France one step closer to Gay Marriage, Adoption

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

French Assembly passes gay marriage, adoption bill

PARIS — France's lower house of parliament has approved a sweeping bill to legalize gay marriage and allow same-sex couples to adopt children.

President Francois Hollande's Socialists have pushed the measure through the National Assembly and put France on track to join about a dozen, mostly European nations that grant marriage and adoption rights to homosexuals.

The measure, approved in a 329-to-229 vote Tuesday, comes despite an array of demonstrations in recent weeks by opponents of the "marriage for all" bill. Polls show most French support legalizing gay marriage, though that backing softens when children come into play.

The Assembly has been debating the bill and voting on its individual articles in recent weeks. The overall bill now goes to the Senate, which is also controlled by the Socialists and their allies.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20130212/EU.France.Gay.Marriage/

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Awesome.

[Teddy B 17,252]

[sandinista! 1,816]

When there are even more qualified and perfectly suitable parents available to adopt children, children win.

[Danno 1,228]

Signature.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Signature.

If you are pro-life, you should be accepting of these children who were put up for adoption (and not brutally murdered by weak women) finding good homes and good parents to raise them. That's the goal, right?

[Teddy B 17,252]

If you are pro-life, you should be accepting of these children who were put up for adoption (and not brutally murdered by weak women) finding good homes and good parents to raise them. That's the goal, right?

The pro-life group seems to not care so much after the child is born. They'll try and force a woman to have a child that for whatever reasons has a bleak future ahead, then walk away once the baby is born.

The majority of the pro-life hard liners in the US are religious Republicans who preach self responsibility and are against the welfare system. A good number of abortions are performed on lower class women on welfare who can't afford to raise a child. The right wing nuts will force a poor woman to have a baby against her will, which said baby will later end up on a social program that they are against. Then they will tell that lazy good for nothin welfare sucker to get off their lazy ####### and get a job. Hypocrisy always has been the religious right's calling card.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Teddy B

[Danno 1,228]

If you are pro-life, you should be accepting of these children who were put up for adoption (and not brutally murdered by weak women) finding good homes and good parents to raise them. That's the goal, right?

Absolutely.

But the reality is, there is a waiting lists to adopt these babies, if so many were not run through a disposal more waiting parents could adopt and not have to scour third world countries.

Who said the women who destroy their offspring are "week women"? Some are at trying moments in life and take the path which only demands $300, others are quite determined to rid themselves of their unborn.

It has more to do with a weak society.

Wasn't that long ago, few people would even consider such a thing, it used to be quite common for a mothers to beg the delivering Doctor to save the baby first.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

It has more to do with a weak society.

Wasn't that long ago, few people would even consider such a thing, it used to be quite common for a mothers to beg the delivering Doctor to save the baby first.

That still happens on a daily basis.

There is a difference between finding out there's something wrong (with the baby or the mother) mid-delivery and finding out there's something wrong during pregnancy.

Edited February 14, 2013 by Evylin

[Danno 1,228]

There is a difference between finding out there's something wrong (with the baby or the mother) mid-delivery and finding out there's something wrong during pregnancy.

Something wrong? Where are not discussing the "tuff issues" here I am addressing women whose developing baby might not fit into their plans for that summer cruise ..... so they flush it.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Something wrong? Where are not discussing the "tuff issues" here I am addressing women whose developing baby might not fit into their plans for that summer cruise ..... so they flush it.

What? Then why did you bring up women fighting for the life of their baby over their own to their "delivering doctors"? Do you just change the subject when you don't like someone's response to what you've said?

If a woman does not want to have a baby, for whatever reasons, she does not have to have one.

Do you care about these children when they are OUT of the womb? Or do you just want control while they're in there? Seems like if you're pro-life, you should focus on those issues as well, no?

Luckily, you don't get to make a woman's reproductive choices for her. You control your body, we'll control ours. Thank you.

Why are you even discussing abortion in a gay marriage/adoption thread?

Edited February 14, 2013 by Evylin

[decocker 7,198]

Something wrong? Where are not discussing the "tuff issues" here I am addressing women whose developing baby might not fit into their plans for that summer cruise ..... so they flush it.

so you're addressing hypothetical women?

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Yes, who are these women who have abortions to go on a cruise?

[Danno 1,228]

If a woman does not want to have a baby, for whatever reasons, she does not have to have one.

Do you care about these children when they are OUT of the womb? Or do you just want control while they're in there? Seems like if you're pro-life, you should focus on those issues as well, no?

Why are you even discussing abortion in a gay marriage/adoption thread?

- We are not debating "IF" ..... she already HAS this child, the question is,..... will it continue to live.

-I absolutely would be willing to take a unwanted baby in, (if there were any) but listen to your suggestion~

You suggest one could only be against slavery if they were willing to care for the freed slaves.

YOu could only be against the death penalty if you were willing to care for the capital criminal.

You could only be against child abuse it you were willing to take all the abused kids in your home.

The fact is there are many more open homes, not just for the babies but the mothers too.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

- We are not debating "IF" ..... she already HAS this child, the question is,..... will it continue to live.

-I absolutely would be willing to take a unwanted baby in, (if there were any) but listen to your suggestion~

You suggest one could only be against slavery if they were willing to care for the freed slaves.

YOu could only be against the death penalty if you were willing to care for the capital criminal.

You could only be against child abuse it you were willing to take all the abused kids in your home.

The fact is there are many more open homes, not just for the babies but the mothers too.

If there were any? There are plenty of unwanted babies in this world. Take one in. Do you honestly believe there aren't any unwanted children out there? Surely you are not that naive. Take in an unwanted baby - plenty exist.

And no, a pregnant woman does not already have a child, she is GOING to have a child. She has a fetus in her womb. It will develop INTO a child.

I am saying if you are pro-life, don't stop caring about the baby once it's born and START caring about the mother and her circumstances.

Stop making random stories up about women on cruises.

It always surprises me how you can take someone's opinion and twist it into something absolutely ridiculous - AND you believe that's what they meant. Truly amazing.

Edited February 14, 2013 by Evylin