Sexual orientation should not be a barrier to adoption

John Borg

Mar 8th 2012, 18:39

We are twisting everything upside down to be modern and accept everything, and this includes some sections of the church. Marriage is an institution aimed solely for transmission of children to preserve the human race. adoption should likewise be done by families, made up of a man and woman.

Peter Bonello

Feb 20th 2012, 09:04

of course it should be a problem... what sort of idea of family would a gay couple instruct to "their" child? Im sorry, i am not against gay couples - i believe they should live their life as happily as they can but to include a child in their life is just wrong!!

Magnus Mitchell

Feb 19th 2012, 21:25

For all those saying that a child placed with same sex couple would detrimental to the child’s welfare, unnatural ect..I think it worth studying the facts about what we do know regarding adoptees place with same sex couples. The only study done concludes that children are actually better off http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html .Opinions are subjective, facts are objective .I think with such a heated and polemic issue, its better to work with what we know , rather than what think we know.

C Briffa

Feb 19th 2012, 18:26

I appeal to the Maltese Authorities that the declaration made by Jenny should not go unnoticed when she pubblicly staed that :
“I was never specifically asked whether I am gay, so I didn’t say anything. I knew that, if I did, it might work against me,”
As now one wonders did she give the correct information?????
At this point one appeals to the Comissioner for Children to investigate such behaviour.

The only ones to suffer are the children already adopted from Ethiopia, as they are ending up being the subject of this issue. I appeal to the Comissioner for Children to protect these children from being an issue in the Media

M Borg

Feb 19th 2012, 17:22

@ Joe Xuereb

Reading what you wrote, am I allowed to call it rubbish ? I thank God that the church has stopped adoption to single people.

Nobody's child should be made to grow in the atmosphere you described.

Henry S Pace

Feb 19th 2012, 13:23

@ Sexual orientation should have nothing to do with whether a person is allowed to adopt a child or not, according to theologian Fr René Camilleri '

Is this going to be a @replica @ of what tokk place on the Divorce issue?
I hpe not but morality should prevail. This highly 'learned ' theoliagian tris to look nice with all sections of society. However the Lord God is still There.

Mario Pace

Feb 19th 2012, 12:57

Mr Azzopardi

Scientific research suggest that some are totally gay, some are totally hetero and some are borderline. It's like shades of two colours, there's White, Black and grey in between. In case of children who fall in the grey part, it's the environment (nurture) the decisive factor.

Francis Saliba M.D.

Feb 19th 2012, 11:35

@ Joe Xuereb (19 Feb at 02:28)

Your comment is a mass of inaccuracies, deceptions and outright lies.

My own sexual development DOES NOT “…favour of homosexual adult practices, i.e. sodomy or its female equivalent.” – that is an outright lie. I am absolutely against sodomy on both medical and religious grounds.

I DO NOT BELIEVE “ … that this activity (sodomy) is exclusive to homosexuals …” - lie number two. I believe that sodomy is committed by homosexuals AND heterosexuals and it is wrong whoever commits it. If I were to practise sodomy (I don’t) I would never boast about it because I “ … have never hid myself away from the sexual side.” (your boast, not mine.)

You MISQUOTE Mr Goodwin. He did not write “Don’t FEEL the troll”. He wrote “Don’t FEED the troll” and I don’t care about both activities.

I did NOT WRITE “ … that a normal BIOLOGICAL child brought up by heterosexual parents WILL grow up to be like them …”. I wrote that a normal heterosexual baby uprooted to a homosexual environment runs the RISK of having his normal sexual inclination destroyed by that environment.

I AM NOT SAYING anything about the distribution of sex genes in nature. I am saying that the undisputed anatomical and physiological features of the human body are such as to prove that normal sexuality is heterosexual, not homosexual.

You should appreciate the stupidity of an atheist like yourself claiming that a non-existent “Alla refaghni minn xaghari”.

In my part of the world no one, not even “Catholics in particular” “shit their pants”.

You write: “Thank you because atheism and total acceptance of what god bestowed upon me ensure that at night, I sleep easy”. There you go again, an atheist incongruously expressing his thanks to a God whose existence he denies! I am also very thankful for many things, including sleeping well, but I thank a God in whom I believe wholeheartedly.

“Homo” in Latin means a “human being” and “man as opposed to beasts”. The Latin word for masculine man (male as opposed to female) is “vir”. It is so not so because I “think” so. It is so because that is what Latin dictionaries say.

I have taken some trouble to expose your deceptive tactics by demolishing your comment paragraph by paragraph for the last time, I hope. I will not strive against you any more because by now all readers of The Times should be convinced that I do not consider that your rambling gibberish is worth my strife (or anybody else’s strife, for that matter).

Joe Xuereb

Feb 19th 2012, 10:56

I make no apologies for the typos etc. in my last comments. I am spontaneous, and it shows. I am also selfishly charitable (as the adoption of children so often is). Mi spiego(I'll explain).

First things first. There is NOTHING altruistic about the sexual act. If it were we would do it with everyone and anyone. With that out of the way......

Men - I am homosexual so men are my experience - often need a helping hand. 'It helps them through the night' sort of thing. They have needs especially if they are in a committed relationship (read: with a wife and kids = as in giving in to societal pressure to conform, and to disastrous effect). And that is where spontaneity comes in. The place, ideally, the bedroom, mine or HIS, but any place will do. Or almost anywhere, discretion being the better side of not getting caught and embarrassing/enraging other folk. Men particularly, who are prone to want to try anything new if it looks good. So, discretion is de rigueur. And no favours are exchanged other than the obvious. We are talking of men with men. No wining. No dining. And no obligations either. As long as he's gorgeous and smells nice who gives a monkey's?! It is a selfish act. I dont owe him. He owes me nought (let's hope STDs were not the unwanted part of the bargain. Happens!. That's when the season ticket to the Clap Clinic comes in handy. As for condoms and sodomy......what?! in an alley way? behind a ħajt tas-sejjiegħ?!(rubble wall). What am I? a common street (female) prostitute?!. Disgusting, immoral(the act), amoral(the bint), money changing hands when it should go to the kids. I may be spontaneous (what guilt?) but I have standards.


And so it goes on. Until the next time(only a fraction are pathetic married men. But they have the plus of discretion on their side, a desirable asset, in Malta especially). Because, make no mistake, this is a demon that keeps coming back, it is part of our makeup, a god-given salib(cross) that we have to bear. Some bear it - and deal with it - better than others. These others opt to settle with one woman(or one man) for life. Having settled for 1.5 (or 9)kids, their demon is shelved. The frisson by now a guilty memory in the distant past, probably even before the first kid. Therefore, conception can be achieved by a variety of means, nothing to do with bodily contact. As I said, shelved, in abeyance. It will all be alright once they get to heaven (at says so at Masses for the dead, praesente cadavere, when they invariably go to the embrace of the lord). With all due respect, I do not buy that crap. I have to say though. That crap looks pretty comfy to me, catching cold in an alleyway/a doorway. I have been there and I cannot buy it anymore. It is too late for me now. All I can do now is wait, not without some trepidation, for the next bout of bistouri(scalpel) intervention. C'est la vie!

To the orphans of Ethiopia (that is Haile Selassie country, is it not?!) I wish them luck and a successful placement. The nuns are doing a good job. They are a bit like me. They love kids to bits but do not want any of their own. Even god their spouse could not satisfy them all.


There! Li Tkisser Sewwi. Nittama li ma ċaqqamt l-ebda ċaqquf(I hope I have not stepped on anyone's toes). In any case, dak li ma tkissirx m'hemmx għalfejn issewwieh(why mend something when it is not broken?).

Thank you. I am now off to Conway Hall

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Place_Ethical_Society

for my Sunday morning Mass/Lecture. See you anon.

Joe Xuereb

Feb 19th 2012, 02:28

It gets better. Quoting Saliba, a doctor no less: his sexual development in favour of homosexual adult practices, i.e. sodomy or its female equivalent. So in his febrile imaginings, the doctor thinks that homosexuality is all about sodomy. And that this activity is so exclusive to homosexuals, that surely, female homosexuals must have their own equivalent of this. I wonder what that would be? (For the record, sodomy is more common among heterosexuals either because it is an acquired taste, and, most often, it is used as a mode of contraception especially when none is available). How do I know these things? Simple. I have never hid myself away from the sexual side of life. The Church tried but I knew better. I am the best christian I know. I am compassionate, I give of my time, I smile a let. I said smile, not sneer.


Quote: "Don't feel the troll". Careful there doc, someone's out to feel you. Ugh!.

@Wayne Scicluna. You obviously speak as a heterosexual male. You speak as one who will never be touched by homosexuality. Wait a minute! If you had a child who turned out to be homosexual, would you cull it? Simple question requiring a simple answer. For a minds that simplified things too much until the crap hits the fan.

This adoption thing is a circular debate that gets nowhere. It is pointless to demonise the bad parenting of heterosexual couples. We all know of bad cases. When a child is up for adoption, the This adoption thing is a circular debate that gets nowhere. It is pointless to demonise the bad parenting of heterosexual couples. We all know of bad cases. When a child is up for adoption, the pretenders will be assessed over a long period. It is hoped the child will go to the best people or person; who could be homosexual but does not have to be . It is immaterial.

Dr. Saliba says that a normal biological child brought up by heterosexual parents will grow up to be like them. In other words, the genes and nurturing are working in tandem to produce the ideal.
Did I say ideal? Look around you.

So, is he saying that most children are born with the right gene/s to be het? That would be so if the divide between heterosexuals and homosexuals were clear cut. They are not and if people are terrified of admitting this, they are storing up trouble for themselves because that is the price one pays for ignorance and denials. Science acknowledges the whole spectrum of human sexualities because it is provable and obvious. The Church does not operate like this. It deals in absolutes and so do its followers, the poor lambs. It is a mode of control, surprise! surprise!

This is as much as I am prepared to say about adoptions by gay people, and even civil-partnerships. The way I see it, as an atheist, and because marriage is no more than a social construct of convenience - nothing to do with Kanaa, certainly - with my hand on my heart I can honestly say, Alla refagħni minn xagħri. Children, I love as the next person and I will help wherever necessary. But as for wanting children to feel fulfilled, that I leave to heterosexual mums and dads. No sweat.

If some here are so convinced that homosexuality is a congenital thing, something wrong with the genes, why all this hatred (THAT is the common threat in this debate). Would people speak so if we were talking about children born, say, with spinabifida? Or do people make a special case of homosexuality because when it comes to matters sexual, Catholics in particular shit their pants because to them who they do 'it' with, how, and for what reason is such a guilt-ridden issue? Whatever happened to spontaneity and practising one's urges according to Natural law? to beget kids if that's the big issue? Or maybe they find the whole thing too painful and messy and prefer to shelve it pretending that they are doing god's will? Maybe?


Thanks to all those who affording me the opportunity to write this humble but heartfelt comment. Thank you. Thank you because atheism and total acceptance of what god bestowed upon me ensure that at night, I sleep easy, my breathing regular (or so I am told when I have the occasional stayover what's-his-name. Nah! wouldn't have time for kids. Methinks I'll send a cheque instead. And my teddybear collection can go to the Children's Hospital in Great Ormond Street, just round the corner from where I had my tumour removed. Maybe miracles do happen after all. A miraculous scalpel more like. What a gay day!

Joe Xuereb

Feb 19th 2012, 00:45

Quoting one Dr.F.Saliba: 'But I have read many comments from homosexuals provoking heterosexuals by insulting them as people who hate and fear all mankind - because that is what the pejorative term homophobe means'.
Years ago I picked on the doctor's mistake. He used to, and still does, think that the homo in homosexual refers to man. He is now turning the tables on homosexuals accusing them of calling heterosexual people homophobes. Rightly - according to him and his errant ways - he says that this means that heterosexuals hate and fear all mankind. The doctor knows Latin no doubt but he should explore a bit of Greek like I have done many a time, including Sundays in Pireaus when cash was no problem viz. that homo means same (as in homonym/ομώνυμο - get it doc? any tuppenny dictionary will tell you that homo- as prefix means, 'the same two of anything. Simple!), phobia is fear/φόβος and miso- is hatred (as in misogyny/μισογυνία).

I should add that the homosexual's lot in Malta is not always a happy one. As a result, the worst enemies are self-loathing sexualists, not necessarily homosexuals, who suffer much because of imposed Catholic guilt from the cradle, and who often like to hide behind an aura of pseudo-erudite superiority and teaching their grandmamma to suck eggs. Terrified of any sexual congress, they are the poor lambs! Many, even guys known to me personally, couldn't hack and joined the priesthood. (Aside. I wonder how so-and-so is doing? I hope to god he's not bothering the young 'uns).

I can never understand why people who obviously have their religion close to their heart waste time and energy on this circular debate centring round homosexuality. Homosexuals are only a tiny minority (but much more common than is believed as it is not a black and white issue). I would have thought that other more serious dangers to the status quo are in evidence and they should devote more time to this instead of talking about an innocuous minority. And then they get it all wrong. But that is the nature of blind bigotry.


Nagħmel rasi taħt mannara li għal dan il-kumment m'hemmx tweġiba mingħand m'hemmx għalfejn ngħid. Persona non grata and all that. See if I give a monkey's!

Lawrence Grima

Feb 18th 2012, 23:57

The discrimination is not here with the gays but with the children from Ethiopia, because gays seem to want to adopt only from Ethiopia as if these children's needs are different from other children from Malta or other countries from where adoptions are done. I wonder the reason why?? For example why not from Malta if the law in Malta allows single parents to adopt??? or even in Malta they won't allow them??? I have lived in the orphanage in Ethiopia for almost a month and can assure you that these children are loved by the nuns and those who do not know anything about these nuns and these children how can they even dare to comment and judge them. They want them adopted as they want the best for them. For those who do not know about the orphanage, these children are not dying of hunger!!!These children require to live in a family with a mother and a father like any other child. In addition what hurts more is why are presenters like Peppi Azzopardi etc, trying to intrude in the lives of our children and be the topic of the day of their collegues at school! This is discrimination!!!!!!!! Using innocent children!! What are Appogg and the Commissioner for Children doing in this case? Are ethiopian children treated differently from Maltese or other Foreign Country from where adoptions can be done? I repeat this is REAL DISCRIMINATION WITH THE CHILDREN

Mr l Azzopardi

Feb 18th 2012, 23:01

@ Francis Saliba MD

" if that congenitally heterosexual baby were to be planted deliberately into a different homosexual environment that would very probably warp his sexual development in favour of homosexual adult practices, i.e. sodomy or its female equivalent."

What a load of crap!

Andrew Azzopardi

Feb 18th 2012, 22:52

@ Mr M.D.

Please note that the person quoted in the article is a priest. I promise I can live with you disagreeing with me. But you do sound confused since you seem to disagree with a theologian and minister of Christ. If I am sick in the soul I choose to listen to Fr Rene. I might come to you if I'm sick in the body. On the other hand in matters on children's best interest I choose to listen to my own expertise. May I remind you that the article is about the Church making wrong decisions about adoption?

Re: my typos - I actually have 7 so unfortunately you do not win the prize :p

Francis Saliba M.D.

Feb 18th 2012, 21:05

@ Andrew Azzopardi (18 Feb at 17:20)

Much more important than my evident error in typing “homo” instead of “hetero” sexuals is your deplorable false accusation that I judge men and women according to their preferences for a bed partner. I don't. I do not judge anybody at all but I do criticise those who, like you, have the temerity of invoking the name of Christ as some support for homosexuality – Christ never did that. Christ undoubtedly favoured a heterosexual marriage union when he preached:

“ …He who made them from the beginning, made them male and female, and said for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife …. “. (Matthew Ch 19). Please note that Christ speaks of a son leaving parents of different sexes, a “father” and a “mother”, and he leaves them to be joined in marriage to someone of the opposite sex, a “wife” not to any odd partner of the same sex.

You are just as wrong when you assert that Christ preached an “an eye for an eye”. He did nothing of the sort. That is what had been the practice before - Christ himself did not agree with that. (Matthew Ch 5).

I hope that I have said enough to convince you that you are NOT using the name of Christ “for what he really stands for” and that it is you, not I, who “is really abusing the word of Christ”

P.S. Since you are so fascinated by my one typing mistake you may please take note that your second paragraph contains no less than SIX typing errors in two short sentences.

Marco Cremona

Feb 18th 2012, 20:20

The current debate has turned (intentionally?) as a Church v gays issue

However if we want to discuss discrimination in the adoption process, we should not be wasting our (and everybody's) time discussing the church-run orphanage's decision to favour married couples over singles, but the fact that the STATE of Malta (NOT the church) does not allow for Maltese single men to adopt (but single Maltese women can) and the fact that Maltese cohabiting couples (even if they can prove that they have been in a stable relationship for years) are non-starters where it comes to adoption.

How about discussing these REAL discriminatory issues for a change, eh?

George Camilleri

Feb 18th 2012, 20:14

Dear Fr Rene, according to my reasoning, the answer to the problem that heterosexual couples do not always succeed as adoptive parents is not to allow gay singles or couples to adopt. The answer is for the adoption agency to take better measures to find suitable heterosexual parents. I would have thought that I would be preaching to the converted.

Tarcisio Vella

Feb 18th 2012, 20:03

May I suggest we ask the children to decide whether they would like a mum and dad to look after them..... The answer wll be so simple for all the readers.

Mario Pace

Feb 18th 2012, 19:41

Scientific studies found that homosexual behaviour reduces life expectancy by up to 20 years. I am not a scientist and I don't know whether this is true or false but if it's true then the authorities should run an educational campaign outlining the hazards of homosexual sex to discourage people from engaging in harmful activities. Gays lives must be saved too.

http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/26/3/657.abstract
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2005/jun/05060606

David gatt

Feb 18th 2012, 19:28

This is a breach of fundamental human rights. If adoption is denied due to sexual discrimination, this is a violation of the right to private family life. There are cases in the law such as EB V France and Frette Vs France where the court has ruled this is discriminatory. In malta such gay orientation should definitely have no bearing on our decision.

Anyone should be allowed to adopt with the only requirement being if one is capable of loving and raising the child like one of their own.

Ms.D. Galea

Feb 18th 2012, 18:05

Adoption is there primarily for the benefit of the child, NOT for prospective parents.

Children are not modern technological gadgets or property that one can buy and sell against a written guarantee or pass off as some sort of object of convenience to enhance one's social status or make a point on socity in general.

Andrew Azzopardi

Feb 18th 2012, 17:32

I wonder how many children were placed for adoption by the people writing in this blog? I equally wonder how many children were placed in gay adoptive families by the people writing in this blog? Fr Rene is right in his comments. There are many single parents who are brilliant and many couples who are hopeless. I am sure you all can think of a few yourself. The point is whether the parent or parents can meet the child's needs FULL STOP!

I think Zach says it all in the following link (especially for those who never assessed or worked with gay couples):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ

charles caruana

Feb 18th 2012, 17:04

‘Sexual orientation should have nothing to do with whether a person is allowed to adopt a child or not’
Fr Rene, if you have been quoted accurately, I would like to ask you this: what is the matter with priests of your generation, the ones consecrated immediately after Vatican II, many of whom left the priesthood in hoards and of those who remained a good number seem to be always champing at the bit in their efforts to modify Church teaching and make it conform to the popular desires of the times?
Allow me to ask you some further questions. Is the desire of any adult, of whatever sexual orientation, to adopt a child a human right? Is the child’s basic need to be naturally brought up by parents of different sexes, as has been the natural, God given norm in every place and culture since time immemorial, a human right? Which of these rights should the church teach and preach, and which should the state give priority to and protect?
For a Catholic theologian to reduce natural law teaching of the Church to a matter of mere stereotypes is , to put it mildly, a bit strange. Do you think that many UK Catholic agencies and orphanages were forced to close down because they were defending stereotypes and rules that became dictats? And by what logic do you arrive at the conclusion that because you know that some married couples are a disaster when it comes to parenting, therefore single or same sex parents should be encouraged as ideal and superb parents that most children need?
And again, if this report is wholly reliable, I have a respectful question for Archbishop Paul Cremona. Given the British precedent I alluded to earlier, is the preference ‘for children to be adopted by married couples” a personal opinion of his or well founded Church practice based on Catholic teaching about the family and fundamental human rights, especially those of children?
To both respected clergymen I ask the final question: Are Pope Benedict’s repeated claims that religion, and the Catholic church in particular, are in these times facing unprecedented persecution by militant secularism merely alarmist warnings? If not, what is the best response, irenic compromise, diplomatic defensiveness or unqualified witness?

Amante Reale

Feb 18th 2012, 16:27

Oh dear. Homophobic ToMmers? I'm shocked...! ToMmers are usually so nice, open minded and full of love for one another.

Same crap, different day...

Joseph Grech Attard

Feb 18th 2012, 16:01

That the Catholic hierarchy is prejudiced against homosexuality is no new news. What one needs to understand is that sexuality is given too much negative importance by many. Humans are sexual persons. And God creates sexual persons, whether homo or hetero! It's the same with single persons. God creates humans and does not have a different formula for married mothers or single mothers! It's humans who, in an evil manner, make distinctions. Children, and babies in particular, need love and attention. And this has nothing to do with being married or single, or being hetero or homo!

Joanne Cremona

Feb 18th 2012, 15:15

In the context of this whole debate on discrimination spare a thought for the single man (straight or gay) who wishes to adopt – as far as I am aware few, if any, countries accept applications from single men. So there is gender discrimination for you. In the UK, inter-racial adoptions have only recently been encouraged (to be more exact not ‘dis-encouraged’ officially)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/19/uk-interracial-adoption-social-workers-guidance?INTCMP=SRCH
My point is this is a multi-layered, sensitive issue which has the children’s wellbeing at its core. If we are going to debate it maturely we need to move away from finger pointing and church/gay/singles bashing and look at what research and experience tell us is good for our children and what kind of society we want to live in.

Mr Ernest Vella

Feb 18th 2012, 13:47

Bir-rispett kollu lejn tat-times...imma jew taghtu kaz x'tghid il-Knisja dejjem jew inkella le...mhux ovja li persuna ma tistax tigi ggudikata mill-orjentazjoni sesswali li ghanda...Qatt il-Knisja ghallmet bil-kontra? Sewwa ghamel Fr.Rene li rega ghala

Ramon Casha

Feb 18th 2012, 13:24

I'm glad to see many sensible and intelligent remarks from the people interviewed. Sadly some commentators have their prejudices too deeply ingrained.

There should be no blanket bans. Each and every case should be treated separately, and if a single person or a couple are seen to be good parents, then their sexual orientation should not even be an issue.

There are, in Ethiopia alone, around 5 million orphans. Most will never be adopted. Many were orphaned because their heterosexual parents both died of AIDS. If a person or a couple can adopt one of these, and is seen to be capable and suitable and financially secure enough, they should be allowed to.

Roger Tirazona

Feb 18th 2012, 13:05

Reading homophobic comments below, makes me wonder why people were surprised that a 16 year old was beaten up in public for being a lesbian. This country is sick with ignorance and bigotry and politicians on either side of the room need to do something quick regarding our education.

Marco Cremona

Feb 18th 2012, 12:54

NO civil right of single people has been removed through the church's decision to give preference to married couples over single persons for adoption from an orphanage it runs in Ethiopia. For a right to be removed there has to exist a right in the first place. Nobody has a right to adopt from this particular church-run orphanage. The orphanage has obligation to provide children to Maltese nationals, be they single or married couples. Moreover, adoption is not even a human right so there isn't even an obligation on the state of Malta to provide children to its nationals.

Today, the state of Malta allows single persons to adopt, just as it allows married couples to adopt. The Church's decision re. this orphanage changes nothing in this regards. If anybody feels that they have grounds for discrimination they can take appropriate legal action (against the state? the church? or the orphanage?).

My impression is that some people are using this 'controversy' to continue to bash the church, because its trendy to do so.

V. Cauchi

Feb 18th 2012, 12:50

Article 119 (1)(b) of the Civil Code, Cap. 16, puts the onus on the judge to establish how proper it is for a person to be adopted by a person or spouses.

"119. (1) The court before making an adoption decree shall be satisfied ... (b) that the decree if made will be for the welfare (għall-ġid) of the person to be adopted".

Sub-articles (2) to (4) also demonstrate the seriousness of the decision to be made by the court.
http://justiceservices.gov.mt/DownloadDocument.aspx?app=lom&itemid=8580&l=1

"(2) In determining whether an adoption decree if made will be for the welfare of the person to be adopted, the court shall have regard (among other things) to the health of the applicant, as evidenced, in such cases as may be prescribed, by the certificate of a registered medical practitioner, and shall give due consideration
to the wishes of the person to be adopted, having regard to his age and understanding and to the religious persuasion of such person and of his parents."

The setting of moral standards have in this case been left by law to the Judge who, in our culture, has always been considered as a figure of moral integrity.

John Spiteri

Feb 18th 2012, 12:46

Why are gay people applyig for adoption from a Christian orphanage? Use a secular one

Mario Pace

Feb 18th 2012, 12:39

Children merit a healthy environment. Is homosexual behaviour healthy?

"AIDS Rate 50 Times Higher in Homosexual Men"
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2009/aug/09082609
No wonder they aren't allowed to donate blood.

"The Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center has abandoned a long-held homosexual activist contention by declaring on billboards posted throughout Southern California that HIV/AIDS is a "gay disease.""

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2006/oct/06100404

Even the World Health Organization is worried about this:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2009/feb/09021708

Homosexual behaviour is a corruption of the body and soul.

Ms. P.M Graham

Feb 18th 2012, 12:38

When every child born into this World, sleeps in their own bed, with a full tummy and happy in the knowledge they are the single most important being to one person (or two) then THAT is the time for this debate.

I can't believe anyone would be selfish enough to condemn an innocent child to a life of poverty, pain,hunger, sickness, institutionalism for the sake of their self righteous beliefs.

Gay Parents tend to adopt/foster needy children, AIDS babies, special needs, those needing extra care and attention and never look at color, race, religion. It's so wrong to deny those children.

Children raised by Gay parents may have the advantage of open-mindedness, tolerance and role models for equitable relationships, according to some research and there is no data to date to prove the "they will grow up Gay" card. What research DOES show is that children of gay parents do just fine!!

As I said, when every child in this World has a loving parent, then get picky

and lets start in Malta!!

Marco Cremona

Feb 18th 2012, 12:37

The Church's way out of this matter is easy. If it is in any way forced to go against its conscience and pass on children to single Maltese persons it will discontinue supplying children to Malta. Full stop. It has no obligation to provide children to Maltese couples, and there is an ample choice of married couples from Spain, Ireland and America to pass on children to.

Who will suffer? The Church or the orphanage? NO. The children? NO. The only losers are Maltese couples wishing to adopt from the best-run orphanage in Ethiopia

Robert Callus

Feb 18th 2012, 12:06

@Francis Saliba MD


What is the "inexcusable risk"?

wayne scicluna

Feb 18th 2012, 12:05

The big question is a moral one. When is it time to draw a line? Whats next, the queer animal parade?

R Busuttil

Feb 18th 2012, 11:56

@ Mr Louis Joseph Borg

So based on your reasoning, a local girl who gets pregnant and is not married or in a steady relationship is automatically not fit to be a parent?
There are many girls/women who unfortunately got pregnant and are still single but love their children immensely. There are also lesbian women who cannot have a sexual relationship with a man but still want to raise a child in a loving way just like heterosexual women. There are also gay men who would still love to raise a child. I know people from all three situations.
Are you saying that just because of their circumstances these men and women are automatically not capable of loving a child and giving him a good upbringing?
I would definitely prefer a child to be raised up by a lesbian/gay couple than by a married couple where for instance, physical or mental abuse is common in the family. Yes, a child living in a lesbian or gay family might not be living in a "normal" environment but if he is loved, the parents would be able to explain the situation to him when the time is right, and this child would grow up to learn that there are people with different sexual orientations and that they are all to be respected and all have the same rights. But tell me, how would you explain the situation to a child adopted by a "normal" family who however sees his mother/father continually abused? In which of the two situations is the child really being loved and cared for?


@ Mr P. Vincenti

What are these implications Mr Vincenti?
Are you afraid that all children adopted by gay or lesbian couples will automatically become gay or lesbian?
Your comment shows that you do not respect everyone in the way they should be respected.
All individuals, irrespective of their sexual orientation are capable of loving and all should have exactly the same rights.

MALCOLM SEYCHELL

Feb 18th 2012, 11:51

Fr Rene, try to explain what you said to the Arcbishop of Gozo. If you manage you deserve to be the next pope

Charles Caruana Carabez

Feb 18th 2012, 11:39

In 'sexually-oriented couples' (modern society must thrive on euphemisms because this is not the heroic age but the age of cowards) you would have 2 fathers or 2 mothers. Hawwadni ha nifmek. There is nothing wrong with being 'sexually oriented' but then your choice of life-style would preclude you from being a father or a mother, because -surprise, surprise- it takes a man and a woman to make a child. Or is this too difficult to understand? You can'y have the cake and the money too, you know? I admire Fr. Renee a lot but we're not in synch on this one.

Joe Fenech

Feb 18th 2012, 11:28

Professor René is right in this:

Malta is a perfect example of disastrous parenting (and they're all heteros) ! Why do you think there is so much drugs, drinking, accidents and illiteracy?

Tarcisio Vella

Feb 18th 2012, 11:19

I have great respect for all mankind, no matter of their sexual orieniatiuon, colour, religion etc... But I humbly ask, since when nature started to accept that children can do without a father and a mother ?

Andrew Azzopardi

Feb 18th 2012, 11:17

@joseph saliba how can one have "full respect for all human beings" and then send people to institutions where sexual orientation is 'no problem'?? 

@all homophobes
The institutions do not have parental rights. They care for the child on behalf of the state. It is not up to the home or the church to decide the Law of the land. Maltese law allows single people to adopt so it is not up to the Church to go against it. I have deep respect for the Archbishop and I am hopeful that he will intervene and choose the way of love as Jesus would do. If any of you readers has evidence that a catholic married couple are better parents than single or gay couple bring it on. . .

Just for the record - I am not a gay activist. I'm a firm believer in human dignity and equality. I'm also a professional who works with children and places children for adoption regularly. 

Francis Saliba M.D.

Feb 18th 2012, 11:14

Taking a child, who is presumably heterosexual because that is the biological normal, and making it grow up in a homosexual environment is an inexcusable and indefensible risk.

Victor Rodenas

Feb 18th 2012, 11:10

A breath of fresh air.

Christabelle Bonnici

Feb 18th 2012, 11:06

all of you saying gay/sinkge parents do not have to right to adopt do not know the sufferng encountered by children in orphanages!while these dedicated people give all they can to these children & do a wonderful job, they can never offer individual love like married,gay,single (whatever) people can give to their adpted children!love & care of children has nothing to do with the status of a person or his/her sexual orientation!!!

Sandro Pace

Feb 18th 2012, 11:01

People have choices in life. One can marry, one can remain single, and one can engage in a homosexual relation. Granted. But you cannot have everything. Not at the expense of third parties who cannot express their choices, ie children. Everyone can be loving and caring and non-abusive. But children are not pets. That is not enough.

A person's adaptability to adopt can in no way be totally determined. People can decieve. Facts remain that normal married couples are the safest recipients. Bad examples of the latter does not strengthen the argument for other type of adoptions. Such puerile and simplistic arguments were not expected from Fr. Rene. And whatever he says, does not make it anything authoritative. Apparently, he is for a church that pleases everyone and everything.

And please, stop the discrimination thing. There is nothing in it. Political correctness should not enforce risky benefit of the doubts. Not with children. I, for one, would not have wanted to be adopted by a gay family, if there ever will be one. And I challenge anyone to take me to court over this statement if he thinks that the church is legally liable by what it is doing over the matter.

Our State would be doing a total disservice to society if it does not prefer married couples over other type of adoption. And the children too, who cannot express themselves. The message Fr. Rene is also projecting is that for the church it is ok to have children out of marriage. If he is quoted correctly, that is.

Joanne Cremona

Feb 18th 2012, 10:55

I fully agree with the sentiment expressed by most of the people interviewed i.e. that all prospective adoptive parents, whatever their circumstances and sexual orientation, should undergo the same process and be allowed to adopt if they were found to have the potential to be suitable parents. However I would like to make the following points:
Re Dr Neil Falzon’s comments that “the Archbishop’s message, that adoption should be limited to married couples, could deprive many children of a loving home.” – this is misleading as he fails to mention that demand for adoptable children at this particular orphanage far outstrips supply and therefore no children will actually be so deprived.
Re Pierre Portelli’s final statement – once the adoption process is legally finalised in the country of origin and in Malta the adoptive parents become simply parents like any other. Why should they need to ‘should inform the court when entering into a relationship while an adoptive couple should do the same in case of separation or divorce’? The welfare of their children will be protected by the authorities in the same way that the welfare of biologically-related children born within families is protected.
A final note re adoption by single persons in a heterosexual/homosexual relationship. As I stated at the outset I believe couples should have the opportunity to adopt if they meet the criteria set by the state. However, because in Malta we do not recognise cohabiting couples and same sex relationships, people in such relationships are forced to apply as single persons and to hide their relationship from the social workers – meaning that this relationship is not scrutinised in the way that a married couples’ relationship is. (For those who do not know married couples need to go through a relationship stress test by a psychologist – some couples have been known to fail this test and thus not be allowed to adopt). One may argue that this is discrimination against couples.

joseph saliba

Feb 18th 2012, 10:28

I have full respect for all human beings. I don't like to tag or be tagged. One fundamental question bugs me: The caring institution as tutor to the orphan, having all the rights of a parent, should determine the adoption. Like a mother who (according to her belief/orientation) has got the right to keep her off-springs away from anybody until they become adults. I don't find it ethical for people to use orphans as an argument in favour of their orientation. Maybe they should search in caring institutions where sex-orientation is no problem.

LOUIS JOSEPH BORG

Feb 18th 2012, 10:07

very wrong ! children should have a father and a mother not 2 fathers or 2 mothers or a single parent!

P. Vincenti

Feb 18th 2012, 09:57

Assuming that Fr Rene has been quoted correctly and not out of context, I don't think that Fr Rene has thought the implicattions of his commenst fully.

John Spiteri

Feb 18th 2012, 09:50

The church teaches that homosexual acts are a sin. Many UK Catholic orphanages have had to close because of minority groups screaming for gay rights. This is discriminatoon against freedom of religious expression.