|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 4:22 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 8:58 pm
I think that "allowing children to have an unlimited and ever-changing number of parents" is a bullshit phrase from an anti-gay rights propagandist, for one big reason: Have we ever heard of step-parents? I have a friend whose mother has been married three times since she was born. All three men helped to raise her at one point or another, and she is actually still close with two of them.
What he means is, "allowing children to have same-sex parents", and he should have said what he meant.
If this had been an unmarried heterosexual couple in which the female got artificially inseminated due to his inability to produce sperm, there would be a standard battle for visitation rights upon their split. This should be absolutely no different.
This child was conceived as their child, grew up being raised by both women, and to deny one of her parents any rights to see her is inhumane. I fully support the courts' decision to allow her to seek her rights as a parent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 15, 2006 9:25 pm
Thread title has been edited due to the original title being the exact opposite of what was stated in the article.
Here's hoping you made a typo, blue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 9:08 am
I support the decision as they were both parents and neither one of them acted in a way worthy of denying them visitation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 12:57 pm
Raven: I saw this topic, and decided I'd reply tomorrow. now, I know better, as I have nothing to add now.
Damn you. Damn you and your reading my mind. Stop freaking doing that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 5:13 pm
A_L_R Thread title has been edited due to the original title being the exact opposite of what was stated in the article. Here's hoping you made a typo, blue. Check my source, it was the title of the article...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 6:30 pm
blue_odessy A_L_R Thread title has been edited due to the original title being the exact opposite of what was stated in the article. Here's hoping you made a typo, blue. Check my source, it was the title of the article... Then it was clearly an error on FoxNews' part, but an error nonetheless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 6:57 pm
RavenMcCoy blue_odessy A_L_R Thread title has been edited due to the original title being the exact opposite of what was stated in the article. Here's hoping you made a typo, blue. Check my source, it was the title of the article... Then it was clearly an error on FoxNews' part, but an error nonetheless. Son of Axeman Raven: I saw this topic, and decided I'd reply tomorrow. now, I know better, as I have nothing to add now.
Damn you. Damn you and your reading my mind. Stop freaking doing that. I like the new curtains. Very cozy. mrgreen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 16, 2006 8:19 pm
First let me say that i'm usually very conservative. Second, I agree this.
I think allowing gay marage and rights is a good method to deal with overpopulation and orphans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 18, 2006 6:54 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 19, 2006 4:08 am
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 19, 2006 4:09 am
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 19, 2006 12:11 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 10:17 am
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 6:39 pm
Yondara_The ChaosMage Well, you know... We could make it all easy, and just eliminate tax-cuts for this kind of thing COMPLETELY... stare Actually they can go one step further and states stop recognizing marriage altogether.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
