Moniker wrote:You don't demand special treatment? Good for you! I suppose that you should take back your marriage license (PRONTO!), put your baby up for adoption as soon as it is born, and null away any other rights that all the other citizens have that you should NOT have because of these genetic disorders of yours. :)
Wait a minute. Homosexuals who bear children are not required to put them up for adoption. Last I checked, lesbians can bear children by going to a sperm bank and they are not required to give those kids up for adoption.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
Moniker wrote:You don't demand special treatment? Good for you! I suppose that you should take back your marriage license (PRONTO!), put your baby up for adoption as soon as it is born, and null away any other rights that all the other citizens have that you should NOT have because of these genetic disorders of yours. :)
Wait a minute. Homosexuals who bear children are not required to put them up for adoption. Last I checked, lesbians can bear children by going to a sperm bank and they are not required to give those kids up for adoption.
That is what I heard.... I never promote taking kids away from their mother, even if I agree that a married couple is optimal. A bond between mother and child must be protected.... Unless there is proof of abuse. Then nail the woman to a wall.
JMS
Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition from Mediocre Minds - Albert Einstein
Moniker wrote:You don't demand special treatment? Good for you! I suppose that you should take back your marriage license (PRONTO!), put your baby up for adoption as soon as it is born, and null away any other rights that all the other citizens have that you should NOT have because of these genetic disorders of yours. :)
Wait a minute. Homosexuals who bear children are not required to put them up for adoption. Last I checked, lesbians can bear children by going to a sperm bank and they are not required to give those kids up for adoption.
But of course the rest of the post provides an interesting point into what we have done to homosexuals. Is it really fair for us to give "special treatment" to heterosexual couples--things we deny to homosexual couples?
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
Moniker wrote:You don't demand special treatment? Good for you! I suppose that you should take back your marriage license (PRONTO!), put your baby up for adoption as soon as it is born, and null away any other rights that all the other citizens have that you should NOT have because of these genetic disorders of yours. :)
Wait a minute. Homosexuals who bear children are not required to put them up for adoption. Last I checked, lesbians can bear children by going to a sperm bank and they are not required to give those kids up for adoption.
But of course the rest of the post provides an interesting point into what we have done to homosexuals. Is it really fair for us to give "special treatment" to heterosexual couples--things we deny to homosexual couples?
In childrearing, yes. The needs of the child override any need to make a social group "feel better".
JMS
Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition from Mediocre Minds - Albert Einstein
jskains wrote:In childrearing, yes. The needs of the child override any need to make a social group "feel better".
Why, then, do we allow lesbians and single women to go to sperm banks and bear children? Why do we allow the children of Jehovah's Witness parents to deny blood transfusions for their children?
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
Moniker wrote:You don't demand special treatment? Good for you! I suppose that you should take back your marriage license (PRONTO!), put your baby up for adoption as soon as it is born, and null away any other rights that all the other citizens have that you should NOT have because of these genetic disorders of yours. :)
Wait a minute. Homosexuals who bear children are not required to put them up for adoption. Last I checked, lesbians can bear children by going to a sperm bank and they are not required to give those kids up for adoption.
There are some state legislators that want to deny homosexuals the ability to adopt and raise children. I believe Florida actually has legislation that bans homosexuals from adopting children. If these couples are denied the "right" of parenthood then why should jskains be allowed that same right? There are a few courts that still look at sexual orientation when deciding visitation and custody of children. If this "genetic fault" (according to jskains) is the reason they are denied parenthood then why should jskains have this right if he also has "genetic faults"?
Moniker wrote:You don't demand special treatment? Good for you! I suppose that you should take back your marriage license (PRONTO!), put your baby up for adoption as soon as it is born, and null away any other rights that all the other citizens have that you should NOT have because of these genetic disorders of yours. :)
Wait a minute. Homosexuals who bear children are not required to put them up for adoption. Last I checked, lesbians can bear children by going to a sperm bank and they are not required to give those kids up for adoption.
But of course the rest of the post provides an interesting point into what we have done to homosexuals. Is it really fair for us to give "special treatment" to heterosexual couples--things we deny to homosexual couples?
In childrearing, yes. The needs of the child override any need to make a social group "feel better".
JMS
Shouldn't it depend on the couple? Do we prescreen heterosexual couples before they have children? Do we peek into their bedrooms and make sure there's no kinkiness being manifested? Any porno (gasp!)? What about some naughty wife swapping? So do you advocate us peeking into folks bedrooms to ascertain they're engaging in appropriate sexual behavior (according to your dictates) before they are allowed the same rights as those that only hump in the standard missionary style?
Moniker wrote:Shouldn't it depend on the couple? Do we prescreen heterosexual couples before they have children? Do we peek into their bedrooms and make sure there's no kinkiness being manifested? Any porno (gasp!)? What about some naughty wife swapping? So do you advocate us peeking into folks bedrooms to ascertain they're engaging in appropriate sexual behavior (according to your dictates) before they are allowed the same rights as those that only hump in the standard missionary style?
Oooh, good question. Why don't we ding swingers? Is there really that much of a difference for the child between heterosexual swinger parents and homosexual parents? Are homosexual parents worse than single, divorced, or widowed parents?
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
Moniker wrote:Shouldn't it depend on the couple? Do we prescreen heterosexual couples before they have children? Do we peek into their bedrooms and make sure there's no kinkiness being manifested? Any porno (gasp!)? What about some naughty wife swapping? So do you advocate us peeking into folks bedrooms to ascertain they're engaging in appropriate sexual behavior (according to your dictates) before they are allowed the same rights as those that only hump in the standard missionary style?
Oooh, good question. Why don't we ding swingers? Is there really that much of a difference for the child between heterosexual swinger parents and homosexual parents? Are homosexual parents worse than single, divorced, or widowed parents?
Ultimately I don't have answers, which is why these things should be discussed. None of us have all the answers...
JMS
Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition from Mediocre Minds - Albert Einstein