, or get married just because they got pregnant, rather than thinking about what they are doing first.

First, I appreciate the many thought provoking and sensitive postings to this article. This is a topic that is simply not black and white. I believe the question really revolves around the quality of the parents and their parenting efforts rather than their gender or sexual preferance. Next, we all must respect the fact that no matter the source and/or quality of the parental guidance, for better or worse, every person answers to the consequences of their choices/decisions in life.

as a foster mom, I admire and respect gay couples who take in and adopt foster children. Many couples raise "unloveable" children that aren't "designer"babies that most couples want. I love that they provide loving, stable homes for these children. On the other hand, there are beautiful qualities in each gender, and if for instance a daughter is raised by gay men, isn't she inherantly going to hate her femaleness, because obviously her dads don't like it?

In terms of ideals, and all other factors being equal, a child is best served when both its DNA contributors serve as parents to said child.

Divorce, Homoadoption, singleparent adoption, and adoption in general are all less than ideal to varying degrees.

From a socialization standpoint, a child should have interraction with a parent that is both female and male, for the sake that our society consists of both, and ignoring that is not without consequences.

That said, Life's messy. The question remains, with the state of current parenthood and the many socially acceptable complications and disadvantages that we accept as a whole, as to whether the "gayby" thing makes any difference whatsoever.

I embrace the ideal, but tolerate the exceptions to the rule, cuz we don't live in an ideal society, and we are not ideal beings.

@ Interesting Discussion at 10:42

Thank you. Your comment said it perfectly. Better than I could have myself. You are spot on!

A loving home is by far the most important aspect of raising children. I wouldn't know what it's like to be raised by gay parents because, like everyone else in the world, I'm here because of a heterosexual relationship.

My grandfather is gay and, although he is very sweet and generous and would have taken good care of my mom, he opted out because it's easier that way. She was much better off being adopted into a family consisting of a mother and a father. I know this because she's said so. Whether she stayed with her birth father or not, she would have always felt different from other kids. One scenario would have given her two fathers and the other an adopted mother and a father. You've got to consider all aspects of a child's life, which may include the possible social consequences of being the only kid around with two moms or two dads. Some kids don't care, but others do. And everyone knows how mean kids can be to each other.

Regardless, as long as the child has love and support from someone they are more likely to grow into happy healthy adults.

Good questions. I think the ideal situation is for children to live in the home with two loving biological parents (Mom and Dad).

Obviously, the ideal is not achieved in a great many cases. Certainly, having two loving gay parents is far better than being an orphan or having abusive opposite sex parents.

There are needs a child has that a mother can fill but a father cant and vice versa. While Im not saying a gay couple would be rotten parents, I think children of a home with one mother/one father have an advantage.

I don't think we have any idea what the effects of this will be. How do you tell when someone was a good parent? By how their grandkids turn out.

Homosexual people are always born from straight parents. You can't make someone be either. Isn't that the whole reason it's okay to be gay? You can't make someone be one or the other.

I would rather my kid(s) be raised by a husband and wife. I think if birth moms want to place with same sex couples, they should be able to. Who better to place than the birth family. But when the state does it (no will) they should keep the sensitivites of most parents in place while deciding who gets the kids. Yes single and same sex couples can do the job, but the ideal is for a dad and a mom.

On issues like this you will find evidence to support each side of the question.

I just read two articles, the first about a woman who delivered a baby and dropped it down the holding tank of a portapotty and another about several kids getting locked inside of a shed, in Houston, during the summer, by the Day Care instructor during a surprise inspection. I really don't understand why so many object to letting adoptions take place to loving homosexual couples. To many children in the world, being in a loving home would be the best thing to ever happen to them.

Interesting article, thanks for bringing up the topic.

We need another name though, it's hard to know right off whether you rhyme with baby or say gay by.....

Anecdoctal evidence, which the article relies on, is useful, but I wish they had referenced research that is used by opponents and supporters of gay families, so we could tease out what's emotion and what's fact about it.

And count me as another conservative Republican that agrees with the premise that gay marriage would work to strengthen society, by making it easier for gays to have stable, normalized family relationships. Hopefully better anyway then gov. "Soulmate" Sanford.

Personally, as a father of two, I feel that children have the greatest chance of success when being raised in a home with loving parents that are in the home and accessible to their children. When it comes to the vital issues in a childs life, I think that there's little difference what the sex is of any of the parents, or even to the extent of how many parents there are. Sure there are aspects of growing up where it would be nice for a child to be able to get the perspective of their same sex parent, but on that same note, it would also benefit a child to have one parent that was an expert on math, one on English, one on science...these are things that can be beneficial, but not vital. Love + time together = an emotionally healthy and secure child.