ThinkProgress reports that the Kansas Supreme Court has ruled in favor of same-sex adoption. Ordinarily you’d think that such an obviously correct statement, like gays can actually take care of children, wouldn’t be much to write about…but it’s in Kansas.
In a decision on how to handle a dissolved same sex relationship in which children were involved, the court ruled:
To summarize, the coparenting agreement before us cannot be construed as a prohibited sale of the children because the biological mother retains her parental duties and responsibilities. The agreement is not injurious to the public because it provides the children with the resources of two persons, rather than leaving them as the fatherless children of an artificially inseminated mother. No societal interest has been harmed; no mischief has been done. Like the contract in Shirk, the coparenting agreement here contains “no element of immorality or illegality and did not violate public policy,” but rather “the contract was for the advantage and welfare of the child[ren].”
The parent to a child is the person, or people, who have come to treasure them. People who say that means less than what genitals they have must be under the influence of something that causes them to seriously mismanage their priorities. Probably religion. Probably Christianity.
