French Gay Marriage Bill Presented to Parliament

Jan 29, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: EDGE

People demonstrate in support of a government project to legalize same-sex marriage and adoption for same-sex couples in Paris.

Comments
61 - 80 of 106 Comments Last updated Feb 6, 2013
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68
Jan 31, 2013
 
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
So you're saying that "married" couples may adopt, and "CU" couples may not?
A
I don't know why you insist on saying I want a ban in total contravention to anything I have written, but since you want to make up both sides of this, have at it....
but don't expect me to pretend you are reading my posts...
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#69
Jan 31, 2013
 
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
There are plenty of kids discarded by their straight parents.
you do get that you assumed all procreation was straight?
but you mean gay ones as well right?

or are you saying we are DIFFERENT that way?
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#70
Jan 31, 2013
 
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>

I don't believe you have this properly thought out.
go back, and READ my posts.

I say many times NO BAN...yet here you are again claiming I want a ban.

You either didn't even read what I wrote or you need to follow your own advise...

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71
Jan 31, 2013
 
straight shooter wrote:
go back, and READ my posts.
I say many times NO BAN...yet here you are again claiming I want a ban.
You either didn't even read what I wrote or you need to follow your own advise...
I read it! How could I reply if I hadn't? It was so SHORT, it's not as if I couldn't spare the time!

If you want to be better understood, how about trying more than a one-word answer? All you said was "adoption". What ELSE am I supposed to get out of that? If you want me to have a deeper understanding of what you're saying, then try EXPANDING on that single word!

So you DON'T mean that "married" couples may adopt and that "CU" couples may not. So what DO you mean?

Do you mean that "married" couples will be given "first draft pick" at adoptions, while "CU" couples get punted down the waiting list?

Why can't they do that NOW? As the poster "Not Yet Equal" pointed out to you, adoptions are decided on a case-by-case basis. Couples with two sources of income, no felonies, and a clean house are given "preference" in this arena over couples who live in squalor, or are alcoholics, or are career criminals. If you think that "same-sex couple" is a valid point to consider when placing children for adoption, there isn't any reason to create an entirely new category for those couples. They can simply be considered on their merits when they apply to adopt, like everyone else! You don't have to paste a segregating label onto them which does NOTHING ELSE AT ALL.

If NONE of this is what you mean, could you explain further? Meaning, further than just ONE word?
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#72
Jan 31, 2013
 
straight shooter wrote:
its curious that we have had gay marriage for so long and have no data on this when we had tons of data on how CU's were not good enough well before 7 years...isn't it?
Not curious at all. Children don't go to school until they are six years old, so there's only a few years of data.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73
Jan 31, 2013
 
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
please provide the study. As you well know, many of the studies addressed divorced homes but not when one of the gay parents is not present...
and given that you guys love to say the regenrus study is not reliable as the groups it compares are not spot on ....
I would suggest you need to apply that critique to the MARRIAGE context as well...
its curious that we have had gay marriage for so long and have no data on this when we had tons of data on how CU's were not good enough well before 7 years...isn't it?
We have data from studies spread out over 30 years. You simply refuse to accept it.

The Regenrus study confirmed what we already knew: intact families do better than non intact families.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#74
Jan 31, 2013
 
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
you do get that you assumed all procreation was straight?
but you mean gay ones as well right?
or are you saying we are DIFFERENT that way?
Discarded kids are usually unwanted, unplanned kids.

Gay couples must be motivated to have kids, and when they do, they are usually not discarded.

But as you surely must know by now, many gay people do reproduce using all of the many methods available to straight couples who choose to use assistance, or adopt.

You provide no legitimate governmental interest sufficient for harming same sex parent families. Doing so provides nothing to opposite sex couples. It only causes unnecessary harm.
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#75
Feb 1, 2013
 
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Discarded kids are usually unwanted, unplanned kids.
Gay couples must be motivated to have kids, and when they do, they are usually not discarded.
.
a rational distinction, no?
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#76
Feb 1, 2013
 
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>

So you DON'T mean that "married" couples may adopt and that "CU" couples may not. So what DO you mean?
?
for the last time, I mean a distinction should be made in the case of a tie in every other factor between a CU and a marriage as to a specific adoption...to prefer the marriage as providing both parents...

if both couples are "married" how would we distinguish?
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#77
Feb 1, 2013
 
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
We have data from studies spread out over 30 years. You simply refuse to accept it.
The Regenrus study confirmed what we already knew: intact families do better than non intact families.
and most of your studies merely show that highly educated parents tend to be better then average educated...

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#78
Feb 1, 2013
 
straight shooter wrote:
for the last time, I mean a distinction should be made in the case of a tie in every other factor between a CU and a marriage as to a specific adoption...to prefer the marriage as providing both parents...
if both couples are "married" how would we distinguish?
By simply LOOKING at them! Why should that be so difficult? Adoption agencies do that every day! All the married couples they look at NOW are all called "married", but that doesn't stymie the agency's efforts to determine which are more suited for adoption and which are not. They investigate each and every couple in great detail. They look at their home lives, their employment. They can perform background checks. They don't simply pull names out of a HAT, for pete's sake.

When marriage equality is established nationwide, these agencies will distinguish between fitting parents and unfit parents in exactly the same way that they distinguish them NOW. With a thorough examination of the couple that is applying for adoption. That's the only appropriate way to do it.

Every single married couple in the nation (or world) is different from every other couple in millions of tiny ways. You will NEVER find two couples that are an EXACT tie. And even if you did, it's not as if there aren't enough children to go around. Adoption agencies will never have to pick one couple over another due to a tie. There are orphaned children enough for BOTH couples, if they are both found to be fitting as parents. The only couples that need to be turned down are those that would not be good parents, not those who are as fitting as any other, but lose a coin toss.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#79
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
a rational distinction, no?
Not at all. The end results are the same. Same sex parent families are raising kids, just like opposite sex parent families. We don't treat kids of straight parents differently depending on how they came to be. Adopted kids are legally equal to kids who have biological ties to one or both parents.

Denial of equal treatment provides nothing for straight families. It only harms same sex couples and their families for no legitimate reason.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80
Feb 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
and most of your studies merely show that highly educated parents tend to be better then average educated...
They show that same sex couples can do at least as well if not better than opposite sex couples.
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81
Feb 4, 2013
 
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
By simply LOOKING at them! Why should that be so difficult?
easy, gays will simply claim they have the same EXACT marriage and thus are the same and such a distinction can not be supported...

like you ALREADY do...
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#82
Feb 4, 2013
 
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
They show that same sex couples can do at least as well if not better than opposite sex couples.
as long as you compare highly educated gays to average straights and exclude gays who abandoned their children...
like most of your studies do...

what was your gripe with regenrus again?
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83
Feb 4, 2013
 
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
as long as you compare highly educated gays to average straights and exclude gays who abandoned their children...
like most of your studies do...
what was your gripe with regenrus again?
His data didn't support his conclusions. He made invalid comparisons.
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#84
Feb 4, 2013
 
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
for the last time, I mean a distinction should be made in the case of a tie in every other factor between a CU and a marriage as to a specific adoption...to prefer the marriage as providing both parents...
Give us some examples from YOUR State.
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#85
Feb 4, 2013
 
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text> His data didn't support his conclusions. He made invalid comparisons.
just like the studies on which you would rely...
or do you want to share a study comparing married gays with married straights?
straight shooter

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#86
Feb 4, 2013
 
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>Give us some examples from YOUR State.
how much of a right is gay marriage in YOUR state?

what job did you have at GE moron?

go play with icons dude...
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#87
Feb 4, 2013
 
straight shooter wrote:
<quoted text>
just like the studies on which you would rely...
or do you want to share a study comparing married gays with married straights?
...and on what studies would I rely, oh great and powerful Wizard of Fake? You enjoy putting words in people's mouths and then bitching about it. Kinda makes you look simple.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••