It wouldn't surprise me, Geoff; Greg has demonstrated in the past on this
board that he has real issues with anyone wanting to spend time with
children that they didn't have themselves. Probably not worth getting into it
with him.

You know me, Al -- I'm all about giving the benefit of the doubt.  But I also think if you say something you should expect to be challenged on it and either defend it, clarify it, or retract it.  Its what having the conversation is all about . . .

Kevin:

Thats why I am seeking a clarification.

(I wrote "gay adoption" first but that sounded really weird, plus I have no room for Tom French or his husband in my studio apartment).

Maybe they can adopt you.  It would be like when Jonathan Winters joined the cast of "Mork & Mindy."

QUOTE: Hold the phone.  I think what Greg was saying is that, if between marriage and adoption, one HAD to be permitted first, he's surprised that adoption got the nod over marriage.  Not that either is unacceptable, but that marriage would seem easier to fit into our mores than adoption by gay people

That's EXACTLY what I'm saying, thanks Kevin!

QUOTE: Greg has demonstrated in the past

Yeah, Al, and you've demonstrated in the past that you're a little emotionally unstable.  I take it I'm off you're ignore list now?  If not, please don't respond to someone quoting me.

QUOTE: Are you articulating that someone's prejudice (in this case a prejudice against gays) is an acceptable reason to prohibit an adoption?

Not acceptable at all.  I wrote that I think it would be a cause for concern for them, whether it's their prejudice or not.  Whatever the reality (and I say this being 100% for gay rights), there is a common (mis)conception that gay unions are less based in traditional family values and more focused on hedonism.  My point was that if some lawmaker felt this way, he'd seem to be more likely to allow it between two consenting adults, than for those adults to "corrupt" a child.  Evidently the laws (surprisingly to me) are not this way.  In fact, how are adoption laws set up regarding gay couples?  Is it state to state differences?

QUOTE: Could be, but Greg's history of prejudice against those incapable of having children themselves makes me suspicious.

I had to go back and read Al's posts, because it's obvious that I am no longer on your ignore list for you to be able to read my posts.  Al, you are truly a little manipulative bitch.  Sorry to everyone else reading this (my use of language and personal "attack") but Al, you have clearly had an agenda against me with your complete disregard for my actual words.  I have absolutely no prejudice against people incapable of having children.  I have stated that numerous times in that thread.  You obviously didn't read any of it because you chose to put me on your ignore list from that point on.  You're going to go into other threads and tell others that I'm prejudiced against something I'm not?  They can read the thread for themselves.  Al, you might as well put me back on ignore, because I'm going to call you out on everything now.  Manipulative bitch.

Greg:

Thanks for the clarification -- based on your earlier post I thought you were articulating something different.  So it was my misreading your post -- and with that my apologies for doing so.  I think we were looking at the issues from different viewpoints I articulated a "legalistic" view-- meaning I can understand -- though not agree -- with a legal ban on gay marriage based on the defintion of the term "marriage," but I can't understand how being gay is a basis, legally speaking, from prohibiting adoption.  Your post, I presume, went to the mindset of some politicians.  Hence my confusion.