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

Skip to comments.

Alabama's High Court Denies Custody to Lesbian Mom
AgapePress (Link to FULL Article) ^ | February 18, 2002 | By Fred Jackson and Jody Brown

Posted on 07/31/2002 3:49:59 PM PDT by davidosborne

(AgapePress) - The chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court says he supports a court decision that denied child custody rights to a woman because she is a lesbian.

Chief Justice Roy Morre -- in an opinion backing the unanimous decision -- said the homosexual conduct of a parent "creates a strong presumption of unfitness that alone is sufficient justification for denying that parent custody of his or her own children or prohibiting the adoption of the children of others." His opinion continued:

"In this case there is undisputed evidence that the mother of the minor children not only dated another woman, but lived with that woman, shared a bed with her, and had an intimate physical and sexual relationship with her.

...But Alabama expressly does not recognize same-sex marriages or domestic partnerships.

...Homosexual conduct is, and has been, considered abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature and of nature's God upon which this Nation and our laws are predicated. Such conduct violates both the criminal and civil laws of this State and is destructive to a basic building block of society -- the family. The law of Alabama is not only clear in its condemning such conduct, but the courts of this State have consistently held that exposing a child to such behavior has a destructive and seriously detrimental effect on the children. It is an inherent evil against which children must be protected."

(Excerpt) Read more at headlines.agapepress.org ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; US: Alabama; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: activistjudges; antiamericanjustice; benchlegislators; children; chrisitanjihad; courts; davidcosborne; deviancy; deviants; domesticpartners; families; family; familylaw; homos; homosexual; judicialactivism; judiciallawmaking; justice; law; lesbian; liberaljudges; marriage; perversion; perverts; rugmunching; samesex; sasu; sex
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 221-227 next last
To: Lowelljr
To me it was the opposite. I did not like to be slapped, but the belt was a deterent.

I guess every kid is different.
I remember one time my father punched me in the head so hard that I saw stars.....and I thought about how the comics showed stars around a character's head when they got hit, and it amazed me that it really happened.LOL.
But I hated that belt. It made me vengeful.

61 posted on 07/31/2002 7:02:30 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
Little over-sensitive about this subject, aren't we?

I was making an anonymous observation. No names. Said I could have been wrong. I got news for ya; we all make observations and form opinions based on those perceptions when we see people. It's normal. You don't have to be ashamed of it unless act on some impulse - like asking a pair of women if they are domestic partners. Right!!

I just related what my perception was. Get a grip. Got enough police on FR. We don't need Thought Police.

62 posted on 07/31/2002 7:10:55 PM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
Well, if you didn't ask if they were domestic partners, how did you make that giant leap to conclude that were domestic partners?

See, I like facts. I don't make assumptions without evidence. If you had seen them holding hands or necking, it'd be easier to draw that conclusion. Without any factual basis or evidence, you made an assumption. Fact is, you simply don't know and you aren't able or willing to defend the assumption you made.

No need to get defensive about it, you know. I was just trying to ask a few questions about how you were able to draw the conclusion that these females were domestic partners. It looks like you saw two females together and your gaydar went off, huh?

63 posted on 07/31/2002 7:18:19 PM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
Now if I were to say that I thought you were gay or homophobic or a thief or an idiot, I would probably need to defend my statement. But, since I recounted an observation I made about two people who don't know me, I don't know them, and you don't know them, I don't think I have to explain anything. It's called intuition, fact person, intuition.
64 posted on 07/31/2002 7:31:21 PM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne; EdReform
* PERVERSION PING *

65 posted on 07/31/2002 7:36:26 PM PDT by ppaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne
WoW!

They (the court) should expect a large, loud number of people standing outside the courthouse screaming at the top of their voices, and calling them bigots and homophobes very soon.

They will be mostly dressed in pink chiffon.
66 posted on 07/31/2002 7:40:00 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: one_particular_harbour; Nick Danger; IronJack; right2parent; Lorianne
...but when a man is a better parent, I get the children for him. Every time.

Well, good for you. I do respect that. And I do wish that those whose primary purpose is to complain about money would jump ship...the primary issue has to be about the equal right to parent for all involved biological progenitors who have not been proven unfit.

67 posted on 07/31/2002 7:49:13 PM PDT by J.R.R. Tolkien
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ppaul
Is there such a thing???
68 posted on 07/31/2002 7:50:16 PM PDT by J.R.R. Tolkien
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: J.R.R. Tolkien; one_particular_harbour
"Ever stopping wagging your head and chanting, "Most divorcing men are scumbags..."? "

ROTFLMAO!

Hey JRR, are you new or just way out there...?OPH is the resident champion for divorcing males!

LOL!OPH, are you having fun yet?LOL!

69 posted on 07/31/2002 8:13:33 PM PDT by sarasmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sarasmom; one_particular_harbour
OPH is the resident champion for divorcing males!

A point of view.

70 posted on 07/31/2002 8:27:56 PM PDT by J.R.R. Tolkien
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: sarasmom
And check out #67, s'il vous plait...
71 posted on 07/31/2002 8:28:42 PM PDT by J.R.R. Tolkien
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne
BTTT!!!!!!
72 posted on 08/01/2002 3:44:50 AM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne
Why the repost of a six month old article. Did something change the decision? Was it overturned or something?
73 posted on 08/01/2002 3:48:27 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne
I take back every negative statement that I might have said about Alabama.
74 posted on 08/01/2002 3:57:06 AM PDT by Movemout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: J.R.R. Tolkien
...the primary issue has to be about the equal right to parent...

Correction, it's about equal protection. A father still has a superior right to the guardianship of his children, absent circumstances that would allow the state to interfere.

I understand it is your position that this right has somehow been stripped away, but the law has not changed. The power of the state under the parens patriae doctrine is often invoked unlawfully. That is the issue, and it requires the parent who walks out on a marriage without cause to walk away from the children as well. This is a natural incentive to work out differences to keep the family together. The so called "no-fault" divorce doesn't, by itself, give the court a justiciable issue regarding custody of the children. The standard of review is not the same.

75 posted on 08/01/2002 4:50:47 AM PDT by right2parent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: All
from the case:

No matter how much society appears to change, the law on this subject has remained steadfast from the earliest history of the law, and that law is and must be our law today. The commonlaw designates homosexuality as an inherent evil, and if a person openly engages in such a practice, that fact alone would render him or her an unfit parent.

And:

Homosexual conduct by its very nature is immoral, and its consequences are inherently destructive to the natural order of society. Any person who engages in such conduct is presumptively unfit to have custody of minor children under the established laws of this State.

Call me homophobic, but I agree.

76 posted on 08/01/2002 5:24:13 AM PDT by right2parent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: *SASU; JMJ333; Tourist Guy; EODGUY; abandon; Khepera; Dakmar; RichInOC; RebelDawg; Fiddlstix; ...
Woo Hoo!
77 posted on 08/01/2002 5:28:06 AM PDT by Khepera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner; shuckmaster; sheltonmac; 4ConservativeJustices; Constitution Day
God bless the great state of Alabama and her state's Supreme Court!!
78 posted on 08/01/2002 5:47:57 AM PDT by billbears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
My my leadpenny *might* have witnessed an actual sighting of two "domestic partners." Two women. Together. Kinda had that...you know..."look."
Two women standing there. Side by side. At the commisary no less. A couple of females in close proximity to one another.
One even wore an army uniform! Gasp! Maybe they even touched one another when he turned the corner.
M A Y B E they might even know the lesbian mother who had her own children ripped from her just because she was one of those women who likes other women.

My. Whatever shall we do? There are lesbians amongst us.

Uh oh. Better make sure they don't have any children!

79 posted on 08/01/2002 6:20:21 AM PDT by punkit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: punkit
My. Whatever shall we do? There are lesbians amongst us.

Uh oh. Better make sure they don't have any children!

As you can see from this decision, Alabama frowns on the premise of lesbians with children.

80 posted on 08/01/2002 6:39:53 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 221-227 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