'Father' To Marry 'Son' In Bucks County (PA) -- With Court's Blessing

[bripat9643]

well it could be worse, what if the father wanted to marry one of his male pets?

Is it your imagination or your dog's? So you claim that incest is much better than zoophilia? You can have hope at least, soon you perverts will win and will fick your grannies.

i wonder who married who and produced Alan Grayson. i dont think he is the product of an average american couple. although alan grayson does look 1/32nd pig.

He's more like 1/4 pig.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

well it could be worse, what if the father wanted to marry one of his male pets?

Is it your imagination or your dog's? So you claim that incest is much better than zoophilia? You can have hope at least, soon you perverts will win and will fick your grannies.

i wonder who married who and produced Alan Grayson. i dont think he is the product of an average american couple. although alan grayson does look 1/32nd pig.

He's more like 1/4 pig.

the other mystery is of course who produced james carville. Maybe ET had sex with a donkey?

 

[Syriusly]

well it could be worse, what if the father wanted to marry one of his male pets?

Is it your imagination or your dog's? So you claim that incest is much better than zoophilia? You can have hope at least, soon you perverts will win and will fick your grannies.

The simple fact is that once one father can divorce his son in order to marry his son, any person can do that...

No not a fact- as I pointed out- hetero's have done this before homosexuals.

You only whine because in this specific case it is homosexuals.

If it was heteros- you would ignore them.

When did heteros ever do this?

I posted it a few pages back- go look- Florida billionaire adopts girlfriend in order to protect his money- and then later on marries her- happened in 2012.

 

[bripat9643]

well it could be worse, what if the father wanted to marry one of his male pets?

Is it your imagination or your dog's? So you claim that incest is much better than zoophilia? You can have hope at least, soon you perverts will win and will fick your grannies.

The simple fact is that once one father can divorce his son in order to marry his son, any person can do that...

No not a fact- as I pointed out- hetero's have done this before homosexuals.

You only whine because in this specific case it is homosexuals.

If it was heteros- you would ignore them.

When did heteros ever do this?

I posted it a few pages back- go look- Florida billionaire adopts girlfriend in order to protect his money- and then later on marries her- happened in 2012.

According to Wiki:

John B. Goodman industrialist - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

During the civil trial proceedings, Goodman attempted to adopt his adult girlfriend, 42-year-old Heather Ann Hutchins, in a ploy to protect some of his assets from being attached by Wilson's family. This was not allowed by the courts.
​

So no banana.

 

[Syriusly]

Is it your imagination or your dog's? So you claim that incest is much better than zoophilia? You can have hope at least, soon you perverts will win and will fick your grannies.

The simple fact is that once one father can divorce his son in order to marry his son, any person can do that...

No not a fact- as I pointed out- hetero's have done this before homosexuals.

You only whine because in this specific case it is homosexuals.

If it was heteros- you would ignore them.

When did heteros ever do this?

I posted it a few pages back- go look- Florida billionaire adopts girlfriend in order to protect his money- and then later on marries her- happened in 2012.

According to Wiki:

John B. Goodman industrialist - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

During the civil trial proceedings, Goodman attempted to adopt his adult girlfriend, 42-year-old Heather Ann Hutchins, in a ploy to protect some of his assets from being attached by Wilson's family. This was not allowed by the courts.
​

So no banana.

Actually- plenty of bananas

A Florida court revoked a polo tycoon's adoption of his girlfriend, a scheme that aimed to funnel her millions of dollars as he battled lawsuits that could have cut into his fortune.

He adopted- and the adoption was revoked- and then he went onto marry the girl.

Just like this gay couple- who had their adoption revoked- and then went onto marry.

 

[Silhouette]

I posted it a few pages back- go look- Florida billionaire adopts girlfriend in order to protect his money- and then later on marries her- happened in 2012....
A Florida court revoked a polo tycoon's adoption of his girlfriend, a scheme that aimed to funnel her millions of dollars as he battled lawsuits that could have cut into his fortune.
He adopted- and the adoption was revoked- and then he went onto marry the girl.
Just like this gay couple- who had their adoption revoked- and then went onto marry

Equally inexcusable. Same goes with Woody Allen.

It's different having a court order you to revoke your adoption because they're wise to your scam; compared to choosing to have your adoption revoked because your scam is successful. That precedent will be followed to the detriment of children. Equality demands that not just one but all may "have" their adoption revoked and then marry that child.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

Since, technically, they're not actually father and son, then the article is in essence, misleading. They're just two males getting married.
The Old School's statement is a bit misleading.
Any adult of sound mind can prepare a "Health Care Directive" and in doing so, list who is to be the "medical care decision-maker." In doing so, the medical care decision-maker is the go-to individual who the hospital must go to when the patient is not able to decide for him/herself. This rules out actual family members (if the patient so desires) in decision making. Living wills, durable powers of attorney and trusts can also be set up by the individual to have "whoever" he/she wants to take over an estate. The nonsense put forward by gays and lesbians that they have absolutely no say in such matters is false, with one exception and that is in the event that the individual/patient made no prior arrangements and is unable to communicate his/her decisions. Then, that's his/her fault.

 

[bripat9643]

The simple fact is that once one father can divorce his son in order to marry his son, any person can do that...

No not a fact- as I pointed out- hetero's have done this before homosexuals.

You only whine because in this specific case it is homosexuals.

If it was heteros- you would ignore them.

When did heteros ever do this?

I posted it a few pages back- go look- Florida billionaire adopts girlfriend in order to protect his money- and then later on marries her- happened in 2012.

According to Wiki:

John B. Goodman industrialist - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

During the civil trial proceedings, Goodman attempted to adopt his adult girlfriend, 42-year-old Heather Ann Hutchins, in a ploy to protect some of his assets from being attached by Wilson's family. This was not allowed by the courts.
​

So no banana.

Actually- plenty of bananas

A Florida court revoked a polo tycoon's adoption of his girlfriend, a scheme that aimed to funnel her millions of dollars as he battled lawsuits that could have cut into his fortune.

He adopted- and the adoption was revoked- and then he went onto marry the girl.

Just like this gay couple- who had their adoption revoked- and then went onto marry.

In other words, she was never legally adopted.

No banana.

 

[ChrisL]

Since I don't feel like answering each post addressed to me individually here, I will just say, give it a rest, will you? They are just two old men. Let them do what makes them happy and leave them be. I do agree though, that the adoption thing was a bit dishonest. However, I can understand why they did it. There probably should be a law against such things so that some abusive parents couldn't take advantage of something like that in some way. But as far as the two old men are concerned, no one is or was harmed.

 

[Silhouette]

Look at you, defending them and the bastardization of adoption laws!

 

[Silhouette]

Since I don't feel like answering each post addressed to me individually here, I will just say, give it a rest, will you? They are just two old men. Let them do what makes them happy and leave them be. I do agree though, that the adoption thing was a bit dishonest. However, I can understand why they did it. There probably should be a law against such things so that some abusive parents couldn't take advantage of something like that in some way. But as far as the two old men are concerned, no one is or was harmed.

What they are doing is more than merely dishonest. It is setting a precedent legally whereby any parent anywhere can divorce their child (equality means more than one person can do this) and then use that divorce in order to marry them. It shoots a torpedo directly at the heart of the intent the adoption laws seeking to establish an unbreakable bond between parent and child.

That they are openly sniggering about being father/son, then going to marriage is also disturbing. The LGBT media not taking them to task on that and making excuses or mollifying their acts (like you just did Chris) is inexcusable and telling.

It would be like listening to the media celebrate how Woody Allen divorced his own adopted daughter and then began shacking up with her. It's a thought that should bring bile up in your throat and cause you to shake with disgust. Should. But here you are defending it. I wonder if it's because two guys are doing it? If it was a hetero dude and his daughter, you'd' be swinging from the lamp posts in faux rage because of "how disgusting heteros are!" Am I right? Should we visit some of Syriusly's posts here to refresh your memory on that point?

 

[ChrisL]

Look at you, defending them and the bastardization of adoption laws!

Hmm. Where did I do that? Are you capable of having an adult discussion ever?

 

[ChrisL]

Since I don't feel like answering each post addressed to me individually here, I will just say, give it a rest, will you? They are just two old men. Let them do what makes them happy and leave them be. I do agree though, that the adoption thing was a bit dishonest. However, I can understand why they did it. There probably should be a law against such things so that some abusive parents couldn't take advantage of something like that in some way. But as far as the two old men are concerned, no one is or was harmed.

What they are doing is more than merely dishonest. It is setting a precedent legally whereby any parent anywhere can divorce their child (equality means more than one person can do this) and then use that divorce in order to marry them. It shoots a torpedo directly at the heart of the intent the adoption laws seeking to establish an unbreakable bond between parent and child.

That they are openly sniggering about being father/son, then going to marriage is also disturbing. The LGBT media not taking them to task on that and making excuses or mollifying their acts (like you just did Chris) is inexcusable and telling.

It would be like listening to the media celebrate how Woody Allen divorced his own adopted daughter and then began shacking up with her. It's a thought that should bring bile up in your throat and cause you to shake with disgust. Should. But here you are defending it. I wonder if it's because two guys are doing it? If it was a hetero dude and his daughter, you'd' be swinging from the lamp posts in faux rage because of "how disgusting heteros are!" Am I right? Should we visit some of Syriusly's posts here to refresh your memory on that point?

You're a douchebag.

It's because they are two OLD MEN, stupid.

 

[Silhouette]

You're a douchebag.

It's because they are two OLD MEN, stupid.

So this ^^ is your definition of "an adult discussion"? I knew you were a hypocrite but could you at least wait a page or two before you expose yourself as such?

Here's ChrisL

"I don't want to answer the questions I know are pressing"...

.."I'm going to deflect that by accusing someone of not posing them to me correctly"....

.."Then I'm going to act in the precise manner I just accused that poster of"...

.."Then I'm going to hope they don't notice and go off on a tangent so everyone forgets how despicable and duplicitious the faux-outrage from the LGBT camp is about the welfare of children.."

"...if all else fails I'll use this post to launch a strawman...and the next and the next..."

"...that is my purpose here at USMB on LGBT topics...I get paid well for what I do...time and a half on holidays.."

An Example vv (thanks for proving me right)

 

[ChrisL]

You're a douchebag.

It's because they are two OLD MEN, stupid.

So this ^^ is your definition of "an adult discussion"? I knew you were a hypocrite but could you at least wait a page or two before you expose yourself as such?

I'm just responding in idiot so that you can understand.

 

[Silhouette]

For some reason, this topic obviously bothers you.

 

[Syriusly]

I posted it a few pages back- go look- Florida billionaire adopts girlfriend in order to protect his money- and then later on marries her- happened in 2012....
A Florida court revoked a polo tycoon's adoption of his girlfriend, a scheme that aimed to funnel her millions of dollars as he battled lawsuits that could have cut into his fortune.
He adopted- and the adoption was revoked- and then he went onto marry the girl.
Just like this gay couple- who had their adoption revoked- and then went onto marry

Equally inexcusable. Same goes with Woody Allen.

It's different having a court order you to revoke your adoption because they're wise to your scam; compared to choosing to have your adoption revoked because your scam is successful. That precedent will be followed to the detriment of children. Equality demands that not just one but all may "have" their adoption revoked and then marry that child.

Different only to you.

LIke I said- you only care in this case because the couple is homosexual.

If they were heterosexual you would never have noticed.

 

[Syriusly]

For some reason, this topic obviously bothers you.

talking to yourself again Silhouette?

 

[Syriusly]

Since I don't feel like answering each post addressed to me individually here, I will just say, give it a rest, will you? They are just two old men. Let them do what makes them happy and leave them be. I do agree though, that the adoption thing was a bit dishonest. However, I can understand why they did it. There probably should be a law against such things so that some abusive parents couldn't take advantage of something like that in some way. But as far as the two old men are concerned, no one is or was harmed.

What they are doing is more than merely dishonest. It is setting a precedent legally whereby any parent anywhere can divorce their child?

No- once again you just display your vast ignorance of the law in your attempts to attack homosexuals.

There is no 'precedent'.

This does not mean that I can 'divorce' my biological child.

Whether you are lying or just ignorant doesn't really matter- you are wrong.

 

[Syriusly]

No not a fact- as I pointed out- hetero's have done this before homosexuals.

You only whine because in this specific case it is homosexuals.

If it was heteros- you would ignore them.

When did heteros ever do this?

I posted it a few pages back- go look- Florida billionaire adopts girlfriend in order to protect his money- and then later on marries her- happened in 2012.

According to Wiki:

John B. Goodman industrialist - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

During the civil trial proceedings, Goodman attempted to adopt his adult girlfriend, 42-year-old Heather Ann Hutchins, in a ploy to protect some of his assets from being attached by Wilson's family. This was not allowed by the courts.
​

So no banana.

Actually- plenty of bananas

A Florida court revoked a polo tycoon's adoption of his girlfriend, a scheme that aimed to funnel her millions of dollars as he battled lawsuits that could have cut into his fortune.

He adopted- and the adoption was revoked- and then he went onto marry the girl.

Just like this gay couple- who had their adoption revoked- and then went onto marry.

In other words, she was never legally adopted.

No banana.

And now according to the law- neither was the gay man.

The adoption technically never existed- just like if a marriage is annulled.