Comments about ‘Senate panel tables same-sex adoption bill’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Feb. 7 2011 1:55 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
ute alumni
Salt Lake, UT

I assume then that cohabitating heterosexuals are okay to adopt also?

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

Once in a while the Salt Lake City and Utah community do something that fills my heart with joy. What a wonderful gift to give children the security and stability of a family. I sincerely pray that Senator Ross Romero's bill passes with a 100% of all votes in the Senate.
Family should come first and this is a step in the right direction. Congratulations Utah!

Anti Bush-Obama
Washington DC, MD

Better than the barbarism of abortion.

sjgf
South Jordan, UT

Baccus0902:

You are certainly correct in the thought that children deserve the security and stability of a family.

Unfortunately, roommates do not constitute a family. This bill would allow a roommate, rather than a parent, to become a parent.

Thank heaven the bill was tabled, which should encourage the new mother quoted in the story to marry a spouse and provide a stable family for the child she loves.

Eddie
Syracuse, UT

Discrimination is cried everytime anything goes against someone who want everyone to see it their way. Let's just all face it, there is discrimination in nature. That's why guys can't have babies and women don't have the upper body strength of men. Everywhere we go we run into discrimination. "I want it my way and if I don't get it, I am going to scream and shout until I get what I want."
sjgf is right above! roommates do not constitute a family. All this would do is create more problems and more confusing laws that leave all of us dazed and confused and the courts full of nonsense cases.

RoadBiker
Orem, UT

I'm a Kleptomaniac. I want to change the laws so that everyone will accept me for who I am and give me all the rights that anyone else has. I shouldn't be criticized. I was born this way and I can't help it. It's just the way I am.

Jiggle
Clearfield, UT

@sjgf

Conservatives tend to have a structural definition of the ideal family as one man married to one woman with children.

Progressives tend to have an operational definition of the ideal family. This is usually a couple who form a committed, stable, and loving relationship with one another and can do the same for any children they may have. They are not just roommates and often would PREFER to be married.

I find the conservative definition to be ignorant. Mainly because I know that a married man and woman may be miserable or they may abuse or neglect their children. The structure of their family does not inherently make them a good family.

The progressive definition makes sense. A family that is attached to each other by bonds of trust and love is likely to be secure and can provide a great home for children.

It is for that reason that I think step, adoptive, same sex, mixed, extended, etc. families can be just as good or better than the "traditional" nuclear family that conservatives advocate as ideal. All families have their own unique challenges, but to assume they are always inherently inferior to the "traditional" ideal, seems very misguiided.

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

@ sjgf 12:57
My friend, unfortunately this forum does not allow us to expand into too much detail. However, I must say that I agree wholeheartedly with you, Roommates do not necessarily constitute a family. That why is so very important that consenting, responsible adults are allowed to enter into a civil contract, call it civil union, call it marriage, call it whatever you want. But a contract that allows people regardless their sex, race, religion, to form a civil unity that protect the children of the
nucleus. A secular society as ours in the United States, should provide the same protection to all children, adopted or otherwise. Parents should be allowed to join under the law and receive the same benefits as traditional marriage, no more no less.

@Eddie:
The history of the United States is filled with discrimination cases, Mentally disabled,African Americans, Chinese,women, Mormons, Hispanics, Gays, to name a few. I agree that sometimes, some people may cry "Wolf", but I think our history forces us not to dismiss those claims very easily.

three11stu
Saratoga Springs, UT

sjgf:
Problem is, she has a spouse, she is just not able to marry her.
I wonder how many people would be okay if their spouse passed away, and from that moment on, your kids were taken from you, since, we all know, kids are better with a man AND a wife as the parents. So, sorry single parents, your rights only go as far as having both of you together. Once one of you goes away, the state will come and take them and give them to a couple, not a single parent.

washcomom
Beaverton, OR

People who don't get their ways of the "progressive movement" tend to cry "discrimination" when literally the way of life that it has been established for thousands of years is being discriminated against.

If someone is a guardian over a child, that child can inherit - if the last will and testament of the guardian makes it so. Just because you are a parent doesn't mean you are a guardian over that child. Guardians actually have more pull over needs of a child than parents do. It's a fact of law.

Johnny Triumph
American Fork, UT

Society's downward spiral will continue as long as government sanctioned immorality pervades. We cannot allow the disintigration of the family unit to continue and to be perceived differently by good-meaning yet off-base attacks on that family unit. The thought may be well meaning but it is still just another attack on the family.

FargoUT
Salt Lake City, UT

@Johnny, then you would support a bill banning divorce, correct? Nothing disintegrates the family unit more than divorce does, not even supposed "immoral" same-sex couples.

The Rock
Federal Way, WA

As a member of the LDS church I believe that same sex retationship are forbidden. I also believe that we all lived in heaven, with God,before we were born.

I can just picture our loving Heavenly Father escorting one of his precisious spirity children down to earth and trying to explain to each child why they are being born into different kinds of families.

After explaining to my children hundreds and thousands of times that they were going to be born to parents who totally disregard His laws and as a result they would have virtually zero opportunity to gain eternal salvation, I might be just a bit testy.

No wonder destruction of those who are ripe in iniquity is certain.

I hope the law makers in Utah treat this with the kindness it deserves.

Rosebyanyothername
Home Town USA, UT

It is quite clear that parents who adopt their spouses children are legally married to begin, and the law does not prohibit such cases.

So why a push for "partners" to adopt the other partner's child if no married. It does not make any sense. It sounds like a back door ploy to make the partners legally joined in same sex unions--when is enough enough. What part of NO do same sex-marriage relationships attempts not understand?

three11stu
Saratoga Springs, UT

the rock:
As a member of the LDS Church, you should know that those who don't have the chance to hear the gospel in this life will get their chance in the next.
Nice try though to try and support your argument.

Kathy.
Provo, Ut

I didn't read anything about the real parent in this situation.
Seems to me all rights for the real parent should be established not a surrogate. All the co-parenting belongs to the real father of this child.

This bill seems to be about taking away the parental rights of the real father and changing the law to make it happen.
Each child has a real mother and a real father and their s rights should be preserved and not given to another.

There has never been a child born to a same gender couple no matter how much hype there is. In order to give them parental rights they must be taken away from the real parent.
It is this "I own the child and the father has no rights" that really bothers me.

O'really
Idaho Falls, ID

@three11stu

The single parent of a child (assuming the other natural parent has no legal rights to the child. ie deceased or perhaps waived their rights at the child's birth) needs to appoint a legal guardian for their child in case of untimely death. That could be the child's aunt/uncle or grandparents or a close friend. There is no need to throw the baby our with the bathwater, or in other words assume the child will be "given" to the government in a free floating scenario like you described. All the protection the child needs according to the natural parent's wishes are already in place. This bill isn't necessary! It will only confuse and undermine the protection of the child.

Jiggle
Clearfield, UT

Culture change is difficult for many to understand. The things which have always been with every society, and always will be: Murder, Theft, Corruption, Scandal, Rape-etc. (you name it - it's probably been done before by someone at some time) There is no "downward spiral"...it just goes around in a circle. The doomsayers have always been around saying society is in a downward spiral yet society in general has not collapsed. Yes, there are challenges and the challenge we now face is not to go backward, but to go forward. All cultures are inherently predisposed to change and, at the same time, to resist change. Culture loss is an inevitable result of old cultural patterns being replaced by new ones. Within a society, processes that result in the resistance to change include habit and the integration of culture traits. Habitual behavior provides emotional security in a threatening world of change. Change makes society keep up with the times, values and laws change based on current needs. An effective, culturally diverse society is one whose culture is inclusive of all of the varying groups. Exclusion and discrimination is what will spiral society downward; not inclusion. Religion often promotes exclusion_and_discrimination.

friedeggonAZstreets
Pembroke, NC

If they are so concerned for the children after they die; then why not make a will?

pikap1868
Layton, UT

@friedeggonAZstreets- because wills can be contested...

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments