Michigan Allows Adoption Agents to Opt-Out of Adoption to Gay "Couples"

[Silhouette]

Many opponents of same sex marriage and adoption by gay people assert that” children have a fundamental right to a mother and a father” and” that when gay couples adopt or use a surrogate, they are denying that child that fundamental right” However, public policy in New Jersey states that children 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...

OK, so which of those "variety structures" would you force the 50 states to incentivize with tax breaks "as married"? And which wouldn't you allow? And how is it a minority, waffling behavioral group gets to decide these things again; or to inadvertently bamboozle an unwieldy precedent on which other minority behavioral groups will follow?

I have no idea what you are rambling on about but it's apparent that you didn't get much out of my post.

I think you do know what I'm talking about but are pretending not to.

I'm talking about MARRIAGE and the innate rights to adoption that come with it. And the legal quagmire being created by giving minority behavioral groups a carte blanche to dictate to the majority using "rights" and sympathy-plays as the shoehorn to get that done.

Shouldn't the states' majorities be able to choose what parenting situation is best for children (who marriage is for and about ultimately) and set that as law/the highest standard instead of being forced to lose money on "anything goes marriage"? (which is doing away with marriage ultimately, because that's where some states are already poised to do if LGBTs succeed in winning rights to dictate to this country)

You do realize the quagmire this situation is heading towards. Some call it a slippery slope. But more properly it's a legal-quagmire. And now we have people like Skylar and others foreshadowing the near-future legal plan to starve orphans until orphanages cave to LGBT demands.. (link in my signature)

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Many opponents of same sex marriage and adoption by gay people assert that” children have a fundamental right to a mother and a father” and” that when gay couples adopt or use a surrogate, they are denying that child that fundamental right” However, public policy in New Jersey states that children 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...

OK, so which of those "variety structures" would you force the 50 states to incentivize with tax breaks "as married"? And which wouldn't you allow? And how is it a minority, waffling behavioral group gets to decide these things again; or to inadvertently bamboozle an unwieldy precedent on which other minority behavioral groups will follow?

I have no idea what you are rambling on about but it's apparent that you didn't get much out of my post.

I think you do know what I'm talking about but are pretending not to.

I'm talking about MARRIAGE and the innate rights to adoption that come with it. And the legal quagmire being created by giving minority behavioral groups a carte blanche to dictate to the majority using "rights" and sympathy-plays as the shoehorn to get that done.

Shouldn't the states' majorities be able to choose what parenting situation is best for children (who marriage is for and about ultimately) and set that as law/the highest standard instead of being forced to lose money on "anything goes marriage"? (which is doing away with marriage ultimately, because that's where some states are already poised to do if LGBTs succeed in winning rights to dictate to this country)

You do realize the quagmire this situation is heading towards. Some call it a slippery slope. But more properly it's a legal-quagmire. And now we have people like Skylar and others foreshadowing the near-future legal plan to starve orphans until orphanages cave to LGBT demands.. (link in my signature)

I think you do know what I'm talking about but are pretending not to.

You’re still rambling. You’re all over the map making questionable and logically fallacious assertions. Try to get focused

I'm talking about MARRIAGE and the innate rights to adoption that come with it.

For instance-this statement right here. The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

And the legal quagmire being created by giving minority behavioral groups a carte blanche to dictate to the majority using "rights" and sympathy-plays as the shoehorn to get that done.

More meaningless gibberish. What quagmire? In this country, minorities do have rights. The majority does not get to determine who has what rights. That is determined by the constitution and constitutional law.

Shouldn't the states' majorities be able to choose what parenting situation is best for children (who marriage is for and about ultimately) and set that as law/the highest standard

No, No No! Again NO ! However, you might have heard that most people now are in favor of same sex marriage and adoption by gays. And as far as what is best for children is concerned, a clear majority of child welfare and mental health professionals, including all major mental health organizations agree that gays are just fine as parents. By the way, I have tons of documentation to back up everything that I say here. However, I’m not even going to bother posting any of it unless you show some willingness to actually try to understand and learn about the issue. What do you have? Caution: I know all of the bogus “studies “ about gay parenting to purport to show that it is harmful.

instead of being forced to lose money on "anything goes marriage"? (which is doing away with marriage ultimately, because that's where some states are already poised to do if LGBTs succeed in winning rights to dictate to this country)

Losing money? What? Your really grasping at straws here? They are not going to do away with marriage. That is all just bluster. Can you imagine the political backlash from HETEROSEXUALS? Oh, and same sex marriage is actually a money maker and good for the ecconomy

You do realize the quagmire this situation is heading towards. Some call it a slippery slope. But more properly it's a legal-quagmire. And now we have people like Skylar and others foreshadowing the near-future legal plan to starve orphans until orphanages cave to LGBT demands.. (link in my signature)

There is that word quagmire again. Do you imagine there to be quagmires under your bed? Maybe you can tell about what sort of quagmire has developed in states and other countries that have had same sex marriage for a decade or more. Perhaps you can try to explain some of your assertions instead bloviating about imaginary quagmires.

And no one is going to starve the orphans but if agencies that accept federal funds discriminate, they should be put out of business. I will add, as I said in my last post, that that those who oppose adoption and marriage for gays do not really care about the kids at all. They are either willfully ignorant or just hypocrites.

 

[Silhouette]

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

 

[Montrovant]

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

I would guess that most people have some aspect of their lives that deviates from the norm. What you really mean, I think, is that gays deviate in a way you are not comfortable with.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

I would guess that most people have some aspect of their lives that deviates from the norm. What you really mean, I think, is that gays deviate in a way you are not comfortable with.

THAT.....makes absolutely NO sense

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

It is, at this point abundantly clear that you have no intention of discussing this topic in good faith, with facts and logic. Indeed, you may not have that ability. You have failed to directly address a single point that I have made and it's apparent that you do not care a whit about the children. You're only purpose here is to drop snarky, uniformed and bigoted comments about gay people. As far as adoption by singles goes-as thought that was relevant- take a look at this and try to expand your knowledge base just a little:

_____________________________________________________________________________

While some states outright ban adoption by gay couples, other states have laws that do not expressly prevent adoption, but may make it hard or impossible for same-sex couples to complete the adoption process. Still other states do not allow gay couples to adopt, but have no prohibitions on a single gay person adopting

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html#ixzz2vklNkZ3B

http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html


States with Unclear Laws

• According to the Human Rights Campaign, several states have unclear regulations about whether same-sex couple can adopt. In Michigan, for example, the law states that only married couples may petition to jointly adopt, and the state does not have gay marriage. However, a court in 2006 allowed a joint adoption for an unmarried gay couple. The Human Rights Campaign also calls laws in Wisconsin unclear because the courts have never ruled specifically on gay couples adopting jointly, but have "strongly suggested" that unmarried couples may not jointly adopt. Marriage in Wisconsin is legally defined as between a man and woman.
  

Adopting a Same-Sex Partner's Child

• Not all gay adoption cases are from same-sex couples seeking to jointly adopt. Sometimes, a same-sex partner petitions to adopt his or her partner's child. States that explicitly permit this are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Vermont. The states that expressly forbid a same-sex partner from petitioning to adopt a partner's child are: Florida, Nebraska, Ohio and Utah. The remainder of the states have no explicit laws either way.
  

Single Gay People Adopting

• States are more lenient with laws that allow single gay people to petition to adopt. That is, there are no laws that expressly forbid single gay people from adopting. Instead, most states have general laws that allow single people to adopt and do not mention sexual orientation as a factor. Florida is the lone state that does not allow single gay people to petition to adopt a child.
  

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html#ixzz2vkmOa8im

​

 

[Silhouette]

I would guess that most people have some aspect of their lives that deviates from the norm. What you really mean, I think, is that gays deviate in a way you are not comfortable with.

More to the point, "gays" (practitioners of habitual homosexual sex) deviate in a way that Christian adoption agencies are not comfortable with. You can't tell a child that a woman is "his new daddy" or a man is "her new mommy". That is a lie. Lying to children is abusive. Adoption agencies don't want children abused. And their Bible tells them that to aide the spread of homosexual values (marriage/adoption/formative environment for new generations) is forbidden under pain of eternal damnation for failure to heed the warning.

 

[Syriusly]

I would guess that most people have some aspect of their lives that deviates from the norm. What you really mean, I think, is that gays deviate in a way you are not comfortable with.

More to the point, "gays" (practitioners of habitual homosexual sex) deviate in a way that Christian adoption agencies are not comfortable with. You can't tell a child that a woman is "his new daddy" or a man is "her new mommy". That is a lie. Lying to children is abusive. .

Yet you lie on these boards all the time. Like in this post. Who is saying that a woman is 'his new daddy'- other than you?

"Lying to children is abusive"?

Then most Americans are abusing their children every Christmas as they tell their kids about Santa Claus coming to visit.

You prefer that children abandoned by their biological families stay lingering in foster homes, and even age out of the system rather than be adopted by a gay couple who step up to take care of children emotionally and financially.

100,000 children a year waiting for adoption. Almost all of them abandoned by their biological parents.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I would guess that most people have some aspect of their lives that deviates from the norm. What you really mean, I think, is that gays deviate in a way you are not comfortable with.

More to the point, "gays" (practitioners of habitual homosexual sex) deviate in a way that Christian adoption agencies are not comfortable with. You can't tell a child that a woman is "his new daddy" or a man is "her new mommy". That is a lie. Lying to children is abusive. .

Yet you lie on these boards all the time. Like in this post. Who is saying that a woman is 'his new daddy'- other than you?

"Lying to children is abusive"?

Then most Americans are abusing their children every Christmas as they tell their kids about Santa Claus coming to visit.

You prefer that children abandoned by their biological families stay lingering in foster homes, and even age out of the system rather than be adopted by a gay couple who step up to take care of children emotionally and financially.

100,000 children a year waiting for adoption. Almost all of them abandoned by their biological parents.

That one sounds like a candidate for religious reparative therapy

 

[Montrovant]

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

I would guess that most people have some aspect of their lives that deviates from the norm. What you really mean, I think, is that gays deviate in a way you are not comfortable with.

THAT.....makes absolutely NO sense

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

It is, at this point abundantly clear that you have no intention of discussing this topic in good faith, with facts and logic. Indeed, you may not have that ability. You have failed to directly address a single point that I have made and it's apparent that you do not care a whit about the children. You're only purpose here is to drop snarky, uniformed and bigoted comments about gay people. As far as adoption by singles goes-as thought that was relevant- take a look at this and try to expand your knowledge base just a little:

_____________________________________________________________________________

While some states outright ban adoption by gay couples, other states have laws that do not expressly prevent adoption, but may make it hard or impossible for same-sex couples to complete the adoption process. Still other states do not allow gay couples to adopt, but have no prohibitions on a single gay person adopting

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html#ixzz2vklNkZ3B

http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html


States with Unclear Laws

• According to the Human Rights Campaign, several states have unclear regulations about whether same-sex couple can adopt. In Michigan, for example, the law states that only married couples may petition to jointly adopt, and the state does not have gay marriage. However, a court in 2006 allowed a joint adoption for an unmarried gay couple. The Human Rights Campaign also calls laws in Wisconsin unclear because the courts have never ruled specifically on gay couples adopting jointly, but have "strongly suggested" that unmarried couples may not jointly adopt. Marriage in Wisconsin is legally defined as between a man and woman.

Adopting a Same-Sex Partner's Child

• Not all gay adoption cases are from same-sex couples seeking to jointly adopt. Sometimes, a same-sex partner petitions to adopt his or her partner's child. States that explicitly permit this are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Vermont. The states that expressly forbid a same-sex partner from petitioning to adopt a partner's child are: Florida, Nebraska, Ohio and Utah. The remainder of the states have no explicit laws either way.

Single Gay People Adopting

• States are more lenient with laws that allow single gay people to petition to adopt. That is, there are no laws that expressly forbid single gay people from adopting. Instead, most states have general laws that allow single people to adopt and do not mention sexual orientation as a factor. Florida is the lone state that does not allow single gay people to petition to adopt a child.

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html#ixzz2vkmOa8im

​

Was it me or Sil that you think made no sense?

 

[Montrovant]

I would guess that most people have some aspect of their lives that deviates from the norm. What you really mean, I think, is that gays deviate in a way you are not comfortable with.

More to the point, "gays" (practitioners of habitual homosexual sex) deviate in a way that Christian adoption agencies are not comfortable with. You can't tell a child that a woman is "his new daddy" or a man is "her new mommy". That is a lie. Lying to children is abusive. Adoption agencies don't want children abused. And their Bible tells them that to aide the spread of homosexual values (marriage/adoption/formative environment for new generations) is forbidden under pain of eternal damnation for failure to heed the warning.

Parents lie to their children all the time. That is the norm. They lie about silly things like Santa or the Easter Bunny. They lie about sex. They lie about adult subjects they don't think the child is ready for. Lying to your child is not child abuse legally or, for most people, morally. Once again, you are making things up to try and push a point that you cannot defend honestly.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

I would guess that most people have some aspect of their lives that deviates from the norm. What you really mean, I think, is that gays deviate in a way you are not comfortable with.

THAT.....makes absolutely NO sense

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

It is, at this point abundantly clear that you have no intention of discussing this topic in good faith, with facts and logic. Indeed, you may not have that ability. You have failed to directly address a single point that I have made and it's apparent that you do not care a whit about the children. You're only purpose here is to drop snarky, uniformed and bigoted comments about gay people. As far as adoption by singles goes-as thought that was relevant- take a look at this and try to expand your knowledge base just a little:

_____________________________________________________________________________

While some states outright ban adoption by gay couples, other states have laws that do not expressly prevent adoption, but may make it hard or impossible for same-sex couples to complete the adoption process. Still other states do not allow gay couples to adopt, but have no prohibitions on a single gay person adopting

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html#ixzz2vklNkZ3B

http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html


States with Unclear Laws

• According to the Human Rights Campaign, several states have unclear regulations about whether same-sex couple can adopt. In Michigan, for example, the law states that only married couples may petition to jointly adopt, and the state does not have gay marriage. However, a court in 2006 allowed a joint adoption for an unmarried gay couple. The Human Rights Campaign also calls laws in Wisconsin unclear because the courts have never ruled specifically on gay couples adopting jointly, but have "strongly suggested" that unmarried couples may not jointly adopt. Marriage in Wisconsin is legally defined as between a man and woman.

Adopting a Same-Sex Partner's Child

• Not all gay adoption cases are from same-sex couples seeking to jointly adopt. Sometimes, a same-sex partner petitions to adopt his or her partner's child. States that explicitly permit this are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Vermont. The states that expressly forbid a same-sex partner from petitioning to adopt a partner's child are: Florida, Nebraska, Ohio and Utah. The remainder of the states have no explicit laws either way.

Single Gay People Adopting

• States are more lenient with laws that allow single gay people to petition to adopt. That is, there are no laws that expressly forbid single gay people from adopting. Instead, most states have general laws that allow single people to adopt and do not mention sexual orientation as a factor. Florida is the lone state that does not allow single gay people to petition to adopt a child.

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html#ixzz2vkmOa8im

​

Was it me or Sil that you think made no sense?

It was sil. Looks like something went wrong. Just getting used to this new board

 

[Montrovant]

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

I would guess that most people have some aspect of their lives that deviates from the norm. What you really mean, I think, is that gays deviate in a way you are not comfortable with.

THAT.....makes absolutely NO sense

The right to adoption comes with marriage? Seriously? OK, in that case , since gay couples have the right to marry in 36 states-soon to e 50- than you would agree that they also have the right to adopt?

Actually, it doesn’t work that way at all. Marriage does not give anyone the right to adopt. Marriage and adoption are separate issue with marriage being a RIGHT and adoption being something that people have to actually be qualified for. In addition, single people, including single gay people have been allowed to adopt for quite some time now. I worked in a child welfare agency in NJ and NJ has been allowing same sex couples to jointly adopt since 1997, long before marriage was a possibility.

Yes, single people are not parading a deviant lifestyle in front of kids. Couples would be. Now you understand why couples are required to be married on order to adopt by an overwhelming majority of adoption agencies. New Jersey isn't going to dictate to the rest of the country. It is one state. There are 49 others' democratic will and opinion on the father/mother necessity of couples to contend with.

It is, at this point abundantly clear that you have no intention of discussing this topic in good faith, with facts and logic. Indeed, you may not have that ability. You have failed to directly address a single point that I have made and it's apparent that you do not care a whit about the children. You're only purpose here is to drop snarky, uniformed and bigoted comments about gay people. As far as adoption by singles goes-as thought that was relevant- take a look at this and try to expand your knowledge base just a little:

_____________________________________________________________________________

While some states outright ban adoption by gay couples, other states have laws that do not expressly prevent adoption, but may make it hard or impossible for same-sex couples to complete the adoption process. Still other states do not allow gay couples to adopt, but have no prohibitions on a single gay person adopting

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html#ixzz2vklNkZ3B

http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html


States with Unclear Laws

• According to the Human Rights Campaign, several states have unclear regulations about whether same-sex couple can adopt. In Michigan, for example, the law states that only married couples may petition to jointly adopt, and the state does not have gay marriage. However, a court in 2006 allowed a joint adoption for an unmarried gay couple. The Human Rights Campaign also calls laws in Wisconsin unclear because the courts have never ruled specifically on gay couples adopting jointly, but have "strongly suggested" that unmarried couples may not jointly adopt. Marriage in Wisconsin is legally defined as between a man and woman.

Adopting a Same-Sex Partner's Child

• Not all gay adoption cases are from same-sex couples seeking to jointly adopt. Sometimes, a same-sex partner petitions to adopt his or her partner's child. States that explicitly permit this are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Vermont. The states that expressly forbid a same-sex partner from petitioning to adopt a partner's child are: Florida, Nebraska, Ohio and Utah. The remainder of the states have no explicit laws either way.

Single Gay People Adopting

• States are more lenient with laws that allow single gay people to petition to adopt. That is, there are no laws that expressly forbid single gay people from adopting. Instead, most states have general laws that allow single people to adopt and do not mention sexual orientation as a factor. Florida is the lone state that does not allow single gay people to petition to adopt a child.

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_7875436_states-allow-gay-adoption.html#ixzz2vkmOa8im

​

Was it me or Sil that you think made no sense?

It was sil. Looks like something went wrong. Just getting used to this new board

I usually don't multi-quote because I worry I'll screw it up.

 

[Skylar]

Skylar said he believes it is right and proper to blackmail adoption agencies (the children who depend on their food, clothing and shelter) until they disgorge children to motherless or fatherless "marriages" against their better judgment of what is best for the child. That's like holding up a stick of dynamite to the adoption agency and saying "give me you children or our blow up the orphanage!"

Nope. You'll hallucinating again. I said if a private agency is receiving state funds, its subject to state rules. And if the state rules prohibit discrimination of gays, the private agency can either abide the state rules, or cease taking state funding.
A private agency that is privately funded can do what it wants.

So are you claiming that you are 1. Unaware that those funds feed, clothe and give shelter to the children of those private agencies or 2. Aware but willing to use starving children of those necessities in your war on religion?

Those funds will still clothe, feed and give shelter to children. Just at an agency that is abiding state rules. With the children being moved to where the food, clothing and shelter is.

 

[Silhouette]

Skylar said he believes it is right and proper to blackmail adoption agencies (the children who depend on their food, clothing and shelter) until they disgorge children to motherless or fatherless "marriages" against their better judgment of what is best for the child. That's like holding up a stick of dynamite to the adoption agency and saying "give me you children or our blow up the orphanage!"

Nope. You'll hallucinating again. I said if a private agency is receiving state funds, its subject to state rules. And if the state rules prohibit discrimination of gays, the private agency can either abide the state rules, or cease taking state funding.
A private agency that is privately funded can do what it wants.

So are you claiming that you are 1. Unaware that those funds feed, clothe and give shelter to the children of those private agencies or 2. Aware but willing to use starving children of those necessities in your war on religion?

Those funds will still clothe, feed and give shelter to children. Just at an agency that is abiding state rules. With the children being moved to where the food, clothing and shelter is.

Let me guess...run by gays, for gays? THESE ARE CHILDREN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, NOT ON-DEMAND ACCESSORIES SO YOUR PLAY AT BEING "NORMAL LIKE EVERYONE ELSE" "IN MARRIAGE" CAN GO OFF WITHOUT A VISIBLE HITCH.

 

[Skylar]

Skylar said he believes it is right and proper to blackmail adoption agencies (the children who depend on their food, clothing and shelter) until they disgorge children to motherless or fatherless "marriages" against their better judgment of what is best for the child. That's like holding up a stick of dynamite to the adoption agency and saying "give me you children or our blow up the orphanage!"

Nope. You'll hallucinating again. I said if a private agency is receiving state funds, its subject to state rules. And if the state rules prohibit discrimination of gays, the private agency can either abide the state rules, or cease taking state funding.
A private agency that is privately funded can do what it wants.

So are you claiming that you are 1. Unaware that those funds feed, clothe and give shelter to the children of those private agencies or 2. Aware but willing to use starving children of those necessities in your war on religion?

Those funds will still clothe, feed and give shelter to children. Just at an agency that is abiding state rules. With the children being moved to where the food, clothing and shelter is.

Let me guess...run by gays, for gays? THESE ARE CHILDREN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, NOT ON-DEMAND ACCESSORIES SO YOUR PLAY AT BEING "NORMAL LIKE EVERYONE ELSE" "IN MARRIAGE" CAN GO OFF WITHOUT A VISIBLE HITCH.

The commitment that gay and lesbian parents make to these children is life long. And they are being denied due to the religious bigotry of others. The gays and lesbians are not responsible for the bigotry cast against them. Those doubling down on religiously motivated bigotry are.

 

[Silhouette]

The commitment that gay and lesbian parents make to these children is life long. And they are being denied due to the religious bigotry of others. The gays and lesbians are not responsible for the bigotry cast against them. Those doubling down on religiously motivated bigotry are.

The commitment wolves make to random human infants they find in the wild is also life long. That doesn't mean that adoption agents should consider them prime parenting material for orphans. There are other factors to be weighed besides "religious biogtry"...though at this particularly-wincing time, your animus towards Christians is duly noted for the record..

A great place to start for that information on "other factors to be weighed" is my signature's picture and the link....to your comments actually Skylar, that it's perfectly acceptable to starve children of food, shelter and clothing to forward the gay agenda of forcing orphanges to disgorged their charges to your cult...or else!

 

[Skylar]

The commitment that gay and lesbian parents make to these children is life long. And they are being denied due to the religious bigotry of others. The gays and lesbians are not responsible for the bigotry cast against them. Those doubling down on religiously motivated bigotry are.

The commitment wolves make to random human infants they find in the wild is also life long.

Gays aren't wolves. Making your entire analogy meaningless jibber jabber.

Gays and lesbians are people. Many of whom are seeking a lifetime commitment to offer a good home to orphans and foster children. And opposing them are those motivated by religious bigotry.

The folks preventing these children from living in good homes with people committed to caring and supporting them are the religious bigots. Not the gays and lesbians.

That doesn't mean that adoption agents should consider them prime parenting material for orphans. There are other factors to be weighed besides "religious biogtry"...though at this particularly-wincing time, your animus towards Christians is duly noted for the record..

The bill in question allows for a religious exemption. There are no mention of wolves, fashion accessories or any of the other babble you've made up.

 

[auditor0007]

Allowing homos to adopt kids is the worst form of child abuse. ......

Put your head back into the sand Sunni.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Allowing homos to adopt kids is the worst form of child abuse. ......

That is a stupid and hateful thing to say. You have no idea what you are talking about!!


. I worked in a state run child welfare agency for 26 years. I had many jobs during that time including child protective services investigator, protective services supervisor, foster care unit supervisor, and foster and adoptive parent trainer.

The state in question, New Jersey, has been placing children with gay foster and adoptive parents for decades, long before same sex marriage was even being discussed. During my career, I was involved in some manner or other with thousands of cases of child abuse, including sexual abuse, physical abuse neglect as well is families that were generally dysfunctional due to substance abuse or mental health issues. I was responsible for removing children from some of those homes when it was determined that the risk was too great not to do so, or if the parents could not be rehabilitated.

In all that time I never came across a gay person who was the perpetrator of child abuse of any kind. Granted, they are few in number compared to heterosexual couples and single parents, but we are talking about a span of more than two and a half decades. In addition, I personally placed children with gay and lesbian couples and individuals after they were damaged by their straight parents. Those gay people provided loving and nurturing homes and gave those kids the best shot in life possible. And no, there were not enough straight people to care for those kids, but if there were I would have still have placed them with the gay folks if the match was right.

Never once did I have a problem with a gay foster of adoptive parent. Never once did any of them reject a child because they were not of the “correct” sexual orientation, but some straight people did in fact reject gay kids. During my time there and beyond I followed those families and I can tell you that those children have grown and thrived and overcame the bad hand that they were dealt by their straight parents, largely due to the nurturing offered and sacrifices made by the gay families who took them in.

In addition, when we talk about gay adoption, most often we are referring to situations where the child in question is the biological child of gay person and that persons partner wishes to adopt as a second parent. The benefits of having two legal parents are clear. There are an estimated 2 million children in the care of gay people. That will not change by banning adoption. It will only put those children at a disadvantage, socially, financially and legally.

In conclusion, opposition to gay adoption is just ignorant and hateful equine excrement. To say that you care about the children while opposing adoption by gays is hypocrisy at it’s very worst.

 

[Syriusly]

Skylar said he believes it is right and proper to blackmail adoption agencies (the children who depend on their food, clothing and shelter) until they disgorge children to motherless or fatherless "marriages" against their better judgment of what is best for the child. That's like holding up a stick of dynamite to the adoption agency and saying "give me you children or our blow up the orphanage!"

Nope. You'll hallucinating again. I said if a private agency is receiving state funds, its subject to state rules. And if the state rules prohibit discrimination of gays, the private agency can either abide the state rules, or cease taking state funding.
A private agency that is privately funded can do what it wants.

So are you claiming that you are 1. Unaware that those funds feed, clothe and give shelter to the children of those private agencies or 2. Aware but willing to use starving children of those necessities in your war on religion?

Those funds will still clothe, feed and give shelter to children. Just at an agency that is abiding state rules. With the children being moved to where the food, clothing and shelter is.

Let me guess...run by gays, for gays? THESE ARE CHILDREN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, NOT ON-DEMAND ACCESSORIES SO YOUR PLAY AT BEING "NORMAL LIKE EVERYONE ELSE" "IN MARRIAGE" CAN GO OFF WITHOUT A VISIBLE HITCH.

Run by people who want to find homes for the kids abandoned by their biological parents, rather than abide by their religious prejudices.