Lesbian Couples Sues Government For Inability To Foster Refugee Child

[Tilly]

The point is not whether or not it will happen . The question is what if? Do you think that other minorities should be protected from discrimination, or are gays a special case?

Only because they make themselves a special case.

Oh really ? No other group has ever made some noise about being discriminated against? Thank you for admitting that there should be open season on gays only

Why are you sooooooooooo obsessed with all things gay???
Not a single day passes when you’re not foaming at the mouth about some (usually imagined) slight against homosexuals.

Hes ghey perhaps

Incredibly

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The short is that I think if a child lacks parents and there is person who demonstrates they can provide for and love a child that needs parents and a stable home, it should be nihil obstat as goes that parent's eligibility to adopt or foster parent the child. The implicit conclusion that, on account of prospective parents' sexuality, a child is somehow better off bereft of permanent parents who have chosen willfully to unconditionally extend their love, care for and raise the child, well, that's just multidimensionally nuts.

Thank you and thank the ******* Gods and Goddesses!! Finally a rational and appropriate response!!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Let 'em eat *****.

Apparently you did not read it to the end as I asked, or your reading comprehension sucks. I said Let’s keep this about the Constitution, the law, government funding and refugee children as opposed to Homosexuality and parenting. There has been far too much of that and it always turns into a shit storm. Take a ******* hike asshole!

But you chose a lesbian couple to illustrate your point, and you said it’s coz they is gay that they aren’t allowed to adopt

So what? Did you not understand what I said at t the end. ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let 'em eat *****.

Apparently you did not read it to the end as I asked, or your reading comprehension sucks. I said Let’s keep this about the Constitution, the law, government funding and refugee children as opposed to Homosexuality and parenting. There has been far too much of that and it always turns into a shit storm. Take a ******* hike asshole!

But you chose a lesbian couple to illustrate your point, and you said it’s coz they is gay that they aren’t allowed to adopt

So what? Did you not understand what I said at t the end. ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yes I understand you chose a gay couple as the platform on which to whine about discrimination, then said but don’t talk about homosexuality or parenting

That is the topic. Deal with it or go away. That case caught my attention, and yes I chose to use it. Can you come up with any other minority that is being subjected to this kind of treatment that is condoned by the government?

 

[Tilly]

Let 'em eat *****.

Apparently you did not read it to the end as I asked, or your reading comprehension sucks. I said Let’s keep this about the Constitution, the law, government funding and refugee children as opposed to Homosexuality and parenting. There has been far too much of that and it always turns into a shit storm. Take a ******* hike asshole!

But you chose a lesbian couple to illustrate your point, and you said it’s coz they is gay that they aren’t allowed to adopt

So what? Did you not understand what I said at t the end. ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let 'em eat *****.

Apparently you did not read it to the end as I asked, or your reading comprehension sucks. I said Let’s keep this about the Constitution, the law, government funding and refugee children as opposed to Homosexuality and parenting. There has been far too much of that and it always turns into a shit storm. Take a ******* hike asshole!

But you chose a lesbian couple to illustrate your point, and you said it’s coz they is gay that they aren’t allowed to adopt

So what? Did you not understand what I said at t the end. ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yes I understand you chose a gay couple as the platform on which to whine about discrimination, then said but don’t talk about homosexuality or parenting

That is the topic. Deal with it or go away. That case caught my attention, and yes I chose to use it. Can you come up with any other minority that is being subjected to this kind of treatment that is condoned by the government?

Your whole point is they are being discriminated against because they are gay - then you idiotically demand that nobody discuss the most pertinent point - that they are gay. Again - you don’t seem to know what the hell you are doing in your rush to whine about allegedly anti gay stuff

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Thank you for you eloquent legal opinion but this is very much about the constitution. What if an agency chose not to place kids with black or Jewish people ? Should they just suck it up ?

Let me know when that happens.

The point is not whether or not it will happen . The question is what if? Do you think that other minorities should be protected from discrimination, or are gays a special case?

Only because they make themselves a special case.

Oh really ? No other group has ever made some noise about being discriminated against? Thank you for admitting that there should be open season on gays only

Why are you sooooooooooo obsessed with all things gay???
Not a single day passes when you’re not foaming at the mouth about some (usually imagined) slight against homosexuals.

Why are you sooooo intent about always making it about me instead of actually dealing with the topic. Why don't you scratch your head real hard and try to come up with something useful and intelligent about the legal aspect of the case? Oh, that's right, you can't

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Apparently you did not read it to the end as I asked, or your reading comprehension sucks. I said Let’s keep this about the Constitution, the law, government funding and refugee children as opposed to Homosexuality and parenting. There has been far too much of that and it always turns into a shit storm. Take a ******* hike asshole!

But you chose a lesbian couple to illustrate your point, and you said it’s coz they is gay that they aren’t allowed to adopt

So what? Did you not understand what I said at t the end. ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Apparently you did not read it to the end as I asked, or your reading comprehension sucks. I said Let’s keep this about the Constitution, the law, government funding and refugee children as opposed to Homosexuality and parenting. There has been far too much of that and it always turns into a shit storm. Take a ******* hike asshole!

But you chose a lesbian couple to illustrate your point, and you said it’s coz they is gay that they aren’t allowed to adopt

So what? Did you not understand what I said at t the end. ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yes I understand you chose a gay couple as the platform on which to whine about discrimination, then said but don’t talk about homosexuality or parenting

That is the topic. Deal with it or go away. That case caught my attention, and yes I chose to use it. Can you come up with any other minority that is being subjected to this kind of treatment that is condoned by the government?

Your whole point is they are being discriminated against because they are gay - then you idiotically demand that nobody discuss the most pertinent point - that they are gay. Again - you don’t seem to know what the hell you are doing in your rush to whine about allegedly anti gay stuff

I asked that people deal with the legal aspects of the case. I did not demand that poster not talk about them being gay. I said please do not turn this into a shit storm and FOCUS on the legal issue. What part of that do you not understand?

 

[Lastamender]

How would it work if numbers were reversed and 96% of the population was gay? Would people still procreate? All I see is the futility of the whole thing.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The discrimination against homosexual adults who want to care for a child is what it is, and make no mistake, what it is is ethically wrong. But those women are adults who've found their place in the world and they'll overcome the adversity, angst and anguish some here would have them endure.

Be that as it may, the parentless children are the biggest losers in the situation described in the OP, and, apparently, people think that those children's loss is acceptable because the people who want to give them stable homes, a family they can call their own, educations, soccer teams, vacations, trips, a network from which they might launch a career....all the "big things" and "little things" that accompany being a child who's loved by his/her parents, that issue from being a child who has a stable foundation upon which to build his/her place in the world into which s/he'll mature into adulthood....How can one deny all that to a child, any child! No! Hell, no!

 

[usmbguest5318]

Thank you

You're welcome.

 

[Lastamender]

The discrimination against homosexual adults who want to care for a child is what it is, and make no mistake, what it is is ethically wrong. But those women are adults who've found their place in the world and they'll overcome the adversity, angst and anguish some here would have them endure.

Be that as it may, the parentless children are the biggest losers in the situation described in the OP, and, apparently, people think that those children's loss is acceptable because the people who want to give them stable homes, a family they can call their own, educations, soccer teams, vacations, trips, a network from which they might launch a career....all the "big things" and "little things" that accompany being a child who's loved by his/her parents, that issue from being a child who has a stable foundation upon which to build his/her place in the world into which s/he'll mature into adulthood....How can one deny all that to a child, any child! No! Hell, no!

You won't be the next Supreme court judge.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

How would it work if numbers were reversed and 96% of the population was gay? Would people still procreate? All I see is the futility of the whole thing.

Just another red herring to derail the topic.

 

[Lastamender]

How would it work if numbers were reversed and 96% of the population was gay? Would people still procreate? All I see is the futility of the whole thing.

Just another red herring to derail the topic.

I think it is profound, myself.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The discrimination against homosexual adults who want to care for a child is what it is, and make no mistake, what it is is ethically wrong. But those women are adults who've found their place in the world and they'll overcome the adversity, angst and anguish some here would have them endure.

Be that as it may, the parentless children are the biggest losers in the situation described in the OP, and, apparently, people think that those children's loss is acceptable because the people who want to give them stable homes, a family they can call their own, educations, soccer teams, vacations, trips, a network from which they might launch a career....all the "big things" and "little things" that accompany being a child who's loved by his/her parents, that issue from being a child who has a stable foundation upon which to build his/her place in the world into which s/he'll mature into adulthood....How can one deny all that to a child, any child! No! Hell, no!

Thank You!!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The discrimination against homosexual adults who want to care for a child is what it is, and make no mistake, what it is is ethically wrong. But those women are adults who've found their place in the world and they'll overcome the adversity, angst and anguish some here would have them endure.

Be that as it may, the parentless children are the biggest losers in the situation described in the OP, and, apparently, people think that those children's loss is acceptable because the people who want to give them stable homes, a family they can call their own, educations, soccer teams, vacations, trips, a network from which they might launch a career....all the "big things" and "little things" that accompany being a child who's loved by his/her parents, that issue from being a child who has a stable foundation upon which to build his/her place in the world into which s/he'll mature into adulthood....How can one deny all that to a child, any child! No! Hell, no!

You won't be the next Supreme court judge.

S/he is not trying to be. S/he is being a moral, practical and sensible human being. Try it sometime,

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

How would it work if numbers were reversed and 96% of the population was gay? Would people still procreate? All I see is the futility of the whole thing.

Just another red herring to derail the topic.

I think it is profound, myself.

Of course you would.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The discrimination against homosexual adults who want to care for a child is what it is, and make no mistake, what it is is ethically wrong. But those women are adults who've found their place in the world and they'll overcome the adversity, angst and anguish some here would have them endure.

Be that as it may, the parentless children are the biggest losers in the situation described in the OP, and, apparently, people think that those children's loss is acceptable because the people who want to give them stable homes, a family they can call their own, educations, soccer teams, vacations, trips, a network from which they might launch a career....all the "big things" and "little things" that accompany being a child who's loved by his/her parents, that issue from being a child who has a stable foundation upon which to build his/her place in the world into which s/he'll mature into adulthood....How can one deny all that to a child, any child! No! Hell, no!

You won't be the next Supreme court judge.

I knew that well before you knew of my existence. Now, do you still feel obliged to write about me? It doesn't matter to me if you do or don't for I don't care what you write/think about me because I don't think about you.

 

[Lastamender]

The discrimination against homosexual adults who want to care for a child is what it is, and make no mistake, what it is is ethically wrong. But those women are adults who've found their place in the world and they'll overcome the adversity, angst and anguish some here would have them endure.

Be that as it may, the parentless children are the biggest losers in the situation described in the OP, and, apparently, people think that those children's loss is acceptable because the people who want to give them stable homes, a family they can call their own, educations, soccer teams, vacations, trips, a network from which they might launch a career....all the "big things" and "little things" that accompany being a child who's loved by his/her parents, that issue from being a child who has a stable foundation upon which to build his/her place in the world into which s/he'll mature into adulthood....How can one deny all that to a child, any child! No! Hell, no!

You won't be the next Supreme court judge.

I knew that well before you knew of my existence. Now, do you still feel obliged to write about me? It doesn't matter to me if you do or don't for I don't care what you write/think about me because I don't think about you.

It is more about the next justice, not you.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The discrimination against homosexual adults who want to care for a child is what it is, and make no mistake, what it is is ethically wrong. But those women are adults who've found their place in the world and they'll overcome the adversity, angst and anguish some here would have them endure.

Be that as it may, the parentless children are the biggest losers in the situation described in the OP, and, apparently, people think that those children's loss is acceptable because the people who want to give them stable homes, a family they can call their own, educations, soccer teams, vacations, trips, a network from which they might launch a career....all the "big things" and "little things" that accompany being a child who's loved by his/her parents, that issue from being a child who has a stable foundation upon which to build his/her place in the world into which s/he'll mature into adulthood....How can one deny all that to a child, any child! No! Hell, no!

You won't be the next Supreme court judge.

I knew that well before you knew of my existence. Now, do you still feel obliged to write about me? It doesn't matter to me if you do or don't for I don't care what you write/think about me because I don't think about you.

It is more about the next justice, not you.

You just keep telling yourself that....

 

[Lastamender]

No, you just keep telling us, that is what a forum is for.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Why are you [TheProgressivePatriot] sooooooooooo obsessed with all things gay???
Not a single day passes when you’re not foaming at the mouth about some (usually imagined) slight against homosexuals.

It's not just about homosexuality. It's about children, too. He's obsessed with giving immoral sexual perverts easy access to children.