Failure?

[999969999]

Did you hear that infertile men and women? Do you understand people that don't want children? You will never be normal. You are not entitled to any human companionship or comfort in your life. "Relationships" are for the sole purpose of procreation. If you straight people are married and can't/won't have children, it is your moral obligation to divorce and move into separate domiciles where, if you are very lucky, you will be permitted a goldfish.

Even with the horribly scary wicked and evil Prop 8, if you lived in California right now, you could live with whoever you want to live with. Have fun! Knock yourself out! Just don't expect everyone to think what you are doing is normal and wonderful.

I pesonally don't care what you do behind closed doors. That's your private business.

But when you try to make it a legal marriage, it becomes a public issue, with things like adoption rights, and so forth. I don't like the idea of children being raised in a "family" like that.

Maybe you're the one who should get a goldfish.

As soon as I get married to my girlfriend, I plan on having my own children. No need for goldfish.

[clocker]

Even with the horribly scary wicked and evil Prop 8, if you lived in California right now, you could live with whoever you want to live with. Have fun! Knock yourself out! Just don't expect everyone to think what you are doing is normal and wonderful. As soon as I get married to my girlfriend, I plan on having my own children. No need for goldfish.

You have a woefully inadequate appreciation of what "normal" is.

Part of that is no doubt due to the callowness of yoot but I fear a large part is simply self-induced/perpetuated ignorance.

[MagicNakor]

I have no inclination of moving to California; I live in a country that doesn't dole out legal and civil rights based upon sexual orientation. What you appear to not realise is that there is far more conferred with the status of marriage than the ability to have children (which doesn't require marriage at all!). The recent example of outrageous actions committed by officials in Sonoma County against Clay Greene should be enough to illustrate the concept.

If your concern is "for the children!" then how do you reconcile that the majority of child abuse cases involve "traditional" families? That children in foster homes (also set in the "traditional" manner) are more likely to be abused? That purporters of child abuse in religious communities are most often youth pastors or priests?

You will be very hard-pressed to find a child being abused in a gay household due to the nature of the adoption process. It is lengthy, expensive and humiliating. If one's goal is to abuse children, there are easier ways to go about it, irrespective of the fact that most child abusers are not homosexual.

As for me, my complex doesn't allow pets. But there is an illegal alien living downstairs. I would complain but then I would be subject to the howlings of the ACLU. Marmalade tabby is a protected status lazing-cat.




Greene vs Sonoma County

Spoiler: Show

Clay and his partner of 20 years, Harold, lived in California. Clay and Harold made diligent efforts to protect their legal rights, and had their legal paperwork in place—wills, powers of attorney, and medical directives, all naming each other. Harold was 88 years old and in frail medical condition, but still living at home with Clay, 77, who was in good health.

One evening, Harold fell down the front steps of their home and was taken to the hospital. Based on their medical directives alone, Clay should have been consulted in Harold’s care from the first moment. Tragically, county and health care workers instead refused to allow Clay to see Harold in the hospital. The county then ultimately went one step further by isolating the couple from each other, placing the men in separate nursing homes.

Ignoring Clay’s significant role in Harold’s life, the county continued to treat Harold like he had no family and went to court seeking the power to make financial decisions on his behalf. Outrageously, the county represented to the judge that Clay was merely Harold’s “roommate.” The court denied their efforts, but did grant the county limited access to one of Harold’s bank accounts to pay for his care.

What happened next is even more chilling: without authority, without determining the value of Clay and Harold’s possessions accumulated over the course of their 20 years together or making any effort to determine which items belonged to whom, the county took everything Harold and Clay owned and auctioned off all of their belongings. Adding further insult to grave injury, the county removed Clay from his home and confined him to a nursing home against his will. The county workers then terminated Clay and Harold's lease and surrendered the home they had shared for many years to the landlord.

Three months after he was hospitalized, Harold died in the nursing home. Because of the county’s actions, Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 20 years. Compounding this tragedy, Clay has literally nothing left of the home he had shared with Harold or the life he was living up until the day that Harold fell, because he has been unable to recover any of his property. The only memento Clay has is a photo album that Harold painstakingly put together for Clay during the last three months of his life.