Children will win the fight for same sex marriage and adoption by gays!

Not relevant

 

I'm going to make one more, most likely futile attempt to get you focused on what this thread is supposed to be about:

It's about real children It's about real people It's about real lives that are negatively impacted by discrimination and the children are the collateral damage!


The inane crap that you are posting is irrelevant and out dated. Here is what matters:

PARENTING

ADOPTION

Surrogacy

Educate yourself. These things work. This is the United States of America in 2015. Not ancient Rome for god's sake

 

Learn about what is possible instead of making up reasons about why only heterosexuals can or should be parents:

 

That is in the backward state of Texas where same sex marriage is not YET legal. Now in New York, where it is legal:


New York Court Finds Marriage Presumption of Parenthood Applies to Child of Married Lesbian Couple

Not that it has anything to do with the right to marriage, but just saying.

There is a patchwork of laws across the country concerning adoption, the legal status of children and same sex parents. Case law is still developing. Legislation may be needed.

The rational response in a just and progressive society that values all life is to work to changes laws where needed. We say that yes, the laws are unfair to certain people, they treat some people differently, and yes they have been that way for a long time. We either didn't realize the unfairness, or were not ready for a change.

The irrational response of conservatives and bigots is to say that the laws treat some people differently and unfairly and that is proof that they are different, even inferior. Therefore, that is justification for continuing to treat them differently

 

DIRECTLY relevant to the quoted post. Likely irrelevant to what you would rather discuss.

 

All states have similiar statutes. Heres California's

7540. Except as provided in Section 7541, the child of a wife
cohabiting with her husband, who is not impotent or sterile, is
conclusively presumed to be a child of the marriage.

 

Superseded by court action:

Give up Dixon. Stop embarrassing yourself. This is truly pathetic

 

Gay rights will only be possible as long as America is free.

Once he curtain falls on freedom in America (coming soon to a town near you), gay rights will vaporize.
That's because gay is minority. And deals largely with what many non-gays feel is repulsive behavior.
It can only exist because the government protects it. Once that protection subsides, there will be a huge wave of anti-gay pushback. Could get ugly.
(I'm not saying that's right or wrong, just what will probably happen eventually)

A very good modern example would be Russia.
In Russia, gay is becoming dangerous. In China it is still shunned.
Because neither are free nations, that is not likely to change.

As Russia moves further away from human rights, gays in Russia could be in danger.
Similar to how gays are considered in most Islamic countries.

 

Gee.....thanks for that dire prediction. Meanwhile. lets party! It's funny though how so many Americans who bloviate about freedom vilify and marginalize gays.

 

What whiney liberal BS. There are more children growing up in a household with two closely related adults than there are children with gay couples. So stop with this hypocritical BS about your concern for the children. YOUR only concern is the gay adults trying to ape heterosexual couples.
But isn't it revealing, the same people that claim marriage has nothing to do with procreation, that marriage is not limited to heterosexual couples because they are the only couples with the potential of procreation, are the same people that insist marriage must be extended to all gay couples, because they might decide to adopt, use in-vitro fertilization or hire a surrogate mother. Heterosexual sex has a strong natural tendency to lead to procreation. Gay sex has no tendency whatsoever to lead to adoption or in-vitro fertilization.

 

it's irrelevant to the topic of this thread.

 

Wow Tex!! Settle down! I didn't mean to rattle you so badly But really. that's all that you have? To call it liberal BS and rant about "closely related people" who actually don't really want to get married? NOBODY believes that crap. You just want to keep gay people down. Allowing the "mother and grandmother down the street" to marry would not change that.. You are so agitated. I worry about you/

"to ape heterosexual couples?" What the hell does that mean? You really don't have any sort of a rational or logical response to anything that I've said, do you?

That reveals what? It reveals that marriage is about-in part- providing a home and a family for children. It does not contradict the fact that marriage is not about procreation and that procreation is not required for marriage, a point that you can't seem to get passed. And if they do not have children, they still have a right to marriage as long as heterosexual couples who do not have children have a right to marry. Geeeezzzzz.

So what?

Equine excrement. gay relationships do. You are just being so ridiculous! And your growing desperation is obvious and painful to watch. Give my regards to Ted Cruz. Rafael also.

 

You didn't. I don't need to be rattled to point out your BS.

Only heterosexual sex leads to procreation and children that need to be provided a home. Homosexual sex has no rational relation to children. And it reveals the hypocrisy of your arguments.

Absurd argument to make while arguing that marriage is about homosexuals using adoption and surrogacy to obtain children.

 

Well Tex, you're back!! It appears that it took you a while to compose yourself sufficiently to respond to my last post.

So let’s see what we have here. It seems that you are willing to go on record basically denying the existence of children in the care of gay and lesbian people. And, if you do acknowledge their existence at all, you are taking the position that they are less deserving-than children born as the result of “heterosexual sex” - of the legal protections and economic benefits of having married parents.

You realize of course that many of the children in the care of gay people were in fact conceived by “heterosexual sex” don’t you? So those children are also to be relegated to that status of the less deserving once the birth parent enters into a homosexual relationship? This seems to be a fair representation of your position. If not, please explain how, exactly. Thank you for a rare moment of honesty.

One last thing. What about children who are in the care of heterosexual couples who were “obtained “ by means other than “heterosexual sex” ? What status do you assign to them? What are they deserving of.

Each of you posts becomes more ridiculous than the last

 

Silly little man. I label your (*)(*)(*)(*) "whiney liberal BS" because that's what it is. Not because I am rattled

Never denied any such thing and SPECIFICALLY acknowledged there existence when I pointed out that there are even more children with two closely related couples.

Actually, they are EQUALLY deserving of the benefits of marriage, both their biological mother and father in the home working together to provide and care for their children. But a child with a homosexual couple requires separating the child from one or both of those parents.

Actually, MOST children with homosexual couples, are from a previous heterosexual relationship, before they decided they were born homosexual.

No more or less deserving than the many more children with two closely related adults. Children from previous heterosexual relationships. Notice how EVERY SINGLE BENEFIT of marriage you imagine for children with homosexual couples, applies equally to the more numerous children with two closely related adults. Reveals your true agenda, promoting "respect and dignity" for homosexuals.

 

More of the same inane clap trap! Children who are available for adoption have been separated from their parents for reasons completely unrelated to same sex marriage. They have NO parents. To imply differently is just more of you dishonest equine excrement. I’m just going to sum up where we’re at here and then I’m done with you. Again.

It has been well documented and established that you are opposed to extending the social, legal and economic benefits of marriage, or even the right to have a family, to the children in the care of gay people, ostensibly because you disapprove of the way in which they were conceived or the fact that they were adopted. That is if you acknowledge their existence at all . Your words:

My god man! No home, no rights, no security for those kids! They are the spawn of homosexuals!! Do you have even an ounce of humanity?

Aside from the fact that many of those children were in fact conceived through heterosexual sex, and that one of the gay caretakers is a biological parent, it has also been established that you are quite willing to give a pass to heterosexual people who “ acquire “ children though other that the usual way.

It also establishes that your contention that you don’t approve of marriage for gay people because of the way in which they “acquire” children is a bold faced lie. You position on gay marriage has little or nothing to do procreation or conception. The fact that you cannot run and hide from is that your vile, and irrational hatred of gay people is so deep that you are willing to punish and deprive their children, by denying rights, and legal recognition to gay people.

Your hypocrisy is as astounding as your dishonesty

 

Fortunately the trend on this issue is clear

 

Your day is done Tex. You have few allies left:

 

This month, HRC was proud to celebrate National Foster Care Month. The blog series shared family stories, covered the experiences of LGBTQ youth in foster care, listed tips for people considering becoming foster parents,highlighted HRC's work to improve the foster care system, and more.

With nearly 400,000 children and youth in foster care in the U.S. today, LGBTQ youth are disproportionally represented in the system. Many have been abused or neglected because of their gender identity or sexual orientation

This month isn’t just about youth in the foster care system. It’s also the many families, including LGBT adults and same-sex couples, who have opened up their homes to youth in need. http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/fosterequality-celebrating-national-foster-care-month

 

I didn't "imply differently". Sooooo what is it exactly you are labeling "inane clap trap". If you can locate your nads, youll need to actually dispute something Ive said.

I never even suggested they be denied the "right to have a family". Yes, I oppose gay marriage. You are pointing out the obvious there.

Not sure what you are babbling on about here. They have the same rights as any kids who have been separated from their biological parents. You've not contradicted the two sentences of mine you quoted. They are statements of fact.

 

You said

.

You implied that adoption by gays results in the separation of children from the bio parents. But, as usual, when you get called on something, suddenly it means something different

More revisionist bull. Remember this:

Not sure what you are babbling on about here. They have the same rights as any kids who have been separated from their biological parents. You've not contradicted the two sentences of mine you quoted. They are statements of fact.[/QUOTE]

WHAT? Who has the same rights as who .? What the hell are YOU talking about? If children in the care of gay people can't be adopted. If the parent figures can't marry, the children most certainly do not have equal rights. Here are a few fun facts that you might want to try to absorb:

Fact: There are hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of children in the care of gay people

Fact: Those children can benefit greatly if their parent was able to marry his/her partner and if that partner were able to adopt the children as a second parent.

Fact. YOU have expressed NO willingness to allow either marriage or adoption y gay people DESPITE the FACT that children are harmed by DISCRIMINATION against their parents.

Fact: There are many children in the foster care system in need of a permanent, loving home and there are not enough people who can accommodate them, especially those who are older and otherwise hard to place.. Gay people provide a valuable resource for these children.

Fact: You are opposed to adoption by gay people.

Fact: You cannot refute or deny a word of this without lying, and distorting the FACTS

Conclusion: You despise gay people to the point where you are willing to harm children. Your hatred is so profound that you don’t care if those children suffer collateral damage as a result of discrimination against their caretakers and potential caretakers.

That is dispicable

 

Had I meant that "results in the separation of children from the bio parents" I would have said so. I didn't. I said it "requires separating the child from one or both of those parents". Its one of those inconvenient FACTS , you cant deal with.

Another scientific FACT, your ideology wont allow you to accept.

 

???? Children with gay couples "have the same rights as any kids who have been separated from their biological parents."MOD EDIT - Rule 3

No one suggested they could not be. Try to focus.

Of course they do. Just like the single mother and grandmother down the street, joined together for over a decade to provide and care for their children/grandchildren. Their father died separating them from their biological father. The grandmother adopted the children, but the mother and grandmother are prohibited from marriage in all 50 states. Their children/grand children have identical rights to a gay couple who has adopted a child. But you think the gay couple and their children, for no other reason than the fact that the adults are gay, deserve a preference in the law when it comes to children.

 

MOD EDIT - Rule 3

Fact: There are hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of children in the care of gay people

Fact: Those children can benefit greatly if their parent was able to marry his/her partner and if that partner were able to adopt the children as a second parent.

Fact. YOU have expressed NO willingness to allow either marriage or adoption y gay people DESPITE the FACT that children are harmed by DISCRIMINATION against their parents.

Fact: There are many children in the foster care system in need of a permanent, loving home and there are not enough people who can accommodate them, especially those who are older and otherwise hard to place.. Gay people provide a valuable resource for these children.


MOD EDIT - Rule 3

 

According to this website only about 110,000 children have been adopted by gay parents.

http://www.lifelongadoptions.com/lgbt-adoption/lgbt-adoption-statistics

And the adoption isn't as good as you say it is, there are abusive gay foster parents out there too.