A lesbian mother forced to choose...

[enjolras]

synopsis: A mother and her ex husband go to court to amicably adjust their parenting plan (he had recently gotten married). She is a lesbian with a partner of 9 years. The judge orders her partner to move-out or she loses custody of the children. The father didn't ask for this, the judge simply decided to impose his own brand of Christian 'morality' into this.

http://www.progressivepuppy.com/the_progressive_puppy/2008/12/judge-to-lesbian-mom-no-cohabitation-or-lose-your-child.html

For some reason, this story really bothers me. It is definitely not the America I believe in.

[W*GS]

Yet another reason for me to despise right-wing evangelical Christian types, and why my political home never has been and never will be the GOP.

[Hotrod]

You know when a judge does something like this there needs to be a way to have him removed.

[Garcia Bronco]

Something this is diffenately an area for the parents to decide. Not a man with no vested interest.

[Smiling Assassin27]

synopsis: A mother and her ex husband go to court to amicably adjust their parenting plan (he had recently gotten married). She is a lesbian with a partner of 9 years. The judge orders her partner to move-out or she loses custody of the children. The father didn't ask for this, the judge simply decided to impose his own brand of Christian 'morality' into this.

http://www.progressivepuppy.com/the_progressive_puppy/2008/12/judge-to-lesbian-mom-no-cohabitation-or-lose-your-child.html

For some reason, this story really bothers me. It is definitely not the America I believe in.


Sorry, I'm looking for the part of the article that defines the paramour law as strictly of and by Christian moralists, but I can't find it. There are secularists who argue for the validity of such a law as well, not just 'Christian moralists'. Their argument is based on societal good, not some God standard. Is this what the good Chancellor is doing? I don't know. Is he a Christian? More importantly, is he applying a solely Christian interpretation of the law or is he relying on the full breadth of the law's secular foundation to apply his ruling? Just because a law is restrictive and you don't agree with its' supposed moral parameters does not mean you chalk it up to good ol' puritanism from those backward Christians.

Do I agree with the ruling? I don't know enough about the facts of the case to definitively say, but on face value, this is a bad application of a law that has a legitimate place in a state that sees fit to enact it.

[Spider]

LOL so name one Judge in a case from Tenn that provoked this law ..........

[cutthemdown]

I don't agree with laws that try and say how Americans should live. It's fine to say Marriage between a man and women. But these morality laws go to far and our outdated.

[gunns]

I would think the Judge would have to state a "why" and how this was in the best interest of the children. I see a very good appeal here if he has not.

[epicSocialism4tw]

synopsis: A mother and her ex husband go to court to amicably adjust their parenting plan (he had recently gotten married). She is a lesbian with a partner of 9 years. The judge orders her partner to move-out or she loses custody of the children. The father didn't ask for this, the judge simply decided to impose his own brand of Christian 'morality' into this.

http://www.progressivepuppy.com/the_progressive_puppy/2008/12/judge-to-lesbian-mom-no-cohabitation-or-lose-your-child.html

For some reason, this story really bothers me. It is definitely not the America I believe in.


Not sure why you are pulling a rabbit out of a hat here and coming to the conclusion that a judges brand of "Christian morality" is what is being legislated here. That appears as your own addendum spin tacked on to the article. Show how that is the case.

On another note, the judge could be considering other factors tied in with the cohabitiation rather than whether or not it is a moral way to live. Judges in these cases tend to rule in favor of consistency in finances and in family life.

Personally knowing a family who experienced this same situation (mom moved out, cohabitated with a lesbian partner, left dad, dad became the reliable parent and remarried) I can see how a judge would rule in this way. In this family's case, the mother intentionally moved far away from the children so that they didnt hinder her newfound lesbian lifestyle. This obviously isnt a general truth in this situation, but it acts as an example of why a judge would even forgo the irresponsible but well-intentioned wishes of a father to provide the mother with certain rights while the judge didnt see it in the best interest of the child.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Also, she SHOULD be forced to choose.

Responsible parenting vs. live in girlfriend is an obvious ruling. Especially if the child suffers from the situation. Its the same case as in having a live-in heterosexual partner that may not be ideal.

[Bronco Bob]

Also, she SHOULD be forced to choose.

Responsible parenting vs. live in girlfriend is an obvious ruling. Especially if the child suffers from the situation. Its the same case as in having a live-in heterosexual partner that may not be ideal.

This is why same sex marriages need to be legalized.

[Miss I.]

I have a couple of female friends who are married to each other, but they have to live in Canada and it is nonsense like this that is at least partly why. Here they can't get married, they have no real legal rights (even with power of attorney) that will probably not be overturned. They are loving and wonderful women and I hope they get their wish of having a child, but they won't be able to do that in the US I suspect.

[snowspot66]

Also, she SHOULD be forced to choose.

Responsible parenting vs. live in girlfriend is an obvious ruling. Especially if the child suffers from the situation. Its the same case as in having a live-in heterosexual partner that may not be ideal.

If they are lesbians I can guarantee you that is the most stable and healthy nontraditional environment he could be in. It's probably better than most traditional environments too. They've been together nine years. They'll be together until the day they die. Lesbian relationships are the most stable of all intimate relationships.

And to those taking offense and asking "why assume it's Christian" etc. Come on. We all know it is. The odds of that not being the case are ridiculously small and we all know it.

[epicSocialism4tw]

If they are lesbians I can guarantee you that is the most stable and healthy nontraditional environment he could be in. It's probably better than most traditional environments too. They've been together nine years. They'll be together until the day they die. Lesbian relationships are the most stable of all intimate relationships.

And to those taking offense and asking "why assume it's Christian" etc. Come on. We all know it is. The odds of that not being the case are ridiculously small and we all know it.

You succeeded in making two extremely broad generalizations here that do not deserve the faith that you have in them.

[watermock]

Jesus, move to cali.

One way or another, the father will pay child support.