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

Skip to comments.

Same-Sex Marriage Judge Finds That a Child Has Neither a Need Nor a Right to a Mother
CNSNews ^ | August 9, 2010 | Terence P. Jeffrey

Posted on 08/09/2010 9:44:11 AM PDT by jazusamo

(CNSNews.com) - U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who ruled last week that a voter-approved amendment to California’s constitution that limited marriage to the union of one man and one woman violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, based that ruling in part on his finding that a child does not need and has no right to a mother.
 
Nor, he found, does a child have a need or a right to a father.
 
“Children do not need to be raised by a male parent and a female parent to be well-adjusted, and having both a male and a female parent does not increase the likelihood that a child will be well-adjusted,” the judge wrote in finding of fact No. 71 in his opinion.
 
“The gender of a child’s parent is not a factor in a child’s adjustment,” the judge stated in finding of fact No. 70. “The sexual orientation of an individual does not determine whether that individual can be a good parent. Children raised by gay or lesbian parents are as likely as children raised by heterosexual parents to be healthy, successful and well-adjusted. The research supporting this conclusion is accepted beyond serious debate in the field of developmental psychology.”
 
Despite Walker’s claim that this “fact” is “beyond serious debate,” one of the sources he cited for it was a brochure published by the American Psychological Association (APA) that was entered into evidence in the case, which specifically stated twice: “Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.” Walker did not quote this part of the brochure in his opinion.
 
However, Walker did quote this same brochure as saying: “[S]ocial science has shown that the concerns often raised about children of lesbian and gay parents--concerns that are generally grounded in prejudice against and stereotypes about gay people--are unfounded.”
 
This quote comes from a side-bar box on page five of the six-page APA brochure. The box purports to answer the “most common questions” about homosexual parents, posing four such questions and giving the APA’s answer to them.
 
The first is: “Do children of lesbian and gay parents have more problems with sexual identity than do children of heterosexual parents?”
 
The full answer in the brochure is as follows: “For instance, do these children develop problems in gender identity and/or in gender role behavior? The answer from research is clear: sexual and gender identities (including gender identity, gender-role behavior, and sexual orientation) develop in much the same way among children of lesbian mothers as they do among children of heterosexual parents. Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.”
 
The brochure does not explain why the APA concludes that the “answer from research is clear” that children of homosexual parents do not have more problems with sexual identity than children with mothers and fathers when in fact, as the brochure itself states, “[f]ew studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.” Nor does Judge Walker explain how his finding of “fact” that the gender of parents does not matter to children is “beyond serious debate” when in fact his own source stipulates that “[f]ew studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.”
 
The second question answered in the brochure is:  “Do children raised by lesbian or gay parents have problems in personal development in areas other than sexual identity?”
 
The entirety of the answer provided in the brochure states:  “For example, are the children of lesbian or gay parents more vulnerable to mental breakdown, do they have more behavior problems, or are they less psychologically healthy than other children? Again, studies of personality, self-concept, and behavior problems show few differences between children of lesbian mothers and children of heterosexual parents. Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.”

Judge Walker does not quote this part of the brochure in his finding that the gender of parents does not matter, nor does he explain how his finding can be “beyond serious debate” when in fact the very evidence he uses to establish this point states that “[f]ew studies are available regarding gay fathers.”
 
To further his case that the well-being of children is no bar to declaring same-sex marriage a right protected  by the Fourteenth Amendment, Judge Walker makes a finding of fact that the state of California already legally recognizes that the gender of parents is irrelevant.  As Walker reports it, California laws goes so far as to “encourage” homosexuals to acquire children whether through adoption, foster care, or artificially conceiving a child and, presumably, in the case of a male-male couple, securing a female to gestate the child until the male-male couple can take custody of it.
 
“California law permits and encourages gays and lesbians to become parents through adoption, foster parenting or assistive reproductive technology,” writes Walker in finding of fact No. 49. “Approximately 18 percent of same-sex couples in California are raising children.”
 
To support this finding, Walker notes that California’s attorney general, who is Jerry Brown, “admits that the laws of California recognize no relationship between a person’s sexual orientation and his or her ability to raise children.”
 
“Attorney General admits,” writes Walker, “that California law protects the right of gay men and lesbians in same-sex relationships to be foster parents and to adopt children by forbidding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”

Walker’s ruling declaring same-sex marriage protected under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, if upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, would have ramifications far beyond California, requiring states across the union to recognize same-sex marriages while wiping out any legal protection a child might have from being handed over by state governments to same-sex couples either through adoption or foster parenthood.
 
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as applied by Walker would require states to grant a marriage license to same-sex couples and would-be parents, while implicitly annihilating the notion that each American child has an equal right to a mother and a father.
 
A child put out for adoption or foster parenting by the state, or a child conceived through technological means and gestated in a hired womb, would have no right not to be assigned to a homosexual couple who would act as his or her father and father or mother and mother.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; judgewalker; leftwingextremism; prop8; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-49 next last
Walker cherry picks facts to write a bogus decision.
1 posted on 08/09/2010 9:44:14 AM PDT by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Walker:
2 posted on 08/09/2010 9:45:39 AM PDT by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

The judge discounts the natural bond between parents and child. IT IS REAL!!! In the end, it is “All About Family”.


3 posted on 08/09/2010 9:46:45 AM PDT by Sacajaweau (What)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Amazing that for all the work the idiot Judge took to determine his desired perverted and socially destructive outcome by means of ‘findings of fact’ that not one one-hundredth of that effort as been put into finding, in a court, under oath and cross examination and the ability to have opposing experts heard, whether Obama is eligible to hold his office.


4 posted on 08/09/2010 9:48:25 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Absolute bullsh!t.

A child needs both a mother and a father.

We are lost as a species.

It’s just a short matter of time at this point.


5 posted on 08/09/2010 9:48:25 AM PDT by chris37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

He probably also believes that single parent Moms are equal in all ways to two parent families.


6 posted on 08/09/2010 9:49:36 AM PDT by brytlea (Jesus loves me, this I know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

This judge, and I use the term judge loosely, is an agenda driven idiot. You’re correct, the family bond is real!


7 posted on 08/09/2010 9:51:24 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo; Maelstorm
"Children raised by gay or lesbian parents are as likely as children raised by heterosexual parents to be healthy, successful and well-adjusted. The research supporting this conclusion is accepted beyond serious debate in the field of developmental psychology.”

LOL!! No doubt this guy also believes in global warming.

8 posted on 08/09/2010 9:51:33 AM PDT by Albion Wilde (" 'Bush did it' is not a foreign policy." -- Victor Davis Hanson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
But unprovable, just like the Bible. The judge can just get a few hundred perverted atheist psychologists to deny it.

In basing their decisions on humanism, they have picked a religion.

The truth is, in America, the government is meant to be impartial in matters of faith. But in reality, they have picked humanism, as if it were "no religion". But of course it is a religion.

http://www.famlisearch.com/?q=church+of+humanism
9 posted on 08/09/2010 9:52:03 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I wonder who raised him?


10 posted on 08/09/2010 9:53:11 AM PDT by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

“Children do not need to be raised by a male parent and a female parent to be well-adjusted, and having both a male and a female parent does not increase the likelihood that a child will be well-adjusted,”

Complete and utter BS.


11 posted on 08/09/2010 9:54:27 AM PDT by KansasGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis
There is a remedy for this kind of conduct.The Impeachment Process

The impeachment process is a two-step procedure. The House of Representatives must first pass by a simple majority articles of impeachment, which constitute the formal allegation or allegations. Upon their passage, the defendant has been "impeached". Next, the Senate tries the accused. In the case of the impeachment of a president, the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the proceedings. For the impeachment of any other official, the Constitution is silent on who shall preside, suggesting that this role falls to the Senate's usual presiding officer. This may include the impeachment of the vice president, although legal theories suggest that allowing a defendant to be the judge in his own case would be a blatant conflict of interest. If the Vice President did not preside over an impeachment (of anyone besides the President), the duties would fall to the President pro tempore of the Senate.

To convict the accused, a two-thirds majority of the senators present is required. Conviction automatically removes the defendant from office. Following conviction, the Senate may vote to further punish the individual by barring him from holding future federal office, elected or appointed. Conviction by the Senate does not bar criminal prosecution. Even after an accused has left office, it is possible to impeach to disqualify the person from future office or from certain emoluments of his prior office (such as a pension). If there is no charge for which a two-thirds majority of the senators present vote "guilty", the defendant is acquitted and no punishment is imposed.

12 posted on 08/09/2010 9:57:06 AM PDT by An Old Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
The irony is that females have been carrying the homosexual agenda on the backs of the feminist movement. Strange bedfellows, indeed, in the end. Gender is something people are. Homosexuality is a behavior, and a bad behavior at that.

Of course, we can only expect this kind of inept understanding of our republic, from most liberals. They despise America and the ballot and personal responsibility, yet they celebrate tyranny and authoritarianism. Why? Because they are elitists.

The irony is that 99.9% of these left liberals are shooting even themselves in the foot, but are far too ignorant to even see it coming, even though it is their own finger on the trigger.

They are cutting off their noses to spite their face. But, it will always be someone else’s fault when they look in the mirror and see the ugliness.

13 posted on 08/09/2010 9:58:08 AM PDT by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

Agree with you, but our constitution is based on Natural Law Theory. This judge violates the entire theory of Natural Law which is based on logic, reason and science.

He should be disbarred immediately because he is so ideological driven he cannot see reason and logic which all our laws are based on, and our laws have to be based on reason and logic to be just.


14 posted on 08/09/2010 9:58:55 AM PDT by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

The judge will justify his decision based on the fact that the Nazis did the same thing — breed as many Arian-pure children for future SS troopers and separate them from their mothers at birth. Parental influence was not desirable.

Children should be educated by the State and not by the parents in this brave new world. What’s the matter with U?


15 posted on 08/09/2010 9:59:48 AM PDT by 353FMG (ISLAM - America's inevitable road to destruction.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Didn’t I see where this Walker was gay? And he pretends to know how to create a “well adjusted child”? He’s not a psychologist, he just plays one in the courtroom.


16 posted on 08/09/2010 10:00:11 AM PDT by FrankR (It doesn't matter what they call us, only what we answer to....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrankR

Yes, I read that he’s gay and though supposedly not an activist he’s never tried to conceal it.


17 posted on 08/09/2010 10:07:18 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FrankR

18 posted on 08/09/2010 10:09:46 AM PDT by Yet_Again
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

>> “having both a male and a female parent does not increase the likelihood that a child will be well-adjusted”

Especially when the male is a closet homosexual... /s

It is not enough to describe this guy as an idiot.


19 posted on 08/09/2010 10:10:32 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Your Hope has been redistributed. Here's your Change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

This is what it’s all about. Getting access to children.


20 posted on 08/09/2010 10:11:54 AM PDT by GourmetDan (Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-49 next last

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.

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