Now that President Obama has declared himself in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage, the implications of its legalization have to be examined closely.
Interestingly, the latest issue of Christianity Today hosted three editorials on the role of Christians regarding adoptions or foster care placements to homosexual couples. This question is now on the cutting edge. As gay marriage becomes legalized in the various states, Christians and Christian agencies will not be able to opt out from placing children /babies with gay couples.
Paul Shrier, professor of practical theology at Azusa Pacific University, defended Christians who would entrust the children to gays:
- Several years ago, I facilitated a faith-based luncheon at Azusa Pacific University to promote foster care among faith-based organizations. We invited representatives of churches, synagogues, mosques, and other religious groups. (CT, May 2012, 48)
Shrier suggests that if Christians have no moral qualms about placing children in foster care with Muslims, then they should have none regarding gay couples.
This argument is far from a slam-dunk. If we are concerned about the welfare of the child, then there are compelling reasons to hesitate placing a child with an Islamic family. According to one Hadith (a saying of Muhammad), anyone who leaves Islam deserves death:
- The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I (Muhammad) am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims. (Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:83:17)
How can we ignore this in consideration of child placement! Shrier also claims that “there has been a lot of solid, reliable research on the outcomes for children fostered or adopted by stable gay couple.” However, all of this research has been hotly contested. In another of the three editorials, Ryan T. Anderson states:
- Not surprisingly, the best social science confirms the biblical truth that children do best when reared by a mom and a dad. (49)
Shrier concludes his argument by citing the example of Michael Klausman, president of the CBS Studio Center who confided that:
- When the hit TV show Will & Grace [which has been identified as influencing many in favor of the gay lifestyle] first came out, Christians sent letters condemning him… “I guess I could have just taken a stand if I agreed with them”…But God didn’t tell him to do that, so he didn’t…Klausman also noted that if he had quit his job over Will & Grace, he would have lost his influence in the arena.
Why wasn’t Klausman able to find the guidance he needed from Scripture? Why did he require God to personally show him, when He had already made this issue so abundantly clear in Scripture? Did retaining his presidency induce him to compromise? And if he had compromised, what possible Godly influence could he still exert?
The gay political agenda is militant and intolerant, prohibiting any choice other than its own. Diversity has no place in their agenda. Already, several Christian adoptive agencies have been forced out of business, rather than to compromise their principles. Others have lost their jobs, rather than participating in the same-sex marriage process. Public schools are now being coerced to legitimize the gay lifestyle, and parents are often prevented from opting their children out of such “education.”
In short, the gay agenda sends forth lengthy tentacles to remake society. If the stats are any indication of our future, we should expect severely heightened levels of suicide, depression, mental illness, and substance abuse. Caring means warning!