Rethinking the cause of homosexuality
From WWJW (MyFox 8) in Cleveland...
[Sara] Wheeler, 36, and her partner, Missy, decided to start a family together and share the Wheeler last name. In 2000, Sara Wheeler gave birth to a son, Gavin, through artificial insemination. Two years later, they decided Missy Wheeler should adopt the child and legally become his second parent.
Georgia law doesn't specifically say whether gay parents can adopt a child, so the decision was up to a judge in the Atlanta area's DeKalb County. After an adoption investigator determined that both partners wanted it, the judge cleared the request.
The couple's relationship later soured. Missy Wheeler wouldn't comment for this story, but her attorney, Nora Bushfield, said Sara became involved with someone else and wouldn't let Missy and Gavin see each other....
Sara and Missy Wheeler had split by July 2004, and Missy was fighting for joint custody of the boy.
Sara is saying that homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to adopt, until legislation is passed that specifically allows it. Sara, now hated by the Atlanta homosexual community, is also rethinking whether she is actually even a lesbian.
Two things stand out about this.
1. Homosexual activists use ambiguity of the law as well as flaky judges to foist their agenda on others, but cry foul when that same tactic is used against their agenda. While Sara Wheeler's convenient flip-flop is obviously hypocritical, the law shouldn't have been allowed to be toyed with in such a way in the first place. The question, now, is whether the legal system will acknowledge it's weakness and overturn a bad precedent, or force society to endure it.
2. Homosexuals argue that their sexual orientation is biological and not a choice. We've seen the silliness of this argument when recent scientific advances have shown that were a biological cause actually found, science may also find a way to prevent it, which left homosexuals in outrage, demanding no "cure" be offered. If they don't want to be "cured" then why do they insist that it isn't a choice? Anyway...it now seems that the dynamics of sexual orientation extends beyond even personal choice in sexual activity, to community identification. If Sara Wheeler can so easily rethink her choice of sexual partners based on being rejected by the homosexual community, how many others practice homosexuality simply because they want to belong? Remember the old adage "Men will have a relationship in order to get sex; Women will have sex in order to have a relationship"? Could that extend to a communal relationship? Why not?
In addition to spoiling their plans for adoption of victi...children, Sara has also added an additional causation for homosexuality, that adds even more argument against their pipe-dream of a "biological imperative".
Posted by Danny Carlton at March 26, 2007 5:29 AM
Several things to say about this. But point for point...
1. Everybody uses the law for their own ends. Your sexual orientation doesn't matter. That's pretty clear.
2. Do not forget how many marriages are broken up by extramarital affairs. This happens all of the time, regardless of sexual orientation. The problem here is not that the couple is homosexual, but rather that they don't have the legal protection a marriage offers. Think about it: if they had been married under the law, there would be rules and systems in place in order to protect the child as well as the parents. Both parents would have a legal right to seeing their child. Homosexuals don't have this safety net.
3. Choice or no choice, the damage is done. Do I choose to like chocolate and not broccoli? Twin studies would say that it must be a choice because identical twins have different food preferences. But either way, I wouldn't want you to give me a drug to make me like broccoli and hate chocolate. I'd call you a sick perv for suggesting such a thing.
In the end, people will do what they will do. The law can only try to keep them from hurting themselves and each other. Homosexuals have no laws in place to protect them when children and property are involved, and, as your article shows, that needs to be remedied.
bob
Does one choose what their favorite pizza topping is? Did Danny Carlton consciously "choose" to be sexually attracted to females at some point during puberty?
Does a homosexual who desires their own personal impregnation "impose" their "agenda" on the straights? If so, then haven't the straights already been imposing their "agenda" on the gays?
To "impose" is to force someone to do something. The only way a gay could impose their lifestyle on a straight is to force the straight to engage in homosexual sex. Last time I checked, the straights havent been forced into gay sex by the gays.
And last time I checked, a homosexual woman wanting to carry a baby didn't cause straights to have gay sex either.
The solution to this particular legal problem is clear: keep the courts out of the bedroom and out of womens' wombs, whether those women are gay or straight.
While the actions of "Sara" may be hypocritical on some level, all this underscores is the fact that when courts get involved in people's sexuality, everyone loses; not just the straights or just the gays.
Irrelevant. The point was that homosexual activists have been abusing the legal system in order to impose their agenda, now the tactic has backfired and they're screaming foul.
Neither does the lady that married a dolphin. Inventing a new definition of marriage solves no problems, it creates problems. Their problem was in condemning the child to a perverted pseudo-family, that ended predictably.
A very weak argument. I'd love for a drug that would make me love broccoli and hated chocolate. It'd solve a lot of problems for me, and I wouldn't consider someone offering such such a drug perverted. You're really making some asinine arguments here.
It would seem that in this instance (and many others) children have been denied the protection of laws that would prevent people from screwing up their lives in meaningless, idiotic experiments in redefining marriage.
Yes. Pepperoni tastes good, but tend to be too greasy and leads to stomach problems, so I prefer sausage. I made the choice to avoid what I enjoy more, and go with what is better for me.
Danny 1, Aaron 0
Yes. I thought girls were icky. But then they started appealing to me, but I feared ridicule from other pre-teens. between peer pressure and female companionship. I made a choice.
Danny 2, Aaron 0
They impose their agenda on the poor child.
Danny 3, Aaron 0
No. The normal behavior of humans since the beginning of the human race can hardly be considered an agenda to be imposed. homsexuals are the ones perverting the norm.
Danny 4, Aaron 0
A child was forced to be raised by squabbling lesbians.
Danny 5, Aaron 0
Four-year-old Jandre Botha, murdered for refusing to call her mother's lesbian lover, "Daddy", might also disagree, were she able.
Tim Bono of Bono Films, ordered, against his will, to reproduce homosexual porn by the Arlington Human Rights Commission, would also disagree.
Parents of children at North Newton High School in Newton Mass, whose children were forced to attend homosexual recruitment seminars, would also disagree.
Parents of 14 year-old freshmen at Deerfield High School in Deerfield, Ill. whose children were also forced to attend a homosexual recruitment seminar, would also disagree.
Students suspended for wearing "Day of Truth" t-shirts during the pro-homosexual "Day of Silence" would also disagree.
Scott Savage, accused of "sexual harassment" by several homosexual professors at Ohio State University in Mansfield for simply recommending a book "The Marketing of Evil", would also disagree.
Danny 6, Aaron 0
You mean like Jesse Dirkhising, the child that homosexuals forced o perform unnatural acts before they murder him? Or maybe the 15 year-old girl forced to have lesbian sex with her basketball coach would also disagree? Seems you didn't check very far. That's just two I found fairly quickly. There are lots and lots more.
Danny 7, Aaron 0
Completely beside the point. A. whether or not she's forcing anyone to have sex has nothing at all to do with the post. B. carrying a baby has nothing at all to do with the post.
Homosexual adoption, however, is the issue, and homosexuals forced it on society using activist judges who ignored the law. Now they are faced with the consequences of their own disregard for the principles of jurisprudence.
Danny 8, Aaron 0.
If you think adoption takes place in a bedroom, then you've got some serious problems.
So if someone tries to murder you in your bedroom, will you be okay if, when you call the police, they respond by saying, "Sorry, can't help you. It's none of our business what goes on in your bedroom."?
Danny 9, Aaron 0
Sara is actually her name.
So if it involves sex, the courts should butt out? Shall we then free all the rapists, pedophiles, peeping toms, etc.? Or is there a line you personally want to draw while condemning others for drawing a line?
Danny 10, Aaron 0.