In the state of VT where gay marriage is considered legal the “spouse” has rights. This isn’t judicial tyranny. She was willing to partake in the benefits that this state was willing to offer her now she gets to deal with the aftermath of her choices.
The lesbian "spouse"?
Who did not bear the child should get the child?
The real mother is the one who went through pregnancy and her lesbian partner/spouse is a minor player
Yet the judge said the child should be with the non-child bearing partner?
Seems like perverted justice to me.
Tell me where I am wrong
"Two wrongs don't make a right."
Is homosexual marriage in VT the result of a vote by the people, the legislature, or judicially imposed? Which is it?
Many will object to there being any substantial difference, but Vermont had "domestic partnerships", not "gay marriage" when all this occurred - so get your facts right, at least. I'm not very well versed in the implications on children born to a person in a domestic partnership, but I'd be willing to bet that they're not nearly as rigorous as those for married people. This should be significant, especially since Jenkins never adopted the child.