| Author |
Message |
    
Maplewoody
Citizen
Username: Maplewoody
Post Number: 893
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 5, 2005 - 2:51 pm: | 
|
Yet another example of superior heterosexual parents.
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/10810718.htm |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4463
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 5, 2005 - 3:05 pm: |
|
The Dollars are not the kid's parents. So, your thread title is incorrect.
|
anon
Citizen
Username: Anon
Post Number: 1639
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, February 5, 2005 - 3:16 pm: |
|
Why is their sexual orientation relevant? |
alison mccoll
Citizen
Username: Alikoz
Post Number: 75
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, February 5, 2005 - 3:38 pm: |
|
Anon,
If the state placed these kids in this home, the sexual orientation of the parents would be VERY relevant. Florida is the most vile state in the union when it comes to the rights of queer couples in adoption. The arguement would be that Florida is more comfortable placing kids in the torture chambers of hetero couples than allowing loving gay couples to adopt them.
This is a peculiar case, because authorities claim the Dollars (oh, the irony of that name, given the financial incentives to foster children!) are neither the childrens' biological OR foster parents. Hard to understand why they were caring for(or more accurately, mistreating) them.
Monsters like the Dollars sadly exist in all sorts of places. But in other states, one might make the argument that the children have no one else who wants them. It would be a bad argument to make. But in FLorida, many gay couples WANT desperately to adopt and are denied. So it is possible these children could have been well-cared for by a queer couple rather than tortured by the Dollars.
The group financially backing the fight to take down the Harvey Milk school also hails from Florida. "The Sunshine State?" I don't think so.
|
Mark Fuhrman
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 1244
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 5, 2005 - 6:59 pm: |
|
They moved to Florida from Tennessee--I think it was TN that placed the kids with the Dollars. And obviously lost track of them, did not do home studies, etc. I don't see how this is Florida's fault, regardless of its stand on gay adoptions. |
cmontyburns
Citizen
Username: Cmontyburns
Post Number: 670
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 5, 2005 - 8:28 pm: |
|
"The arguement would be that Florida is more comfortable placing kids in the torture chambers of hetero couples than allowing loving gay couples to adopt them."
Have any facts to back up that ridiculous allegation?
Sometimes being on the right side of the issue isn't enough. The way you make your argument matters, too.
|
johnny
Citizen
Username: Johnny
Post Number: 1184
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, February 5, 2005 - 11:38 pm: |
|
Who says their heterosexual? |
CFA
Citizen
Username: Cfa
Post Number: 1292
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, February 6, 2005 - 6:29 am: |
|
Oye |
Michael K. Mc Kell
Citizen
Username: Greenerose
Post Number: 558
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 6, 2005 - 8:42 am: |
|
Homosexual or heterosexual abuse is abuse.
|
joeltfk
Citizen
Username: Joeltfk
Post Number: 96
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, February 6, 2005 - 9:43 am: |
|
I think the point is that if Florida allowed homosexual adoptions, there's a chance a more loving family would have come up in line before the Dollars got control of these kids. But who knows? Homosexual abuse and hetero abuse is abuse. Gay family love and Hetero family love is family love. |
e roberts
Citizen
Username: Wnwd00
Post Number: 298
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 7, 2005 - 4:55 pm: |
|
who said that a homosexual couple is less likely to abuse a child then a heterosexual couple? seems like we are just trying to stir the pot up maplewoody. |
joeltfk
Citizen
Username: Joeltfk
Post Number: 101
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 7, 2005 - 5:04 pm: |
|
I don't think anyone is really saying that, e roberts, but more good parents -- straight or gay -- in the mix means it'll be less likely that those monster parents -- straight or gay -- might not come up so high on the "deserving list" either because the standard can be raised or they'll just fall further down on the list.
There is no question, however, that state laws banning gay adoption are viciously ignorant and as repugnant as any racist or sexist legislation that has ever been turned into law. |
e roberts
Citizen
Username: Wnwd00
Post Number: 299
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 7, 2005 - 9:13 pm: |
|
joe, while i may agree with you in principal that i do not like the state law you do have to consider the fact that this whole issue is rather new (less then 10 years) and it takes a long time for people to chance their view points and then the law eventually. the people of the state who supported, passed, or enforced this law are allowed to their opinions and can do what they like in their state.
if you dont agree thats fine but i will not discount their feelings and opinions just because you do not like it.
regardless of what the more liberal part of the country says and thinks throughout a huge portion of the country there is still a great stigma of being a child in a family that has two dads/moms. |
luv2cruise
Citizen
Username: Luv2cruise
Post Number: 322
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 8, 2005 - 4:59 am: |
|
That's because the people that live in that huge portion of the country are retarded and are involved in incest. |
e roberts
Citizen
Username: Wnwd00
Post Number: 301
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 8, 2005 - 9:35 am: |
|
yes that is right luv everyone in the entire country is wrong except for the portion that live on the west coast and a portion of the east coast. |
joeltfk
Citizen
Username: Joeltfk
Post Number: 103
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 8, 2005 - 9:45 am: |
|
erob,
I know we agree on the issue fundamentally. For example, laws requiring parental notification for abortion procedures are wrong IMHO, but I can understand the opposition in their efforts to decrease the number of abortions in America and allow(if not mandate) opportunities for families to work together on personal issues.
But banning gay adoption is akin to banning interracial marriage. It's something society should reject outright at the earliest opportunity. I cannot sit idly by and say, well everyone has an opinion, because gosh darn it, in this case, I KNOW BETTER. Anyone who favors banning gay adoption anywhere is at best, ill informed, and at worst disgustingly self-righteously ingorant. If you ban gay adoption because children are best raised by a mother and a father (and that may even be true), then you should ban single parent adoption and interracial adoption as well.
The predominant mission should be placing children in loving homes where they can be cared for, protected, and given the means to thrive. That description does not speak to gender any more than it speaks to race.
I think everyone has a right to an opinion, but reject the notion that Floridians are entitled to that opinion as manifested in state law.
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page