Social Workers Favor Gay Couples over Married Couples?


In a New York Times report that gay adoption is generally on the rise, this story sticks out:

"Matt and Ray Lees, a couple in Worthington, Ohio, said they were selected as parents for a 7-month-old, ahead of several heterosexual couples, in part because they had successfully adopted two older children."

So a couple with two older children who could not legally jointly adopt were favored by social workers for a 7 month old baby, over a childless married mom and dad in Ohio?



  1. Rob
    Posted June 14, 2011 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

    This is odd. NOM supporters usually say that adoption is about the needs of the child, not the needs of the adults. The social worker seemed to be following that principle exactly. In fact, a better headline for this post would be:

    "Social Workers Favor Successful, Experienced Parents over Unproven Couples with No Experiene?"

  2. John Noe
    Posted June 14, 2011 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

    This is sick, perverted, and disgusting on the part of the social workers. Had to fear that due to political correctness this would happen.
    There were couples ready to adopt a baby. They would have provided a mother and father to the child. Instead the baby is denied the mother and father he/she deserves to appease the sexual desires of selfish adults.

  3. Posted June 14, 2011 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

    Well Obviously they were picked first. They already had children, and were experienced parents. The difference between gay foster parents and straight foster parents are : 1. they are not allowed to get married to the ones they love. 2. straight foster parents usually do it to gain an extra pay check each month.

    True Story

    So is it the needs of the child which are more important or the needs of the adults?

  4. John Noe
    Posted June 15, 2011 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

    Yes I do vote and drive a vehicle and unlike the SSM advocates love children and put their needs before selfish adult sexual desires.
    When you put children first, you want the best for them and that would be a mother and father.

  5. Bruce
    Posted June 15, 2011 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

    Did anyone actually read the NYT article? I hope so, since the headline here and the summary are highly misleading.

    This couple adopted 8, that's right 8, African-American childern, 5 of whom are siblings. They knew that 8 children would be a huge responibility but didn't want to split the siblings up. Since most of these children are past the toddler stage, it's probable that they would have been hard to place. If this is what selfishness looks look, may God make all of us more selfish.

Comments are temporarily disabled. Please try back later.