Arizona same-sex married couples are seeking adoptions

Again, that's more of your attempts to revision and ignore history.

Keep trying. We will keep winning.

 

I continue to feel sorry for the children of these "experiments" coming from selfish people. Think about the child first; NOT yourself. I believe that someday all this undermining of the family structure that has been the foundation of our country and way of life....will come back to bite us in the behind!! The rules behind adopting children are designed on what's best for the child. Used to be even age was a factor and I'm betting it still is. IOW's, they didn't let a traditional couple over a certain age adopt a child. WHY? Because they likely would not see that child get up through high school before either dying or becoming too old to devote the time and energy needed. Was that discrimination against old people??? NO. It was having some rules that looked out for the children.

These experiments today are coming from selfish people; NOT people thinking of the baby/child they are creating or adopting. Just the other day I read where 2 homosexual men have 3 surrogate women pregnant all at once and will be having 3 babies, each within a 7 month period.

Just because science says you CAN do something....doesn't mean you SHOULD do something. THINK of the BABIES and CHILDREN.

 

Feel free to provide us some of that history. The stuff you make up as you go along is meaningless.

 

Are you asserting that same sex parents are somehow harmful to children? Because every study done says children raised by same sex parents are just as good or better off than children raised by opposite sex couples.

 

When facts don't jive with ideology, facts get thrown out. Duh.

 

That is not correct. The Texas State Constitution states that the only marriage shall consist of one man and one woman. No other marriages are recognized or allowed. How is that not preventing?

The state of Texas prevents SSM just as Virginia prevented interracial marriage. There is no place where a SS couple can go to marry in Texas just as there was no place where a interracial couple could go to marry in Virginia in 1967.

Because interracial marriage had the added insult of a criminal penalty is irrelevant.

 

I feel more sorry for children that have alcoholic, druggy parents... or parents that neglect and abuse them.

 

That's patently false. Texas is referring to the LEGAL RECOGNITION of marriage. That law does not state a homosexual couple can't get married. If a homosexual wants to go somewhere in Texas and get married and have a wedding ceremony NOBODY is going to stop them. I could see them having a wedding ceremony and call the cops and the cops aren't going to go over there and break it up.

Here's a whole directory of "preachers" who will officiate your gay wedding in Texas. http://www.engaygedweddings.com/tx/officiants-tx.html

Gay people are NOT being denied the right to marriage. They're being denied the LEGAL RECOGNITION of that marriage.

 

Biological parents aren't preferred because they are always of the opposite sex. They are preferred because they are the only two people obligated by law to provide and care for the child. Without them, the child has only the hope that someone will voluntarily step forward and assume those obligations.

 

Proven lie

- - - Updated - - -

Which means they are denied the right to marry.

 

No, they would be denied the right to marry if they were being treated like the interracial couples were and not ALLOWED to even have a marriage.

Show me an example of a gay marriage being stopped or being prosecuted for it like occurring in Loving v Virginia.

 

Actually, the Lovings going to Washington DC to get a marriage wasn't against the law in Virginia. It was only returning to Virginia and cohabitating as husband and wife that made it a crime. But you are right in that no one prevents gays from marrying.

 

No, you merely proclaim, again and again that it is a lie. You've never even proposed a rational argument as to why its a lie. The fact that a lesbian lover of the mother, OR ANY OTHER CONSENTING ADULT can voluntarily assume those obligations, doesnt contradict my statement of fact above.

 

Just like your circular chasing your tail argument.

Paternity, procreation, and then right back around to the history of marriage. Your endless cycle of broken arguments that mean nothing.

You keep trying to sell that broken argument and we will keep winning in court again and again.

- - - Updated - - -

Doesn't matter.

Keep trying to move the goal post and ignore the fact that they can not legally get married.

You've lost. Stop squirming about like some urchin with your arguments.

 

Is their marriage legaly recognized?

Then they are denied the right to marriage.

- - - Updated - - -

18 states prevent them.

- - - Updated - - -

Any child born in a same sex marriage obligates both spouses as legal parents.

Your statement is a proven lie.

 

That's absurd. As you just admitted, they're being denied LEGAL RECOGNITION of marriage. You do not need legal recognition of your marriage to get married. People do it ALL the time, all over the world.

- - - Updated - - -

The Lovings were charged under Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code, which prohibited interracial couples from being married out of state and then returning to Virginia, and Section 20-59, which classified miscegenation as a felony, punishable by a prison sentence of between one and five years.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course it matters lol Legal recognition of marriage and the benefits conferred therein are NOT a right.

MARRIAGE is a right. Which means we cannot make it a criminal offense for someone go out and get married. However, there is NO obligation WHATSOEVER for any State to recognize anybody's marriage as being legal.

 

That is complete equine excrement. It's very much about the children. Children need a stable home with legally married parents and it doesn't matter what each has between their legs.

 

What do you mean by "involve children in their "taboo" lifestyle or "unorthodox" lifestyle Children of gays are not any more involved in their lifestyle- if by that you mean sexual behavior, that any other children. Gays are parents and people above all else . They are not freaks who have gay sex.

I worked in a state run child welfare agency for 26 years. I had many jobs during that time including child protective services investigator, protective services supervisor, foster care unit supervisor, and foster and adoptive parent trainer.

The state in question, New Jersey, has been placing children with gay foster and adoptive parents for decades, long before same sex marriage was even being discussed. During my career, I was involved in some manner or other with thousands of cases of child abuse, including sexual abuse, physical abuse neglect as well is families that were generally dysfunctional due to substance abuse or mental health issues. I was responsible for removing children from some of those homes when it was determined that the risk was to great not to do so, or if the parents could not be rehabilitated.

In all that time I never came across a gay person who was the perpetrator of child abuse of any kind. Granted, they are few in number compared to heterosexual couples and single parents, but we are talking about two and a half decades. In addition, I personally placed children with gay and lesbian couples and individuals after they were damaged by their straight parents. Those gay people provided loving and nurturing homes and gave those kids the best shot in life possible. And no, there were not enough straight people to care for those kids, but if there were I would have still have placed them with the gay folks if the match was right.

Never once did I have a problem with a gay foster of adoptive parent. Never once did any of them reject a child because they were not of the “correct” sexual orientation, but some straight people did in fact reject gay kids. During my time there and beyond I followed those families and I can tell you that those children have grown and thrived and overcame the bad hand that they were dealt by their straight parents, largely due to the nurturing offered and sacrifices made by the gay families who took them in.

In addition, when we talk about gay adoption, most often we are referring to situations where the child in question is the biological child of gay person and that persons partner wishes to adopt as a second parent. The benefits of having two legal parents are clear. There are an estimated 2 million children in the care of gay people. That will not change by banning adoption. It will only put those children at a disadvantage, socially, financially and legally.

In conclusion, opposition to gay adoption is just ignorant and hateful equine excrement. To say that you care about the children while opposing adoption by gays is hypocrisy at it’s very worst.

Bigotry and ignorance is not normal and should not be treated as such. Thank you for inspiring to write this

 

????? You are the one who insists upon preferential treatment for homosexual couples, seemingly for no other reason than the fact that they rub together what they have between their legs, just like heterosexual couples who produce all the children. ANY two consenting adults can join together to provide and care for children. More homes made up of two closely related adults, raising children together than there are homes made up of a homosexual couple with children. There is no rational justification for giving homosexual parents the same preference given to biological parents while continuing to exclude any other alternative.

 

Well, 16 years in 97. How long ago did you retire from the state?

 

What ???? I retired in 2005. What about it?

 

Actually, it was only a crime IF THEY marry out of state "and afterwards return to and reside in it, cohabiting as man and wife, they shall be punished as provided in § 20-59,"
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/388/1

They could have married in DC and gone back to Virginia and live next door to each other, without violating any laws. IT WAS ONLY the cohabitating as man and wife that was against the law. Just as it was against the law for any man to cohabitate with an unrelated woman he is not married to. It still is against the law for a man in Virginia to engage in sexual relations or cohabitate with a woman he is not married to.

http://hamptonroads.com/2014/02/effort-strike-virginias-fornication-law-fails
http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/laws-affecting.html

although they don't enforce it any more. That's the only reason marriage was ever considered to be a fundamental right, because a marriage was required in order to exercise the fundamental right to become fathers and mothers to their children. To "found a family".

Article 16.
•(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family......
The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

 

Sooooo you had 8 years of experience with homosexual couples as adoptive parents, not decades. And I suspect, so rare that you could count on one hand the number of examples.

 

Nope. Without the legal recognition there is no marriage. Just a party. They are denied the right to marry.

The Supreme Court consistently disagrees

US law and the Supreme Court disagree.

 

Strawman