Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill against gay couples

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Since the law says gay can legally marry, they should be treated like all married couples. Even single people can adopt.

They can marry, but until Two biological men or two women can create babies thru sex with each other they are not meant to be parents. And they cannot be fit parents to raise a child normally. Don't give me any bullshit about normal couples who are barren are allowed to adopt. The difference is the child will have a father and a mother. The basic unit of a family.

I could not agree more.

The day that a child is raised in a home to believe that two men ass fucking each other is normal is the day our society will crumble.

That is about the stupidest fucking thing that you have said yet, and you have said a lot of stupid shit. Gay people have been adopting children in some states for decades, same sex relationships are not just about sex any more than hetero relationships are, and if society is collapsing it's because there are people like you who are part of it.

Here are some additional statistics supporting gay adoption in the United States: Researchers estimate the total number of children nationwide living with at least one gay parent ranges from 6 to 14 million.3. An estimated two million LGBT people are interested in adopting.4.
LGBT Adoption Statistics | Gay Adoption | Same Sex Adoption
www.lifelongadoptions.com/lgbt-adoption/lgbt-adoption-statistics

 

[airplanemechanic]

FAGGOT LOVER. You must have taken it DEEP IN THE ASS by your faggot friend to defend them that much.

Fags are sick disgusting human beings. It's bad enough they want to do that sick shit, but to bring kids into that sick ass fucking lifestyle, they should be shot.

 

[dblack]

If you love faggots so much why don't go get ass fucked by one, adopt a kid, and molest them? That's what faggots do.

FAGGOT LOVER. You must have taken it DEEP IN THE ASS by your faggot friend to defend them that much.

You seem to have a lot of anger on this issue. Have gays abused you personally? Or are you just afraid they will? Why are you so preoccupied with the sex lives of others?

 

[airplanemechanic]

I only get concerned when fags want to bring kids into their sick shit.

The thread is not about fags, it's about faggots adopting kids. That's sick and anyone who supports that sick shit should be shot too.

So yea, I get pretty angry when people want to harm kids in the name of being "progressive."

Homosexuals more likely to molest kids, study reports

Since heterosexuals outnumber the homosexual population about 44 to 1, as a group the incidence of homosexuals molesting children is up to 40 times greater than heterosexuals, she said.



"You're looking at a much higher rate of abuse," said Reisman, a former university research professor who recently completed a study titled, "Crafting Gay Children." "The Department of Justice just released data and the rate of abuse are off the charts."

 

[dblack]

I only get concerned when fags want to bring kids into their sick shit.

The thread is not about fags, it's about faggots adopting kids. That's sick and anyone who supports that sick shit should be shot too.

So this is basically the same motivation as the people who want to ban homeschooling. You want to control how other people raise their kids.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Since the law says gay can legally marry, they should be treated like all married couples. Even single people can adopt.

And this is exactly why homo marriage should not be legally sanctioned. Kids need a mother and a father not one or two of either. Empirically proven, post-1960’s. Those who disagree are backwards neoconservatives.

Just more of your profound, pathetic and utter ignorance. I wrote this prior to Obergefell and it is still relevant now.

CHILDREN WILL WIN THE FIGHT FOR SAME SEX MARRIAGE AND ADOPTION BY GAYS! 9.12.14

While marriage equality for gay and lesbian people is making astounding advances and is likely to be the law of the land by next June, there are still many who are resisting the inevitable. Opponents of equality are at the end of their legal rope, with every argument ever devised having been decimated by the courts. The most egregious of those arguments is that gay people make bad parents, that children should have a mom and a dad, and that they do less well when they don’t. All of that has been debunked numerous times but that is not the focus of this post. Rather, it is that like it or not, for better or worse, gay people do and will continue to have children in their care and when we allow discrimination against those gay parents, we penalize the children.


Extract from Kennedy's Windsor Opinion -

The differentiation demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects, see Lawrence, 539 U. S. 558 , and whose relationship the State has sought to dignify. And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples. The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives. ... DOMA also brings financial harm to children of same-sex couples. It raises the cost of health care for families by taxing health benefits provided by employers to their workers’ same-sex spouses. See 26 U. S. C. §106; Treas. Reg. §1.106–1, 26 CFR §1.106–1 (2012); IRS Private Letter Ruling 9850011 (Sept. 10, 199

. And it denies or re- duces benefits allowed to families upon the loss of a spouse and parent, benefits that are an integral part of family security. See Social Security Administration, Social Security Survivors Benefits 5 (2012) (benefits available to a surviving spouse caring for the couple’s child), online at http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10084.pdf.

Marriage Equality and adoption…The Right Thing to do For The Children By Progressive Patriot 9.12.14

People who use children to assail gay marriage and adoption either have not given much thought to the down side of these bans-or – are being intellectually dishonest in saying that they take their position on behalf of the children which they really care little about.

It is a logical fallacy-an appeal to ignorance if you will to insist that same sex marriage and adoption of children by gays will be detrimental to those children, and that society as a whole, will somehow be harmed by these arrangements. Many will take the position that children are entitled to a “mom and a dad” That may be so but the reality is that many people in this life do not have everything that they are entitled to. There are many children without both a mother and a father, and some without either. Banning gay marriage and adoption is not going to change that.

Children also have a right to a stable, nurturing and permanent home and it is well established that that goal can be realized in a variety of family structures. The NJ Department of Families and Children-the public agency charged with the responsibility of finding adoptive homes for children –states, in part, on their web site that no one will be denied the opportunity to adopt based on sexual orientation. In fact, the Department’s Division of Child Protection and Permanency (formerly DYFS) has been placing children for adoption with gay and lesbian people- those who are single and those who are in a relationship- for decades with good outcomes for the children. And there are many, many more who still need homes while there is a dearth of people willing and able to adopt them. I know this because I worked in the foster care and adoption field in New Jersey for 26 years. I might add that children who are placed for adoption are already in a situation where they have neither a mother nor a father available to them. To imply that that a child would better off languishing in the foster care system as a ward of the state, then to be adopted into a nontraditional family is beyond absurd.

Furthermore, the vast majority of child psychologists will tell you that there are far more important factors that impact a child’s development than the gender or sexual orientation of the parents. No doubt that one could dredge up research studies that claim to prove that gay parenting is harmful. However, well established organizations like the American Psychological Association take the position that gay and lesbian parents are just as capable of rearing emotionally healthy children as anyone else. Yet even if family composition was, as some purport, a critical factor in children’s development, the fact is that there are and will always be children in non-traditional living situations where they do not have a mother and a father. Like it or not, it is also a fact that gay and lesbian people have children, be it from a prior relationship, adoption, or surrogacy.

Denying gay and lesbians the opportunity to marry does nothing to ensure that any greater number of children will have a home with a mother and a father. All that will be accomplished will be to deny numerous children the legal rights, protections, status and stability that comes with having married parents. And, to deny gays the ability to adopt will only ensure that more children will have neither a mother nor a father. Everyone is entitled to their moral views and religious beliefs but it is disingenuous and opprobrious to use children as pawns in the lost fight against equality by bloviating about how children would be harmed by it. While single people can be great parents, the benefits to children of having two parents is undeniable

The benefits to children of allowing two people who are in a committed relationship to be married are obvious for anyone willing to look at the issue objectively. Those who truly care about children should be willing to open all of the possible pathways for them to be adopted and to have married parents when possible.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I only get concerned when fags want to bring kids into their sick shit.

The thread is not about fags, it's about faggots adopting kids. That's sick and anyone who supports that sick shit should be shot too.

So yea, I get pretty angry when people want to harm kids in the name of being "progressive."

Homosexuals more likely to molest kids, study reports

Since heterosexuals outnumber the homosexual population about 44 to 1, as a group the incidence of homosexuals molesting children is up to 40 times greater than heterosexuals, she said.



"You're looking at a much higher rate of abuse," said Reisman, a former university research professor who recently completed a study titled, "Crafting Gay Children." "The Department of Justice just released data and the rate of abuse are off the charts."

Religious horseshit propaganda.

To continue your education, as futile as that my be.....

Members of disliked minority groups are often stereotyped as representing a danger to the majority's most vulnerable members. For example, Jews in the Middle Ages were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Black men in the United States were often lynched after being falsely accused of raping White women. ]

In recent years, antigay activists have routinely asserted that gay people are child molesters. This argument was often made in debates about the Boy Scouts of America's policy to exclude gay scouts and scoutmasters. More recently, in the wake of Rep. Mark Foley's resignation from the US House of Representatives in 2006, antigay activists and their supporters seized on the scandal to revive this canard. http://psc.dss.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

Selected Excerpts:

The number of Americans who believe the myth that gay people are child molesters has declined substantially. In a 1970 national survey, more than 70% of respondents agreed with the assertions that "Homosexuals are dangerous as teachers or youth leaders because they try to get sexually involved with children" or that "Homosexuals try to play sexually with children if they cannot get an adult partner."1

By contrast, in a 1999 national poll, the belief that most gay men are likely to molest or abuse children was endorsed by only 19% of heterosexual men and 10% of heterosexual women. Even fewer – 9% of men and 6% of women – regarded most lesbians as child molesters.

Apparently you're a part of the moronic minority( Yes a play on words lifted from the moral majority)

One problem is that none of the studies in this area have obtained data from a probability sample, that is, a sample that can be assumed to be representative of the population of all child molesters. Rather, most research has been conducted only with convicted perpetrators or with pedophiles who sought professional help. Consequently, they may not accurately describe child molesters who have never been caught or have not sought treatment.

A second problem is that the terminology used in this area is often confusing and can even be misleading. We can begin to address that problem by defining some basic terms.

Pedophilia and child molestation are used in different ways, even by professionals. Pedophilia usually refers to an adult psychological disorder characterized by a preference for prepubescent children as sexual partners; this preference may or may not be acted upon. The term hebephilia is sometimes used to describe adult sexual attractions to adolescents or children who have reached puberty.

Child molestation and child sexual abuse refer to actions, and don't imply a particular psychological makeup or motive on the part of the perpetrator. Not all incidents of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by pedophiles or hebephiles; in some cases, the perpetrator has other motives for his or her actions and does not manifest an ongoing pattern of sexual attraction to children.

Thus, not all child sexual abuse is perpetrated by pedophiles (or hebephiles) and not all pedophiles and hebephiles actually commit abuse. Consequently, it is important to use terminology carefully.

Hopfully, you are beginning to see that the issue is a bit more complicated than your small mind is able or willing to contemplate



A

nother problem related to terminology arises because sexual abuse of male children by adult men2 is often referred to as "homosexual molestation." The adjective "homosexual" (or "heterosexual" when a man abuses a female child) refers to the victim's gender in relation to that of the perpetrator. Unfortunately, people sometimes mistakenly interpret it as referring to the perpetrator's sexual orientation.

Now we are getting to the crux of the issue. Still with me, or are you watching porn and jerking off, rather than trying to learn something?

As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: "The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however" (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted).

To avoid this confusion, it is preferable to refer to men's sexual abuse of boys with the more accurate label of male-male molestation. Similarly, it is preferable to refer to men's abuse of girls as male-female molestation. These labels are more accurate because they describe the sex of the individuals involved but don't implicitly convey unwarranted assumptions about the perpetrator's sexual orientation.

Typologies of
Offenders The distinction between a victim's gender and a perpetrator's sexual orientation is important because many child molesters don't really have an adult sexual orientation. They have never developed the capacity for mature sexual relationships with other adults, either men or women. Instead, their sexual attractions focus on children – boys, girls, or children of both sexes.

 

[toobfreak]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

The key is faith-based adoption agencies. Nothing wrong with them selecting parents based on THEIR criteria. If a gay couple is blocked going through one of them, they can always choose to deal with someone else.

 

[Aba Incieni]

I thank the Lord that I was created with the hetero gene.

#HeteroPride.

What "lord"? Yeah, I got the "hetero gene," too. But I don't go around insulting people who got the "other" genes. What's that about? "Hetero pride," my ass. I happen to be female and the only people I've ever been attracted to were male. I never had to "come out of the closet" and stop hiding the fact that I am heterosexual like the LGBTs had to do. If you had any "pride," it would be as a heterosexual WOMAN, who decides which man she will welcome in her bed and which she will not, and stop kowtowing to heterosexual men who want to program us to have sex on their command. Being a "proud" straight woman means that we make our own choices, Sometimes it's "yes;" and sometimes it's "no." If you're so proud, you would understand this fundamental concept. Stand up for heterosexual women for a change.

It's not our fault we're better than you. Nor to our credit. We're still sinners, we're just saved from our sins, that's all.

And I do stand up for heteros of all genders, which is why I'm better than you.

#ThinkForYourself.

#HeteroPride.

You are serious ? Really ?

Why would that be a joke?

I represent hundreds of millions more people than homo sympathizers in the US alone.

And the billion or so Muslims would say what to your claim ?

They kill homos, so their heteros would fall under my representation, as well. I represent a sexual preference, not a religion.

But why fail to mention the over 2 billion Christians?

 

[dblack]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

The key is faith-based adoption agencies. Nothing wrong with them selecting parents based on THEIR criteria. If a gay couple is blocked going through one of them, they can always choose to deal with someone else.

Exactly. This is no different, in principle, from a mother, who is interested in giving up her child for adoption, "discriminating" when choosing who she wants to raise her kids. Kansas is pushing aback against the civil rights mindset that insists we must use government to force people to accept various minorities according to the "protected classes" agenda.

 

[rightwinger]

FAGGOT LOVER. You must have taken it DEEP IN THE ASS by your faggot friend to defend them that much.

Fags are sick disgusting human beings. It's bad enough they want to do that sick shit, but to bring kids into that sick ass fucking lifestyle, they should be shot.

Tell us what you really think

 

[rightwinger]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

The key is faith-based adoption agencies. Nothing wrong with them selecting parents based on THEIR criteria. If a gay couple is blocked going through one of them, they can always choose to deal with someone else.

Very true
They can grant adoptions based on their faith

Unless they accept taxpayer funds

 

[bodecea]

FAGGOT LOVER. You must have taken it DEEP IN THE ASS by your faggot friend to defend them that much.

Fags are sick disgusting human beings. It's bad enough they want to do that sick shit, but to bring kids into that sick ass fucking lifestyle, they should be shot.

It always puzzles me why those who claim to dislike gays are the ones who talk (and think) more about gay sex more than any gay person I know. It's in the forefront of their thought processes all....the....time.

 

[Aba Incieni]

FAGGOT LOVER. You must have taken it DEEP IN THE ASS by your faggot friend to defend them that much.

Fags are sick disgusting human beings. It's bad enough they want to do that sick shit, but to bring kids into that sick ass fucking lifestyle, they should be shot.

It always puzzles me why those who claim to dislike gays are the ones who talk (and think) more about gay sex more than any gay person I know. It's in the forefront of their thought processes all....the....time.

You say it like there's something wrong with that.

 

[Sunni Man]

Do you actually know any gay people?

I do not want to know any sodomites.

They are mentally ill and carry infectious diseases. .....

 

[dblack]

Do you actually know any gay people?

I do not want to know any sodomites.

They are mentally ill and carry infectious diseases. .....

Don't take off your tinfoil hat. That's how they get you!

 

[Sunni Man]

Don't take off your tinfoil hat. That's how they get you!

No need to be rude about it.

If you like to hang around homo's that that is your choice.

Personally, I find them disgusting and a health threat to normal society. ....

 

[Sun Devil 92]

People choose to be fags.

The Lord does NOT create them as such.

And the Constitution protects their right to make that choice.

Please show me the word "homosexual" in the constitution.

Thanks.

People choose to be fags.

The Lord does NOT create them as such.

And the Constitution protects their right to make that choice.

Please show me the word "homosexual" in the constitution.

Thanks.

You can find it here in the Constitution:

“When sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring. The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to make this choice.”

LAWRENCE V. TEXAS

You’re welcome.

Bullshit.

It's not in the consitution.

It overturned Bowers which said the constutiton said something else.

You guys are so fucked up.

It is unconstitutional to prosecute people for private sexual conduct. Period over and done with. It has the same force of law as if it were in the body of the constitution. Get the fuck over yourself. You are far from a constitutional scholar.

That's what people said after Bowers.

Guess what....

You are the one who needs help.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

That's not the constitution. That's case law.

You said the constitution protects that choice to be a fag. Show me where the CONSTITUTION does that.

The SCOTUS was ruling on the Texas law that made it ILLEGAL. That's far different than saying the constitution protects the right to be a fag. You're moving the goalposts because you're losing the argument.

So the answer is.....Um no, it doesn't.

Obviously you do not understand Constitutional Law. Case law becomes part of constitutional law as it represents binding precedents and carries the same force of law as the articles of the constitution, the amendments , and legislation. Please smarten up.

Until it gets reversed.

Now, please confirm you are a moron by telling us that nothing has ever been reversed.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

That's not the constitution. That's case law.

You said the constitution protects that choice to be a fag. Show me where the CONSTITUTION does that.

The SCOTUS was ruling on the Texas law that made it ILLEGAL. That's far different than saying the constitution protects the right to be a fag. You're moving the goalposts because you're losing the argument.

So the answer is.....Um no, it doesn't.

Obviously you do not understand Constitutional Law. Case law becomes part of constitutional law as it represents binding precedents and carries the same force of law as the articles of the constitution, the amendments , and legislation. Please smarten up.

Until it gets reversed.

Now, please confirm you are a moron by telling us that nothing has ever been reversed.

Please be sure to let us all know when it gets reversed. Meanwhile it is law. Constitutional law. If you can't accept that and choose to spend your days sobbing and obsessing about what those perverted filthy gays do, it is your problem, and your problem alone.