It's Time For Conservative Christians To Change Their Tone On Adoption Rights
Start writing a post
Politics

It's Time For Conservative Christians To Change Their Tone On Adoption Rights

Every child deserves a stable home, no matter who gives it to them.

46
It's Time For Conservative Christians To Change Their Tone On Adoption Rights
Stocksnap

Here in the Grand Ole Party, particularly in the Bible Belt, we're all about "Adoption, not abortion" –– except when we're not. We're all about freedom of association and letting people do their own thing –– except when they're doing that thing.

You know what I'm talking about. Despite conservatives' emphasis on family and liberty, many of them still don't think same-sex couples should have the liberty to start a family. Because the government is bad unless it comes to dictating who has the right to adopt, or something.

This talking point is cliche, but true: social conservatives are hypocritical when they talk about LGBT rights. Whether you agree with the LGBT community or not, you as a conservative should not have supported the government dictating who people married or who gets to adopt children. And if you preach "adoption not abortion," you should absolutely be in favor of more adoptions.

In the United States, 491,000 married couples are lesbian or gay, according to a 2016 Gallup poll. If even half of these couples decided to adopt one child apiece, that's nearly a quarter-million children rescued from foster care. This idea should fill you with hope if you care about the well-being of children. For no one could seriously argue that children with gay parents (whether you think that lifestyle is holy or not) are worse off than children being shuffled from home to home with no parents at all.

More than 400,000 children lived in foster care as of 2015. Despite the fact that all of us went to school with or otherwise encountered some people who had spent time in foster care, the problems of the system are one of the most ignored social topics of our time. The Department of Health and Human Services reported 683,000 foster children were victims of abuse and neglect in 2015. I wonder how many hundreds of others were abused, but no one ever investigated-- or perhaps were coerced into silence or even too young to comprehend what was happening. Furthermore, children shuffled from house to house and school to school have no sense of stability, no healthy attachments, no parents to call their own-- common sense dictates this lifestyle is detrimental.

Shame on anyone who thinks this type of life is better for a child than a life with two healthy moms or two healthy dads. Shame on any Christian who doesn't lift a finger to help the least of these but has Opinions when a gay atheist wants to adopt a baby.

Conservative Christians do adopt, foster and donate to children in need-- but not to the extent we should, and the fact remains that thousands of children need homes. Thousands more will be aborted because their parents aren't ready to take care of them. The fact remains that whether you condone homosexuality or not, LGBT couples are equally capable of loving, protecting, feeding and educating their kids. The arguments against same-sex adoption rights are not about the welfare of small ones. They are just about bigotry.

(And absolutely miss me with that "gays are pedophiles" stuff-- that dated stereotype has no basis in facts and statistics. And again, I direct you to the children being sexually abused in foster care, and dare you to tell me why that's a better life for them than life in a same-sex household.)

The same Book which defines marriage as something for a man and a woman also forbids divorce except in extreme cases, yet we see no crusades against divorced singles raising children. And far, far worse, we see no crusades against the abuses and injustices in the foster system-- although the Bible commands us over and over to do justly and love our neighbors as ourselves (especially the least of these). (Gosh, it's almost like extreme anti-LGBT sentiment has little to do with religion and more to do with prejudice).

Every child deserves a shot at birth and living. Preferably, they'll spend their childhoods in a stable home with a couple of people who will love them, protect them, read to them and take them on adventures once in a while. If you're more concerned about the gender of that couple than the well-being of the child, you're missing it.

Report this Content
This article has not been reviewed by Odyssey HQ and solely reflects the ideas and opinions of the creator.
Featured

An open letter to my father

What you did sounds dumb to me

31
An open letter to my father
The Truth About My Parents' Divorce

Considering im 18 now & you're one of the best men i've ever met since you have a child; me. I want you to know that I love you, more than anyone, I love you. I don't forgive you for the way you hurt my mother. I'm hurt because you broke our family. Thing went down hill the day you found Laquita. You we're distant & shortly after my mother turned into the coldest, saddest women to walk past me. She's my best friend & so are you. Not one day goes by where I don't wonder what she did wrong. How on earth could you trade your family & the women who loved you unconditionally for a home wrecker? Sounds dumb to me.

Keep Reading... Show less
Featured

Is God Reckless?

Exploring the controversy behind the popular worship song "Reckless Love"

345
Is God Reckless?


First things first I do not agree with people getting so caught up in the specific theology of a song that they forget who they are singing the song to. I normally don't pay attention to negative things that people say about worship music, but the things that people were saying caught my attention. For example, that the song was not biblical and should not be sung in churches. Worship was created to glorify God, and not to argue over what kind of theology the artist used to write the song. I was not made aware of the controversy surrounding the popular song "Reckless Love" by Cory Asbury until about a week ago, but now that I am aware this is what I have concluded.The controversy surrounding the song is how the term reckless is used to describe God's love. This is the statement that Cory Asbury released after many people questioned his theology regarding his lyrics. I think that by trying to clarify what the song was saying he added to the confusion behind the controversy.This is what he had to say,
"Many have asked me for clarity on the phrase, "reckless love". Many have wondered why I'd use a "negative" word to describe God. I've taken some time to write out my thoughts here. I hope it brings answers to your questions. But more than that, I hope it brings you into an encounter with the wildness of His love.When I use the phrase, "the reckless love of God", I'm not saying that God Himself is reckless. I am, however, saying that the way He loves, is in many regards, quite so. What I mean is this: He is utterly unconcerned with the consequences of His actions with regards to His own safety, comfort, and well-being. His love isn't crafty or slick. It's not cunning or shrewd. In fact, all things considered, it's quite childlike, and might I even suggest, sometimes downright ridiculous. His love bankrupted heaven for you. His love doesn't consider Himself first. His love isn't selfish or self-serving. He doesn't wonder what He'll gain or lose by putting Himself out there. He simply gives Himself away on the off-chance that one of us might look back at Him and offer ourselves in return.His love leaves the ninety-nine to find the one every time."
Some people are arguing that song is biblical because it makes reference to the scripture from Matthew 28:12-14 and Luke 15. Both of these scriptures talk about the parable of the lost sheep and the shepherd. The shepherd symbolizes God and the lost sheep are people that do not have a relationship with God. On the other hand some people are arguing that using the term reckless, referring to God's character is heretical and not biblical. I found two articles that discuss the controversy about the song.The first article is called, "Reckless Love" By Cory Asbury - "Song Meaning, Review, and Worship Leading Tips." The writer of the article, Jake Gosselin argues that people are "Making a mountain out of a molehill" and that the argument is foolish. The second article, "God's Love is not Reckless, Contrary to What You Might Sing" by author Andrew Gabriel argues that using the term reckless is irresponsible and that you cannot separate Gods character traits from God himself. For example, saying that God's love is reckless could also be argued that God himself is reckless. Reckless is typically not a word that someone would use to describe God and his love for us. The term reckless is defined as (of a person or their actions) without thinking or caring about the consequences of an action. However, Cory Asbury is not talking about a person, he is talking about God's passionate and relentless pursuit of the lost. While I would not have chosen the word reckless, I understand what he was trying to communicate through the song. Down below I have linked two articles that might be helpful if you are interested in reading more about the controversy.


Keep Reading... Show less
Student Life

10 Signs You Grew Up In A Small Town

Whether you admit it or not, that tiny town will always have your heart.

882
The Odyssey

1. You still talk to people that you went to elementary school with.

These are the people you grew up with and the people you graduated high school with. The faces you see in kindergarten are the same faces you’ll see for the rest of your life.

Keep Reading... Show less
Student Life

150 Words For Anyone Who Loves Football Games

Why I love high school football games, even though I don't like football.

2060
Dallas News

When most think of high school they think of friend drama, parties, getting your drivers license, and best of all foot ball games.

Keep Reading... Show less
Politics

10 Greatest Speeches In Modern American History

The United States is a relatively infantile nation, but its legacy of spoken rhetoric is one of the richest in the world.

4729
flickr

Rhetoric, in all its forms, arrives under the scrutiny of historians both for its historical impact and literary value. Dozens of speeches have either rallied the nation together or driven it drastically apart –– the impact of speeches in politics, social movements, and wars is undeniable.

Keep Reading... Show less

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Facebook Comments