Is this messed up, even by liberal standards?

Question

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070210/ts_nm/rights_gays_adoption_dc

I've seen it all. Wiouldn't we be better off if we reverted to Ozzie and Harriet days? *sigh*

sydb: It's a liberal thing because there are no Republicans parading in the streets demanding "equal rights". Homos already have equalr rights. They can marry anyone of the opposite sex they choose. They're looking for special rights.

Answer 1

Why not just write out a will?

It costs less, protects the rights of the people inheriting and it is easier to rewrite a will than it is to get divorced.

Why can't gay couples incorporate?

Answer 2

Oh, no, you JUST think you have seen it all. In Vermont, the court is taking a 4 year old baby away from its biological mother to give it to the Lesbian civil union person because the real mother refused to let the other person visit the child.
In the case you referenced where one Lesbian adopted another and is now seeking an annulment. How do you annul an adoption? On what grounds? A marriage can be annulled if it was NOT consummated. If a parent consummates something with an adopted child, then that becomes incest or something doesn't it? So, if NOT consummating the adoption means not having sex with that person, then we will need Bill Clinton to sort out the proper language! How can some one unadopt a child? That would be like a biological parent doing what to a child?
Like someone else pointed out, Homos have no standards.

Answer 3

What a sad state of affairs...(pun intended!)

I've heard of this type of "end run" before, but it is very, very rare!

Even as a truly liberal Liberal, I do find myself longing for the O & H days, or what we THOUGHT of as the O & H days, sometimes.

But we DO have to realize that gay couples often want to marry each other, and to protect each other financially. What's wrong with that? If such unions were legal, it would make these "adoptions" unnecessary. (Of course, we'd still have divorce and fights over inheritance, child custody, etc. But we have those anyway.)

Answer 4

This isn't a liberal issue,this is a matter of decency.Forcing people into extraordinary actions like these just so they can live a halfway decent life is immoral.I don't believe the greatest threat to our society is gay marriage.I'm not gonna suddenly turn gay just because people who are can spend their lives married to the person they love.I love how christianists justify their hate and homophobia over this issue,quoting words from a book about an imaginary god and a dead jewish guy who might or might not of existed.

Answer 5

I would think that by even conservative standards that would be messed up, because it puts a tangible effect(the costs of tying up the courts with crap) on the reasons why civil unions should hold the same rights as marriage. They end with the relationship is over....no bs.

Answer 6

Well, the situation is certainly bizarre. However, if these 2 had been allowed to marry, we wouldn't be reading about this, would we.....

Just shows what a stupid issue "gay marriage" is. What difference does it make anyway. It isn't anybodys business who marries who....

Answer 7

It's not Adam and Steve its Adam and Eve*. Give me a break, who cares about gay marriage. I say if they want to be miserable like the rest of us, let 'em! If I have to, they have to.** Same for the military. If you are dumb enough to want to work for that company, go for it!!***

Answer 8

yeah, it's messed up that they couldn't have just gotten married to begin with. Things would be a lot simpler if we didn't make people resort to inaccurate legal processes to recognize unions.

Answer 9

I am a lesbian myself and even I see this as messed up.

Answer 10

Messed up is the cons stupid refusal to allow same sex marriage - they and the courts wouldn't be having this problem if the "moral" minority would back off of it's prehistoric ways.