I knew of a little girl some years back who was adopted by two homo men. They treated her well enough, I suppose. But they got their precious little feelings hurt when she wanted a mother. SHOCK! How dare her to want a mother?! A little girl of eight years old wanted a mother and THEY got their feelings hurt?!
Really, they did. They whined about it like two little sissies. But we gave her a bike. We bought her new clothes, blah, blah, blah. Well there are some things that money just can not buy!
Guess what? It’s not about YOU and YOUR desires, homos. It is about the child. ALWAYS.
I think children are perfectly capable of knowing they need a mother and a father — NOT two mommies and NOT two daddies. You would think the vile liberal left would believe as much, wouldn’t you? The way they insist children have rights from comdoms to sex education, and every other FILTH they want the children to attain and believe.
This judge, this piece of excrement is pushing the New religion. One where everything goes except for the standards of a Holy God. UNLESS he and the other sodomites in this nation REPENT, they will go to hell.
Now I realize there are some who will say they do not believe in God — as if by not believing it will exempt them somehow. WRONG.
And there are others who have made God in their image as some peace-nik who just ooozes with love for everyone soooo much that he winks at such things. WRONG.
But I digress for now. This is what God’s word says about it:
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. — 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
THIS judge WILL stand before a Holy God and answer for his perversions. He will answer for offending one of these little ones with his lying tongue. It would be better if he had a millstone hung around his neck and cast into the sea than to stand before Almighty God on the day of judgment.
Parents, you better hold unto your children. Satans’ government is coming after them! This is about undermining YOUR role as parent as the state begins to do whatever they choose concerning your child.
My mother told me over 30 years aago, “There will come the day when the government will want your children.” SHE WAS RIGHT!
And if you are a homo, don’t come here trying to defend this piece of dung. I’m not interested.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/70722
Same-Sex Marriage Judge Finds That a Child Has Neither a Need Nor a Right to a Mother
U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who ruled last week that a voter-approved amendment to California’s constitution that limited marriage to the union of one man and one woman violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, based that ruling in part on his finding that a child does not need and has no right to a mother.
Nor, he found, does a child have a need or a right to a father.
This man is an abomination to truth!
“Children do not need to be raised by a male parent and a female parent to be well-adjusted, and having both a male and a female parent does not increase the likelihood that a child will be well-adjusted,” the judge wrote in finding of fact No. 71 in his opinion.
“The gender of a child’s parent is not a factor in a child’s adjustment,” the judge stated in finding of fact No. 70. “The sexual orientation of an individual does not determine whether that individual can be a good parent. Children raised by gay or lesbian parents are as likely as children raised by heterosexual parents to be healthy, successful and well-adjusted. The research supporting this conclusion is accepted beyond serious debate in the field of developmental psychology.”
Despite Walker’s claim that this “fact” is “beyond serious debate,” one of the sources he cited for it was a brochure published by the American Psychological Association (APA) that was entered into evidence in the case, which specifically stated twice: “Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.” Walker did not quote this part of the brochure in his opinion.
However, Walker did quote this same brochure as saying: “[S]ocial science has shown that the concerns often raised about children of lesbian and gay parents–concerns that are generally grounded in prejudice against and stereotypes about gay people–are unfounded.”
This quote comes from a side-bar box on page five of the six-page APA brochure. The box purports to answer the “most common questions” about homosexual parents, posing four such questions and giving the APA’s answer to them.
The first is: “Do children of lesbian and gay parents have more problems with sexual identity than do children of heterosexual parents?”
The full answer in the brochure is as follows: “For instance, do these children develop problems in gender identity and/or in gender role behavior? The answer from research is clear: sexual and gender identities (including gender identity, gender-role behavior, and sexual orientation) develop in much the same way among children of lesbian mothers as they do among children of heterosexual parents. Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.”
The brochure does not explain why the APA concludes that the “answer from research is clear” that children of homosexual parents do not have more problems with sexual identity than children with mothers and fathers when in fact, as the brochure itself states, “[f]ew studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.” Nor does Judge Walker explain how his finding of “fact” that the gender of parents does not matter to children is “beyond serious debate” when in fact his own source stipulates that “[f]ew studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.”
The second question answered in the brochure is: “Do children raised by lesbian or gay parents have problems in personal development in areas other than sexual identity?”
The entirety of the answer provided in the brochure states: “For example, are the children of lesbian or gay parents more vulnerable to mental breakdown, do they have more behavior problems, or are they less psychologically healthy than other children? Again, studies of personality, self-concept, and behavior problems show few differences between children of lesbian mothers and children of heterosexual parents. Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.”
Judge Walker does not quote this part of the brochure in his finding that the gender of parents does not matter, nor does he explain how his finding can be “beyond serious debate” when in fact the very evidence he uses to establish this point states that “[f]ew studies are available regarding gay fathers.”
To further his case that the well-being of children is no bar to declaring same-sex marriage a right protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, Judge Walker makes a finding of fact that the state of California already legally recognizes that the gender of parents is irrelevant. As Walker reports it, California laws goes so far as to “encourage” homosexuals to acquire children whether through adoption, foster care, or artificially conceiving a child and, presumably, in the case of a male-male couple, securing a female to gestate the child until the male-male couple can take custody of it.
“California law permits and encourages gays and lesbians to become parents through adoption, foster parenting or assistive reproductive technology,” writes Walker in finding of fact No. 49. “Approximately 18 percent of same-sex couples in California are raising children.”
To support this finding, Walker notes that California’s attorney general, who is Jerry Brown, “admits that the laws of California recognize no relationship between a person’s sexual orientation and his or her ability to raise children.”
“Attorney General admits,” writes Walker, “that California law protects the right of gay men and lesbians in same-sex relationships to be foster parents and to adopt children by forbidding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”
Walker’s ruling declaring same-sex marriage protected under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, if upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, would have ramifications far beyond California, requiring states across the union to recognize same-sex marriages while wiping out any legal protection a child might have from being handed over by state governments to same-sex couples either through adoption or foster parenthood.
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as applied by Walker would require states to grant a marriage license to same-sex couples and would-be parents, while implicitly annihilating the notion that each American child has an equal right to a mother and a father.
A child put out for adoption or foster parenting by the state, or a child conceived through technological means and gestated in a hired womb, would have no right not to be assigned to a homosexual couple who would act as his or her father and father or mother and mother.
My thoughts on wicked men like this: Repent — or go to hell.
Recent Comments