Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc.

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Yo, here is a bizarre and bigoted jerk that I bet you can relate to.......save the link. Since you are impervious to all reason and have failed miserably to respond to the documented factual evidence that I presented about gay parenting, I have to resort to this.

So essentially when I rebut a point in a way you have no lucid comeback to, no defense, you change the subject back to "anyone who disagrees with LGBT agenda points is a bigoted, hating freak." Do you believe that people with a brain cannot see your weak scale? Your inability to rebut my points and your lame attempts at diversions?

You don't make any points. You just bloviate and spew nonsense. You present nothing factual that you can back up with documentation. For instance...gay men prefer to adopt boys? Do you have evidence of that or is it the voices in your head that are taking? I don't think that everyone who thinks that homosexuality is wrong is a bigoted freak. They are free to believe as they will This is America. I do believe that those- like you - who vilify, degrade and seek to deny gays their rights are bigoted freaks. You continue to disregard all of the evidence that I presented that shows that gay people are good parents because YOU cannot rebut what I AM SAYING.

 

[mdk]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with liesk

I don't blame Christians for being Christians. Most Christians are wonderful people who want no harm to come to anyone- just as most gay Americans- most of whom are Christian- also want no harm to come to anyone.

Now there are some faux Christians who preach hate towards homosexuals and other groups they despise- they are false Christians who live to hate- not to follow Christs commandments.

Show me the preachers preaching hate of homosexuals?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Just b/c you are not aware of them doesn't mean they don't exist. Start with Preacher Kevin Swason. You should be able to find more than enough stories about this loon. Ted Cruz spoke at even he held recently.

 

[Syriusly]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with liesk

I don't blame Christians for being Christians. Most Christians are wonderful people who want no harm to come to anyone- just as most gay Americans- most of whom are Christian- also want no harm to come to anyone.

Now there are some faux Christians who preach hate towards homosexuals and other groups they despise- they are false Christians who live to hate- not to follow Christs commandments.

Show me the preachers preaching hate of homosexuals?

What do you think this is 'Family Feud'?

Fred Phelps dies at 84; Westboro Baptist's preacher of hate

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...stor-death-of-gays-defense-cnn_n_1559293.html

Arizona pastor urges killing gays to have an AIDS-free world

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with liesk

I don't blame Christians for being Christians. Most Christians are wonderful people who want no harm to come to anyone- just as most gay Americans- most of whom are Christian- also want no harm to come to anyone.

Now there are some faux Christians who preach hate towards homosexuals and other groups they despise- they are false Christians who live to hate- not to follow Christs commandments.

Show me the preachers preaching hate of homosexuals?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Who cares about preachers – we've got GOP presidential candidates who exhibit their hate of homosexuals by advocating violating the rights of gay Americans by denying them access to marriage law, such as Cruz, Rubio, and Huckabee.

 

[thanatos144]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with liesk

I don't blame Christians for being Christians. Most Christians are wonderful people who want no harm to come to anyone- just as most gay Americans- most of whom are Christian- also want no harm to come to anyone.

Now there are some faux Christians who preach hate towards homosexuals and other groups they despise- they are false Christians who live to hate- not to follow Christs commandments.

Show me the preachers preaching hate of homosexuals?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Just b/c you are not aware of them doesn't mean they don't exist. Start with Preacher Kevin Swason. You should be able to find more than enough stories about this loon. Ted Cruz spoke at even he held recently.

Show me proof .... I get tired of the bullshit you guys use. Regressives ether greatly exaggerate something or down right lie about it and never once show proof.... show proof

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[thanatos144]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with liesk

I don't blame Christians for being Christians. Most Christians are wonderful people who want no harm to come to anyone- just as most gay Americans- most of whom are Christian- also want no harm to come to anyone.

Now there are some faux Christians who preach hate towards homosexuals and other groups they despise- they are false Christians who live to hate- not to follow Christs commandments.

Show me the preachers preaching hate of homosexuals?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Who cares about preachers – we've got GOP presidential candidates who exhibit their hate of homosexuals by advocating violating the rights of gay Americans by denying them access to marriage law, such as Cruz, Rubio, and Huckabee.

Not being for the usurpation of states rights is not hate of homosexuals. Stop using homosexuals to further your authoritarian utopia .

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[mdk]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with liesk

I don't blame Christians for being Christians. Most Christians are wonderful people who want no harm to come to anyone- just as most gay Americans- most of whom are Christian- also want no harm to come to anyone.

Now there are some faux Christians who preach hate towards homosexuals and other groups they despise- they are false Christians who live to hate- not to follow Christs commandments.

Show me the preachers preaching hate of homosexuals?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Just b/c you are not aware of them doesn't mean they don't exist. Start with Preacher Kevin Swason. You should be able to find more than enough stories about this loon. Ted Cruz spoke at even he held recently.

Show me proof .... I get tired of the bullshit you guys use. Regressives ether greatly exaggerate something or down right lie about it and never once show proof.... show proof

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Kevin Swason has proudly stated that he wants to kills gays. Guy is a loon. Do a dash of research if you don't believe me.

 

[Syriusly]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with liesk

I don't blame Christians for being Christians. Most Christians are wonderful people who want no harm to come to anyone- just as most gay Americans- most of whom are Christian- also want no harm to come to anyone.

Now there are some faux Christians who preach hate towards homosexuals and other groups they despise- they are false Christians who live to hate- not to follow Christs commandments.

Show me the preachers preaching hate of homosexuals?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Just b/c you are not aware of them doesn't mean they don't exist. Start with Preacher Kevin Swason. You should be able to find more than enough stories about this loon. Ted Cruz spoke at even he held recently.

Show me proof .... I get tired of the bullshit you guys use. Regressives ether greatly exaggerate something or down right lie about it and never once show proof.... show proof

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

You can't handle the proof!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with lies

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Who blames Christians? I blame bigots like you. Bigots are the cause of any "unhappiness or troubles" gays might experience. What lies are you talking about? Try to make some sense for a change. You are as pathetic as Sill is when it comes to being able to deal with the facts and logic that I present.

Unlike you regressives I am not a bigot. I don't hate nor fear homosexuals. I don't agree with thier choice that's all. Unlike you I don't feel the need to lie about it . Homosexuals are going to get shafted by you regressives because in the in long run we all know where the true bigots are .

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

You're not a bigot? You just "disagree" with their "choice" That you think that it is a choice, itself says a lot. But aside from that, if you just disagree, then you would be willing to allow gays to live as they wish, free of discrimination, and having the same rights as you. However, everything that you post indicates you want to marginalize them, demean them , and deny them basic civil right that you take for granted, just because you disapprove of them. Therefor YOU are a BIGOT. You might not fear them. You might not be in touch with your feelings of hatred, but your rhetoric and what you advocate says that you do fear and hate them. Even if you do not fear and hate the individual, you have an irrational fear and hatred of the changes to society that acceptance of gays represents, therefore you are a BIGOT

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with liesk

I don't blame Christians for being Christians. Most Christians are wonderful people who want no harm to come to anyone- just as most gay Americans- most of whom are Christian- also want no harm to come to anyone.

Now there are some faux Christians who preach hate towards homosexuals and other groups they despise- they are false Christians who live to hate- not to follow Christs commandments.

Show me the preachers preaching hate of homosexuals?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Just b/c you are not aware of them doesn't mean they don't exist. Start with Preacher Kevin Swason. You should be able to find more than enough stories about this loon. Ted Cruz spoke at even he held recently.

Show me proof .... I get tired of the bullshit you guys use. Regressives ether greatly exaggerate something or down right lie about it and never once show proof.... show proof

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

There is plenty more where this comes from !! Geeze. They are not all preachers but I know of a lot more. Open your fucking eyes boy!

Linda Harvey: 'Gaystapo' Now 'Full Of Pink Testosterone' Submitted by Brian Tashman on Wednesday, 1/27/2016 4:35 pm In her weekly column for WorldNetDaily yesterday, Mission America’s Linda Harvey railed against “the GOP establishment” for “‘going gay,’” warning that doing so “will eviscerate the GOP.” Harvey said that gay peoples’ “aberrant sexual conduct is a blight on America” that’s “sinful, unhealthy and immoral, and there is no need for anyone to engage in it” since “people are not constructed for these bizarre behaviors.” This “behavior,” she wrote, is “tearing our country – and families – apart.” Angry that gay conservative commentator Guy Benson is making an appearance at CPAC in March, Harvey warned that Republicans are “becoming willing tools of the gaystapo” whose leaders are “full of pink testosterone” and bent on promoting “child-endangering, changeable deviance.” Jeb Bush and John Kasich hired them for key campaign staff positions. John Boehner and others campaigned for them. - See more at: Linda Harvey: 'Gaystapo' Now 'Full Of Pink Testosterone'

Ted Cruz Embraces Hate Group Leader Tony Perkins Submitted by Brian Tashman on Wednesday, 1/27/2016 1:10 pm Last night, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins officially endorsed Ted Cruz for president during an interview with Fox News host Megyn Kelly. Perkins’ endorsement was long expected, as he has worked behind the scenes to coalesce Religious Right leaders behind Cruz’s candidacy - See more at: Ted Cruz Embraces Hate Group Leader Tony Perkins

Theodore Shoebat Says That Gays Routinely Rape And Murder

Young Boys During 'Southern Decadence

Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Thursday, 1/28/2016 10:56 am
Yesterday, radical right-wing activist Theodore Shoebat posted an extended discussion he recently had with fellow Shoebat.com contributor Andrew Bieszad about their belief that "all of the evils that we are seeing around the world can find its origin in anti-Catholicism."

Given Shoebat's extreme hatred of gays, it was not long before the conversation turned toward exposing the ways that "the sodomite agenda wants to colonize the whole world through the U.S. government," with Shoebat declaring that gays in New Orleans routinely rape and murder young boys during the annual Southern Decadence event while the local police do nothing about it.

As Shoebat explained, a fellow anti-gay activist "went out to preach against the sodomites in New Orleans" and was told by locals "about how the sodomites in the French Quarter go out and hunt for little boys, they steal little boys and then bring

- See more at: Theodore Shoebat Says That Gays Routinely Rape And Murder Young Boys During 'Southern Decadence'

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Stop blaming christians for everything. Christians are not the cause of homosexual unhappiness or troubles. They need only look at the regressives who at every turn incite them with liesk

I don't blame Christians for being Christians. Most Christians are wonderful people who want no harm to come to anyone- just as most gay Americans- most of whom are Christian- also want no harm to come to anyone.

Now there are some faux Christians who preach hate towards homosexuals and other groups they despise- they are false Christians who live to hate- not to follow Christs commandments.

Show me the preachers preaching hate of homosexuals?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Just b/c you are not aware of them doesn't mean they don't exist. Start with Preacher Kevin Swason. You should be able to find more than enough stories about this loon. Ted Cruz spoke at even he held recently.

Show me proof .... I get tired of the bullshit you guys use. Regressives ether greatly exaggerate something or down right lie about it and never once show proof.... show proof

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

GOP Candidates Really Don't Want To Talk About 'Kill The Gays' Conference
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Wednesday, 11/18/2015 2:50 pm
A couple of weeks ago, we reported extensively on a conference in Iowa organized by extremist pastor Kevin Swanson, at which three Republican presidential candidates joined Swanson on stage shortly before he went off on a series of rants about how the biblical punishment for homosexuality is death, Harry Potter is bringing God’s judgment on America, and how if your gay child gets married you should show up to the wedding covered in cow manure.

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow ran a segment on the conference, but other than that, as a number of commentators have noted, the media has been strangely silent on the Republican candidates’ participation in this event.

Today, Des Moines Register columnist Rekha Basu reports that she reached out to the campaigns of the three candidates, Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee and Bobby Jindal (who has since dropped out of the presidential race), and found them rather reluctant to talk about it.

- See more at: GOP Candidates Really Don't Want To Talk About 'Kill The Gays' Conference

The Year In Homophobia: The Right-Wing's Anti-Gay Meltdown In 2015
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Tuesday, 12/22/2015 2:30 pm
The fall of marriage equality bans in all 50 states following the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision was a disaster for the conservative movement, whose leaders have spent years demonizing same-sex couples and warning that the legal recognition of their marriages will unleash a wave of terror on the nation.

While Obergefell was a major setback for the Religious Right, the 2016 presidential campaign proves that the movement’s anti-gay crusade is far from over. Several GOP presidential candidates have vowed to enshrine anti-gay discrimination into law and to turn the government into an arm of the anti-gay movement. At the same time, more and more conservative leaders are insisting that government officials should simply ignore decisions they don’t like, such as Obergefell.

- See more at: The Year In Homophobia: The Right-Wing's Anti-Gay Meltdown In 2015

 

[Silhouette]

Nobody is trying to "Kill the Gays" asshole.

This is about how gays are trying to kill the hope of children of ever having a mother or father FOR LIFE by the very institution of their newly-wrought idea of "marriage"...

See, marriage isn't an adult-vacuum. Marriage implies children. Even the Court admitted this in so many words in their deliberations. Yet how this BRAND SPANKING NEW version of "marriage" affected those implicit partners wasn't even debated beyond "we're just gonna take the gay's word on this that it's good for kids involved". Well, it isn't. And that's a problem.

New York vs Ferber says that if there's a problem (there is. Boys need a father and girls, a mother...it's the reason marriage was invented in the first place) then adult "civil rights" are not dominant to children (collectively, those that could be affected in the future, not just "the poor children of unmarried gays right now!") and their needs.

You don't change an entire body of Law to accommodate a few individuals out of armchair psychology, that will ripple outward and affect many millions more of children over time. And the core of society itself in fact. Which is what this whole "gay marriage" thing was about anyway. It is the arrow in the heart of the moral society this cult insidiously has been undermining through its media arm and now the courts. The Five in SCOTUS were way beyond their authority. None of them are child psychologists. And as another LGBT poster pointed out here recently, there were no deliberations at all about how the very structure of gay marriage stripped children clean of even the hope for a mother or father FOR LIFE. That is a mental prison. Mental prisons are psychologically harmful. Psychological harm is disallowed as a matter of law for children. So says New York vs Ferber..

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Nobody is trying to "Kill the Gays" asshole.

This is about how gays are trying to kill the hope of children of ever having a mother or father FOR LIFE by the very institution of their newly-wrought idea of "marriage"...

See, marriage isn't an adult-vacuum. Marriage implies children. Even the Court admitted this in so many words in their deliberations. Yet how this BRAND SPANKING NEW version of "marriage" affected those implicit partners wasn't even debated beyond "we're just gonna take the gay's word on this that it's good for kids involved". Well, it isn't. And that's a problem.

New York vs Ferber says that if there's a problem (there is. Boys need a father and girls, a mother...it's the reason marriage was invented in the first place) then adult "civil rights" are not dominant to children (collectively, those that could be affected in the future, not just "the poor children of unmarried gays right now!") and their needs.

You don't change an entire body of Law to accommodate a few individuals out of armchair psychology, that will ripple outward and affect many millions more of children over time. And the core of society itself in fact. Which is what this whole "gay marriage" thing was about anyway. It is the arrow in the heart of the moral society this cult insidiously has been undermining through its media arm and now the courts. The Five in SCOTUS were way beyond their authority. None of them are child psychologists. And as another LGBT poster pointed out here recently, there were no deliberations at all about how the very structure of gay marriage stripped children clean of even the hope for a mother or father FOR LIFE. That is a mental prison. Mental prisons are psychologically harmful. Psychological harm is disallowed as a matter of law for children. So says New York vs Ferber..

So now you are lowering yourself even further and calling me an asshole !! I think you are loosing your grip for certain bubba. Bla Bla Bla ....same old shit over and over again. Get the fuck over it. You make NO SENSE You have failed to even try to deal with the facts that I presented because you are woefully unable to. Wipe the spit off your chin and take a chill pill.

 

[mdk]

Nobody is trying to "Kill the Gays" asshole.

This is about how gays are trying to kill the hope of children of ever having a mother or father FOR LIFE by the very institution of their newly-wrought idea of "marriage"...

See, marriage isn't an adult-vacuum. Marriage implies children. Even the Court admitted this in so many words in their deliberations. Yet how this BRAND SPANKING NEW version of "marriage" affected those implicit partners wasn't even debated beyond "we're just gonna take the gay's word on this that it's good for kids involved". Well, it isn't. And that's a problem.

New York vs Ferber says that if there's a problem (there is. Boys need a father and girls, a mother...it's the reason marriage was invented in the first place) then adult "civil rights" are not dominant to children (collectively, those that could be affected in the future, not just "the poor children of unmarried gays right now!") and their needs.

You don't change an entire body of Law to accommodate a few individuals out of armchair psychology, that will ripple outward and affect many millions more of children over time. And the core of society itself in fact. Which is what this whole "gay marriage" thing was about anyway. It is the arrow in the heart of the moral society this cult insidiously has been undermining through its media arm and now the courts. The Five in SCOTUS were way beyond their authority. None of them are child psychologists. And as another LGBT poster pointed out here recently, there were no deliberations at all about how the very structure of gay marriage stripped children clean of even the hope for a mother or father FOR LIFE. That is a mental prison. Mental prisons are psychologically harmful. Psychological harm is disallowed as a matter of law for children. So says New York vs Ferber..

You do realize that none of the Justices were child psychologists when Feber was decided, right? Or do they only need to be when they are discussing gay people and their families?

Your faux concern for children isn't swaying anyone. Sorry.

 

[Silhouette]

You do realize that none of the Justices were child psychologists when Feber was decided, right? Or do they only need to be when they are discussing gay people and their families?
.

Did they have child psychologists testify? Remember, the judges don't present argument. They preside over it. I imagine they consulted some child psychologists on the question of "should an adult's constitutional right to circulate child pornography be dominant to what's best for children" (the essence of New York vs Ferber). But if there were no child psychologists present, are you asserting that it was a matter of common sense that children exploited for child pornography should not be, even when it is an adult's constitutional right to free speech? If that's the case, I suppose we could deduce that it is also a matter of common sense that boys stripped of fathers for life or girls stripped of mothers for life (the mechanics of gay marriage) is also bad for children.

In any event, I will welcome the professional argument that the Justices may then use to render a Decision. And I'm sure you would welcome that too, since you pretend to be all about children's well being. Notice: I'm not afraid of the professional discussion...but you seem to be all about advocating that it not happen at all....which in itself is telling...

 

[mdk]

You do realize that none of the Justices were child psychologists when Feber was decided, right? Or do they only need to be when they are discussing gay people and their families?
.

Did they have child psychologists testify? Remember, the judges don't present argument. They preside over it. I imagine they consulted some child psychologists on the question of "should an adult's constitutional right to circulate child pornography be dominant to what's best for children" (the essence of New York vs Ferber). But if there were no child psychologists present, are you asserting that it was a matter of common sense that children exploited for child pornography should not be, even when it is an adult's constitutional right to free speech? If that's the case, I suppose we could deduce that it is also a matter of common sense that boys stripped of fathers for life or girls stripped of mothers for life (the mechanics of gay marriage) is also bad for children.

In any event, I will welcome the professional argument that the Justices may then use to render a Decision.

The Justices are not going to rehear Obergefell v. Hodges based on the demands of your imagination and crippling homophobia. You would be wise to remember that.

 

[Silhouette]

The Justices are not going to rehear Obergefell v. Hodges based on the demands of your imagination and crippling homophobia. You would be wise to remember that.

No, but they may be forced to revisit it after "Any catholic adoption agency vs Obergefell" makes its way up to the four Justices necessary to agree to Hear the case.. or "the State of (fill in the blank) vs Obergefell"...when it comes to being required to give monetary incentives to people who strip children of even the hope of a mother or father for life...and that societal/fiscal negative outfall..

 

[mdk]

The Justices are not going to rehear Obergefell v. Hodges based on the demands of your imagination and crippling homophobia. You would be wise to remember that.

No, but they may be forced to revisit it after "Any catholic adoption agency vs Obergefell" makes its way up to the four Justices necessary to agree to Hear the case.. or "the State of (fill in the blank) vs Obergefell"...when it comes to being required to give monetary incentives to people who strip children of even the hope of a mother or father for life...and that societal/fiscal negative outfall..

Don't hold your breath.

Your lame attempts to smear gay people and their families is failing miserably.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You do realize that none of the Justices were child psychologists when Feber was decided, right? Or do they only need to be when they are discussing gay people and their families?
.

Did they have child psychologists testify? Remember, the judges don't present argument. They preside over it. I imagine they consulted some child psychologists on the question of "should an adult's constitutional right to circulate child pornography be dominant to what's best for children" (the essence of New York vs Ferber). But if there were no child psychologists present, are you asserting that it was a matter of common sense that children exploited for child pornography should not be, even when it is an adult's constitutional right to free speech? If that's the case, I suppose we could deduce that it is also a matter of common sense that boys stripped of fathers for life or girls stripped of mothers for life (the mechanics of gay marriage) is also bad for children.

In any event, I will welcome the professional argument that the Justices may then use to render a Decision. And I'm sure you would welcome that too, since you pretend to be all about children's well being. Notice: I'm not afraid of the professional discussion...but you seem to be all about advocating that it not happen at all....which in itself is telling...

You want to talk about common sense? Here is some common sense........from Justice Kennedy writing for the majority in Obergefell. Source :http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf

A third basis for protecting the right to marry is that it safeguards children and families and thus draws meaning from related rights of childrearing, procreation, and education. See, e.g., Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510. Without the recognition, stability, and predictability marriage offers, children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser. They also suffer the significant material costs of being raised by unmarried parents, relegated to a more difficult and uncertain family life. The marriage laws at issue thus harm and humiliate the children of same-sex couples. See Windsor, supra, at ___. This does not mean that the right to marry isless meaningful for those who do not or cannot have children. Precedent protects the right of a married couple not to procreate, so the right to marry cannot be conditioned on the capacity or commitment to procreate.

Here is more common fucking sense from the same opinion:

April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse are co-plaintiffs in thecase from Michigan. They celebrated a commitment ceremony to honor their permanent relation in 2007. Theyboth work as nurses, DeBoer in a neonatal unit and Rowse in an emergency unit. In 2009, DeBoer and Rowse fostered and then adopted a baby boy. Later that same year,they welcomed another son into their family. The new baby, born prematurely and abandoned by his biologicalmother, required around-the-clock care. The next year, a baby girl with special needs joined their family. Michigan,however, permits only opposite-sex married couples or single individuals to adopt, so each child can have only one woman as his or her legal parent. If an emergency were toarise, schools and hospitals may treat the three children as if they had only one parent. And, were tragedy to be fall either DeBoer or Rowse, the other would have no legal rights over the children she had not been permitted to adopt. This couple seeks relief from the continuing uncertainty

And that is jut the beginning. I am really tired of your fucking lies. Would you like to see what he wrote in Windsor now?

 

[Syriusly]

Nobody is trying to "Kill the Gays" asshole.

This is about how..

This is all about you trying to harm homosexuals- and their children.

Every thread.

Every post.