Posted on 05/20/2021 7:07:43 AM PDT by rktman
An international court has ruled that Iceland was within its rights to deny parental rights to two lesbians who obtained a baby boy through surrogacy in the United States.
For one thing, the decision from the European Court of Human Rights found, is that surrogacy is illegal in Iceland.
So that required the infant, when he came to Iceland about eight years ago with the two women, to be classified an unaccompanied minor who was in the custody of the government.
The two lesbians eventually obtained a foster care agreement with the government to care for the child, but their later adoption plan was disrupted because they divorced.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
There is no way at all that "Gay couples" should be around, much less adopting, children.
Yep.
Homosexual acts should have remained illegal everywhere. Even if poorly enforced those laws helped to protect us from all this same-sex rights nonsense.
“...because they divorced.”
LOL!!!!
Thanks a whole hellova lot, American Psychiatric Association and the US Supreme Court.
Not part of God’s plan. Homosexuals can’t procreate.
Note: IRCC Iceland totally eliminated Downs Syndrome
“illegal”? You want to put people in jail for that?
Why not?
Look at the harm ther perverts have caused since Lawrence in 2003?
But as I specifically noted those statutes were often poorly enforced and no one went to jail ... their depravity though was at least somewhat held at bay in society.
Sounds like they have some Muslims on that court, as Muslims are not very ‘woke’ on this crap.
Well that might bring an end to hollyweird for sure.
...by killing everyone who had it.
No much of a loss at this point.
Meh. I’m a conservative. Which means I want three things. Smaller government, lower taxes, and more individual freedom. I want the government staying out of my life. If two dudes want to go do ... whatever... its none of my business. Just don’t ask me to endorse or it or support it.
You want the government telling you what you and your wife can or cannot do?
Did I mention men and wives?
No. I only mentioned homosexuality etc.
The way I understand it, this ends up being more of a protection for minors/victims. Am I wrong?
We’re talking about consensual acts between adults. Anything else, yes. Put them in jail for that.
Well if the government is going to go crawling into bedrooms, don’t be surprised if you find them in yours.
You are aware that immunity from government sanction is one of the Privileges and Immunities associated with actual marriage under outer rightful common law and therefor among the P&I covered by A4:S2:C1 or the other rights retained under the 9th Amendment?
So where (essentially local or state) government might lawfully have something to say about adultery what goes on in the marriage bed would be protected.
The sexual revolution whereby people reduced the pursuit of happiness to little more than who does what with their genitals was not either a new or a good idea anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.