Posted on 03/20/2009 12:11:23 PM PDT by pissant
Fathers knows best.
This judge is living up to his name and that is the nicest thing I can say about him.
The fact is that a child cannot have 2 fathers. Or, in La., 2 single parents. Either would be a fiction. For medical records, the children should have access to biological info.
Why isn’t the cirt from NY?
My question would be, if they live in San Diego now, but adopted the child from New York what the heck do they need a Louisiana birth certificate for?
Well, obviously, because Bush murdered all those gay minorities after Hurricane Katrina. Gotta be it. ;’)
I was born in 1968, adopted 10 months later. My birth certificate was changed. I’ve since found and met my birth mother. As far as I’m concerned, they didn’t falsify my certificate - they corrected it. They put the name of my REAL mom on it. Not the woman who gave birth to me. I understand what you’re saying, but just can’t get too worked up over it.
And as much as I abhor gay partners adopting, the fact that a judge is trying to force LA to go along with it is insane. It just goes to show that people were right when all this crap started. One state’s ratification of this junk is nothing more than a tool to force the others into submission.
“Did ya ever notice that gay men couples only adopt boys?”
Oh, come on. First, that’s not accurate. Gay men DO adopt girls. Second, you seem to be implying that they want the little boys so they can be pedophiles. Homosexuality and pedophilia are two SEPARATE things. Most (95%) pedophiles are straight men, they are not gay. When they have sex with another adult, it is an adult female. When they have sex with a child, the child may be girl, boy, or they may have a preference for both.
It’s really very simple: Gay men have sex with gay men, bisexual men, and seemingly curious men. Pedophiles have sex with children, whether girl or boy. Again, pedophiles are 95% heterosexual men, not gay. Their preference is children, not gender.
It’s been said that if you want to protect children, remove children from their own fathers (since a high percentage of pedophilia is incest).
In reality, I believe the answer to rape and pedophilia is to have men MORE involved in the raising of children (supervised, of course). The more men become involved in raising children, the more they will understand that children are human beings, and not objects, and specifically not sexual objects.
“like the catholic priests touching boys, it was a catholic issue but mostly a homo problem and yet the media never covered that part of the story.”
They have studied this. There are two reasons for the priest pedophile problem. 1 - these were priests from the older school, in which most of their lives they knew they would be going to seminary. They did not participate in the same coming of age experiences that their peers did, which led to their emotional/sexual maturity remaining fixated at a younger age level - ie, on a certain level, they felt as if a peer to the kids, which made them (actually an adult) a pedophile. 2- what is the best and closest, safest access a priest has to a kid? It’s to a boy in the choir, or working at the alter. Remember, these are sexist Catholic churches - girls may need not apply. All the fish in the tank were boys for the pedophiles to pick from.
Homosexuality and pedophilia are two separate things.
The research paper assignment was made, pure and simple, as an affront to her LDS religion.
If Americans really understood what is being hidden in plain sight here, there'd be a revolution tommorrow. As well, referring to Roman law as "civilian law" and then contrasting it with common law on the grounds of lack of judicial restraint by the legislature takes my breath away. I've never read facts presented with such a complete 180 degree twisting that they literally redefine black as white, but this does. It's an insidious masterpiece by a deceitful monster.
hmmmmm
Of course it was. It was specifically selected by some pervert instructor to bring into submission the most formidable adversaries he saw in the classroom.
Right you are.
Paid for by tuition I provided my daughter and taxes I provided the state.
[Article] Louisiana has 15 days to add the names of both fathers to the birth certificate of a boy born in Shreveport and adopted by a gay couple from out-of-state, a federal judge has ruled.
This is a birth certificate not an adoption certificate. The birth certificate needs to show the names of the two DNA contributors, for lack of a better term of art like "father" or "mother".
Demanding that two homosexuals be shown as fathers on the birth certificate is clearly a political stunt at Louisiana's expense, and the State of Louisiana is correctly resisting the travesty, which was no doubt forum-shopped by HRC-related gay lawyers to a liberal judge. (They do this all the time.)
The State needs to give the district judge's draconian time limit (a stunt pulled earlier, you'll recall, by Massachusetts's Supreme Judicial Court in the infamous "marriage" case up there -- clearly showing at least conscious parallelism, if not deliberate tactical imitation by the homocounsel) the brush, and move the matter all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
This is not a matter of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of Article IV of the Constitution; this is a matter of a State record's being changed to count political coup on a State that has not "reconciled" to the homoagenda.
Actually, I'd have to challenge that statement, knowing what I know about how Texas changed its adoption practices to conform to the homosexual political agenda, illegally.
In Texas, a gay cabal at the top of the Texas state government directed Children's Protective Services to start allowing homosexuals to adopt. "Somehow" word got around the homosexual fraction, and gays lined up to adopt, although state statute still forbade their doing so. A conservative state employee noticed the discrepancy and complained that the State's agency was breaking the law. The employee was promptly fired and all administrative recourse denied. That was how Texas law was "changed".
I rather imagine that this process has been repeated, as a template, in several other states. Hence my challenge to your statement.
Since the media won't cover these issues, it would be a major effort to find out whether these adoptions are in fact legal.
Really quickly. I know it is a BIRTH CERTIFICATE and not an adoption certificate. THEY ARE THE SAME THING for all intents and purposes! When a person is adopted their BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS AMENDED to show their legal guardians as their DNA PARENTS. They don’t, for instance, show an adoption certificate at the DMV when getting a license - they show and AMENDED BIRTH CERTIFICATE that even a government employee can’t tell has EVER been altered...
For instance, my birth certificate that lists my adoptive parents as birth mother and birth father has a registrar and notary’s date of 3 days after my birthdate which should signify the date that the information was received by the state and entered into the computer. However, my adoption wasn’t finalized till a full 3 months later, and up until THAT date the names on the certificate WERE DIFFERENT for those 6 months of time...
I think we’re on the same side in this. The alteration should never occur in the first place, and if it didn’t NY and this couple couldn’t use this law to override LA’s law (where the States’ Rights issue comes in).
My only argument is that the alteration of ANY birth certificate violates my CONSTIUTIONAL RIGHTS and the rights of all adoptees. It has nothing to do with WHO is allowed to adopt. It has to do with the CHILD’S rights to not be subject to having their information changed by the government is all...
There are a lot of things I had trouble explaining on this thread - that’s for sure. Plus, there are some things I’d like to express that in my anger people may have gotten the wrong idea about — for the record I LOVE my “adoptive” mother, and I have never, and will never see her as anything but my “real” mother. The reason I used that word is because when a teenager tries to come to grips with this issue that is one of the things that some will use to express how they feel - even if in their heart of hearts they don’t really mean it as a condemnation of their adoptive parents.
Now that I’ve taken time to relax a bit I may come back to clarify a few things, but I don’t have the time at this moment... If I’ve misunderstood you, or you still have questions, feel free to ask, please... I’ll try to answer as best I can ASAP. I don’t however want to go through how I felt the other day again — I still have too much work to do in regards to my emotions on this issue - so I may have to let further explanations pass for others to address...
That’s something definitely worth looking into. I have found in my past research on this issue that there are SO MANY unethical adoption agencies and brokers out there that you would be shocked to find out about. If there is money to be made they will find a way to make it legal, or find a way around the laws. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit to find out that those same people who passed the laws were involved in the adoption industry as far as — they MAKE money from it.
We know the lobbyists of course are, but it goes deeper than that in many cases. We found the same thing when fighting the records laws. Many of those fighting tooth and nail against changes were adoption agencies and employees who make more money off the secrecy, and in many cases are the same agencies who have been accused of unethical practices.
Keep in mind of course, that I DO RECOGNIZE that there are many WONDERFUL people in the adoption “industry”. And, again, I DO realize adoption is a GOOD THING in the vast majority of cases. I’m merely addressing the problems that need to be fixed in order to make it EVEN BETTER for all involved... :)
CORRECTION: I said my adoption was finalized 3 months after my adoption. That was wrong... It was at least 6 months + before it was finalized however, I don’t have the exact date as I’ve never seen my adoption records (obviously! LOL).
All I know is that my adoption was final before I was baptized and my baptism record shows that it occurred 9 months AFTER my birth.
I shouldn’t have chosen “pass those laws”, what I should’ve said is “changed” those laws in my post responding to the stuff about how gays came to adopt in the first place, because if what you’re saying is true obviously they subverted the laws, and it wasn’t about any legislative process.
I know people will question perhaps what I meant about making money when in some of these cases the children were adopted through the state and not privately. Well, the state STILL makes money off these children - they also receive federal funds based on the number of children that are in the system at any given time...
This is where problems with other aspects of Child Protective Service agencies comes in (like what was seen in Texas with that church group — Texas (or ANY state) stands to make a TON of money off children in this way... Another dirty little secret (even more money if they can get the kids diagnosed with a behavioral or mental problem even where none exist — many kids waiting to be adopted are on Ritalin — I would hazard to say probably the MAJORITY of them, and that’s just not statistically likely, really...).
As you can tell, there are so many issues and aspects to this. So many things I haven’t even touched on, and this case is but ONE example of probably ALL of these different things if we looked really closely...
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.