I support gay marriage

Yep, until the mother voluntarily surrenders her parental rights, the woman who gave birth and the man who fathered the child are the only two people in the worl, obligated by law to support the child.

 

Then they might lose on that account, leaving other accounts to be considered.

 

Being true in any jurisdictions, such a law should obviously be changed.

 

???? Did you want to obligate someone else? Assign kids to some random stranger.

 

Surrogates are providing a service to couples who want to have children that cannot. I imagine it is provided within the services and the contract that the couple seeking them out will be the legal parents of the child born.

Also what do you think of adoption? It sort of renders your argument moot when people can give children up for adoption. There is clearly no obligation to financially support them when they can ultimately give them up to the state.

 

Until the mother willingly surrenders the child, after it is born, there is no obligation in the law that says she must do so. And no contract that can make them the legal parents. One of them biologically related to the child is obligated, the other has no obligation unless they adopt the child after it is born.

 

The scenario you talked about was a surrogate who was carrying the child on behalf of another mother and father. This other mother is not "some random stranger", but the very reason that the surrogate is carrying a child in the first place.

 

True in some jurisdictions, but as described in this article, large variations exist between states. It depends on the state, if the child is biologically related to the surrogate, and depending on the state, the intended mother might have to adopt - or might not. It's described as a largely unsettled area of law, but it makes perfect sense to me that presumption should automatically lie with the intended parents when a contract is filled out, and especially when the baby has no biological relation to the surrogate. And this is how it exists in some states.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._parkers_surrogate_get_visitation_rights.html

 

Still, like I said, when a child is born, only two people in the world obligated by law to provide and care for the child. The woman who gave birth and the man who fathered the child. The fact that surrogate mothers and sperm donors can surrender all parental rights and someone else can voluntarily assume the parental obligations doesnt change that fact.

 

Well, I'm glad you support gay marriage, even if for superficial and ignorant reasons, but let's get the story straight: gay marriage is GOOD for the economy and it IS a big deal to many gay people that can't get married. It gives them a lot of rights. To say it's a petty issue is to show great ignorance and a lack of empathy.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/mar_bene.htm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...rriage-million-economic-impact_n_1699089.html

 

Marriage between ANY TWO consenting adults would provide the same benefits. Whats so special about gays that could justify such preferential treatment as "gay marriage"

 

Um, the article directly contradicted that. It depends on the state; and in some states the intended parents are immediately granted parental rights based on the contract.

What you describe is an unsettled area of law, not a law that can't or should not be changed. It already has been changed in some states, and it makes perfect sense that parental rights should be given to the intended parents by contract.

 

You and your brother can have it too, what makes you think gays oppose it? If you and your brother are denied the same right, it will be on the basis if a sufficiently important state interest

 

I have to admit to being somewhat surprised that you are foolish enough to believe capitulation on this issue would accomplish anything but make these people even more demanding.

 

I support gay marriage because it's time straight people stood up for people who have had to live their lives in the shadows and as second class citizens for too long.
Their money is as green as mine and marriage promotes stability.

 

Amen to that!!

 

Marriage between men and women promotes stability.

 

so does marriage between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman.

 

Uh...not if it wasn't legal.

Uh, what? How is allowing gay people to do the same thing as everyone else "special" and giving them "preferential treatment?"

This is like saying giving black people voting rights is giving them special rights and preferential treatment.

 

Everyone else isnt entitled to marriage. Only heterosexual couples. And your advocacy for "gay marriage" as opposed to marriage for any two consenting adults is like giving blacks the right to vote while not giving the orientals and indians the right to vote.

 

Lets see your evidence. Every study done on marriage has been studies on heterosexual marriage.

 

They've observed enough to know that gay marriage is just fine.

 

you made the claim first. lets see your evidence

 

So, giving gay people the same rights is giving them special rights? wtf. Don't be dumb.

Uh, I AM advocating for gay marriage between any two consenting adults. I never said otherwise, but this thread is about gay marriage, genius and we're talking about gay people. You're not getting around the fact that your argument is freaking idiotic and nonsensical. Claiming giving gay people the same rights as straight people is giving them special rights is the exact opposite of the truth. YOU are wanting to treat straight people special and give them preferential treatment. You're taking something and calling it the exact opposite of what it is.

 

Nope............