North Carolina Passes Amendment Banning Same-sex Unions

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You said it right there. I called bollocks.

How many bollocks? Two or four.

"Partner" is not a linguistic equivalent to "husband" any more than "husband" is a linguistic equivalent to "wife", nor are they the same legally.

Stop being a bigot and actually read.

I have absolutely no concern with the quality of relationship between homosexuals, or the "sinfullness" or otherwise of their lifestyle.

So what? If adopted children want to go back at some point and try to find their biological parent(s), nothing is stopping them. That's a red herring argument. A birth certificate isn't a genetics document, it's to indicate who the one or two lawful parents of a child is.

You are legally incorrect - in a case where a man sues for paternity and wins the birth certificate must be altered, regardless of the social situation. It does not matter who the child thinks "daddy" is, the father is the man that sired them. There was a legal case in the UK about six months ago reaffirming this fact - the Judge ordered that the two children's birth certificates be altered immediately. The fact that such a case is resolved in this way whilst two Lesbians are writing their names on birth certificates shows how absurd the situation is.

The correct course is to have the mother and father's names on the birth certificate and then have the mother's partner/lover/wife/whatever adopt the child. That reflects reality, anything else is an indulgence of fantasy.

So you're making one of the argument points about potential incest?

There are cases where faulty adoption papers have resulted in siblings marrying - there is a known case in the 1970's in the UK, and it may not be the only one. It is a valid point about

[Whacker]

"Partner" is not a linguistic equivalent to "husband" any more than "husband" is a linguistic equivalent to "wife", nor are they the same legally.

I don't care what you try two wrap it up as, it's still a turd. You're stating that a homosexual man can't call his "life partner" his "husband", because YOU say it's not the same thing.

Stop being a bigot and actually read.

I have been reading exactly what you say. Thanks for that good laugh though, I enjoyed YOU calling ME the bigot here. As tribsey used to say, .

I have absolutely no concern with the quality of relationship between homosexuals, or the "sinfullness" or otherwise of their lifestyle.

No, you just hate the fact that they want to be treated with the same human dignity, respect, and equality that any other human being should be. Go ahead though, keep talking. I love reading your explanations of why this isn't discrimination or degrading.

You are legally incorrect - in a case where a man sues for paternity and wins the birth certificate must be altered, regardless of the social situation. It does not matter who the child thinks "daddy" is, the father is the man that sired them. There was a legal case in the UK about six months ago reaffirming this fact - the Judge ordered that the two children's birth certificates be altered immediately. The fact that such a case is resolved in this way whilst two Lesbians are writing their names on birth certificates shows how absurd the situation is.

The correct course is to have the mother and father's names on the birth certificate and then have the mother's partner/lover/wife/whatever adopt the child. That reflects reality, anything else is an indulgence of fantasy.

I jumped the gun there, forgetting you are English. Perhaps in England that is how they are viewed and handled. In the US, birth certificates are handled such that the legal parents are listed on the document. See here and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_certificate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_adoption

See the part where it states an amended certificate is issued and the adoptive parents are assigned the roles, and this becomes the bottom line official document. This does contrast with how open adoption works in some states, in that the certificate is apparently not altered but the records are "sealed" and the child is prevented from gaining access to "identifying" information about their biological parents.

There are cases where faulty adoption papers have resulted in siblings marrying - there is a known case in the 1970's in the UK, and it may not be the only one. It is a valid point about

I don't deny there is a shred of validity to this, but historically speaking this is an extremely rare occurrence. You're getting into a different area now. Keep in mind that some countries allow marriage between first cousins, such as Japan. While there may be some social stigmas and legal limitations on this in other nations, what is defined as "incest" varies between cultures. I for one happen to find anything where a distant relative marries another to be pretty disgusting, but that's not my decision what others do with themselves.