Utah judge removes child from lesbian foster parents

  • Thread starter Thread starter gracepoole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lax16 said:
You are making an assumption that they will be in a loving, stable home and not bounced around.
Click to expand...
That is not an assumption. It is the judgement of the relevant authorities and the biological mother.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
There is plenty wrong with the judge’s ruling. He did not judge fitness based on any of the criteria defined by law, disregarded the findings of the relevant authorities, disregarded the wishes of the biological mother, did not evaluate the circumstances of the specific couple, and instead went way beyond the scope of his authority and declared that an entire class of citizenry is unfit to raise children and refused to disclose the basis of this opinion. Disclosure or not, the basis is clear; personal prejudice. Its no different than denying a couple adoption for no reason other than their race or religion.
Click to expand...
Nope. I think he weighed all of those against facts on the other side in terms of what children need and have a right to.

I noticed ALL of your criteria are about what the adults with a stake want and none about the child in question.
  1. wishes of the biological mother
  2. circumstances of the couple
  3. fitness of the couple
  4. relevant authorities
  5. current law
The rights of the child don’t count or substantially amount to “no reason” in your estimation.

Perhaps the judge is trying to voice his concern for the child and children in general and, for once, stating clearly that those need to be taken into account above and beyond what adults want where a voiceless human being is concerned.

This issue is being decided in our culture purely on the basis of what adults want in a very similar way to which the “right” to abortion has been decided with absolutely no regard for those babies in the womb.

That side of the issue needs to be taken into account by courts, judges and future parents. My suspicion is that the need of a child for a mother AND father don’t even register on your radar. Correct?
 
Peter_Plato said:
That side of the issue needs to be taken into account by courts, judges and future parents. My suspicion is that the need of a child for a mother AND father don’t even register on your radar. Correct?
Click to expand...
That is correct, because no such need has been established. In fact, the evidence points to the contrary; a child does not need parents of both genders.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
That is correct, because no such need has been established. In fact, the evidence points to the contrary; a child does not need parents of both genders.
Click to expand...
I remember when people “establish” such things were saying that children do not need both parents, one would do.

So now we have induced the state to ok experimenting on the most vulnerable of those in its charge, on the specious grounds that badly conducted social science experiments have not found any harm being done… ignoring the one they did find, which is that thise raised in same-sex households ars more likely to experiment with homosexual sex (which is puzzling, if one is “born gay,” no?) What will we find in 20 or 30 years when these poor experimental subjects are all grown up?
 
St_Francis said:
I remember when people “establish” such things were saying that children do not need both parents, one would do.

So now we have induced the state to ok experimenting on the most vulnerable of those in its charge, on the specious grounds that badly conducted social science experiments have not found any harm being done… ignoring the one they did find, which is that thise raised in same-sex households ars more likely to experiment with homosexual sex (which is puzzling, if one is “born gay,” no?) What will we find in 20 or 30 years when these poor experimental subjects are all grown up?
Click to expand...
This is hardly experimental. Same-sex couples have been raising children for decades.
 
lax16 said:
The culture in which a child is being raised must also be taken into account.

Is it fair to subject a child to being ridiculed or ostracized if the majority of people around him or her don’t accept the lifestyle? What if this was a predominantly Muslim area - should a child be used to prove a point or take a stand?
Click to expand...
So all those white couples out there with adopted kids of a minority race should have their kids removed too? Especially in the south! I’ve seen the ridicule those kids can face first hand. Your argument is ridiculous… Either we have laws and our courts enforce them, or we just go with whatever the judge feels like at the moment. He is religiously opposed to gay people marrying and raising kids, so he will enact his own version of religious justice. That can’t stand in the US.
 
Maximilan_Kolbe said:
Why is it sketchy, when the Pope and God both agree the child didn’t belong there?
Click to expand...
What God’s stance on it is is up for debate… and the Pope’s opinion on the matter has no bearing whatsoever in a US courtroom. The only opinions that matter are those of the legislature and the judges who’ve written the relevant case law. And in this case the DCFS, or whatever they’re called in Utah. Church teachings do not matter in the least bit when it comes to civil law.
 
SeannyM said:
So all those white couples out there with adopted kids of a minority race should have their kids removed too? Especially in the south! I’ve seen the ridicule those kids can face first hand. Your argument is ridiculous… Either we have laws and our courts enforce them, or we just go with whatever the judge feels like at the moment. He is religiously opposed to gay people marrying and raising kids, so he will enact his own version of religious justice. That can’t stand in the US.
Click to expand...
What do you mean have kids removed? Nobody is talking about removing children that have already been adopted.

So, it’s a good thing for children to be adopted even if it puts them in harms way? According to you, it happens all the time in the south. Is that something that should be promoted?

The judge obviously does not think that by allowing this couple to adopt the baby is in the best interest in the child. I highly doubt it’s how he feels at the moment. I’m sure he has seen a lot in his time as a judge to help form his opinion.

I know people that absolutely do not think gays should marry and adopt children and they are not religious in the least. I hate to tell you, many people think it is common sense.
 
SeannyM said:
So all those white couples out there with adopted kids of a minority race should have their kids removed too? Especially in the south! I’ve seen the ridicule those kids can face first hand. Your argument is ridiculous… Either we have laws and our courts enforce them, or **we just go with whatever the judge feels like at the moment. **He is religiously opposed to gay people marrying and raising kids, so he will enact his own version of religious justice. That can’t stand in the US.
Click to expand...
So it is ok to go with what judges feel like when they feel like overturning referendums, but not when they are choosing the fate of a child?
 
lax16 said:
What do you mean have kids removed? Nobody is talking about removing children that have already been adopted.

So, it’s a good thing for children to be adopted even if it puts them in harms way? According to you, it happens all the time in the south. Is that something that should be promoted?

The judge obviously does not think that by allowing this couple to adopt the baby is in the best interest in the child. I highly doubt it’s how he feels at the moment. I’m sure he has seen a lot in his time as a judge to help form his opinion.

I know people that absolutely do not think gays should marry and adopt children and they are not religious in the least. I hate to tell you, many people think it is common sense.
Click to expand...
If the only reason the judge gave for removing this child is the gender of the adoptive parents, then his ruling is unconstitutional. There is no evidence that the child would be subjected to any harm, and the parents have been screened and vetted and approved by child services.
 
St_Francis said:
So it is ok to go with what judges feel like when they feel like overturning referendums, but not when they are choosing the fate of a child?
Click to expand...
No it is not… When a judge is asked to rule on the Constitutionality of a statute he must look at relevant case law, precedent, legislative intent, application, jurisdiction, standing, and of course the Constitution… Not just do whatever he feels like.

In this case the judge ignored all of the relevant case law, and made a decision with absolutely no legal footing. His order will be overturned.
 
SeannyM said:
No it is not… When a judge is asked to rule on the Constitutionality of a statute he must look at relevant case law, precedent, legislative intent, application, jurisdiction, standing, and of course the Constitution… Not just do whatever he feels like.

In this case the judge ignored all of the relevant case law, and made a decision with absolutely no legal footing. His order will be overturned.
Click to expand...
And of course there was sooooo much precedent for overturning CA Prop 8!
 
SeannyM said:
**If **the only reason the judge gave for removing this child is the gender of the adoptive parents, then his ruling is unconstitutional. There is no evidence that the child would be subjected to any harm, and the parents have been screened and vetted and approved by child services.
Click to expand...
If…Why not wait and see what his reasons are before making assumptions?

There have been studies showing that children do not do well in these situations but of course there are studies to show the opposite. For those of us who have seen it in person, there is evidence enough.
 
lax16 said:
For those of us who have seen it in person, there is evidence enough.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I’ve known and seen some excellent same-sex households that should be a model for all prospective parents.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
Indeed. I’ve known and seen some excellent same-sex households that should be a model for all prospective parents.
Click to expand...
I have seen good and very bad.

If I were a judge, I would think about the environment in which this child would be raised and try to put him/her in the best possible situation.
 
SeannyM said:
There was.

Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley
Loving v Virginia
Lawrence v Texas

And others!
Click to expand...
Three cases about real marriage (between two people of opposite sexes), and one unrelated to marriage?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top