Now, the bothersome door-knocking habit of missionaries is not that common in my whereabouts, but that does not mean you will not get your fair share of threshold-to-threshold ministry. The only time when I did get what seemed like an alien invasion was when I was staying at a friend's house in New Jersey. I would be lying if I wanted to tell you with strict precision which church they belonged to, but they did have an excellent sense of the opportunity and approached me when I was to walk my friend's dog in the morning or early evening. When intercepted, I tried hard to be polite and defer the encounter for later, the usual word I resorted to being "tomorrow". Such term bore literal interpretation value to them, so the next day I was once again questioned about my beliefs and deeds (the latter being far more interesting than the former).

Perhaps you will not be surprised if I disclosed my feeling of anxiety every time my friend's cute puppy made for the kitchen to fetch the leash. I did not take their intervention in my affairs as a game of wits or a personal offense; to me, it was just another waste of time and energy caused by wrong assumptions as regards the universe and its tenants. Intellectual sloth, at its best; intellectual irresponsibility, if bad comes to worse.

They say human beings are capable of a certain reasoning process called abduction. I did not know whether the answer I came up with to disrupt my adversaries' assets (infinite patience, endless resilience and imperviousness to rudeness -not that I tried to test this last one-) was ethically adequate, but my meager brains were not in a position to snatch a more promising option than prejudice. I had long suspected that conversion was the aim of each and every group of door-bangers, and that the capture of a non-believer's flag would be the ultimate prize. My advice to those of you still striving to be left alone is NEVER to reveal you are either atheists or agnostics. Such blunder would amount to exposing a juicy flank to their guns. Instead, I opted for an easy way out, however vile, however tricky. I just said I was Jewish (I am not, in fact). After seeing an undecipherable look (maybe a bit of a glare) mask their faces, and their faces become fast-disappearing backs under a wintry morning sun, I saw them no more. My ruse did not work just once, but twice, the second time in another country, another cultural environment, and definitely another religious denomination.

Jews are not indeed famous for proselytizing, but I wonder whether my stratagem would have succeeded the other way round.

Thanks to you all, adorable people! Yes, I stubbornly think I am still a member of the manly gender. Now, come to think of it, is it just because I have never been proved otherwise? Life, love and their wonders...

ArtGurl, thanks for coming to my rescue. I used to believe that I was a good excuse for a joke-teller as a writer, but it seems the tables have been turned and must think of myself as a vice versa...

To all of you, thanks for your kind words and hope we all get a well-aimed kicked out of this site and its consequences.

I have just got a sworn statement that erases all questions as regards the manly quality of my gender! Available upon request, all major credit cards accepted.

Hello, everybody. Hope to find what most people here are looking for: mutual solace and thrill, happiness and understanding. Perhaps I should define myself as an intense contradiction: I possess extensive military training acquired in a European country, but I am not a gun buff (I do not even own a weapon), although I relish in swordsmanship. I started a scientific career but ended up majoring in humanities. I feel the call of all things intellectual, but seriously bodybuild on a regular basis. I sport Russian, English and Italian ancestries, but do not reside in any of the aforementioned countries. I was born a male and, well... I still think I am one. .

Lots of luck to everyone in their searches.

Paul

The topic of GLB adoption is actually an interesting one in terms of scientific research, that is, as far from partisan leanings as possible. In unequivocal terms, the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Child Welfare League of America have published well conducted studies supporting the validity and qualification of GLB as adoptive parents. If we just do away with phony studies published by organizations having strong ties with institutional religion's groups (or even hate groups), I dare say that up to a few months ago the standard American research shedding light on the matter was the Williams and Urban Institutes from California and Washington DC, respectively, in association with the UCLA School of Law, released in March 2007. Aside from mentioning that about half a million children endure foster care in the United States, this paper showed several key findings that are indeed hard to swallow by the opponents of GLB adoption rights. Some of them include:

* There are about two million GLB individuals willing to adopt in the US. The report does not bring up the question of transgender adoption.

* Gay and lesbian parents are raising more than four per cent of adopted children and three per cent of foster children in the US.

* Most same-sex couples raising adopted children are older, more educated and with more economical resources than their straight counterparts.

Of course, data and methodology are impeccable, and the references and bibliography are a treasure in themselves. However, an even more recent study (Expanding Resources for Waiting Children II: Eliminating Legal & Practice Barriers To Gay & Lesbian Adoption From Foster Care, by Jeanne Howard & Madelyn Freundlich, from the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, New York, September 2008)explicitly states that gay and lesbian adoptive parents fare as proficiently as heterosexual ones (Breways, Ponjaert, Van Hall, & Golombok, 1997; Chan, Raboy & Patterson, 1998; Golombok, Perry, Burston, Murray, Mooney-Sommer, Stevens, & Golding, 2003; Wainwright, Russell & Patterson, 2004), listing thirteen professional organizations that have issued formal statements supporting adoption by gays and lesbians.

On the other side, what is it that we stumble upon? Feeble paragraphs that have been tampered with and are methodologically as consistent as 1984's doublespeak, prejudice and appeals to biased opinions instead of facts supported by scientific research.

From the psychological, sociological and pedagogical viewpoints, the matter is sufficiently settled. It is in the urgent interest of those children awaiting a warm embrace that the legal and political perspectives surrounding the issue finally come to terms with scientific reality, too.

Paul