At this point, it seems more of a bill to prevent [...] damned gay people from having "special" rights as opposed to protecting the children. I am so tired of other people judging others...seems like there are a lot of people throwing stones who shouldn't be... -TheSuaveOne
I would have to examine closely the details of the amendment to make a judgement, but based on this piece, I tend to think the amendment goes too far, and it sounds unlikely to be in Texas' adoption reform law when it finally passes anyway.
That said, I am prepared to give the legislators the benefit of the doubt that their hearts are in the right place and they wish to amplify the probability that children will be adopted into traditional families, a goal I certainly agree with.
With regard to judging others, I think it is ridiculous to talk about not judging others. Of course we do, everyone does. We must judge people on their behavior. I would agree with unfounded judgements based on the color of someone's skin, for example. But there is logic to preferring married man-woman couples.
So in other words it shouldn't be done if homosexuals are going to object?
This is not governance it is demagoguery.
Demagoguery consists primarily in making unfounded accusations against the motivations of one's opponents, instead of debating the actual issues. Now guess who on this thread is doing that?
"I think from this Texas legislation instead of trying to solve a problem instead seeks to create a wedge issue and gay bait in order to get votes. This is not governance it is demagoguery."
Would it have been gay-baiting if 10 years ago we in the Peoples Republic of assachusetts had passed an amendment defining marriage?
I think that given the current environment and the agenda of the sodomite lobby that this is simple common sense fortifying of a position.