California Assembly passes bill to up...

California Assembly passes bill to update birth certificates to reflect same-sex parents

There are 191 comments on the San Bernardino County Sun story from May 8, 2014, titled California Assembly passes bill to update birth certificates to reflect same-sex parents. In it, San Bernardino County Sun reports that:

Lawmakers in the Assembly have approved a bill that updates birth certificates to reflect the status of same-sex parents.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at San Bernardino County Sun.

FundieMentally ill

Philadelphia, PA

#41 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
2. If the birth parents aren't listed it isn't an accurate record of birth.
Your homosexual fixation is further distorting your thinking.

Many birth certificates aren't "accurate." Many adoptees cannot (easily) obtain information about their birth parent or parents. These issues involve _only_ lgbt couples in your addled mind.

Further, these issues of altering birth records to ensure legal rights is not tantamount, as you in your homosexual frenzy would have it, to a married couple of men trying to tell their child that she is biologically theirs.

That is an absurd claim to make about any same sex couple.(Although one parent in a same sex couple could be, and often is, one of the birth parents.)

You're very, very disordered is all. Your deranged arguments really come down to, "I'm afraid I won't be able to be a homophobic bigot for much longer, so I better try to undermine lgbt rights by any insane argument I can dream up for eight hours a day."

And so off to your grave with you, trash.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#42 May 13, 2014
FundieMentally ill wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Your homosexual fixation is further distorting your thinking.
Many birth certificates aren't "accurate." Many adoptees cannot (easily) obtain information about their birth parent or parents. These issues involve _only_ lgbt couples in your addled mind.
1. Your thinking that is inaccurate and very strange, but I wouldn't expect much from you.
2. I made it clear that it was an adoption issue, not a gay issue. Again, your strange fixation clouds your thinking.

Why don't you go sit by the Liberty Bell and tell everyone what you think?
FundieMentally ill

Philadelphia, PA

#43 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Your thinking that is inaccurate and very strange, but I wouldn't expect much from you.
2. I made it clear that it was an adoption issue, not a gay issue. Again, your strange fixation clouds your thinking.
Why don't you go sit by the Liberty Bell and tell everyone what you think?
We don't have a lot of ignorant bigots in the environs of the Liberty Bell. They're all concentrated in educationally impoverished backwaters.

You didn't address any of the content in my post.

Many of these issues you are pretending to complain about are in play in exactly the same way with heterosexual couples' adoptions. You don't obsess over those. You never mentioned them. You're not now castigating heterosexual, adoptive parents.

It is a an issue of your sexual illness of homophobia, therefore.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#44 May 13, 2014
FundieMentally ill wrote:
<quoted text>
We don't have a lot of ignorant bigots in the environs of the Liberty Bell.
Then stay away and keep it that way.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#45 May 13, 2014
FundieMentally ill wrote:
You didn't address any of the content in my post.
Your post had no content.
FundieMentally ill

Philadelphia, PA

#46 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Your post had no content.
Did jaysus say you could like when doing your homophobic trolling?

Of course the content was: Every single thing you are complaining about all the time, for hours each day here, pertains just as accurately (or inaccurately) to heterosexuals.

Yet your whines are directed only at gay men. You merely have serious problems with your sexuality is all.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#47 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
If the birth certificate doesn't name the birth parents it isn't a record of birth. Good news, it remains the one and only record of birth, it's just becomes a sealed record.
If it says "birth certificate" and it lists anyone other than the birth parents it's fake, a lie, false.
Only a really stupid person would say that naming two people unrelated to the birth in any way was 'slightly' changing the information.
Then answer 2 questions for me:

1. Why doesn't the state arrest anyone who presents this document as if it were legitimate?

2. How long have you been an opponent of adoption documentation fraud?
FundieMentally ill

Philadelphia, PA

#48 May 13, 2014
I meant did jaysus say you could _lie_ when doing your homophobic trolling?

I realize in my better moments that this is not facebook.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#49 May 13, 2014
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Then answer 2 questions for me:
1. Why doesn't the state arrest anyone who presents this document as if it were legitimate?
2. How long have you been an opponent of adoption documentation fraud?
1. Because they approve of the lie. They created the lie.
2. Not really an opponent, just presenting the facts. Again, it's simple, if you were adopted your birth certificate is a sealed document in every state. Six states allow you access to the real document after your 18th birthday.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#50 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
1. Because they approve of the lie. They created the lie.
Then they are complicit in this crime. Should charges be filed?
Wondering wrote:
2. Not really an opponent, just presenting the facts.
Your "facts" have included words like "fraudulent", "falsified", and "fake". Are you saying you're NOT an opponent of these things? Are you OKAY with fraud? Wouldn't you prefer to see the perpetrators punished appropriately?
Wondering wrote:
Again, it's simple, if you were adopted your birth certificate is a sealed document in every state. Six states allow you access to the real document after your 18th birthday.
Should penalties be harsher against the 44 states which force adoptees to be a permanent party to this fraud? How can this be rectified? What would be the best punishment to level against the state agencies, or even elected officials, who participate in this ongoing conspiracy to defraud the American public?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#51 May 13, 2014
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Then they are complicit in this crime. Should charges be filed?
2. Your "facts" have included words like "fraudulent", "falsified", and "fake". Are you saying you're NOT an opponent of these things? Are you OKAY with fraud? Wouldn't you prefer to see the perpetrators punished appropriately?
3. Should penalties be harsher against the 44 states which force adoptees to be a permanent party to this fraud? How can this be rectified? What would be the best punishment to level against the state agencies, or even elected officials, who participate in this ongoing conspiracy to defraud the American public?
1. It's not a crime, the law is the law. It's just a lie.
2. I would like to see a record of birth be accurate.
3. See #1.

You may have a problem with this but it's true.
If you were adopted your birth certificate may not identify your real parents.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#52 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
1. These birth certificate "updates" are nothing new and not exclusive to California. You most likely are unaware but we have 50 states in this country.
Actually, such "updates" are new, and at the moment they are in California. I am well aware that there are 50 states, and when last I checked, they are sovereign and capable of making their own law, assuming that they do not violate the US Constitution.

Once again, you merely reaffirm your own ignorance.
Wondering wrote:
2. If the birth parents aren't listed it isn't an accurate record of birth. Simple, just like you.
Wondering, the record is what the state says it is, plain and simple. Your opinion is irrelevant. Your inability to absorb that their might be births that include those with anonymous parents (like sperm donors), where adding the legal parent of record is desirable, is merely indicative of your lack of creativity and mental capacity.
Wondering wrote:
Did you know that sperm donations are becoming a big problem? Of course not.
I never said they were, foolish person. They also aren't listed as parents on a birth certificate. Congratulations, for once again making a fool of yourself.
Moloch the Owl

Florence, MA

#53 May 13, 2014
FundieMentally ill wrote:
<quoted text>
Have we established the LaRouche-alike, anti Semitic, Fed and Ukraine obsessed homophobe logging on from various places in (Western?) MA is "Wondering"?
Because my guess would be that "Boy Wonder" is "Foxy."
Your azz is smarter than your brain.

"The Odessa Massacre". "What REALLY happened"?
Youtube...
10 minutes long and thoroughly eXplained for remedial folks like you.
If you think you're going to get critical thinking unbiased news here in America you are terribly mistaken. And why? Well, who owns the media?

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#54 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
1. It's not a crime, the law is the law.
So, you acknowledge the law, so long as you like it?
Wondering wrote:
It's just a lie.
And the law isn't the law if you don't like it?
Wondering wrote:
2. I would like to see a record of birth be accurate.
Such a record is an accurate record showing the legal guardians, just as a document showing the legal birth mother and guardian of a child of artificial insemination would be. Were you any more intelligent, you might understand how absurd your arguments are.
Wondering wrote:
3. See #1.
Granted, you are still insane.
Wondering wrote:
You may have a problem with this but it's true.
If you were adopted your birth certificate may not identify your real parents.
So, you acknowledge that this condition already exists, but only under the circumstances that you find to be acceptable..
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#55 May 13, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
I am well aware that there are 50 states
Only because I told you.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#56 May 13, 2014
lides wrote:
I never said they were, foolish person.
I'm not surprised, ignorant person. Search accidental incest. Be sure you have a 5 year old with you so they can explain it to you in terms you'll understand.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#57 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
1. It's not a crime, the law is the law. It's just a lie.
A fraudulent document IS a crime. Why don't you want to see this crime punished? Why are you happy to see it slide?
Wondering wrote:
2. I would like to see a record of birth be accurate.
So, you want to see the identities of the birth parents revealed, and the relationship between the adoptive parents and their child weakened?
Wondering wrote:
3. See #1.
You may have a problem with this but it's true.
If you were adopted your birth certificate may not identify your real parents.
But according to you, this is fraud (even if the state doesn't think so).

So, one of three possibilities is happening here.

1. You are in the habit of making excuses for crimes to go unpunished. Or,

2. You would like to see this crime corrected, even at the expense of the families that these polices are intended to protect. Or,

3. You are broadly misusing terms like "fraudulent", there is no fraud taking place, and you simply have too large of an opinion of your own authority in state matters.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#58 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
Only because I told you.
No, I was aware before, your remark, as usual, had little bearing upon the topic at hand. The topic, in case you had not noticed is, "California Assembly passes bill to update birth certificates to reflect same-sex parents," which would render the position of the other states irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Were you more intelligent, you might understand that.
Wondering wrote:
I'm not surprised,
That comes as some surprise.
Wondering wrote:
ignorant person.
Yes, you are.
Wondering wrote:
Search accidental incest.
Why? Doing so seems somewhat irrelevant to the topic at hand. You aren't strengthening your case, although you are making a strong case that you aren't terribly bright.
Wondering wrote:
Be sure you have a 5 year old with you so they can explain it to you in terms you'll understand.
I'll tell you what, I'll leave them on loan to you. You clearly need on the help you can get.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#59 May 13, 2014
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
A fraudulent document IS a crime.
Not if the law allows it. Now FO.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#60 May 13, 2014
Wondering wrote:
Not if the law allows it. Now FO.
If the law allows it, then it isn't fraud.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Hyper sensitive gay posters 23 min Frankie Rizzo 14
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 38 min cpeter1313 51,438
News Microphone cut after Mormon girl reveals shea s... 1 hr nomo 12
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 1 hr Cue Ball 26,389
News Poll: Younger Republicans more liberal on immig... 1 hr Tommy T 5
News Nikki Haley and her son heckled during NYC gay ... 2 hr Tommy T 9
News New York's highest court welcomes first openly ... 2 hr Tommy T 5
News California AG bans state travel to Texas, 3 oth... 2 hr Rose_NoHo 80
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 2 hr TNT 69,548
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 6 hr Frindly 6,885
More from around the web