A Simple Question For Those Still Opposed to Same Sex Marriage

TheProgressivePatriot

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
16,428
Reaction score
2,592
Points
290
Location
The commie infested, queer loving liberal NE USA
I have a simple question for those who oppose same sex marriage on the grounds that it is detrimental to children - which will come at the end of this post. But first allow me to present a senerio that is quite common.

The setting: A time and place where same sex marriage is not possible and only married couples can adopt .

The people: Kathy is a 29 year old divorced woman with two year old twins- a boy named Brandon and a girl named Britany . After the birth of the children, the husband , Jack, became abusive and angry which resulted in Kathy filing for divorce. Jack, over the last year and a half has had minimal contact with the children by his choice, and has had to be hauled into court several time for not paying child support

Kathy has always felt that she was more attracted to women than men but has supppressed those feelings because of taboos and social pressures, and wanting to avoid disapproval of friends and family . However, public opinion and social norms are changing and she is ready to embrace her feelings, be who she really is, and come out as a Lesbian.

Soon after her divorce, Kathy meets Angela, a Lesbian and they hit it off. The children like her and she is crazy about them. Within 6 months Angela moves in with Kathy in the home that Kathy owns exclusivly as a result of the divorce settlement. In time, it becomes clear that the children are bonding with Angela and she is very involved witgh them

A few years go by, the children are now in school and doing well. They are clearly well adjusted and have many friends. Then the unthinkable happens. Kathy is killed in an auto accident. Social Services at the hospital notifies Child Protective Services (CPS) that there are children living with an unrelated person who is not their legal guardian and investigates. The first thing that they do is to contact the father who has moved some distance away and is with another woman. They find out that the woman does not want kids and the father's interest is tempid at best. They consider charging him with abandonment but determine that placing the children with him might be putting them at risk of abuse or neglect because of the attiudes of the father and his girlfriend.

The next step is for CPS is to explore relatives on both sided of the family who might be able and willing to take the children but Kathy had not been close with any of them some austricized her for living with a woman. None are interested in taking in the children.

Meanwhile, Angela and the children are understanably devistated by the loss of Kathy . Compounding the grief is childrens fear that they will be taken away from Angela and sent off to live with people who they don't know, and away from their friends and school. And of course Angela is fearful of loosing the children.

To be sure CPS could reccomend to the court that Angela be given custody but there is no guarantee that they will, or that the court would follow that reccomendation. And, if a relitive later came forward and asked to be considered as the guardian, or if the father objected, Angela could loose custody at any time. It is also plausable that CPS would reccomend placement into foster care. Remember, Angela has no rights!!

Now one might say that children have rights, and these children are old enough- now 7- so express their wishes. However, that does not mean that their rights and wishes will be respected by the legal system and the adults who have power over them. The court might order a best interest analysis which would include a lengthy process of evaluating the degree of bonding between Angela and the children . But even if resolved in their favor, they will have already suffered unnecessary trauma and will bear those scars for the rest of their lives.

Of course, all of this could have been avoided if Kathy and Angela could have been married so that Angela could adopt the children as a second parent.

So now, my question is : Can anyone say that the best interest of Brandon and Britany were served in a system where Kathy and Angela COULD NOT GET MARRIED? Yes or No and why
 
Last edited:

Peach

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
20,864
Reaction score
2,718
Points
245
Not simple, still the best interests of the child are with the woman who helped raise them, they need no more shocks.
 

DGS49

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
9,689
Reaction score
3,987
Points
400
Location
Pittsburgh
A simple question? Why did it take a dozen paragraphs to set it up?

For ANY law on the books, it is possible to imagine a set of circumstances where the application of it would be "unjust" or silly or counterproductive.

Why not suppose the kids have "bonded" with a homeless prostitute drug addict, or an illegal alien who's being deported tomorrow?

Just because you can imagine a scenario where a law doesn't work as planned does not mean that the basic legal, historical, moral, and economic underpinnings of a law have to the thrown out. The first choice in any broken family, death, or abandonment situation is to find a parent, and if not a parent then another relative. It works 95% of the time. Judges normally have the discretion to be creative when all the facts and circumstances point to it. In the scenario you have imagined, there will probably be a relative of one of the natural parents who is trying to get custody, that that relative would probably get preference over the house-mate.

Some homosexual couples (mainly women) can be great parents and some NORMAL couples can be terrible parents. So what's your point, exactly?
 
OP
TheProgressivePatriot

TheProgressivePatriot

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
16,428
Reaction score
2,592
Points
290
Location
The commie infested, queer loving liberal NE USA
A simple question? Why did it take a dozen paragraphs to set it up?

For ANY law on the books, it is possible to imagine a set of circumstances where the application of it would be "unjust" or silly or counterproductive.

Why not suppose the kids have "bonded" with a homeless prostitute drug addict, or an illegal alien who's being deported tomorrow?

Just because you can imagine a scenario where a law doesn't work as planned does not mean that the basic legal, historical, moral, and economic underpinnings of a law have to the thrown out. The first choice in any broken family, death, or abandonment situation is to find a parent, and if not a parent then another relative. It works 95% of the time. Judges normally have the discretion to be creative when all the facts and circumstances point to it. In the scenario you have imagined, there will probably be a relative of one of the natural parents who is trying to get custody, that that relative would probably get preference over the house-mate.

Some homosexual couples (mainly women) can be great parents and some NORMAL couples can be terrible parents. So what's your point, exactly?
That is quite a rant to set up the question of "what is your point" when the point should be obvious. The children were harmed by the fact that the two women could not marry and that Angela could not adopt as a second parent? Clear now?

What I'm getting from this is that 1) you recognize that at least some Lesbians can be great parents 2) you're skeptical at best about gay men as parents 3) you're not to enthusiastic about same sex marriage or, at least, you wish to downplay the injustice and harm done by prohibiting it. Am I correct??
 

Snouter

Can You Smell Me
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
11,968
Reaction score
3,401
Points
280
The same sex marriage argument is INSANE. This idiotic thread confirms it.

The only reason for same sex marriage is to insult the parents and tweak the IRS system to get inheritance in addition to the diabolical effort to fuck up children in their custody.
 

ScienceRocks

Democrat all the way!
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
59,455
Reaction score
6,754
Points
1,900
Location
The Good insane United states of America
The question is why should some other individual control your life in the first place?

They can choose their own track in life but should stay the fuck out of other peoples life choices...Many of these people have the nerve to whine about how small government and personal responsibility they're but sure as fuck want the government to enforce their belief system against other people. Maybe they should deal with their own goddamn life and I'll deal with mine.
 

ScienceRocks

Democrat all the way!
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
59,455
Reaction score
6,754
Points
1,900
Location
The Good insane United states of America
Conservatives sure bitch about the importance of the constitutions but the constitutions doesn't allow for another group of people to be discriminated against. That is why homosexual marriage is legal! Accept it.
 
OP
TheProgressivePatriot

TheProgressivePatriot

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
16,428
Reaction score
2,592
Points
290
Location
The commie infested, queer loving liberal NE USA
The same sex marriage argument is INSANE. This idiotic thread confirms it.

The only reason for same sex marriage is to insult the parents and tweak the IRS system to get inheritance in addition to the diabolical effort to fuck up children in their custody.
How did you get so fucked up?? Straight parents??
 

Anathema

Crotchety Olde Man
Joined
Apr 30, 2014
Messages
14,502
Reaction score
2,086
Points
290
Location
The Olden Days
So now, my question is : Can anyone say that the best interest of Brandon and Britany were served in a system where Kathy and Angela COULD NOT GET MARRIED? Yes or No and why
The best interests of those children would be served by having them placed with relatives in a mixed-gender couple who can raise them properly. If thsts not possible, then they are bedt setved beco.ing wards of the state. In either setting, serious mental health services for both children need to be provided.
 
OP
TheProgressivePatriot

TheProgressivePatriot

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
16,428
Reaction score
2,592
Points
290
Location
The commie infested, queer loving liberal NE USA
So now, my question is : Can anyone say that the best interest of Brandon and Britany were served in a system where Kathy and Angela COULD NOT GET MARRIED? Yes or No and why
The best interests of those children would be served by having them placed with relatives in a mixed-gender couple who can raise them properly. If thsts not possible, then they are bedt setved beco.ing wards of the state. In either setting, serious mental health services for both children need to be provided.
You don't know much about kids or anything else .Serious mental health services will be needed if they are wrenched away from the only person who they relate to as a parent figure. In you case, however, serious mental health services would be a waist of time and effort . Some things can't be fixed.
 

Anathema

Crotchety Olde Man
Joined
Apr 30, 2014
Messages
14,502
Reaction score
2,086
Points
290
Location
The Olden Days
]You don't know much about kids or anything else .Serious mental health services will be needed if they are wrenched away from the only person who they relate to as a parent figure.
I know plenty about kids. More than I'd like to. What I don't do is believe thst children have Rights of their own. The role of children is to learn how to work within a proper society, so they do so when they become adults.
 

GreenBean

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2013
Messages
5,387
Reaction score
583
Points
155
Can anyone say that the best interest of Brandon and Britany were served in a system where Kathy and Angela COULD NOT GET MARRIED? Yes or No and why
Your situation / setting - be it hypothetical or actual does not fit the standard mold. Personally I am involved [casually] in a group that opposes gay adoption but so far as Lesbians are concerned there is very little reason to oppose their adopting children or even raising their own with their dike partners. The primary opposition is against Gay men - other than same sex attraction gay men and women are not the same. Gay men, based on their history as a group have no business having custodianship over any minor.
 

GreenBean

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2013
Messages
5,387
Reaction score
583
Points
155
]You don't know much about kids or anything else .Serious mental health services will be needed if they are wrenched away from the only person who they relate to as a parent figure.
I know plenty about kids. More than I'd like to. What I don't do is believe thst children have Rights of their own. The role of children is to learn how to work within a proper society, so they do so when they become adults.
Very poorly worded - although I think I know what you were trying to convey - you came across as a true hater - I don't believe you are, just sound that way
 

Anathema

Crotchety Olde Man
Joined
Apr 30, 2014
Messages
14,502
Reaction score
2,086
Points
290
Location
The Olden Days
Very poorly worded - although I think I know what you were trying to convey - you came across as a true hater - I don't believe you are, just sound that way
I am a hater. I have no use for kids, or any group of people who do not support themselves and/or are exempted from the consequences of their decisions.
 

GreenBean

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2013
Messages
5,387
Reaction score
583
Points
155
Very poorly worded - although I think I know what you were trying to convey - you came across as a true hater - I don't believe you are, just sound that way
I am a hater. I have no use for kids, or any group of people who do not support themselves and/or are exempted from the consequences of their decisions.
So I guess you were never a kid - born as a grumpy Old Man ?
 

Marion Morrison

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2017
Messages
58,863
Reaction score
16,733
Points
2,190
Faggotry confuses children. In the old days, they got hung. I'm thinking Jefferson advocated for being too easy on them.
I care about the kids, and they shouldn't be exposed to your faggotry. TheProgressivePatriot

Kids come from God.

Faggots do what their penis tells them to.

/thread.
 
Last edited:

GreenBean

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2013
Messages
5,387
Reaction score
583
Points
155
Faggotry confuses children. In the old days, they got hung. I'm thinking Jefferson advocated for being too easy on them.
I care about the kids, and they shouldn't be exposed to your faggotry.

Kids come from God.

Faggots do what their penis tells them to.

/thread.
Crudely put - but right on target
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top