Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill against gay couples

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Straw man fallacy.

Laws prohibiting government from discriminating against citizens based on race, religion, national origin, or sexual orientation apply solely to government and private sector entities funded by government doing the government’s business.

Correction: There is nothing in the US Constitution about protecting what regular men and woman DO with their hoo hoos "as identity"...anymore than there are laws protecting regular men and women who feel oriented (habitually driven) to drink alcohol and then get behind the wheel of a car. There are no federal laws elevating Drunk Driving Americans (DDAs) or Cleptomaniac Americans (CAs) etc. etc. etc. above other habitual behaviors. And no, not each habitual behavior must separately petition once one habitual behavior gains special legal elevation. The same Amendment you cite as your carte blanche is the same Amendment that's going to reveal the fallacy in the "behaviors as identity" unworkable premise.

Just because people doing weird sex stuff with the same gender can marry each other doesn't mean those behaviors suddenly can disenfranchise orphaned children who share the marriage contract from either a father or mother for life. There are more players in the marriage/adoption legal situation than just the adults. All will have their interests re: the contractual terms considered.

Happy Mother's Day to More Than 50 of Our Favorite LGBT Moms

 

[Aba Incieni]

Mother's Day is tomorrow.

 

[Silhouette]

And on Father's Day coming up, will you also congratulate lesbians?

 

[dblack]

And on Father's Day coming up, will you also congratulate lesbians?

Why not? If they're parents. I raised my sons by myself, and I sure as hell claimed both days.

 

[miketx]

If young people want to be gay that's fine, but them them be raised by normal people first and go gay on their own.

 

[dblack]

If young people want to be gay that's fine, but them them be raised by normal people first and go gay on their own.

Should probably be Republican parents too, right?

 

[miketx]

If young people want to be gay that's fine, but them them be raised by normal people first and go gay on their own.

Should probably be Republican parents too, right?

I don't care. Parents are parents. Male and female.

 

[dblack]

If young people want to be gay that's fine, but them them be raised by normal people first and go gay on their own.

Should probably be Republican parents too, right?

I don't care. Parents are parents. Male and female.

But as long as we're using government to decide who can raise children, might as well 'leverage' it, right?

 

[miketx]

If young people want to be gay that's fine, but them them be raised by normal people first and go gay on their own.

Should probably be Republican parents too, right?

I don't care. Parents are parents. Male and female.

But as long as we're using government to decide who can raise children, might as well 'leverage' it, right?

If you want to go ahead.

 

[dblack]

If young people want to be gay that's fine, but them them be raised by normal people first and go gay on their own.

Should probably be Republican parents too, right?

I don't care. Parents are parents. Male and female.

But as long as we're using government to decide who can raise children, might as well 'leverage' it, right?

If you want to go ahead.

Let's make it only Christian, heterosexual couples. Citizens only, of course. What do we do with the rest? Mandatory abortions? Or just take their kids from them after birth?

 

[Silhouette]

I don't care. Parents are parents. Male and female.

So fathers and mothers are now irrelevant as unique roles?

 

[Aba Incieni]

If young people want to be gay that's fine, but them them be raised by normal people first and go gay on their own.

Should probably be Republican parents too, right?

I don't care. Parents are parents. Male and female.

But as long as we're using government to decide who can raise children, might as well 'leverage' it, right?

If you want to go ahead.

Let's make it only Christian, heterosexual couples. Citizens only, of course. What do we do with the rest? Mandatory abortions? Or just take their kids from them after birth?

They're just clumps of cells. Kill them.

 

[Syriusly]

While you people argue the nuances involved with sexual perversions, I'm supporting heteros, who outnumber homos by hundreds of millions in the US alone.

#HeteroPride

#ThinkForYourself

No problem with you supporting the sexual perversions of heteros.

I support humans- regardless of your sexual perversions- or lack thereof.

Cool. So you're good with a 35-year old man marrying an 8-year old girl.

When did I say that? Provide that quote.

 

[Syriusly]

I don't care. Parents are parents. Male and female.

So fathers and mothers are now irrelevant as unique roles?

Hardly irrelevant- but as you well know- single parents can raise children just fine.

Two parents can raise them just as well as a single parent.

 

[Jessica123]

FUCK FREEDOM AND LIBERTY you say...Weird, how some people act like the people we're at war with in the middle east.

Let people live their lives.

 

[Syriusly]

Every gay person who wants to adopt through an agency is victimized because they do not have the full choices available to others.

No, they're not. Refusing to accommodate the wishes of another person is not victimizing them.

This is the same old argument - namely the conflation of equal rights with equal privilege. Equal rights doesn't mean everyone has to treat everyone else equally. It means the law has to treat everyone equally. Your confusion would be innocent enough, but it's driving real policy, and it actually inverts the original concept of equal rights. A government preoccupied with making sure everyone is treating each other equally must, by design, treat people unequally.

Wrong.

When government acts it must do so in accordance with Federal law and the Constitution – that includes private sector partners of the state that are funded by tax dollars.

Private sector partners of the government can no more discriminate based on sexual orientation than government agencies.

Again, as already correctly noted, if a private sector government partner has a problem with complying with Federal law and the Constitution, they’re at liberty to end that partnership and end the public funding, and discriminate against gay parents wishing to adopt.

Everyone treated equally under the law? Are you serious? You actually think that happens? Hillary is proof the elite class is above the law. SO save me the BS on equal rights under the law

-Geaux

Demonstrating that while legally everyone is equal before the law- the Hillary haters are not equal in brainpower.

 

[miketx]

I don't care. Parents are parents. Male and female.

So fathers and mothers are now irrelevant as unique roles?

Hardly irrelevant- but as you well know- single parents can raise children just fine.

Two parents can raise them just as well as a single parent.

Queers should not be allowed to be around children.

 

[miketx]

Every gay person who wants to adopt through an agency is victimized because they do not have the full choices available to others.

No, they're not. Refusing to accommodate the wishes of another person is not victimizing them.

This is the same old argument - namely the conflation of equal rights with equal privilege. Equal rights doesn't mean everyone has to treat everyone else equally. It means the law has to treat everyone equally. Your confusion would be innocent enough, but it's driving real policy, and it actually inverts the original concept of equal rights. A government preoccupied with making sure everyone is treating each other equally must, by design, treat people unequally.

Wrong.

When government acts it must do so in accordance with Federal law and the Constitution – that includes private sector partners of the state that are funded by tax dollars.

Private sector partners of the government can no more discriminate based on sexual orientation than government agencies.

Again, as already correctly noted, if a private sector government partner has a problem with complying with Federal law and the Constitution, they’re at liberty to end that partnership and end the public funding, and discriminate against gay parents wishing to adopt.

Everyone treated equally under the law? Are you serious? You actually think that happens? Hillary is proof the elite class is above the law. SO save me the BS on equal rights under the law

-Geaux

Demonstrating that while legally everyone is equal before the law- the Hillary haters are not equal in brainpower.

Libstains cannot go a day without attacking someones intelligence.

 

[Syriusly]

I don't care. Parents are parents. Male and female.

So fathers and mothers are now irrelevant as unique roles?

Hardly irrelevant- but as you well know- single parents can raise children just fine.

Two parents can raise them just as well as a single parent.

Queers should not be allowed to be around children.

That is what the bigots keep saying.

 

[Aba Incieni]

While you people argue the nuances involved with sexual perversions, I'm supporting heteros, who outnumber homos by hundreds of millions in the US alone.

#HeteroPride

#ThinkForYourself

No problem with you supporting the sexual perversions of heteros.

I support humans- regardless of your sexual perversions- or lack thereof.

Cool. So you're good with a 35-year old man marrying an 8-year old girl.

When did I say that? Provide that quote.

You support humans, regardless of their sexual perversions.