Kansas Supreme Court rules in favor of same-sex adoption.

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 more than just the people who mixed genetics in order to create them.  Those people could’ve bumped hips never even thinking about a child and then carried it to term because our religiously saturated culture told them they had to.  Those parents could abuse or neglect their children, straightness is certainly no barrier to this.

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.

  • Heather

    An acquaintance of mine who happens to be gay found this video about peoples’ reactions to bullying of gay parents. Assuming it isn’t all staged (the bully and gay couple with kids are actors), it proves that most people are certainly capable of realizing that other people deserve respect as human beings. The only reason why I wonder if it’s staged is because it takes place in Texas and mentions that a more liberal state had less people standing up against the bully.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5JibZ2U3o-M

    • Glodson

      The area in which this was taped is Farmer’s Branch. Which is a sizable suburb of Dallas. This is a larger population center, more urban. So it is unsurprising to see this reaction to bullying.

      So I doubt is staged. First, Texas is really weird. Don’t get me wrong, we send a lot of assholes to our government, but here in state and on the federal level. Even that is still a function of gerrymandering. But still, the acceptance of homosexuality is rapidly growing, even in Texas. While the GOP hasn’t picked up on this, the people have. Second, like I said, it is a suburb of a large city. Dallas itself is rather conservative, but it tends towards more libertarian style conservatism. I’ve noticed people out here call less about a person’s sexuality than in my home state of SC. Finally, part of the reaction could be because it was two women. Look at the last one. No one spoke up for the two gay men. That’s a bit of sexism, in that people seem to think that women need to be protected, and that a man who is gay is even worse. It is a hideous attitude, which might explain some of this as well.

      It also could be that since there’s so much conservatism out there, that people who reject it tend to be louder. I know I am rather loud at times. It is because I already am a fringe person, being a liberal atheist in this state. So speaking out is a bit more natural for me as I do that any time there is a discussion of politics.

      If this was done in a more rural area of Texas, I suspect the results would be quite different.

  • Desiree

    It takes alot more to be a parent than biology. Anyone can have baby, but not everyone can be a parent. Parents are the ones taking care of the child in tough and good times.

  • baal

    “The agreement is not injurious to the public because it provides the children with the resources of two persons, rather than [one] leaving them as the fatherless children of an artificially inseminated mother.
    Why use 12 words when ‘one’ will do? Was the case limited to artificial insemination only or will it cover all cases where there is a child and a gay partner wants to adopt?

    • Amyc

      The specifics of the case seem to be referring to artificial insemination. Court cases are usually very specific and only apply to other cases with the same (or similar) set of facts.

  • Sids

    I’m not able to watch the video, so I’m not sure if this is covered, but despite the averages, there are some rather liberal parts of Texas (read: Austin). If the reenactment was stagedthere and compared with a marginally ‘more liberal state’, those results become quite believable.

  • ben porter

    kansas is not that back water and our lawyers are just as trained as yours. the main reasons republican win in kansas is fiscal conservitisim. and yes we have crazy christians but just about as many as you. we are not that damn backwards and even homosexuality is becoming more accepted here. we are not known as a state for lynching so i wish you all would quit looking down on kansas we are no worse than most of the states in the union


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X