After reading Derek Guillemette’s “Gay adoption is economical” (March 31, pg. 6) and Matthew Sullivan’s response, “Gay adoption is wrong” (April 1, pg. 10), I felt like sharing my own comments. I agree with Matthew in opposing Derek’s claim of Florida being “one of the gayest states in the country.” I am from Sarasota, Fla. and I know very well how conservative my home state is. Any state whose governor would allow an anti-abortion license plate is clearly not a very liberal one.

I also disagree with Derek’s statement, “gays are generally rich people.” I’d like to see any proof of that you can offer, because common sense tells me it’s not true. His statement is as ignorant as saying, for example, “all white people are rich.” The “Fab Five” might now have full wallets, but they are not representative of the entire gay community.

My last argument is against Matthew saying “homosexuality is not natural,” and that “being raised by gay parents … will no doubt make it more likely for the child to choose to be gay.” Although it can be argued that both biological and environmental factors influence a person’s sexuality, I believe the evidence for genetics is stronger. Being raised by gay parents will make a child more accepting of gay people and may even make a child more likely to experiment with his or her sexuality, but he or she will only be homosexual if born that way. It does not seem to be a choice. If it was, would that many people choose to live a life where they can’t adopt children or get married in certain states? I doubt anyone would say, “Hey, I think I’ll be gay from now on. That way I can be discriminated against for my sexuality — yeah, sounds like fun.”

In the end, gay adoption needs to be legal for a reason both gentlemen ignored in their comments. As Ross Schneiderman said in his column (“Florida wrong to ban gay adoption,” March 29, pg. 3), children who have no home are better off being raised by two parents, whether they are gay or straight.

Sarah Kuzma CAS ’04