Judge Finds That a Child Has Neither a Need Nor a Right to a Mother

I have no need for Walker.

 

This is a case of lying with headlines and title. The decision says no such thing.

The decision was that a child has no right to be raised by his biological mother. If the child had a right to be raised by a biological mother then no child could legally be adopted and all children without qualified biological parents must be raised by the state. Is this what you all have in mind?

 

“Children do not need to be raised by a male parent and a female parent to be well-adjusted, and having both a male and a female parent does not increase the likelihood that a child will be well-adjusted,” the judge wrote in finding of fact No. 71 in his opinion.

“The gender of a child’s parent is not a factor in a child’s adjustment,” the judge stated in finding of fact No. 70. “The sexual orientation of an individual does not determine whether that individual can be a good parent. Children raised by gay or lesbian parents are as likely as children raised by heterosexual parents to be healthy, successful and well-adjusted. The research supporting this conclusion is accepted beyond serious debate in the field of developmental psychology.”


The statements seem clear to me. Children need human parents. Adopted parents are fine.

 

And also meaning they don't need a dad. You saying that children in single parent families are maladjusted?

 

If mothers were unionized billwald would no doubt have a completely different opinon. :laugh:

 

>The subject is what this idiot of a judge said.

The judge wasn't writing for ESL Baptists.