'Father' To Marry 'Son' In Bucks County (PA) -- With Court's Blessing

[Silhouette]

And each person is responsible for their own actions. These two men did nothing new. There have been "adoptions" to help same-sex couples gain rights since the early 1900's (at least). Adoptions have been nullified for centuries. But now you wish to blame every future incident involving children on two men who did the adoption when they were in their 50s?? That is ridiculous.
But this is typical. Josh Duggar made a career out of preaching that gay marriage was a danger to children. All while he was abusing little girls.

The two issues have nothing whatsoever to do with one another. Are you saying your position is that if someone promoting normal marriage has issues on the down low with diddling children, the issue of normal marriage itself is somehow tied to diddling children? You're saying "because Josh Duggar diddled kids, society should be more open to institutionalizing the lack of either a father or mother to children in marriage"

What I see there is that in either scenario, you aren't truly concerned about kids; but rather are using the Duggar issue expediently to forward another anti-child agenda. Which is shameful, of course. Two wrongs do not make a right.

We do know how precedents work....You don't....All you see is you anti-gay agenda....Are these legal ploys?...Yes....Are these legal ploys any different than what heterosexuals have done?...No.

Syriusly, you know full well that if one parent can divorce their adopted child in order to marry them legally, that ANY parent can thereafter do so. You know the law is applied equally to anybody under the same question.

That Woody Allen did the same thing with his daughter, or nearly the same thing (shacking up with her) is disgusting. See the difference? I find it disgusting. You are promoting it. Witness the difference between how my camp thinks and how your camp thinks. One of us is concerned about preserving the sanctity of the intent of adoption laws for the good of children. One of us is all about manipulating it to leave the option of marrying your legal child wide open for anyone to take advantage of..

And your continuing theme of "two wrongs make a right" is disturbing...especially where children are at risk.

 

[WinterBorn]

Not buying it Syriusly..

Of course you are not buying it. She shows multiple cases in which straight people do the same thing, and you are "Not buying it...".

You don't have to buy it. The facts are the facts.

 

[ChrisL]

It's beginning: the first step on the road to legalized incest:

Father To Marry Son In Bucks County -- With Court s Blessing Doylestown-Buckingham-New Britain PA Patch​

This week, Bill Novak and Norman MacArthur will go from being father and son to a married couple.

Before you jump to conclusions, consider this: Novak and MacArthur are not father and son biologically. Rather, their relationship through adoption was solely a technicality to enable the rights they desperately wanted but were not legally able to attain as a married couple.

The same-sex couple, who have been together for more than 50 years, registered as domestic partners in New York City in 1994. After moving to Bucks County, they learned that Pennsylvania law does not recognize domestic partners and prohibits same sex marriages.​

“The time came about to do estate planning,” MacArthur said. “We were told at that time ‘hell would freeze over before Pennsylvania approves same sex marriage’.”

They were advised by a lawyer that the only avenue to becoming legally related was through adoption. “It was the only legal method we could use in Pennsylvania to give underpinning to our relationship,” MacArthur said.​

Nice misleading thread title there.

 

[bripat9643]

They must, I've drilled this down asking the same question at each stop:

What is the compelling state interest to deny?

This is the ultimate "throwing out the baby with the bath water scenerio" isn't it?

That's why comprehensive justice is so important in very weighty questions such as these..

Adopted children and natural children are indistinguishable legally as to the parent/child relationship. Therefore, if an adoptive father marries his adopted son, it is legally precisely the same as a natural father marrying his natural son. That is because what a parent means to a child is so very vital, that there cannot be "philosophical exceptions"

Children's welfare and trust in their parents is nothing to "drill down segmentally" at the expense of children's welfare and trust in their parents..

All the hoopla ignores the basic facts of this case.

"So, a week ago, the father and son’s Petition to Vacate Adoption Decree was approved, and the pair simply became two single men now allowed to marry."
from: Father to marry son with court s blessing

If the courts allow a 50 year old man to "adopt" another 50 year old man, you should wonder about the courts.

Or wonder about a system where people have to go through that nonsense.

Exactly! These fools create a system that won't allow a same-sex couple the basic benefits that other couples enjoy, then go nuts over the way they get around it.

Gay "couples" are no more entitled to those benefits than a guy rooming with his brother.

 

[Silhouette]

Nice misleading thread title there.

Was or was not one man the adopted son of the other?

Do or do not the laws regarding adoption have the intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship?

Is or is not the practice of marrying your own child an abomination?

Can or can not other people use this precedent to divorce their own children and then be free to legally marry them?

 

[ChrisL]

Nice misleading thread title there.

Was or was not one man the adopted son of the other?

Do or do not the laws regarding adoption have the intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship?

Is or is not the practice of marrying your own child an abomination?

Can or can not other people use this precedent to divorce their own children and then be free to legally marry them?

One was the "adopted son" because they are old men and that was the only way they could have appropriate arrangements in case something should happen to one of them. Why are people so cruel?

 

[ChrisL]

They must, I've drilled this down asking the same question at each stop:

What is the compelling state interest to deny?

This is the ultimate "throwing out the baby with the bath water scenerio" isn't it?

That's why comprehensive justice is so important in very weighty questions such as these..

Adopted children and natural children are indistinguishable legally as to the parent/child relationship. Therefore, if an adoptive father marries his adopted son, it is legally precisely the same as a natural father marrying his natural son. That is because what a parent means to a child is so very vital, that there cannot be "philosophical exceptions"

Children's welfare and trust in their parents is nothing to "drill down segmentally" at the expense of children's welfare and trust in their parents..

All the hoopla ignores the basic facts of this case.

"So, a week ago, the father and son’s Petition to Vacate Adoption Decree was approved, and the pair simply became two single men now allowed to marry."
from: Father to marry son with court s blessing

If the courts allow a 50 year old man to "adopt" another 50 year old man, you should wonder about the courts.

Or wonder about a system where people have to go through that nonsense.

Exactly! These fools create a system that won't allow a same-sex couple the basic benefits that other couples enjoy, then go nuts over the way they get around it.

Gay "couples" are no more entitled to those benefits than a guy rooming with his brother.

Well, if they were allowed to be married, then this wouldn't be an issue.

 

[ChrisL]

Nice misleading thread title there.

Was or was not one man the adopted son of the other?

Do or do not the laws regarding adoption have the intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship?

Is or is not the practice of marrying your own child an abomination?

Can or can not other people use this precedent to divorce their own children and then be free to legally marry them?

You are a ridiculous human being, just like many conservatives. Shame on you. You people are the reason for these things happening. It's all your fault.

 

[bripat9643]

Nice misleading thread title there.

Was or was not one man the adopted son of the other?

Do or do not the laws regarding adoption have the intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship?

Is or is not the practice of marrying your own child an abomination?

Can or can not other people use this precedent to divorce their own children and then be free to legally marry them?

One was the "adopted son" because they are old men and that was the only way they could have appropriate arrangements in case something should happen to one of them. Why are people so cruel?

It doesn't matter why they did it. According to the law, it only matters that they did it. Why are people so cruel, like when those two queers sued a baker who refused to bake them a cake for $135,000 and put them out of business?

When vicious queers start worrying about how their agenda harms others perhaps we'll start giving a damn about their feelings.

 

[ChrisL]

Nice misleading thread title there.

Was or was not one man the adopted son of the other?

Do or do not the laws regarding adoption have the intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship?

Is or is not the practice of marrying your own child an abomination?

Can or can not other people use this precedent to divorce their own children and then be free to legally marry them?

One was the "adopted son" because they are old men and that was the only way they could have appropriate arrangements in case something should happen to one of them. Why are people so cruel?

It doesn't matter why they did it. According to the law, it only matters that they did it. Why are people so cruel, like when those two queers sued a baker who refused to bake them a cake for $135,000 and put them out of business?

When vicious queers start worrying about how their agenda harms others perhaps we'll start giving a damn about their feelings.

Leave them alone and let them marry one another if they so wish. It doesn't harm you in any way, and if you think it does, then you are delusional.

 

[bripat9643]

Nice misleading thread title there.

Was or was not one man the adopted son of the other?

Do or do not the laws regarding adoption have the intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship?

Is or is not the practice of marrying your own child an abomination?

Can or can not other people use this precedent to divorce their own children and then be free to legally marry them?

One was the "adopted son" because they are old men and that was the only way they could have appropriate arrangements in case something should happen to one of them. Why are people so cruel?

It doesn't matter why they did it. According to the law, it only matters that they did it. Why are people so cruel, like when those two queers sued a baker who refused to bake them a cake for $135,000 and put them out of business?

When vicious queers start worrying about how their agenda harms others perhaps we'll start giving a damn about their feelings.

Leave them alone and let them marry one another if they so wish. It doesn't harm you in any way, and if you think it does, then you are delusional.

If it doesn't harm anyone, then how come a baker had t opay $135,000 fine?

Queers and their apologists are so full of shit it defies comprehension.

 

[ChrisL]

Nice misleading thread title there.

Was or was not one man the adopted son of the other?

Do or do not the laws regarding adoption have the intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship?

Is or is not the practice of marrying your own child an abomination?

Can or can not other people use this precedent to divorce their own children and then be free to legally marry them?

One was the "adopted son" because they are old men and that was the only way they could have appropriate arrangements in case something should happen to one of them. Why are people so cruel?

It doesn't matter why they did it. According to the law, it only matters that they did it. Why are people so cruel, like when those two queers sued a baker who refused to bake them a cake for $135,000 and put them out of business?

When vicious queers start worrying about how their agenda harms others perhaps we'll start giving a damn about their feelings.

Leave them alone and let them marry one another if they so wish. It doesn't harm you in any way, and if you think it does, then you are delusional.

If it doesn't harm anyone, then how come a baker had t opay $135,000 fine?

Queers and their apologists are so full of shit it defies comprehension.

Maybe if people would leave them be and let them live their lives without trying to bully them, those things wouldn't happen anymore, and all of this stuff would fade away eventually. YOU are the people who keep this stupid little "war" going. Just leave them be and let them live their lives the way THEY choose.

 

[Silhouette]

Maybe if people would leave them be and let them live their lives without trying to bully them, those things wouldn't happen anymore, and all of this stuff would fade away eventually. YOU are the people who keep this stupid little "war" going. Just leave them be and let them live their lives the way THEY choose.

Except that what they're doing is harming children by defiling the laws of adoption and their intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship. If they are allowed to dissolve that relationship for "whatever reason" and then marry each other, what exactly would prevent anyone else from doing that?

 

[bripat9643]

Was or was not one man the adopted son of the other?

Do or do not the laws regarding adoption have the intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship?

Is or is not the practice of marrying your own child an abomination?

Can or can not other people use this precedent to divorce their own children and then be free to legally marry them?

One was the "adopted son" because they are old men and that was the only way they could have appropriate arrangements in case something should happen to one of them. Why are people so cruel?

It doesn't matter why they did it. According to the law, it only matters that they did it. Why are people so cruel, like when those two queers sued a baker who refused to bake them a cake for $135,000 and put them out of business?

When vicious queers start worrying about how their agenda harms others perhaps we'll start giving a damn about their feelings.

Leave them alone and let them marry one another if they so wish. It doesn't harm you in any way, and if you think it does, then you are delusional.

If it doesn't harm anyone, then how come a baker had t opay $135,000 fine?

Queers and their apologists are so full of shit it defies comprehension.

Maybe if people would leave them be and let them live their lives without trying to bully them, those things wouldn't happen anymore, and all of this stuff would fade away eventually. YOU are the people who keep this stupid little "war" going. Just leave them be and let them live their lives the way THEY choose.

They don't want people to "leave them be." They want to ram their lifestyle down everyone's throat.

Fuck the queers. I've had my fill of their shit.

 

[ChrisL]

One was the "adopted son" because they are old men and that was the only way they could have appropriate arrangements in case something should happen to one of them. Why are people so cruel?

It doesn't matter why they did it. According to the law, it only matters that they did it. Why are people so cruel, like when those two queers sued a baker who refused to bake them a cake for $135,000 and put them out of business?

When vicious queers start worrying about how their agenda harms others perhaps we'll start giving a damn about their feelings.

Leave them alone and let them marry one another if they so wish. It doesn't harm you in any way, and if you think it does, then you are delusional.

If it doesn't harm anyone, then how come a baker had t opay $135,000 fine?

Queers and their apologists are so full of shit it defies comprehension.

Maybe if people would leave them be and let them live their lives without trying to bully them, those things wouldn't happen anymore, and all of this stuff would fade away eventually. YOU are the people who keep this stupid little "war" going. Just leave them be and let them live their lives the way THEY choose.

They don't want people to "leave them be." They want to ram their lifestyle down everyone's throat.

Fuck the queers. I've had my fill of their shit.

Lol. Lots of inuendos there. Anyway, I disagree. They want to be treated equally is all. Of course, some of the things they do I also disagree with, but I think that if people would just let them be married and treat them as they would any other person, then there wouldn't be so many problems. After all, this is supposed to be a free country, but we have religious fanatics who believe homosexuality is "sinful" and "contagious" or something. The fact is, if you are not gay and you are attracted to the opposite sex, nobody is going to be able to "talk you into" being gay.

 

[Silhouette]

Lol. Lots of inuendos there. Anyway, I disagree. They want to be treated equally is all. Of course, some of the things they do I also disagree with, but I think that if people would just let them be married and treat them as they would any other person, then there wouldn't be so many problems. After all, this is supposed to be a free country, but we have religious fanatics who believe homosexuality is "sinful" and "contagious" or something. The fact is, if you are not gay and you are attracted to the opposite sex, nobody is going to be able to "talk you into" being gay.

Depends what age you are...

Tell that to my friend who was trained-up gay by being molested as a boy, not getting reparative help, who went on to get HIV from his unresolved "sexual orientation" (gay promiscuity) while still falling in love with women [his natural orientation]. The ensuing internal conflict made him insane, even more promiscuous and with a vendetta: to passive aggressively kill as many of "those that did that do him" as he could. So he went around having unprotected HIV sex with hundreds or possibly thousands of other "gay" men.

And speaking of the majority of gay men, here's a little something you might want to read aobut the syndrome not being 'contagious'...

ATLANTA [2005 Clinical Psychiatry News] -- Substance abuse is pervasive among gay men and is so intricately intertwined with epidemics of depression, partner abuse, and childhood sexual abuse that adequately addressing one issue requires attention to the others as well, said Ronald Stall, Ph.D., chief of prevention research for the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta...

 

[ChrisL]

Maybe if people would leave them be and let them live their lives without trying to bully them, those things wouldn't happen anymore, and all of this stuff would fade away eventually. YOU are the people who keep this stupid little "war" going. Just leave them be and let them live their lives the way THEY choose.

Except that what they're doing is harming children by defiling the laws of adoption and their intent of establishing a permanent parent/child relationship. If they are allowed to dissolve that relationship for "whatever reason" and then marry each other, what exactly would prevent anyone else from doing that?

I agree that adults should not be able to "adopt" other adults as sons or daughters. However, that is the only way they could have the legal rights that married couples have, considering that they are both elderly and one of them could "go" at any time. Do you understand that? They want to have the right to make medical decisions, etc., for one another should something happen . . . because they love and care about each other.

 

[ChrisL]

Lol. Lots of inuendos there. Anyway, I disagree. They want to be treated equally is all. Of course, some of the things they do I also disagree with, but I think that if people would just let them be married and treat them as they would any other person, then there wouldn't be so many problems. After all, this is supposed to be a free country, but we have religious fanatics who believe homosexuality is "sinful" and "contagious" or something. The fact is, if you are not gay and you are attracted to the opposite sex, nobody is going to be able to "talk you into" being gay.

Depends what age you are...

Tell that to my friend who was trained-up gay by being molested as a boy, not getting reparative help, who went on to get HIV from his unresolved "sexual orientation" (gay promiscuity) while still falling in love with women [his natural orientation]. The ensuing internal conflict made him insane, even more promiscuous and with a vendetta: to passive aggressively kill as many of "those that did that do him" as he could. So he went around having unprotected HIV sex with hundreds or possibly thousands of other "gay" men.

And speaking of the majority of gay men, here's a little something you might want to read aobut the syndrome not being 'contagious'...

ATLANTA [2005 Clinical Psychiatry News] -- Substance abuse is pervasive among gay men and is so intricately intertwined with epidemics of depression, partner abuse, and childhood sexual abuse that adequately addressing one issue requires attention to the others as well, said Ronald Stall, Ph.D., chief of prevention research for the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta...

Being molested is an entirely different story. We aren't talking about molestation here though. The thread is about two elderly men. No children are involved in this situation.

 

[ChrisL]

One was the "adopted son" because they are old men and that was the only way they could have appropriate arrangements in case something should happen to one of them. Why are people so cruel?

It doesn't matter why they did it. According to the law, it only matters that they did it. Why are people so cruel, like when those two queers sued a baker who refused to bake them a cake for $135,000 and put them out of business?

When vicious queers start worrying about how their agenda harms others perhaps we'll start giving a damn about their feelings.

Leave them alone and let them marry one another if they so wish. It doesn't harm you in any way, and if you think it does, then you are delusional.

If it doesn't harm anyone, then how come a baker had t opay $135,000 fine?

Queers and their apologists are so full of shit it defies comprehension.

Maybe if people would leave them be and let them live their lives without trying to bully them, those things wouldn't happen anymore, and all of this stuff would fade away eventually. YOU are the people who keep this stupid little "war" going. Just leave them be and let them live their lives the way THEY choose.

They don't want people to "leave them be." They want to ram their lifestyle down everyone's throat.

Fuck the queers. I've had my fill of their shit.

My God! You've opened yourself up for SO many jokes!

 

[Silhouette]

Yeah, you change the subject back and forth when you don't want to look at what I just said. Read post 176 again, no matter how much it hurts your position.