You seem pretty willing to ignore the situtaion that the mother brought upon her children. She, and she alone is responsible for what happens to her children. This is why it's called 'Parenting'.
Were the social workers, judges, legislators all supposed to tie mommy up, and imprison her night and day so she wouldn't take drugs? Why is law enforcement suddenly responsible for decisions an individual makes? Do you want law enforment taking over your life - just to 'make sure' you don't make any 'bad decisions' too?
Actions have consequences. The law is not concernced about 'feelings'; they are concerned about the application of 'law'. Being a gay couple (and we will both agree that these are NOT ideal parents), does not preclude them from adoption. This 'couple' wants the children, and is willing to adopt, raise and pay for them. Given the choices available, this was the best that the judge (who knows ALL the factors that this pathetic journalist managed to miss) had to work with.
You weren't there, neither was I. This article is woefully inept; is this gay couple just a random group from off the street? Are there no waiting lists for a man and wife who want to adopt? Are there mental, or physical imparements that the children bring with them? Is there a history of mental abuse in the house? Simply stated - we don't know; but the judge does.
Biological parents need not apply as foster parents as the article describes the homosexuals as so applying.
Funny, no mention of the bio-Dad is made at all. Wonder why that would be?
Perhaps because it is irrelevant to the issues being discussed.
You seem pretty willing to ignore the situtaion that the mother brought upon her children.
The addiction from which she is recovering is certainly serious, but the article describes her as working to overcome her past transgressions.
She, and she alone is responsible for what happens to her children. This is why it's called 'Parenting'.
Ha!!! If that were true then her children wouldn't be placed with overt sexual deviants and there would be no article.
Were the social workers, judges, legislators all supposed to tie mommy up, and imprison her night and day so she wouldn't take drugs?
That's called prison, but apparently the state doesn't believe that is warranted.
Why is law enforcement suddenly responsible for decisions an individual makes? Do you want law enforment taking over your life - just to 'make sure' you don't make any 'bad decisions' too?
I certainly expect the state to incarcerate me or anyone else who engages in any felonious activity, but at the same time I do not expect the state to take children away from loving families and place them with open perverts.
Actions have consequences. The law is not concernced about 'feelings'; they are concerned about the application of 'law'.
Sorry, there is no law in either our or their country that mandates the removal of children from loving homes and placing them with want-to-be child molesters because their mother once had an addiction.
Being a gay couple (and we will both agree that these are NOT ideal parents), does not preclude them from adoption.
Being sexual deviants should certainly disqualify them for that role, and their society has failed if a child like this can be forced into that situation against the child's, parent's, and grandparents' expressed wishes.
This 'couple' wants the children, and is willing to adopt, raise and pay for them.
"Pay for them"?
Given the choices available, this was the best that the judge (who knows ALL the factors that this pathetic journalist managed to miss) had to work with.
Again, this is completely false. You are clearly projecting yourself into this situation, maybe this is too personal for you. This child has loving and fairly young grandparents without any major issues as well as a recovering mother who loves her child. This is the worst option available but apparently suits the perversity of their legal system and those who support this kind of deviancy.
You weren't there, neither was I.
This is a fallacious red herring, although you do seem strangely sympathetic to the issues in contention.
This article is woefully inept;
The article describes the situation in some depth and nothing portrayed could possible justify this abomination.
is this gay couple just a random group from off the street? Are there no waiting lists for a man and wife who want to adopt? Are there mental, or physical imparements that the children bring with them? Is there a history of mental abuse in the house? Simply stated - we don't know; but the judge does.
All of these considerations are completely irrelevant since none of them could justify the removal of a child from a loving home over to a den of perverts.