A Child Can't Call 2 Women or 2 Men "Mom & Dad"

[emilynghiem]

Do Atheists need permission? Or Christians?
So whenever an Atheist has a conflict with a Christian,
we need to run to Court -- wah wah wah -- and tell on each other
and get some third party to intervene because we can't resolve issues on our own?..

When children are involved yes, the Courts need to say who their custodians are, just 9 people in DC or the 10s of millions in their discreet communities/states..

Legal custody is not the same as dictating personal relationships of
calling people mommy and daddy.

you can have a third party legal guardian that is neither mommy nor daddy.

And after what I went through with my father's guardian, and the inability
of my brother to settle guardian issues (and also cases like Terri Schiavo)
NO THANK YOU
I would not trust the decision in the hands of govt.

Counseling and consensus would be necessary to ensure
the best interest of the children, or ward in question, so it does not cause further trauma
by legal wrangling. This bullying through the courts should be replaced with
conflict resolution and consensus, and yes, that is for the best interests of the children.

if there is abuse going on where adults are not legally, mentally or emotionally
competent to make decisions, that would be discovered and managed in the
counseling process to determine how to facilitate a consensus that can accommodate
the parent-child relations especially where mental or criminal issues are involved.

 

[emilynghiem]

A Child Can't Call 2 Women or 2 Men "Mom & Dad"

And your point is?

That the consideration of children in the gay marriage debate is being shunted at their expense..that they are the most oppressed voices in this debate because they of all the players cannot vote to affect their fate; and instead rely upon their states to determine their fate...not just 9 people in DC, 2 of which have officiated over gay weddings in the past two years while the question is yet to be Heard on its merits. So 2 of those Justices can be relied upon to not consider the opposing voices when the Hearing comes.

That can be addressed by counseling and does not have to rely on courts to decide for the children or families.

Silhouette are you even taking into account the impact on children of legal actions and conflicts?
Clearly counseling is needed anyway, so why not use that effectively to form an agreed decision.
Why not empower citizens and communities to resolve conflicts locally, and save resources and courts
for issues that only govt can handle.

 

[bodecea]

This drum beat needs to be heard on behalf of the most meek voices in this debate: children. They cannot vote to affect their fate and they rely solely upon the citizens of their respective states to act as their custodians in this matter. If those voices are silenced, so are theirs.

California, the most permissive state in the Union with the longest opportunity to observe the LGBT culture (San Francisco, CA as ground-zero) and uber-aggressive-litigation-machine, voted to preserve the physical structure of marriage as man/woman TWICE. What this means is, the experimental-lifestyle-as-parents is repugnant to the most permissive state with the most experience with the brand spanking new lab experiment with children.

This is obvious upon it's face, but a child cannot call 2 women or 2 men "Mom and Dad". This thread in the link below goes into excruciating detail as to why states must be allowed to incentivize the best physical structure of marriage on behalf of children/future productive or nonproductive liabilities to that respective state. That state's discreet community MUST have a voice on behalf of its unprotected citizens: children...

Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You're right, our children don't call us "mom & dad". They call us "mom & mom", "dad & dad" or some variation that they are comfortable with. In our house, our daughter has always called out for "Mom" and we both answer. It's not complicated at all.

 

[bodecea]

38 down, 12 more to go.

Not legally. Tyranny will be put back in its cage an democracy restored before the end of the year, or you should get used to photo ops of Justices Roberts and Thomas with shovels breaking ground for "the incremental shadowy denial of stays in various states on various sections of the Keystone pipeline" so they can later say "well the pipeline's almost complete in most states so we have to approve it now"..

Yes legally.

 

[bodecea]

38 down, 12 more to go.

Not legally. Tyranny will be put back in its cage an democracy restored before the end of the year, or you should get used to photo ops of Justices Roberts and Thomas with shovels breaking ground for "the incremental shadowy denial of stays in various states on various sections of the Keystone pipeline" so they can later say "well the pipeline's almost complete in most states so we have to approve it now"..

That's probably similar to what the bigots that came before you said during the civil rights movement.

That mentality certainly explains what happened with the Salem witch trials, where the pressure to keep persecuting and killing the accused was to further justify what was done to the others before.

That was about religious superstition and fear of those different in a place where religion controlled the government....sure you want to use that as an analogy?

 

[bodecea]

A Child Can't Call 2 Women or 2 Men "Mom & Dad"

And your point is?

Sil's point seems to be that now she wants government to control what children call their parents.

 

[Syriusly]

38 down, 12 more to go.

Not legally. .

Absolutely legally.

The Supreme Court let all of those rulings stand.

 

[Syriusly]

A Child Can't Call 2 Women or 2 Men "Mom & Dad"

And your point is?

That the consideration of children in the gay marriage debate .

And the children who have 2 women or 2 men as parents- what purpose is served in preventing their parents from marrying?

 

[Silhouette]

Legal custody is not the same as dictating personal relationships of
calling people mommy and daddy.
you can have a third party legal guardian that is neither mommy nor daddy.
And after what I went through with my father's guardian, and the inability
of my brother to settle guardian issues (and also cases like Terri Schiavo)
NO THANK YOU
I would not trust the decision in the hands of govt.
Counseling and consensus would be necessary to ensure
the best interest of the children, or ward in question, so it does not cause further trauma
by legal wrangling. This bullying through the courts should be replaced with
conflict resolution and consensus, and yes, that is for the best interests of the children.
if there is abuse going on where adults are not legally, mentally or emotionally
competent to make decisions, that would be discovered and managed in the
counseling process to determine how to facilitate a consensus that can accommodate
the parent-child relations especially where mental or criminal issues are involved.

All those various oddball situations you just mentioned are not why states get involved in marriage. States are only involved in marriage to incentivize the best statistical situation for children to be raised in. It goes without saying that all manner of situations that are lesser exist for children less fortunate. A mother and a father have no psychological equal for raising both genders of children in a home. And therefore states who want to preserve this must be allowed to for their collective wards (the children who cannot vote living within their discreet community).

 

[WorldWatcher]

Given that the Supreme Court has allowed gay marriages to proceed in 38 states so far.

Not quite correct.

19 States have SSCM based on State action.

18 States have SSCM based on Federal action.

1 State (Nebraska) is still up on the air (District Court ruling but we're waiting in the 8th Circuit to stary or not).

*******************************

So at this point SCOTUS actions have resulted in 17. There is no issue before the courts on States that have approved of SSCM.


>>>>

 

[Syriusly]

Given that the Supreme Court has allowed gay marriages to proceed in 38 states so far.

Not quite correct.

19 States have SSCM based on State action.

18 States have SSCM based on Federal action.

1 State (Nebraska) is still up on the air (District Court ruling but we're waiting in the 8th Circuit to stary or not).

*******************************

So at this point SCOTUS actions have resulted in 17.


>>>>

Thank you for the correction- I forgot about the state courts which overturned the state's laws, and just rather ignored the states which changed their laws.

 

[Political Junky]

Why should a kid call a woman dad or a man mom? The Right looks for roadblocks. Imagine if they spent all that time coming up with solutions.

 

[BULLDOG]

Sure they can. But even if choose to call them dad/dad or mom/mom, who cares?

Recognition of gay marriage is coming at a federal level; therefore, legal in all states. Get used to it.

Dear J.E.D People's beliefs, including about gay marriage, should ALREADY be protected under free exercise of religion and not discriminating by creed. This reinforces a BAD precedent, that anytime anyone in any state can't resolve a conflict concerning their belief "they have to sue all the way to the Supreme Court" before their beliefs are recognized.

Are we going to have to run to federal govt for EACH issue of prayer, Crosses, terms of marriage, etc. every time this comes up? Surely the people of each state can work out their own issues, especially with beliefs that are supposed to remain free in private.

If people have issues with personal beliefs that involve govt, this should ESPECIALLY be addressed and resolved by consensus. So a solution coming from Texas that works for those people in that environment, may or may not work for another state. We should remain FREE to adopt and adapt solutions that work for us. NOT rely on federal govt to mandate decisions in conflicts of belief and faith-based interests.

If you were on the losing side, you would see this is unconstitutional to rule against your beliefs at stake.
So this is NOT protecting people's beliefs equally, but only the beliefs of the people who get the majority or the court ruling in their favor. This encourages bullying to overrule the beliefs of others = NOT a good precedent!

We should not abuse govt to reward bullying and exclusion of other people's beliefs.
We don't like when politics is abuse to harm us in this way, and the laws are supposed to guarantee EQUAL protection.

We should reward people for writing laws so articulately that they are neutral enough to represent ALL people equally
and not offend or exclude ANYONE's views. Otherwise, such issues should remain private and not be imposed in public, unless where all parties AGREE their beliefs are accounted for.

This bullying has to stop!

Are you trying to say the decision of the majority of the supreme court is bullying, and that unless there is 100% agreement, on any particular issue, we shouldn't make a law concerning that issue? That's the first time I've ever heard something so ridiculous..

 

[BULLDOG]

Why should a kid call a woman dad or a man mom? The Right looks for roadblocks. Imagine if they spent all that time coming up with solutions.

I was a single parent, and in the first grade, my daughters class made Mothers Day cards. She gave the one she made to me. I still have it. She still sends me Mothers Day cards. Sure, it's not what would normally be expected, but do you think that matters to either of us? As long as the parents and kids come to terms with the situation, it's nobody else's business.

 

[Silhouette]

I was a single parent, and in the first grade, my daughters class made Mothers Day cards. She gave the one she made to me. I still have it. She still sends me Mothers Day cards. Sure, it's not what would normally be expected, but do you think that matters to either of us? As long as the parents and kids come to terms with the situation, it's nobody else's business.

That's fine, but you wouldn't call yourself married, nor would you call yourself your daughter's "mom and dad". This isn't about what's adequate; this is about what is married.

 

[Skylar]

This drum beat needs to be heard on behalf of the most meek voices in this debate: children. They cannot vote to affect their fate and they rely solely upon the citizens of their respective states to act as their custodians in this matter. If those voices are silenced, so are theirs.

California, the most permissive state in the Union with the longest opportunity to observe the LGBT culture (San Francisco, CA as ground-zero) and uber-aggressive-litigation-machine, voted to preserve the physical structure of marriage as man/woman TWICE. What this means is, the experimental-lifestyle-as-parents is repugnant to the most permissive state with the most experience with the brand spanking new lab experiment with children.

This is obvious upon it's face, but a child cannot call 2 women or 2 men "Mom and Dad". This thread in the link below goes into excruciating detail as to why states must be allowed to incentivize the best physical structure of marriage on behalf of children/future productive or nonproductive liabilities to that respective state. That state's discreet community MUST have a voice on behalf of its unprotected citizens: children...

Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

The prince trust study doesn't measure the effects of any kind of parenting, doesn't mention same sex couples, same sex parenting, or gays, nor does it say that a positive same sex role model must be a parent.

You made all of that up.

And you're nobody.

 

[Skylar]

Oh, and Silo, there's the question that obliterates your entire argument;

How will denying marriage to same sex parents help their children?

Feel free to keep ignore those children. But don't bother to pretend you give a shit about them.

 

[BULLDOG]

I was a single parent, and in the first grade, my daughters class made Mothers Day cards. She gave the one she made to me. I still have it. She still sends me Mothers Day cards. Sure, it's not what would normally be expected, but do you think that matters to either of us? As long as the parents and kids come to terms with the situation, it's nobody else's business.

That's fine, but you wouldn't call yourself married, nor would you call yourself your daughter's "mom and dad". This isn't about what's adequate; this is about what is married.

Of course I was her mom and dad. Nobody else was.

 

[Gracie]

Instead of answering directly.....how about a strawman argument?

Dad dies. Mom can't make it on her own so she has someone of the same sex come help her make ends meet. Mother, sister, grandmother, cousin, friend. These women raise the child left behind by dad.

Or....gay couple adopts child. Or they are lesbian and one gets pregnant so they can have a child together via sperm donated. Does the child know what they do in the bedroom? Does the child know what mom and DAD do in the bedroom? As long as said child is raised in a loving and decent home, does it matter?

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know.........this isn't that much of a problem.

The kids can do what the daughter of a friend of mine named Cindy did when she got together with her life partner (of which they had been together by that time for around 9 years). The daughter Tawnya was 15, so she'd been around Connie (Cindy's life partner) ever since she was 6.

Tawnya called Connie "Connie", and Cindy (her mother) "Mom".

Matter of fact, foster kids (of which I was one) usually call the "mom" and "dad" of their foster family by their first names until there is enough of a bond formed between the child and the foster parents to call them mom and dad. Me? I was in foster care for around 4 years, and never got to the point of calling my foster parents mom and dad. But then again..........I didn't like being there and ran away from the foster home to go back and live with my Grandparents for the last year I was in high school.

The child can call their biological parent "mom" or "dad", and call the partner of their parent by their first name, at least until the partner is comfortable being referred to by mom or dad.

As far as I'm concerned, this is a non issue.