Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: r9etb
I suspect McLeod is being a first-class vindictive bitch, trying to get back at Clark through the little girl, who is an innocent pawn. To do that, she's using all means available, including Christian teaching, to poison the child against someone whom she no doubt loves as a parent. My sympathies are with the child. She should not be treated like a piece of meat. If that means keeping McLeod's from acting like a Pharisee, so be it.

ON what basis do you state this?? Other than a hostility towards Christians? Dr. Clark converted to Christianity, and SHE is the adoptive parent, not Mcleod. This is a direct attack on freedom of religion and the right of a parent to raise her child as she sees fit.

17 posted on 11/13/2003 8:22:19 AM PST by ibheath (Born-again and grateful to God for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: ibheath
This case is not even close. Totally ridiculous ruling. Mcleod has no blood or legal rights to this child. This is like an old boyfriend coming to take your child just because you lived with him for a long time. Absolutely asinine. People just don't have common sense anymore. This judge just wanted to maintain a homosexual influence over the child. Total idiot.
19 posted on 11/13/2003 8:26:53 AM PST by bluebunny (Formerly known as lemondropkid56)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson