What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
264 Comments
- mostie, on 03/02/2009, -5/+138Seems like a bad idea, there are a lot of kids who need a place to live
- Carpy, on 03/02/2009, -9/+136"traditional" -- white, married, heterosexual, middle-class, Christian, 2-car garage ...
- EatingPaste, on 03/02/2009, -2/+86Should couples that get a divorce lose their kids too?
- FasterGun, on 03/02/2009, -5/+80Um, how does banning unwed couples from adopting promote adoption by wed couples? This is retarded.
- lynchjos, on 03/02/2009, -4/+54Lunacy of this aside, if I lived in red state I'd be pissed that the people in charge waste their time on this *****. Instead of blaming society's ills on homosexuality, think about what could be achieved if they put that much energy into solving problems.
- HookmasterCH47, on 03/02/2009, -9/+58At least they're not singling out certain groups. Either it's all OK, or none of it is. Oh, and I hope it fails.
- Batfishy, on 03/02/2009, -5/+52I think they're doing it this way so they don't have to single out a "certain" group.
- wannaBdug, on 03/02/2009, -11/+53This is so wrong. Are only married people capable of love?
- tgjerusalem, on 03/02/2009, -1/+41Not in Tennessee, where the bill is being considered. TN won't even recognize the marriage of a gay couple if they were married in another state and moved in.
This bill would never have come up if it were a general "unmarried people shouldn't adopt." It's targeting gay couples who can't possibly have their marriage recognized in the state and will therefor be barred from adoption or fostering children. - ProjectGSX, on 03/02/2009, -3/+42Correction: Only STRAIGHT married people are capable of love.
- TenaciousG86, on 03/02/2009, -2/+40So, instead of giving a child to a gay couple who would love and nurture the child, they would give it to an abusive heterosexual couple because the fit the more "traditional" family style...that's really looking out for the kids
- Biscuitz, on 03/02/2009, -10/+44WHAT THE *****!
- inactive, on 03/02/2009, -1/+35This Bill guy wants ot ban a lot of things lately.
- nahsrocketeer75, on 03/02/2009, -11/+44The bill is child abuse, plain and simple.
- MacEnvy, on 03/02/2009, -3/+35Don't you see? When you make it so only some people can adopt, it turns adoption into a sort of "exclusive club". And everyone wants to be in an exclusive club - I think my wife and I may adopt now, even though we never wanted to before!
Seriously though, this whole thing is sick. What a bunch of disgusting fools they have running the show down there. - Hetman, on 03/02/2009, -1/+33I think if it is possible to find a family with a father and a mother to adopt a child that is great. However if you are finiancial capablem and have the time to raise a kid, I do not see how we can rule out single parents. It is far better than leaving them in orphanages, or having them bounced from one foster parent to another.
- maximumstats, on 03/02/2009, -1/+29nothing says "family values" more than not allowing children to be part of a family.
- Shawn4168, on 03/02/2009, -2/+30I'm a conservative that believes in traditional family structure, but I gotta say I agree with you there. It's not like we're facing some kind of shortage of foster kids and orphans. Our country is overflowing with kids that need to be adopted, and there are far too few people that are willing to adopt. I'd rather see a child raised by a single parent than not raised by a parent at all.
- MacEnvy, on 03/02/2009, -3/+29Oh don't worry - they'll try to ban divorce next. Fundie nutbars.
- bear90039, on 03/02/2009, -12/+38The last to free slaves. The last in everything.
- Newswiseguy, on 03/02/2009, -9/+35this is discrimination and unamerican, plain and simple.
- TenaciousG86, on 03/02/2009, -6/+30"Traditional" is a matter of opinion...
- tgjerusalem, on 03/02/2009, -1/+24Even more likely, the children won't to any parents.
There are already way more children in need of good homes than people willing and able to provide them. Cutting out all families headed by unmarried adults, specifically targeting all gay couples who can't have their marriage recognized in TN, means even more children will never be adopted at all. They'll stay in perpetual limbo, as wards of the state until they're 18 and thrown out. The foster care system is profoundly dysfunctional, overburdened, understaffed and underfunded. - woahwoahwoah, on 03/02/2009, -1/+22What a brilliant idea. Take a system that's already loaded with unadopted children and impose more restrictions on interested parties. This "traditional family" bull makes me feel like some of these lawmakers have a backwards mentality. They view anyone who is anti-Christian or pro-homosexual as anti-family. What a ***** joke.
These assclowns should view the foster care centers themselves and ask the children if they care about the current marital status of two consenting, loving individuals. - terribly1, on 03/02/2009, -2/+22mmmmm... Fundie Nutbars.
- einrobstein, on 03/02/2009, -2/+20I would argue that discrimination is very american.
- tgjerusalem, on 03/02/2009, -3/+21Troll bait. The only people who can't see a gay couple without thinking SEX SEX SEX are neurotic closeted douchbags. Stop projecting your own sexual hangups on random people.
- terribly1, on 03/02/2009, -2/+19I'd be all in favour of this if, similarly, you were sterilized at birth and had to be deemed "fit" in order to procreate (including whatever ***** they're pushing through with this adoption legislation).
Adoptive parents get scrutinized in order to adopt people, but there are no such regulations on people squeezing out little unwanted mutants of their own.
How is this fair, or even anything short of retarded? - tgjerusalem, on 03/02/2009, -2/+19Apparently, they think they're helping the kids because being raised by queers is a fate worse than a lifetime in the pathetically dysfunctional state foster care system.
/s - terribly1, on 03/02/2009, -1/+17How anyone can think that these kids, having already been abandoned/abused/whatever their situation, should not be in a family where they're loved, nurtured and gain a sense of belonging is ***** beyond me.
"It's for the children?" Having them in a family is the ABSOLUTE BEST THING for them. Who cares if it's 2 dads or 2 moms? Who cares if it's only 1 mom or dad? Give them a roof over their head, a person who cares for them and you're already better off than some overburdened, apathetic foster system. - Powerfan5000, on 03/02/2009, -6/+21Sorry, but I'm burying you for voting against gay marriage.
- Yez70, on 03/02/2009, -1/+16I agree.
Techically, if this passes, this should also lead to taking the children away from all single parents.
We need to be fair and treat all groups the same right?Getting divorced with kids means you lose your kids to the state. Parent dies in Iraq - BAM, the surviving parent loses their kids.
Is this what we're coming to, just to stop gays from adopting?
/s - woahwoahwoah, on 03/02/2009, -2/+17What an *****. Do you know homosexuals? No? Go drink the kool-aid over at Focus on the Family and keep preaching those family values. Abstinence-only education has been a success. Ted Haggard and that moronic senator aren't hypocrites to their own cause. You should learn to remain the ***** out of the private life of another citizen.
How about we outlaw divorce? How about we outlaw couples that can't procreate due to bodily issues? How about we keep at that "traditional family" and allow our adoption centers to overflow? Homosexuals like my brother are principled, mature individuals with real jobs, and yet they are told by the supposed Land of the Free that they can't serve openly in the military, raise children, or contribute to society. You know nothing of them, excluding the propaganda that Focus on the Family distributes. You know, the morons that think gays will end the world.
***** off, trolltard. - kierucom, on 03/02/2009, -1/+15I mean yeah; in an ideal world any child would have two parents to help carry the burden of raising your little angel not to grow up to be a little abomination of society. But hell... in 1999 alone there were over 581,000 kids in foster care WAITING to be adopted. Passing legislation making it more difficult for otherwise-qualifying people to adopt these kids seems like an awful idea.
- TheSpook, on 03/02/2009, -1/+15Yeah, when I read the title, it reminded me of the "grandfather clause" of the pre-Civil War era.
19th century - "Blacks are free to vote, as long as their parents did!"
21st century - "Gays are welcome to adopt, as long as they're married!" - MattB123, on 03/02/2009, -2/+16So, polygamy it is!
- tgjerusalem, on 03/02/2009, -1/+14TN won't even recognize the marriages of gay couples who got married in another state and moved in.
The sole point of this bill is to get around a ruling by the TN attorney general in 2007 that said there was no legal basis for a state law solely banning gay people from adopting. So now they can say they're not discriminating, they're just banning unmarried people from adoption, while banning gay people from marriage. - idoj, on 03/02/2009, -1/+14I'm sorry RedNeckerson, did I miss the part where the article mentioned BDSM dungeon masters and porn stars? Nobody is defined 100-percent by their sexual identity. Sexual identity does NOT determine who will and won't be a suitable parent.
I am an adoptee and also someone who has raised three boys taken out of the foster care system. Children need love. If it comes in the form of two parents, fantastic! If not, let's give these kids a home and stop bickering about things that don't matter. - thephosphorbox, on 03/02/2009, -1/+14Ridiculous. How does being married make you any more qualified to be a parent?
- SocialPoison, on 03/02/2009, -1/+13I can't believe that didn't occur to me until you said it. There's a hole in their logic you could drive a truck through.
- alricsca, on 03/02/2009, -1/+13So single foster mothers and fathers, grand mothers, grand fathers, brothers and sisters, single men and women of means cannot adopt? The fact they would use children's suffering to pursue their agenda is sickening. Study after study show gays and single parents who adopt fair equal to married couples. One thing is clear, being left in a foster home with no permanent parent is the single worst thing that can happen to a child. Having lived in foster care and known many who grew up in the system, the nightmare results of this policy are far worse in real life terms than what these groups, in their irrational fear, imagine might happen in a gay or single parent home. To say they are sick is not enough, they are advocates of child abuse.
- Powerfan5000, on 03/02/2009, -1/+13@PeteyBugs
Apparently you and the folks who drew up this bill have never been in foster care. Many kids would rather die than live in foster care and some do because of neglect. Two parents would be ideal, but one is infinitely better than none. - eagee, on 03/02/2009, -2/+14Wow - Stunningly Stupid TN! Way to go.
- MattB123, on 03/02/2009, -0/+12Don't worry, the penal system will pick up where the foster system stops.
- pjwalen, on 03/02/2009, -2/+13I am so glad you said this. I was reading the comments regarding this article, thinking, why is it everyone is talking about a wedded couple being the ideal scenario. Not every marriage is a happy one of course. It seems to me that person(s) with the most with the most love to give, and the will to do right by the child would be the most ideal situation.
Why aren't we looking at this from the stand point of the adopter, instead of how many available children there are. If a law were written to criminalize single adoption, we are saying that single people, by definition are not competent to raise children. I bet the large population of single mothers out there, who put their heart and soul in to raising their children would disagree. - adml_shake, on 03/02/2009, -3/+14This is the stupidest ***** thing I've heard in a while. With out even touching the gay or straight issue, who cares if they are a single parent? ***** you, I grew up in a single parent house hold because our dad was a ***** ass hole (one of the types that acts all sweet and kind until he gets married), and I turned out fine thank you.
- Khast, on 03/02/2009, -0/+11While it may have references to religion, it also was founded on the freedom FROM religion at the same time.
- inactive, on 03/02/2009, -13/+24Marriage is a unnatural and psychological prison created by religious nuts and extorted and manipulated by gov't
Lets make Govt small and get rid of religion all together,....you know,....for the children - Pake, on 03/02/2009, -1/+12In other words, they'll go about business as usual except have it in writing this time to prevent the lawsuits against discrimination.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 274 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is