Yeah, but those pre-out children can be pretty fucking awesome.

By his argument a parent should not be allowed to go to war or even hold a dangerous job. Life just is not that absolute. Only religious fanatics are that absolute. That's one reason they are wrong.

(Who finds the posts tiresome?)

Not only does he offend every same-sex couple, but every single parent, all adoptive parents, and every couple who marry for love and who decide to remain child free. What an irretrievable fuckwit.

A friend of mine had a hysterectomy, so no matter what relationship she's in, she'll never be able to biologically produce children either.

Does that mean she shouldn't be allowed to get married either?

Oh wait, I'm trying to use reason and logic with religious fundamentalists. Shame on me.

Most orphans dream of just not getting abused every day...

I'm with you Canuck, who finds these tiresome?

As far as this jerk is concerned, it will be good when no one reacts to anything they write exactly because they are a hate group.

I find the ECDAMAAF posts tiresome only insofar as I find the ECDAMAAF argument annoying, and am annoyed that people keep using it, even though it's been debunked a trillion times over by now.

@6: Bailo, this isn't Dickens, it's real life. Come back when you know the difference.

See, there's the problem with these people's lack of sex ed - they fail to realize that the children that are up for adoption and in need of stable, loving, permanent homes were created by male/female pairings.

@3 canuck -- clearly not the readers of this column! wait...

I'm waiting for the first lawsuit of a child given up for adoption against his birth parents, for having derived the child of the his right to be raised by a mother and a father.

Might work against parents who divorce, too.

The problem, Dan, is that your response doesn't make any sense.

Christian nutjobs are saying that gay parenting is unnatural. But, look! There are terrible straight parents out there! So, gay parents are actually all right! Er, hold on ... that doesn't follow ...

Therefore ... straight parents suck! No, that's not it .... Therefore, kids of gays are actually fine! No ... that doesn't work. Hmm. Therefore, kids of straight parents are actually messed up! Hmm, nope ...

What are you trying to say, Dan? How does this answer the stupid accusation? The fact that there are plenty of bad straight parents has no bearing on whether or not gay parenting is unnatural.

Their argument is stupid and bigoted, but your reply doesn't make any sense.

They are hardly "down with" allowing gay couples to adopt. I'm sure they would love to see it stopped, but they know that's highly unlikely, so they are focusing on the marriage battle instead.

#14

What you just typed doesn't make any damned sense. His arguement is that Maryland is willing to let same sex couples adopted chidren, BUT the same sex couples CANNOT get married because that would be a slight against the child and a way of rewarding people for being gay. This doesn't add up, because then the custody of the adopted children is put into question if the couple breaks up years later.

I'm married and have no children. Now I probably have to buy a gun.

I'm of the opinion that children need to be loved, nurtured, and disciplined. They need routine and clear boundaries. They need adults that give a damn and are invested in helping them gain the tools to navigate life as self-sufficient and critical thinking adults. They need cheerleaders to celebrate their individuality. They need role models. Of course, the need shelter, food, heat, water... too. None of the things children need require a mix matched set of genitalia.

Technically, children don't need 'marriage' either, but because the government attached rights, privileges, and responsibilities (RPRs) to 'marriage' they benefit from 'marriage' as the RPRs provide legal protection and coverage.

This argument that 'marriage' is about and for children is old and irrational. It is obstinately and intolerantly devoted to its own opinion and prejudice, thus it is a bigoted argument in my opinion. Modern 'marriage' is presently defined by the individuals involved. The 'marriage' can be sexually exclusive, open, childless, asexual, friends and house-mates, a means for immigration, obtain health care coverage, etc. and the RPRs remain secure and consistent. The government does not suddenly strip a 'marriage' of its legal benefits, because a couple finds themselves infertile or mutually agree that they have no desire to produce children. This fact, is why it makes perfect sense to right the 'wrong' the government created when it linked 'marriage' to RPRs, to either eliminate all RPRs or extend the RPRs to all couples.

@ Canuck, despicable me, and BEG, etc.

I'm one of those who often skips the "ECDaMaaF" and expressed some weariness some months ago. They remind me of my own childhood, and they remind me of the children of the women I worked with through a local DV organization. I don't need to be reminded and I still see it on a regular enough basis.

@ Dan,

Thank you. I'll happily suck on this. It is a shitty thing to punish children and those who have the grace to raise them, just because their genitalia match. No-one deserves to be erased, and the goal is to erase same-sex families from all public understanding. I support your posts, even when I can only get a few sentences in.

I didn't read past the part about "opposite sex" couple's being the only ones who can "produce" children.
Fuck these people. All they care about is reproduction. Be fruitful and multiply. These people make me sick!

Sprigg seems to be assuming that these gay parents are breaking up straight families in order to steal their children. Um, hello? Gay parents adopt kids whose "birthright" mother and father have abandoned them, or abused them so badly that the state has had to step in and take them away. There are times when his/her own biological parents are the last thing a kid needs...

"Assured of providing children with both a mother and a father" -- well, no. Or is he crusading to punish single parents as well? Widows/widowers? Divorcees?

Just two of the many, many, obvious, infuriating problems with his argument. FRC proving once again: it's not about helping the children, it's not about family values. It's about "those people are different and icky." It's about hate, and nothing else.

Consider it sucked.

As Ben @8 said, it's been debunked a trillion times already. You might as well argue with Flat Earthers about the shape of the Earth.
Having said that, please keep doing what you consider to be right. If nothing else it's informative to see how many provocative morons (not you) still exist in the world.

@kim in portland, completely understandable. There are many posts I have to skip over because the content/subject matter are too trying/tiring on my one last nerve for that day or week.

BTW, how have you been? It's been pretty quiet around SLOG lately, I don't recall seeing much of you, Fnarf, WiS, Fifty-Two-Eighty or Baconcat. I suppose some of it is the new year with new commitments and new interests. Or maybe it's because I'm skipping some of the posts.

So what Peter Sprigg, spokesperson for Family Research Council is saying is that we should do a medical check on every heterosexual couple to make sure that they can conceive a child. If you are old and unable to procreate, then you cannot get married. If you have a medical issue that prevents you from procreating, then you should not be allowed to be married. If you get a hysterectomy or vasectomy, then you must get divorced. Once you reach menopause, or become impotent then you have to get a divorce.. I can see that happening, We should fight for this as it is a against the terms of marriage. FUCKING LOSER!!!

@despicable me,

I've missed you all. I was consumed by and had the honor of caring for a beloved member of the family that recently passed away. And, I've got some upcoming biopsies, ultrasounds, tests etc. to contend with over the next several weeks. My free time is usually spent playing guitar, cooking, or baking bread as I find those activities soothing. SLOG isn't known to be soothing. Instead it is often an educating experience for me. I hope to be around on a more consistent basis in the future with a clean bill of health, more whiskys consumed in my hedonistic search for the perfect dram, my Salsa and Mambo perfecting, and my trademark semi-lopsided smile plastered across my face.

Take care.

Woah, being raised by a biological mother and father is a "birthright" now? If one of their parents dies, can the state place them in a foster home because their "right" to be raised by both parents was "violated"? Are we going to make it illegal for a person with children to die, lest they "violate" the "rights" of their children?

Can I sue my father for leaving my mother when I was a child, or sue my mother for daring to raise me alone? Clearly my "birthright" was "violated" and I was scarred for life as a result.

If a mother or father leaves his or her abusive spouse and raises his or her children alone, is that also violating the "birthrights" of the children? The children would be better off in an abusive home with their "rights" intact?

Children have rights to education, nutrition, shelter, love, medical care, etc. (Interestingly, these same conservatives are against laws like health care reform that would allow uninsured children to obtain medical care. Apparently this right is not as important as being raised by a biological mother and father.) Children do not have the "right" to be raised by someone with a penis and someone with a vagina. That is not a human right.

All my best wishes to you, Kim @25. I too have been there recently and know how unsettling it is until it's all over. Take good care.

It's important, not boring. It just fails as titillating entertainment. That's okay.

Yes, best wishes, Kim! I hope everything goes as smoothly as possible for you.

And, wait....why am I a foster parent to severely sexually and mentally abused children who are the products of a union between opposite sex relationships......oh, that's right , because that's the only relationship that deserves to raise kids! I'm just there to clean up the unfortunate mess!

@25: Keeping you in my thoughts Kim.

That quote from Sprigg sounds extremely familiar. Either Sprigg has commented on this blog, or one of his cultists, cutting and pasting his words, has commented on this blog.

I am so happy not to be married to someone like this asshole, who evidently regards his wife as nothing more than some sort of ambulatory incubator.