After protests from zoo visitors, they were given a chance to act as foster parents and were found to be the best parents out of the lot:
In response, zookeepers gave the pair two eggs laid by an inexperienced first-time mother.
"We decided to give them two eggs from another couple whose hatching ability had been poor and they've turned out to be the best parents in the whole zoo," said one of the keepers.
"It's very encouraging and if this works out well we will try to arrange for them to become real parents themselves with artificial insemination."
In the wild, or at least as depicted in March of the Penguins,the conditions are so harsh for penguins when they are raising their offspring that sometimes the parents don't make it. I imagine that the orphans tend to get adopted by other couples of the group, most likely the ones who don't (or can't) have their own offspring. Same-sex penguin mates obviously can't have offspring with each other, but the urge to raise offspring is innate and strong. From an aspect of nature and survival, having as many offspring as possible make it to adulthood makes sense, and so it seems that there is a purpose to be found in having mates, who cannot have offspring with each other, adopt and care for other offspring whose parents cannot finish the work.
Researchers have known about the existence of homosexuality in the animal kingdom for decades. In recent years, we've had a scattering of news in popular media of homosexuality in the animal kingdom, including gay flamingos adopting and raising offspring to discussions about the sexual behaviors of some of our closest primate relatives, the bonobos. Several years ago, Central Park Zoo's gay penguins had sparked a debate on whether homosexuality in the animal kingdom could be extrapolated to humans:
Some scientists say homosexual behavior in animals is not necessarily about sex. Marlene Zuk, a professor of biology at UC Riverside and author of "Sexual Selections: What We Can and Can't Learn About Sex From Animals" (University of California Press, 2002), notes that scientists have speculated that homosexuality may have an evolutionary purpose, ensuring the survival of the species. By not producing their own offspring, homosexuals may help support or nurture their relatives' young. "That is a contribution to the gene pool," she said.That being said, in regard to human parenting, research has shown that the children of same-sex parents fare just as well as opposite parents, and as Dr. Judith Stacey says at this end of the following video, recent studies have shown that same-sex parents are often more committed parents, because like any other infertile couple, there are no accidents... their parenting is deliberate. She also clarifies James Dobson's distortions on her research that children fare better in a home with a mother and a father. She was comparing biological married parents with divorced and single parents, and since no same-sex couples were in her study at all, that research cannot be used to imply that children fare better in a home with a mother and a father as opposed to same-sex parents.
When a child ends up in the foster care system in our country, most likely they are orphaned, taken away from unsuitable parents, or given up by parents who can't or won't care for them. What a gift it is for those children to be adopted by parents who very much want to love, cherish, and care for them, especially if they had suffered abuse, were orphaned, or have some condition that makes them less desirable for some parents. Thankfully, a judge in Florida acknowledged this and overturned their decades-long ban on gay adoption. I believe that all children deserve to be raised in a loving and stable home, and if possible, in a family that is protected by the legal status, protections, and responsibilities of marriage. Considering that thousands of children are being raised by same-sex couples, the fact that we would force any children to be raised "out of wedlock" by denying their parents the right to marry makes no sense to me.
This leads into some important questions. Should marriage be based on the split second union of a sperm and egg, or should it be based the foundation required for the 18 years of hard work afterward (love)? If we observe, think, reason, and reconsider our beliefs, just as Galileo did when he observed the heavens and concluded that the earth moves when the Bible tells us that it doesn't (Psalms 104:5), is it possible to reconcile our observations and our understanding of the world with our religious beliefs? Procreation isn't all about uniting a sperm and an egg. As we've seen, the work does not stop there. For those people who feel that this is about "nature," I think that by observing nature and the world around us, the evidence speaks for itself.
1 comment:
Your last question says it all - Good post, your use of video helps as well.
Post a Comment