[ElProximo]

Originally Posted by Blitzen

What a backwards point of view.

No, it is a progressive point of view.

So your saying that if I had a partner and we were both financially able, responsible, good people that we wouldn't be aloud to have adopt a child because its 'sexually perverse'?

Yes, of course that is what I am saying. Historically, this is the understanding of most human beings, cultures and civilizations around the planet. In many countries today you would not only be prevented from adopting children but have your children taken away from you and then you and your sex partner put in jails or mental institutions.

Now I don't agree with all that but I do agree my homosexual friends who say it is clearly a perverted 'sex fetish' and a nasty sort of underground kink and certainly not a 'parallel' to normal married people.

Other problems are the obvious lack of a mother and father. We have enough single parents proving that this is the less ideal way to raise a child. These women or single parent men (without homosexuality) often have brothers and friends and room mates.
It doesn't become better because the single parent is having gay sex with their friends.
Its still a child being raised without either a mother or a father.

Other concerns are that a number of homosexual males would like to adopt young men and then raise them as tailor-made sex partners and have what I saw described as 'twink sex servants'. Custom raised to serve the specific sex fetishes of the 'parents'.

All of these views are very common and typical in UK and Western Culture. Don't pretend like you are 'surprised' or act like this is somehow 'backward'. This is a very common opinion.
Worldwide its easily a majority opinion and yours the aberrant 80s 'gay agenda' propaganda opinion is the 'weird idea' in that context.