Lesbian Father

The Great ‘Gay’ Deception Grows: Woman Listed as ‘Father’ on Birth Certificate

avatar
Print Friendly and PDF

Late last month, in an absolute break with reality, Emilia Maria Jesty became the very first baby born in the state of Tennessee to have a woman listed as the “father” on her birth certificate.

The baby’s biological mother, Valeria Tanco, and her lesbian partner, Sophy Jesty, were “married” in New York, and later moved to Tennessee. Their “marital” status became the subject of a flood of last minute court filings in the days leading up to the baby’s birth.

In mid-March, as the due date drew near, Judge Aleta Trauger issued a preliminary injunction requiring Tennessee to acknowledge their “marriage.” The state has since appealed that decision to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Trauger also noted in her ruling that under existing Tennessee law, Jesty could not be recognized as a parent to Emilia and would not be permitted to make certain medical decisions on behalf of the child. But, of course, as it turned out, the law meant absolutely nothing when it came to the homosexual “right” to deviancy.

Two days later after the judge’s decision, on March 27, baby Emilia was born shortly after 4 p.m. She weighed eight pounds, five ounces. The following day, the hospital staff arrived at Tanco’s hospital room to complete the birth certificate. Tanco insisted that Jesty’s name be listed as the “father.”

Questions swirled regarding the legality of such a move, not to mention the absence of reality and morality. But undaunted by these legitimate concerns, Regina Lambert, a Knoxville lawyer volunteering for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, got busy making phone calls. Eventually, several hours and many calls later, the health department in Nashville allowed hospital officials to produce the fraudulent birth certificate.

It is still possible that sanity could ultimately prevail, and a ruling against the pair by the  Sixth Circuit would effectively void Emilia’s birth certificate. A new one would then have to be reissued, listing only Tanco as the mother.

Neither Attorney General Robert Cooper nor the state Health Department, which oversees birth certificates, have responded to requests to make a public statement about this ridiculous turn of events. Like many today, they might have a case of homophobia phobia — the fear of being called a homophobe.

We can only hope, however, that the courts and the state officials eventually come down on the side of the child’s best interest. No child should ever have to be raised is such a biologically and psychologically confusing environment where it is believed that a woman can be a “father.”

It’s time to end this great “gay” deception.

Print Friendly and PDF



Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read More

  • thisoldspouse

    The fact is that this child has a father somewhere, one from which she has been deliberately severed.

    Every homosexual “family” is inherently a broken family. To deliberately create broken families is the height of selfishness and hedonism.

    • Jeanette Victoria

      Absolutely this is evil, pure and simple

      • youngoldbones .

        I know, Why doesn’t anyone understand how this will hurt this child? A child’s relationship with her father is very important!
        I would think that it would be a problem too if a girl Everyone knows the profound effect a Father has on his daughters and of course his sons. and if she had two fathers, then she would know that she represents the gender that neither of her “parents” valued, which would further diminish her feelings of worth. Same effect on a boy with two mothers, he would be the odd man out. The unwanted gender, the gender that his “parents” rejected. It is so wrong to accessorize their sin with innocent victims. A child has a right to know his or her parents of both genders, have the love and affection of both halves of humanity.

        • shepetgene

          Do you know any children from same-sex marriages? You’re arguing some fear of what might happen if a child grew up without a father or a mother. There are other opportunities for role-modeling in life outside of a child’s two parents. What about uncles and aunts? Grandparents? Close family friends? I know multiple children of gay parents and they are all happy, successful, and functional people that somehow managed to have respect for both male and female.

          • thisoldspouse

            I’m sure you don’t know anyone from a same-sex “marriage” who is fully developed and matured. It has only been around about 10 years, so that test is still in progress.

          • shepetgene

            I guess you’re right. I mean same-sex couples raising them. Unless you’re going to argue that giving same-sex couples the benefits of marriage is going to be detrimental to children who were already being raised by same-sex couples then your statement is not really cogent.

          • thisoldspouse

            I know of one, who knows of many more. Look up Oscar Lopez. He has written extensively as a child raise by a two-lesbian household. It’s not a flattering picture.

          • shepetgene

            I suppose this is my fault. I started with the anecdotal evidence. There are no great studies showing real detriment to children except for the Regnerus study, which is pretty much discredited (and really rightfully so if you read its methods and know much about rigorous studies). I’m sure you know of someone who has had a bad experience. Just like I know one who had a great experience. Either way, the argument that children are somehow damaged by same-sex parents is unproven and largely based on fear.

          • thisoldspouse

            It’s only been “discredited” in the minds of leftists, and before they even read it.

            A great work of research is verified by repeating it. But I don’t expect Leftists to follow the same rigorous statistical methods (which were scientifically justified) as Regnerus did. That is off limits – a wholly UNscientific attitude.

          • shepetgene

            I downloaded that paper. Read the materials and methods and tried to see for myself. His comparison groups of opposite-sex couples versus same-sex couples totally did not correlate with each other (e.g. calling a relationship of of a certain amount of months of a same-sex couple the same as years-long marriage, which he effectively did, as comparable is ridiculous). Moreover, he didn’t have significant power with same-sex male couples. But yes, completely assume I and all the other “leftist” scientists who read this completely abandoned any sense of professional ethics and just decried it because we don’t “agree” with its results. That’s also why it’s been thrown out of legal discourse because people “didn’t like it” – or could it be that there are actually questions of credibility?

          • thisoldspouse

            Again, “years-long” “marriages” of homosexuals either don’t exist in any statistically significant numbers (at least not at the time of Regnerus’ data collection), or they are so short-lived that the children evaluated haven’t yet exhibited the final outcomes that are to be measured. The closest that can be approximated are the data points that Regnerus obtained in children of parent who had, at some point, same-sex relationships.

            The laughable studies that do presume to give “finality” to the fiction of the healthiness of same-sex parenting are so flawed and political, it’s embarrassing to even classify them as “science.”

          • shepetgene

            The conclusions of his study aren’t valid – i.e. they are not “close” enough to make the statements he makes. You may be right in saying that there is no solid evidence supporting they are equal – I haven’t read those studies closely and they presumably suffer from the same problem (statistical significance). Maybe the best statement we both can say is “the science is inconclusive.” I’m not sure anyone has said there is “finality.” Either way back to the original argument, making statements like a child won’t have an appreciation for the importance of the other gender because they don’t have parents of both genders seems pretty spurious given we live in a world of people who didn’t have both and still seems to have an appreciation for both genders and other opportunities for role-modeling exist.

          • torrentprime

            “the data points that Regnerus obtained in children of parent who had, at some point, same-sex relationships.”
            Even if the kids weren’t living with that parent at the time. So, you admit it was apples to oranges comparison.

          • thisoldspouse

            No, the data points he collected were children who grew up IN a household with a parent who had a homosexual relationship. Please show me where I am wrong.

          • torrentprime

            Sure -
            While Regnerus critiques “same-sex couples” raising kids, his study does not actually compare children raised by same-sex couples with those raised by different-sex couples. The criterion it uses is whether a parent “ever ha[d] a romantic relationship with someone of the same sex.” In fact, only a small proportion of its sample spent more than a few years living in a household headed by a same-sex couple.
            From the LA times write up. It goes on to say: Indeed, the study acknowledges that what it’s really comparing with heterosexual families is not families headed by a same-sex couple but households in which parents broke up. “A failed heterosexual union,” Regnerus writes in the study, “is clearly the modal method” — the most common characteristic for the group that he lumps in with same-sex-headed households. For example, most of the respondents who said their mothers had a lesbian relationship also endured the searing experience of having their mothers leave the household as the family collapsed.
            In other words, Regnerus is concluding that when families endure a shattering separation, it is likely to shatter the lives of those in them. And this is news?

            He compared stable two parent households to broken households and breaking households. A sham of a study.

            And this is the best you can do?

          • RhondaStar

            “Only a small proportion of its sample spent more than a few years living in a household headed by a same-sex couple”

            That’s because homosexual relationships don’t last. They are transitory in nature. That’s the very reason why homosexuals make bad parents. They experience more infidelity and more broken homes, both of which have a negative effect on children. So, your quote is not a flaw with the study, but a flaw with homosexual relationships. The children lived part of their lives in a same-sex household, and the rest of the time in a single parent home…after the homosexual relationship went south.

            The kind of study you want is not possible because there’s not enough stable gay couples.

          • torrentprime

            LOL

            All of them, everywhere? You do know there are plenty of couples, especially the ones who seek marriage rights in the lawsuits, have been together for decades. So, you’re lying.

            And it is still a flaw in the study because it means he compared apples to oranges.

            And! “The children lived part of their lives in a same-sex household, and the rest of the time in a single parent home…after the homosexual relationship went south.” WRONG. You didn’t read what I shared very closely, did you? Regnerus: “A failed heterosexual union is clearly the modal method” Regnerus threw failed hetero relationships in the same pot as gay-headed households. You do know how often straight people divorce, right?

          • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

            Actually that is a fine example of the simple fact that there is no one-to-one comparison between homosexual pairings and Normal families.

            We do know, as Gay activist psychologists have known for years, that Gays are not born, but made. If children can be reached while their personalities are being formed, they can be formed into young homosexuals.

            Placing a child in the hands of homosexuals is one of the worst sins this society has ever done, save for permitting the murder of the unborn in the womb.

            “Pro-Homosexual Researchers Conceal Findings:
            Children Raised by Openly Homosexual Parents More Likely to Engage in Homosexuality

            By Trayce Hansen, Ph.D.

            “Research by social scientists, although not definitive, suggests that children reared by openly homosexual parents are far more likely to engage in homosexual behavior than children raised by others. Studies thus far find between 8% and 21% of homosexually parented children ultimately identify as non-heterosexual. For comparison purposes, approximately 2% of the general population are non-heterosexual. Therefore, if these percentages continue to hold true, children of homosexuals have a 4 to 10 times greater likelihood of developing a non-heterosexual preference than other children.”

          • torrentprime

            The use of the word “preference” betrays this for the propaganda it is; sexual orientation is not a favorite ice cream flavor.
            The reason kids of gays are more likely to come out than kids raised by straight parents is because those raised by gays are less likely to fear the shame, assault, rejection and in some cases homelessness caused by intolerant parents.

          • vorpal

            No, it’s been discredited by virtually everyone. It doesn’t measure what it claims to measure, and even many right-wing individuals are distancing themselves from Regnerus and his study because of how toxic it is.

          • RhondaStar

            Projecting again? Read this article on BarbWire today: The Love of Hate: Homosexual Martyrdom Complex. And see who’s been discredited. It’s the homosexual hate hoaxsters.

          • vorpal

            Rhonda, I’m not denying that there have been some whiny self-involved gay hoaxers. That’s not what we’re talking about here, though: we’re talking about Regnerus.

          • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

            Wishful thinking does not make it true.

            It’s the earmark of the Leftist to attempt to overrule reality with the strength of a belief. Then, to make sure that belief is not disturbed by reality, to violently suppress the truth (e.g. Morman church invasions, assaults on Christians), to sue them for not applauding deviant behavior (such as the protracted lawfare waged against the Boy Scouts of America, despite revelations of widespread homosexual assaults on the boys), and try to destroy the livelihoods of anyone who disagrees with them (Carrie Prejean, Duck Dynasty and Mozilla). And it gets worse. We have the likes of Floyd Lee Corkins, who was luckily effeminate and ineffectual, which did nothing to change his stated intent — to massacre as many as he could at the Family Research Council because he ‘disagreed with their politics.’ He came armed with a 9mm and ammunition and a satchel full of Chick Fil A sandwiches, which he had intended to smear into the faces of his dead victims.

            No, it’s homosexuality that is toxic.

          • vorpal

            Great, Mjolnir, but we’re talking about Regnerus here. When you have something on topic to contribute, then come respond to my comment.

            Yes, Floyd Lee Corkins was mentally unstable and did something incredibly stupid and destructive. Do we need to start naming all the completely loco Christians that have done stupid things in the last few years, too? It wouldn’t be a short list. You trying to judge “homosexuality” on the basis of the actions of one person speaks more to you, buddy boy.

          • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

            The unhinged violence of homosexuals, far above the Normal rate, is not an isolated instance, as much as you would like to minimize the Corkins attempt, as flaccid and ineffectual as it was.

            And it’s not just in ultra-violence that sets homosexuals apart, homosexuals are hugely overrepresented in serial murder:

            “Murder and Mass Murder

            Although the total number of victims dispatched by a given killer is often in doubt, (e.g., homosexual Henry Lucas claimed that he killed 350), it appears that the modern world record for serial killing is held by a Russian homosexual, Andrei Chikatilo, who was convicted in 1992 of raping, murdering and eating parts of at least 21 boys, 17 women and 14 girls. The pathology of eating one’s sexual victims also characterized Milwaukee’s Jeffrey Dahmer in 1992. He not only killed 17 young men and boys, but cooked and ate their body parts.

            The top six U.S. male serial killers were all gay:

            • Donald Harvey claimed 37 victims in Kentucky;

            • John Wayne Gacy raped and killed 33 boys in Chicago, burying them under his house and in his yard;

            • Patrick Kearney accounted for 32, cutting his victims into small pieces after sex and leaving them in trash bags along the Los Angeles freeways;

            • Bruce Davis molested and killed 27 young men and boys in Illinois;

            • A gay sex-murder-torture ring (Corll-Henley-Brooks) sent 27 Texas men and boys to their grave; and

            • Juan Corona was convicted of murdering 25 migrant workers (he “made love” with their corpses).

            Lesbian Aileen Wuornos laid claim in 1992 to “worst female killer” with at least 7 middle-aged male victims. She singlehandedly topped the lesbian nurse team of Catherine Wood and Gwen Graham, who had killed 6 convalescent patients in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

            The association between serial murder and homosexuality isn’t recent. Two gays compete for the spot of “world’s worst murderer.” During the Nazi reign of terror, Auschwitz executioner Ludwig Tiene strangled, crushed, and gnawed boys and young men to death while he raped them. Though his grand total is uncertain, he often murdered as many as 100 a day. Gilles de Rais (Bluebeard) brutally destroyed the lives of 800 boys. Each lad was lured to his home, bathed and fed. Just as the poor boy thought “this is my lucky day,” he was raped, then killed by being ripped or cut apart and either burned or eaten.

            A study of 518 sexually-tinged mass murders in the U.S. from 1966 to 1983 determined that 350 (68%) of the victims were killed by those who practiced homosexuality and that 19 (44%) of the 43 murderers were bisexuals or homosexuals.

            “Though probably less than a majority of mass murderers are homosexual, given that no more than 3% of the populace is gay, homosexual murderers show up much more frequently than one would expect (even Richard Speck engaged in homosexuality).”

          • Lightning Baltimore

            Yet Lopez routinely whines that other people raised by same-sex couples won’t join him in condemning their parents. Hmmmmmmm.

          • Poppy Graham

            Gay relationships have been around for some time now. You have proof what you say is true. My girlfriend and I raised her daughter together and today she is in her own relationship, with a man and has 2 children. She is completely happy. All you do is spread hate.

          • thisoldspouse

            Instead of pulling out the well-worn “H” card at every turn, why don’t you stick to the facts?

          • thisoldspouse

            Are you a man or a woman? I can’t tell from the picture or your screen name.

          • Martin Rizley

            As a Christian, I not only believe that God has designed marriage to be the union of a man and a woman; I also believe that in His grace, He may spare children brought up in gender-confused households some of the naturally damaging effects that would ordinarily be caused by an environment in which His rules for proper sexual relations are simply rejected. God is merciful, and He does spare children sometimes the ill effects of their parents’ bad decisions by intervening in their lives. Some children of alcoholics turn out well-balanced, despite all the factors stacked against them. Children also have a deep affection for the adults who raise them and treat them kindly. But that doesn’t mean that a gross injustice was not committed against this girl by depriving her of a father, and in her inmost heart, she may lament the fact that she had no father– though she probably would say to you or to her mother about that. What is clear is that our society should not deliberate accept a social change where children are systematically taken away from their birth parents to be raised by homosexual and lesbian couples. No child should have to say, “My daddy was a donor.” That is a gross injustice to children which society should strive against, not willingly facilitate by legalizing so-called same-sex ‘marriage.’.

          • shepetgene

            What a horrible statement “No child should have to say ‘My daddy was a donor’.” One it undermines all of the non-bio dads who raise children all over the country. Two this isn’t a zero sum game. A donor sperm father isn’t saying “I don’t want this child” they’re offering the chance for someone else to conceive a child. Why would you pessimistically twist that act to make it about child abandonment?

          • Martin Rizley

            Children should always be conceived within the context of a loving, lifelong commitment on the part of their birth parents to each other. It is irresponsible for a man to simply ‘give his sperm away’ to women who are not his wife (possibly to hundreds of women, and for money), taking no responsibility for the children who are conceived thereby. That is where advocacy of anonymous sperm donorship leads inevitably from a legal standpoint. But humans are not intended to act like animals that breeders use for breeding purposes. If that were so, then a man could become a professional ‘stud’ and give away his sperm on a daily basis to impregnate as many women as possible– for a price. Technology has made that possible, but it is not moral or right . No man should view his view his body as a mere breeding machine to produce sperm to impregnate as many women anonymously for a price as his greedy heart desires. I grant you that could be a profitable money-making scheme. A man who is well-built could put his picture on a Craig’s List and say, “Attention all you lesbians out there who want children, but don’t want to have to deal with a man in your life. Take a look at the specimen standing before you in the picture. I’m healthy, well-built, and could pass on some really good genes for the child of your dreams.” Who gets lost in this sperm business trade? The children involved. They have a right to a mother and a father. If you ask a child from a single parent home, “If you could have two parents, who would you prefer to raise you– two moms? two dads? or a mom and a dad? Any normal child would say, “A mom and a dad.” It’s natural. All children naturally feel the need for the input of a mom and a dad. If I child said, “Give me two moms any day over a mom and a dad, I would say, “That child’s mind has been messed with. Bad. It’s simply not natural for any child to desire to be raised by two moms or two dads. It is God’s ordained order that a child be raised by a mom and a dad. Everyone knows that. We are really a sick, sick society to deny that that is what is normal; anything else is abnormal– something our society should do nothing to facilitate, inculcate, encourage or approve.

          • shepetgene

            I’m not even sure what to do with your statements on sperm donation. You are clearly fairly from the norms of a society where that process has been used for years to help those couples who cannot conceive, and I’m not sure I know any person, Christian or otherwise, who views that as a cattle-like breeding moneymaking scheme.

            As for your second argument, do you realize that you’re using blatant circular logic. If you ask a child with single parents whether they want a mom and a dad or two mom and two dads that they’d obviously prefer a mom and a dad, if they don’t then their mind is warped? Oh okay, we’ll it’s settled then.

          • Martin Rizley

            Why is my reasoning circular? Are the deep longings and desires (and felt needs) of children completely irrelevant in perceiving what God’s design for marriage is– and what laws society should be passing with regard to marriage? Or is marriage only about adults and removing the social stigma and legal barriers for adults to engage in any sexual lifestyle they please?

          • shepetgene

            I’ll take a look at that article. Meanwhile, your argument is circular because you argue if you hear what you want to hear then it’s right, but if they disagree then their “mind is warped. ” The answer is only right if it’s what you want to hear. That’s a ridiculous statement.

          • Martin Rizley

            Which argument is circular? I pointed to one article dealing with the issue of children born of ‘donor’ parents, then I pointed out that the article, by virtue of its ‘testimonial’ nature, must be supplemented by other articles which develop more fully the ethical argument against anonymous sperm donation. To point to the limitations of one article and the need to examine others dealing with the same subject is not circular reasoning. My main argument against anonymous sperm donation is that it breaks the burden of personal responsibility that an adult has toward a child he conceives. If I am going to involve engage in the procreation of another human being, I cannot simply ‘wash my hands’ of the responsibility of caring for that child i have conceived. That is like a man who goes to a prostitute, impregnates her, and washes his hands of any responsibility for the child who was conceived by saying, “If that woman did not take precautions not to become pregnant, that is no concern of mine.” Deep down, we all know that is selfish reasoning. A man is always responsible for the child whom he conceives. Neither can he impersonalize his role in the process of conception by saying– “I didn’t conceive a child. I simply donated sperm.” The fact is, he donated sperm with the deliberate aim of personally conceiving a child. So the birth father cannot ethically ignore the results of that act of conception and wash his hands of it as if it were no concern of his. He cannot sell his sperm like some impersonal product he has manufactured with his hands for money. The child has come from his own substance. It carries his genes. It bears his image. How can he not care for it? Certainly, if his attitude is, “I didn’t conceive a child. . .I simply donate sperm,” and later, the child finds out about the attitude of his birth father, how will he feel? What psychological effect would it have for any child to think “I don’t even have a ‘donor’ dad, because the person who should consider himself my dad sees himself as bearing no personal relationship to me at all. He takes no responsibility for me– in fact, he cares nothing for me. I meant nothing more to him than a paycheck.” This anonymous sperm donor business is so self-evidently immoral,so cruel and unjust to children, society out to frown upon it and disapprove of it. Society ought to recover its capacity to frown with disapproval on many lifestyles that are unethical, immoral and wrong and reject the moral relativism being touted by our government and taught in the public schools.

          • shepetgene

            Here is your circular argument. I wasn’t referring to the article.

            “Any normal child would say, “A mom and a dad.” It’s natural. All children naturally feel the need for the input of a mom and a dad. If I child said, “Give me two moms any day over a mom and a dad, I would say, “That child’s mind has been messed with. Bad. It’s simply not natural for any child to desire to be raised by two moms or two dads.”

            If child agrees with me = right answer. If child disagrees with me = warped child. That argument is ridiculous.

          • Martin Rizley

            You are missing my point. When I speak of a ‘normal child’ I don’t mean a child who agrees with me but a child who agrees with the vast majority of other children– whose response is ‘normative’ because it is the response given by 99.99999% of children. That’s what I define as a ‘normal child.’ So I repeat my argument: “Any normal child (a child who thinks and feels like the overwhelming majority of children) will say, “A mom and a dad.” Why is that? Because it is natural. That’s obviously how God designed children, to feel the need for the input of a mom and a dad. If I child says,”Give me two moms any day over a mom and a dad,” I would say– because of the child’s abnormal response– that child’s mind has been messed with. Bad. It’s simply not natural– not normative, not in agreement with 99.99999% of children– for any child to desire to be raised by two moms or two dads.” I would suspect that a child raised in an home setting with ‘two moms’ or ‘two dads’ would normally desire to have a mom or dad, if for no other reason, than to be like their classmates. Therefore, I can’t imagine any child saying they prefer to have two moms or two dads over a mom and a dad, except as the resulting of brainwashing by adults (or perhaps out of a desire not to offend a same-sex couple who is raising them.) At some level, they must realize the abnormality of their home situation, and that must create in them a certain feelings of awkwardness and/or deprivation– that is, that they have been deprived of something normal and natural that other children enjoy– the love and care and nurture of a mom and a dad.

          • shepetgene

            Here are some things I took away from that article: The majority of children conceived by the practice still support it. The major example of child unhappy through it seems like that part of their experience might be colored by other extenuating circumstances – a father that fought for an adopted daughter and not her? I mean, that’s awful but saying that the process is inherently wrong by putting her in that situation seems like an overreaching synecdoche. Moreover, their statement that 27% of marriages using sperm donation fail is likely not statistically significant from the 25% of marriages with biological children. Furthermore, their argument for why it is still significant is because they decide to do sperm donation “later in life” so these marriages are “more stable.” That’s completely ignoring the psychological and marital effects of infertility. Couples undergoing infertility treatment and struggling with infertility are often under incredible marital stress. Discounting that seems like a huge confounding variable.

          • Martin Rizley

            Well, that is only one article on the subject. There are many more articles that examine the ethical issues involved. I did not say anything in general about all “infertility treatments.” I was speaking specifically about men donating sperm to women to whom they are not married and who do not conceive a child within the context of marital love and commitment to the birth mother. I believe that God wants children always to be conceived by two parents who love each other and are committed to each other. To reject that principle opens the door to all sorts of unethical possibilities, such as men donating their sperm that will go to anonymous mothers they don’t even know. The ethical irresponsibility is increased when one considers how the child conceived may go to a lesbian or homosexual couple to raise– thus depriving the child of that which every child deserves, the loving care, nurture, and upbringing of the two human parents who conceived him/her. Their is a natural tie of responsibility linking parents to the children they conceive; anonymous sperm donation breaks that tie. It is clearly an unethical act contrary to God’s design for conception and family life.

          • thisoldspouse

            What else is a child, who eventually learns the truth, going to say when someone invariably asks about his family lineage?

          • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

            So, you have to take the very worst of Normal relationships to find a positive comparison?

            Got it.

          • shepetgene

            The “very worst of normal relationships”? Which relationship are you talking about?

          • Poppy Graham

            Her father made that choice, not us. We in fact encouraged her to find her father after all these years and she did. We all got to know each other and are now friends and extended family.

          • shepetgene

            Congratulations to you and your girlfriend. That’s wonderful to hear!

          • turfbarn80

            Stupidity and selfishness have been around for a long time too, but it doesn’t make these behaviors right. Calling a principled disagreement “hate,” is also wrong, but it’s the queer form of hateful hyperbole.
            On a different note, explain how a woman can be a father. That should come as a surprise to the sperm donor. Intelligent people will always resist blatantly and selfishly false assertions. Nor will they acquiesce to the bizarre alternate reality of queer narcisssism. Get used to it.

    • shepetgene

      Assuming this child is born of a sperm donor, the father deliberately severed himself from the child when he donated sperm. Birth certificates with fathers from artificial insemination don’t have to list the father and can be left blank or put as unknown. Putting her partner on the birth certificate in no way separated the father from this child, only provided legal rights to her partner. Family has many definitions and only validating biological families as correct or right seems pretty myopic in a world where we’ve had adoption and mixed families for centuries.

      • absolutlyridiculous

        It’s a lack of common sense, this WOMAN without surgery can’t father, be a father or anything close to it. What is the actual definition of a father?

        • torrentprime

          But she is another parent, just as a straight woman who gives birth to a child from a sperm donor may have her husband listed as the father on the birth certificate.
          I am guessing no one is claiming the other woman is a dad; they are saying she is the other legal parent.
          There is a difference.

          • absolutlyridiculous

            No it says .. .let me spell it slowly for you … F-A-T-H-E-R … the very definition of father includes M-A-N

          • torrentprime

            Yeah, it should be Parent 2. But the form didn’t say that, so they wrote her name where they could. Who cares?

            I mean, seriously, you’re getting upset over the name of a label on a form. If they had switched the mom and dad on the certificate of a straight couple’s kid, would it mean anything? Of course not – they are still her parents. Same here.

        • shepetgene

          This woman can be a parent. A legal guardian. The only reason her name is in the father slot is because they’re pre-labeled “Mother” and “Father.” In this case the father has no legal standing and the partner is effectively the other parent. It makes sense for both parents to be listed on the birth certificate.

          • absolutlyridiculous

            Single parent, yes; foster parent with a husband, yes … same sex … uh NO

          • shepetgene

            Well for now in the state of Tennessee. Agreed with torrent prime it really should just be labelled Parent 1 and 2. It’s no different than if a mother used IVF with a sperm donor and put her husband (not the biological father) as the other parent.

          • torrentprime

            And so you admit that the only difference is in your head – in both of your examples the two people are the child’s parents.

      • thisoldspouse

        “Assuming this child is born of a sperm donor, the father deliberately severed himself from the child when he donated sperm.”

        How else would the child be conceived? Are you now implying that a the male counter part is NOT needed to produce a child with a woman?

        Regardless, it takes two to tango. Unless this woman was raped, she deliberately took a male gamete to join with an egg, whether hers or someone else’s, to create a child without a father involved.

        • shepetgene

          I meant as opposed to another legal arrangement for getting sperm, such as a friend who might not be severing their legal rights. I’m proficient in basic biology.

          • absolutlyridiculous

            so then you understand to be a father you have to have male parts or at least the DNA?

          • shepetgene

            I understand that to be a biological parent you do, yes. We’re talking about a legal parent. Those are different.

  • CajunPatriot

    Sure, she provided the sperm. What a great farce. And of little Nicky’s two fathers, one provided the egg. Reprobate minds, not sound minds, produce this perversion.

  • Truth Offends

    These women are obviously delusional. But, what is the Health Department’s excuse for naming a woman as the “father” on the birth certificate?
    We the People have a right to know.

    • Lightning Baltimore

      The form doesn’t have spots for mother 1 and mother 2, so they used the sections available. Is that really so difficult to understand?

      • Truth Offends

        The woman is not the “father”, nor could she ever be the “father”. And you’re delusional if you think a baby could have two mothers.

  • Jeanette Victoria

    This is simply evil. The child has a father or it could not have been born.

    • thisoldspouse

      It is evil AND deranged.

    • torrentprime

      It’s just “they put the other parent’s name in the other box on the form.” NO one is saying the woman was a biological father.

  • OnlyMyHumbleOpinion

    This child is blessed to have two loving parents. You should be praying instead for the much higher number of damaged kids in broken homes caused by straight parents.

    • regina griggs

      Yea,cheer on! Love of self is the reason,don’t believe men are necessary in this little girls life. Sick attitude, getting pregnant means getting inseminated with a mans sperm.It takes a males sperm to fertilize an egg even if comes from a vile.How do these two provide a positive attitude about men? Do they think their Dad was unnecessary? Do they have a relationship with their dads?

      • youngoldbones .

        Absolutely, Little girls need a father just as much as they need their mother. Kids need parents of both genders which will help give them love and acceptance from both halves of humanity, both male and female. Conversely if a little girl is brought up in a “family” with two fathers, how can she not feel as though she is a member of the gender which her two “fathers” did not value or love. I think it would be terrible for any child brought up in a gay family, but especially if you were of the opposite sex of the couple representing the “parents” you could not help but feel like a gender outsider. A member of the “unloved” gender.

        • torrentprime

          Oh for Pete’s sake. They don’t hate the other gender; they’re just not sexually attracted to that gender. Does a straight woman hate her mother because she doesn’t want to marry a woman? Of course not.
          Lesbians / gays can and do love people of the opposite gender, as friends and family members. To say those of the opposite gender are not valued or loved by gays is to lie.

      • OnlyMyHumbleOpinion

        Insemination makes you a dad about as much as using a toaster makes you a chef. Seriously, parenting is a commitment to nurture, protect, love, and care for a child. And these women have committed to do that. Sad you don’t get that concept.

    • youngoldbones .

      “Broken homes” are the result of one of our earlier mistakes, that of easy no fault divorce which was the result of the same liberal mantra that now brings us homosexual “marriage” You gotta wonder what horrors lurk in the wings as a result of homosexual marriage. Some children are more impressionable than others, I predict sexual confusion for these children on a grand scale.

      • OnlyMyHumbleOpinion

        And yet there is no evidence to prove your fears.

    • RhondaStar

      You can’t compare numbers because there are vastly more heterosexual couples. However, when we look at percentages, though, homosexual parents are much more deficient. More infidelity, domestic violence, broken homes, and worse outcomes for children. I know you won’t acknowledge such facts, but facts they most assuredly are!

      • OnlyMyHumbleOpinion

        I tried to google your baseless assertions, but guess what! Your “facts” do not exist to back your bigotry.

        • RhondaStar

          Nothing will convince you. Your wholesale surrender to your perversion has led to a reprobate mind.

          • Elder53

            Watch out for this guy. In a previous post he referred to his wife, so he’s a man posting under a woman’s name — a transvestwrite.

          • RhondaStar

            Wow, you’re amazing. How in the world did you ever manage to figure out that these are not our real names and identities?

            Are you transgender since the word “elder” is gender neutral?

          • Elder53

            It was revealed to me in a dream. As you well know, women cannot be elders, and I am utterly orthodox, so I must be a man.

          • OnlyMyHumbleOpinion

            Evidence from you would at least make this debate fair, but alas, you have none.

          • Evan C

            In other words, you don’t have any facts to back up your claims.

      • torrentprime

        Do you know that Regnerus’ study is falling apart so fast that even the state of Utah refiled its brief to not use it anymore? There is no science that says what you’re claiming, buddy.

        • RhondaStar

          I know that the gay affirming studies are completely flawed. And I know that the gay mob has everyone running scared from Regnerus.

          Anyone who is so warped as to deny human anatomy and abuse the human sewer system of the body, thinking it is an expression of love, is really not in a position to appeal to science and reason.

          • torrentprime

            “Flawed” in the “affirmed and supported and proven over and over again, using strict peer-reviewed standards”?
            And “running scared” in the “we don’t want to be associated with bad science” kinda way?
            Yeah, totally.

            “abuse the human sewer system of the body, thinking it is an expression of love” You do know that a huge number of straight people do this, too, right? Including married straight Christians? And since there are only a small percentage of gay people in the world anyway, it means that a lot more straight people are doing it than gay people? And what is this obsession with gay intercourse that anti-gays have?

          • RhondaStar

            I’ve read the studies so I know better. You may be able to deceive others, but not me. There was also an article, not that you’re interested in facts, about the fraudulent lesbian study on BarbWire in an article entitled: Is There Any Connection Between Marriage and Procreation….or something like that.

            Regardless of the sexual practices of other Christians, homosexual sex is wrong. Period.

            It’s actually the homosexuals who are obsessed with their perversions. After all, they’re the ones who engage in them. I just realize that it is dirty and disease-causing…that’s why I care about this issue.

          • torrentprime

            “Read the studies”? What, all of them? There have been dozens and dozens of studies on gay parents, and they ALL come to the same conclusion: gay parents do as good a job as straight parents.
            No, actual, that’s what I just said: straights do it too. So, you’re saying it’s only dirty and somehow magically produces diseases where none existed before if it’s two gay people? But when straight people do the same act, it’s fine.

          • RhondaStar

            I thought I made myself abundantly clear, but I’ll try again: I am against anal sex no matter who does it (even straight people.). And it has always been disease-causing.

          • torrentprime

            So, it causes bacteria / viruses to simply appear? The act itself leads to spontaneous generation of life / viruses? What do you mean “disease causing”?

            And, more importantly than this, who called sex love? Lots of people (gay and straight) have sex and don’t call it love. No one calls all sex equal to love. And 1/3 of gays don’t do that thing anyway, and I don’t even know how many lesbians do it in the first place, so are you cool with all of those people, as long as they don’t do that thing?

            See how many of your positions depend on your fixation with that one act?

          • RhondaStar

            It’s disease-spreading is what I mean.

            Are you denying that most AIDS cases in America are among gay men? If you do deny this, then the conversation is over…because that would be the height of denial.

          • torrentprime

            Nope, not denying the incredible and out-of-control spread of AIDS in Africa. Question – do you know the equally tragic number of women who have it? Did they acquire it from gay intercourse somehow? No, all of these people got it through *unprotected* intercourse. Gay or straight, male or female, rear or front entry – it’s the protection or lack thereof that controls its spread.

          • vorpal

            Homosexuality is not disease causing.

      • Evan C

        Please feel free to share these “facts” you have… preferably from credited organizations.

      • vorpal

        By what study? Hint: Regnerus doesn’t count.

        • RhondaStar

          Hint: Your opinion doesn’t count. You’re mind is too warped by your perversion.

          • vorpal

            Ahhh, yes: the old ad hominem. Clearly, because of the fact that I’m a gay atheist, I’m incapable of saying anything of value.

            And a little bonus hint for you, toots: it’s “your mind”, not “you’re mind”.

          • RhondaStar

            Ahhh, yes, the ad hominem against Regnerus.

            I actually believe you many things of value to say, but not on the subject of homosexuality. You are too blinded by your desires.

          • vorpal

            Where did I commit an ad hominem against Regnerus? I fail to see it.

            Regnerus has been widely debunked: his research was pseudoscientific (he asked the funding organization what conclusions they wanted to see before he even began his research), his methodology was flawed, and his conclusions were erroneous. The university where he works and the department in which he is a member have both distanced themselves from him. His “research” was recently more-or-less dismissed in the Utah SSM case, and even the district attorney distanced himself from it after rebuttal showed how flawed Regnerus’ study is. His work is toxic and shows nothing of particular value as it doesn’t even come close to measuring what he claimed it did, and studies that ACTUALLY measure what he claimed to be measuring have shown the complete opposite result.

          • vorpal

            I do appreciate the sentiment in your post, but I have to disagree with you about homosexuality. It seems bizarre to me that you would be distrustful of discussing homosexuality with a homosexual: it would be like me refusing to discuss Christianity with a Christian, science with a scientist, etc. If you want to take my “desires” (whatever you’re implying by this, I’m not entirely sure) with a grain of salt, so be it: I expect you to be critical given our differences of opinion, but to entirely discount anything I might say seems rather odd to me.

  • youngoldbones .

    Poor kid, will never know her father. her view of men will ever be diminished in this lopsided non diverse “family”.

    • thisoldspouse

      Men are declared disposable by these selfish homosexuals. And children are declared tools for an agenda.

      I’ll bet there is a strong chance of this girl growing up to identify as a lesbian, which the moral anarchists will cheer.

    • torrentprime

      Funny what it takes to get conservatives to support diversity.

      • thisoldspouse

        “Diversity” = perversity.

        • torrentprime

          Yeah, I didn’t think anyone here actually wanted a diverse family. Shouldn’t your comment be directed at @youngoldbones:disqus , though?

  • absolutlyridiculous

    OK since this WOMAN wants to be listed as a father time to line up the appointment for the sex change. The only way this can be a father is for her to actually function that way in the world. She has no plumbing that would indicate it in any way. The definition of father … a man in relation to his natural child or children. KEYWORD for those of you without common sense is M-A-N

  • absolutlyridiculous

    The spiral downward continues …

  • thisoldspouse

    All sexual anarchists evidently failed basic biology.

    • Evan C

      …while many commentators here failed the basic understanding of the “Golden Rule.”

      • thisoldspouse

        The “Golden Rule” is used more for cover for ungodly behavior more than the race card.

        Why do you deviants always feign to state what you “believe” Jesus implied, when you won’t ever believe what he explicitly said?

        • Hannah

          Jesus never said a word about homosexulaity or anything of the sort. Assuming you merely misspoke and were referring to the Bible as a whole- not just the portions that are specifically the words of Jesus- I ask, have you ever eaten bacon? Have you ever looked at someone and thought “Wow, she/he is extremely attractive.”? Have you ever cut your hair? Now, if you answered yes to any of these questions, you are simply living by what you “believe” the bible is saying. Not what it explicitly states.

          • RhondaStar

            Jesus didn’t say anything about bestiality either. But he did define marriage as one man, one woman (Matt. 19:4-6).

            As for all of your misunderstandings of the Bible, you’re on the wrong website. We know better. BarbWire did an entire series debunking all of these claims. It’s called Debunking Lies about the Bible (part three answers the ceremonial laws you bring up). The NT specifically states that those ritual laws no longer apply, but the moral law applies. The moral law is what still holds true.

            And there’s nothing wrong with noticing someone is attractive. Jesus referred to lusting — inadvertently noticing is not necessarily the same as lust.

          • Hannah

            Okay, maybe I shouldn’t have used the bible against a bible thumper because, apparently, it’s okay for you to pick and choose what to follow. Well here, I’ll pick and choose now. The only portion I really care to understand of that book is the whole “Love thy neighbor” part. But, hey, I’ll be the first to say, neither of us are going to change each other’s mind on this subject. What is the point of even debating it? No matter which way the discussion goes, I can still sleep at night knowing that in 10 years max, I’ll legally be able to fall in love with and marry the girl of my dreams.

            -signed; the 14 year old that just wants everyone to stop arguing about this. Everyone has a right to be happy, and believe what ever they want to believe.

            The thing is, what you believe, shouldn’t dictate how others live their lives.

          • RhondaStar

            All laws are based on what somebody believes is right or wrong. And these same laws dictate how we live. So, why should marriage law be any different. Besides, it’s not just Christians who believe in natural marriage.

          • vorpal

            Out of curiosity, did the series discuss second marriages after divorce? Unlike homosexuality, Jesus spoke out directly against these, calling them relationships of adultery. However, I almost never see Christians claiming that people in second marriages cannot be Christian despite the fact that they’re living in adulterous sin; that condemnation is saved for gay people, usually.

          • RhondaStar

            Does the NAACP seek guidance on their stances, efforts, and beliefs from the KKK? Then, neither do I see guidance on the Bible from those that don’t believe it.

            I am aware of what Jesus did and didn’t say. I’m not interested homosexual distortions.

          • Lightning Baltimore

            So you pick and choose what scripture *you* will follow and what *others* must follow. Thanks for clarifying your hypocrisy.

          • vorpal

            I’m genuinely curious as to why most of the Christians I meet seem to be far more concerned with the homosexuality of non-Christians than they are with the adulterous second marriages in their own Christian faith. You can exercise avoidance tactics and dismiss the big bad gay atheist if you don’t want to answer the question, but I’d actually like to know more.

          • RhondaStar

            Divorce is a sin except in cases of adultery, abandonment, an abuse. The are no exceptions to homosexuality — It is always wrong. When I meet a heterosexual couple how do I know if they have a divorce in their past? There’s no big “D” on their foreheads! And if I do find out later that they have been divorced, how would I know if they met one of the exceptions listed above or not? Am I supposed to interrogate every opposite-sex couple to make you homosexuals happy? And finally, acts of sin committed prior to becoming a Christian are forgiven. Divorce is not the unforgivable sin.

            For homosexual couples, on the other hand, it is immediately apparent that they are living in sin. And the fact that are still practicing their sin proves that they have never repented. Now, forgiveness is available, but they need to repent and leave that deathstyle.

            We also don’t have divorce activists trying to get everyone to embrace divorce or tryin to fire people who disagree with divorce. And nobody who has had a divorce ever got married with this in mind. Homosexuals actually get together intending to sin. And our denomination doesn’t have divorcees picketing and interrupting our meetings, making threats, trying to change our beliefs — but we do have homosexual activist doing these things. As soon as another group tries to corrupt society and churches, we will focus on them too. And if you don’t like us focusing on you then leave our churches alone and start your own. Stop demanding that we approve of what you do — I don’t try to coerce you into becoming a Christian…though I would love for that to happen!

            Finally, I have been married to my high school sweetheart for almost 27 years. No divorce. So, go bark up some other tree.

          • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

            2 TIMOTHY 3:16

            “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”

            So, should Christians take guidance from the Bible itself, or those who it condemns as abominations?

            Hmmmm…..

          • regina griggs

            What about Matt 19-4 Jesus said do you not remember that my Father created them male and female and a man and woman will leave their family and the two shall become one flesh.Yes this is paraphraised you might want to read the bible and see that Jesus did in deed say something about marriage.

        • Evan C

          Shirley Phelps, is that you? I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that those of the the WBC frame of mind would be posting comments on this site. Perhaps you should ask Matt for a writing gig ;)

    • vorpal

      I don’t know what sexual anarchy means, but I received an A+ in both high school biology courses that I took.

      • thisoldspouse

        You must have attended a social-promotion public school, then.

        • vorpal

          Actually, I attended a fairly prestigious high school for gifted students. (It was public, but the public education system in Canada is excellent, and almost no one attends private schools unless your parents feel inclined to send you to Montessori or Waldorf or something similar.)

          I’m not sure what kind of opinion you have about me, thisoldspouse, but I tested in the 99.994th percentile for IQ; I completed my PhD in math in Jan 2013; and I speak, read, and write English (native), French (advanced), and Mandarin (upper intermediate). While I certainly have a generous smattering of flaws, I’m not exactly a dumb cookie, despite what you might think, toots.

          • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

            Yeaahhhhh… all those smarts and you can’t figure out what the poopy-hole is for.

          • torrentprime

            Straight men who do it with straight women – which by volume is FAR more than gay incidents given how few gays there are – don’t count, though, right? It’s only a sign of a diseased mind when it’s done with the same gender?

  • MsCt12 .

    Wake up society! We have forgotten what the real and most important issue is and that is homosexual acts should be criminalized. It is a disrespect to science, nature, humanity, logic, and our existence. Any person who disagrees with me please answer this question: what if your parents were fully blown homosexuals before you were conceived?
    There is no scientific justification for a man having sex with another man or a woman with a woman. But some well paid judge and activist decided that they should override science, logic, and anything that makes sense in an attempt to justify the perverted lifestyle of the LBGT community. We are failing our future generation of children and potential leaders by condoning homosexual fake parenting and fake marriages.

    • torrentprime

      It’s not like homosexuality and heterosexuality are competing ideologies or one side is trying to get as many people as possible to defeat the other side. That’s not what gays are saying or doing, and it’s a lie to say they are. All gays are saying is that some people are going to be both gay whether some Christians or Muslims like it or not, and those people shouldn’t be marginalized or discriminated against when they discover they are.

      And there are plenty of humans walking around and being born; the planet is not running out of humans.

      And I want you to find a baby boy taken from an orphanage, adopted, and raised to adulthood by two gays and tell him that he was subject to “fake parenting”. Just record it, please – I want to see his reaction to you, when you tell him he should have been left in that orphanage.

      • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

        It’s already happened. Check out the Real Duke Rape Case.

        News agencies gagging gay’ factor in boy rape
        By Joe Kovacs, WorldNetDaily, posted July1, 2009

        “News coverage of a Duke University official accused of raping his adopted 5-year-old son and offering the child to someone else is apparently lacking what some say is a key piece of information: the fact the alleged perpetrator is a homosexual who lives with another “gay” man.

        Frank Lombard, associate director of the Health Inequalities Program at the university’s Center for Health Policy, was arrested last Wednesday in Raleigh, N.C., for attempting to induce someone to cross state lines to engage in sex with the child, who is black.

        The arrest affidavit goes into graphic detail of Lombard’s alleged actions, including alleged performance of oral sex with the child in front of a webcam, and sodomizing the boy with his finger and tongue. It also prominently cites the fact that Lombard is a homosexual living with another “gay” man.

        In his online profile, Lombard reportedly describes himself as “perv dad for fun.”

        But days after the case broke, there have been few, if any, mentions in news stories that Lombard is part of a homosexual couple raising children.

        In reports by the Associated Press, CNN and ABC News, for instance, the “gay” factor is never brought up.

        A Lexis-Nexis news database search by WND using search terms “Frank Lombard” and “homosexual” or “gay” resulted in just four results, none of which were any major media.”

        Face it, Gay adoption is DiGiorno’s for Molesters

  • Martin Rizley

    How sad that our government leaders, instead of standing against this sort of craziness masquerading as reality, simply cave to it. The consequences for our culture, country, and legal system in yielding without a fight to homofascist demands will be devastating, as will the emotional/psychological/spiritual toll on this poor girl who is being dragged into her two guardians’ world of virtual reality. Our society needs to recover its capacity to frown on immoral and irrational modes of living. That is not being ‘mean’ or self-righteous; rather, it is fulfilling a moral duty we owe to God. In these sad, mixed-up times in which we are living, our actions should spring from a heart of compassion toward our children’s children. We ought to be thinking of THEM by doing all in our power to bequeath to them a culture marked by moral sanity, instead of thinking only of ourselves and our desire to avoid the social ostracism of being labelled a ‘homophobe.’ If we speak out loud and clear the truth concerning God’s design for human sexuality to a culture that does not want to hear it, perhaps our descendants will rise up and call us blessed that we at least stood firm in a day and age marked by grotesque moral deformity and rebellion against God.

  • thisoldspouse

    There is one glaring problem that the sexual anarchists fail to face or admit. If homosexuals only comprise 2-3% of the population – let’s even be generous and allow for the bogus number invented by pedophile Alfred Kinsey’s “studies” of 10% – then, the vast majority of children raised in same-sex-headed households are presumably heterosexual, or will be expected to develop primarily that way.

    Then, who is to model the opposite-sex relationship that the vast majority of these children will need to witness to be good partners with their future spouses? It’s already a proven fact that single-parent households result in poorer outcomes for children when they mature than biologically intact families. Why would a single-sex household be any different? Why is the mere number “2″ somehow an ameliorator of a situation where a major factor in influencing a child’s upbringing is deliberately absent?

    Again, who models the man-woman marriage relationship that a presumably hetersexual child needs to see?

    • shepetgene

      A same-sex couple can model a healthy relationship. The practices, skills, and signs of a healthy relationship are not inherent to only male-female couples.

      • thisoldspouse

        In other words, you are saying that men are no different than women. That they are complete interchangeable.

        Is that what you’re saying?

        • torrentprime

          No one is saying that, as much as you wish they were.

        • shepetgene

          What I’m saying is that the actions that make up a healthy relationship are not specific to gender. Having effective communication, respect for the other’s experience, appropriate boundaries, the ability to be flexible, etc. are not inherent to male-female couples. These are tools that work in all relationships. Assuming only male-female couples can model healthy relationships undermines all of the long-lasting, successful child-rearing same-sex couples. Of which there are many.

  • Sam

    How can the state list a woman as the father? That’s about the stupidest thing I ever heard! What is wrong with our legislature these days? They act like they are retarded and don’t know anything!

  • Ray

    Hmm. An entire 102 total comments on all of todays stories. And with all the violent imagery Matt uses to promote the site: “leftists”, “warfare” “satanic”, “deception”, “slaughter”, “persecution”, “marxist”. Better go film a lynching or something, Matt. Maybe some baby killings or brown people “stealing our job” in the lettuce fields of California.

  • Rockon

    It’s interesting that in their claims that homosexuality as being “so normal,” they always find themselves attempting to supplant man-woman roles. A worldview built on lies is one that exposes itself as self-defeating to its own claims.

    • shepetgene

      You’ll probably want to direct your attention to the feminist movement as well. The idea of traditional man-woman roles has been challenged for a number of years now and long before the modern gay rights movement.

      • Rockon

        I agree that without the feminist movement, which propagated the idea that men and women don’t need each other, opened the door for homosexuality becoming “normalized.” Garbage in…Garbage out.

      • Rockon

        The feminist movement, which propagates the ideology that men and women don’t really need each other, definitely contributed greatly to the normalizing of homosexuality. As the saying goes, garbage in = garbage out.

        • shepetgene

          I wouldn’t necessarily agree with your summary of the women’s rights movement, but I would agree the modern LGBT rights movement does have them and the civil rights movement to thank for its progress.

    • Rockon

      The feminist movement, which propagates the ideology that men and women don’t really need each other, definitely contributed greatly to the normalizing of homosexuality. As the saying goes, garbage in = garbage out.

      • torrentprime

        It saves time when attacking gay rights to show everyone that you don’t even understand the feminism movement.

        • thisoldspouse

          You begin with the FALSE premise, “gay rights,” and then attempt to build on this contrived foundation.

          sexual predilection isn’t a “right.” Otherwise, you have a long line of flavors to accommodate.

          • torrentprime

            Orientation is not a predilection. Comparing the gender to which one is attracted (out of… two options) to something like an ice cream flavor preference shows only that you don’t understand orientation.
            Tell me (assuming you’re straight): when did you choose to be straight? Was it a hard choice?

          • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

            In the APA’s DSM-II, the official listing of mental diseases and disorders, homosexuality was number one — considered to be a mental disease and sexual aberration.

            Homosexuals infiltrated the APA, worked their way onto the Nomenclature committee and, in 1973) unilaterally removed it as a mental disease. (See Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, THE TROJAN COUCH).

            It was a political decision, not supported by any scientific evidence. Of course, that did nothing to change the reality of homosexuality.

            Nature reasserted herself within a decade with the global AIDS epidemic and the Global Tainted Blood scandal (Gay-donated, HIV and Hepatitis-infected blood killing thousands of innocent blood transfusion recipients world-wide).

            Homosexuals would have us believe that by changing labels, they are changing reality. They are not.

            They are just lying.

          • torrentprime

            Except that there was no scientific reason for it to be on the mental disease list in the first place – just some religions didn’t like it.
            And if mother nature lashed out at the gays, then whose fault was the Black Death? Liberals?

  • Lightning Baltimore

    Rather than admit that you want Ms. Jesty to have no legal connection whatsoever to the child, you claim they demanded she be listed as the father . The fact that Tennessee birth certificates give “mother” and “father” as the *only* parental options is beside the point, eh? Better the child become a ward of the state if something happens to Ms. Tranco, rather than simply use the space available on the birth certificate so she has two legally recognized parents. Despicable.

    • thisoldspouse

      Yeah, create the problem that others are expected to accommodate and then blame the others for not accommodating them.

      Typical. Reminds me of the AIDS debacle. Remember? “Reagan’s fault?”

      • Lightning Baltimore

        Two women raising a child together is not a “problem” for people uninfected by bigotry.

        • thisoldspouse

          It’s a problem for biology and truth when they demand to be known as the “progenitors.”

          You have quite a war on your hands when you label natural biology as a “bigot.”

          • Lightning Baltimore

            I’m calling *you* a bigot, not nature. I don’t use that term lightly, either; your ugly words throughout the comments on this site, not just this page, have shown there is no doubt that you are one.

          • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

            First, homosexuals lie to themselves in an attempt to convince themselves that what they do is normal. They, themselves know that it is sick. So they demand others not remind them of this sickness.

            For instance, Gender Identity Disordered (GID) person *thinks” it is a female, even though biology confirms that it is male. Nonetheless, this GID calls itself a female and thereafter demands to use the ladies room, rather than the men’s room.

            It demands we call it a ‘she’ or ‘her’ or worse yet a ‘woman.’

            It’s a lie, but the difference is they demand we play along in their delusion.

            Ain’t gonna happen.

  • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

    This entire homosexuality-is-good movement is propelled by lies. Can you imagine a public information service commercial, similar to ones airing now about the graphic dangers of cigarette smoking, but warning about the dangers of homosexual acts?

    Even without being graphic, such a commercial would point out that perhaps 2 percent of America is homosexual, and yet this tiny sliver of society accounts for over 70 PERCENT of all new Syphilis cases, TWO THIRDS of all new HIV infections (and over 80 PERCENT of new HIV infections in males), translating into an HIV infection rate 44 TIMES that of Normals and an AIDS infection rate 50 TIMES that of Normals. Lifespans curtailed by 20 years.

    The CDC reports that one in five Homosexuals is already HIV infected, while other sources report that it costs taxpayers, hospitals and insurance co-payers over $600,000 to treat each HIV-infected homosexual.

    But we know why this information is not getting out.

    Just ask Carrie Prejean, Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty, and Brenden Eich.

    It’s all about pro-Gay les and the suppression of truth.

    • torrentprime

      None of those factoids has anything to do with being gay (some of them are actually lies, the “20 year shorter lifespan” thing was debunked since the state was used by scanning obituaries in gay newspapers during the AIDS crisis, 1 in 5 men of cities hardest hit by AIDS are infected, not all gays everywhere), nonetheless the STI rate for gays is far higher than it should be. Those stats (the real ones, not the lies) have to do with unprotected and reckless intercourse. Simply being attracted to the same gender does not equal or demand or require those two things. Instead of telling people, ‘You are gay and are therefore going to die of AIDS,” you should try telling people, “If you know you are gay, make the smart decisions in your life to avoid these horrible, horrible consequences which too many of your peers suffer.” Being gay is not a choice; having unprotected sex is.

      Question: 100% of teen pregnancy and 100% of babies born out of wedlock is due to straight people and straight intercourse. Does this mean there is something wrong with straight people? Why not?

      • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

        Homosexuals have debunked squat. Indeed, homosexual activists in Canada, suing for additional taxpayer funds to support their diseases, used the same figures and drew the same conclusions.

        Here’s a summary of the Cameron findings:

        Gay Obituaries Closely Track Officially Reported Deaths from AIDS
        Authors: Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron

        Summary: The age distribution of AIDS deaths of males who have sex with males [MSM] was estimated from obituaries in the Washington Blade, a gay newspaper. Statistics from the 2003 HIV/AIDS Surveillance Supplemental Report are highly congruent with deaths of MSM due to AIDS from these obituaries. Death due to AIDS in old age was most frequent for heterosexuals and least frequent for MSM who were drug abusers. Obituaries in the Washington Blade are thus consistent with and may be representative of deaths due to AIDS among MSM. The latest CDC report tends to strengthen the overall finding based upon obituaries: that the lifespan of MSM is shortened two to three decades by AIDS and, possibly, other causes.
        – References: Psychological Reports, 2005, 96, 693-697.

        and

        “A group of six Canadian “qu**rs,” to use the gay media’s term, have filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, charging the nation’s entire healthcare system with homophobia.

        In what may wind up in the “What were they thinking?” file, they have dug a deep hole for themselves by demanding that more attention be given to “the many health issues that are endemic to our community.”

        What would those “endemic” issues be? Well, here is their list, not mine: lower life expectancy, higher rates of substance abuse, depression, HIV/AIDS, an*l cancer, and suicide, and higher rates of breast cancer and cervical cancer among lesbians.

        Astonishingly, these activists admit what we have been saying for years, that “gay/bisexual men have a life expectancy 20 years less than the average man” in Canada. Even the life expectancy of lesbians, though not as severely impacted, “is still lower than the life expectancy of the general population.”

        Suicide rates, they admit, are anywhere from double to 13.9 times higher than the general population. By their own estimates, homosexuals comprise 30% of all suicides in Canada.

        They admit that smoking rates among gays are up to three times higher, alcohol use up to seven times higher, and illicit drug use up to 19 times higher than the general population.”

        • torrentprime

          Cameron debunked

          Dude, you literally just admitted what I said: the “scientific analysis” was nothing more than scanning gay newspapers and adding up obituaries. That would be like scanning religious newsletters in Rwanda and after reading about massacres deciding that Christianity was a dangerous lifestyle. Nothing in Cameron’s hatchet job applies to either being gay or all gays anywhere. What it does show is that many, many, far too many gays made and continue to make bad choices about intercourse and protection.
          Suicide stats – if religious and straight bullies would stop terrorizing them so much, they’d probably stop killing themselves so much. What say we give it a try?
          Gays are told they are evil, Satanic, child molesters, anti-family, perverted, unclean, sinful, death-deserving and abominations, and they are told ALL this from early childhood; many are driven from their homes and physically endangered by their family and classmates – and you wonder why they drink too much.
          Stop messing with their lives from the getgo and you’ll be surprised how normal they are.

          • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

            Dude, yourself.

            When HIV remains incurable and homosexuals account for over 80 percent of new infections in males, and have an AIDS infection rate 50 TIMES that of the Normal population, it can only be expected that those engaging in deviant acts live, statistically, dramatically shorter lives.

            “As an empirical test of the proposition, if about the same drop in prevalence in old age and/or longevity is exhibited in societies where homosexuals are accepted (e.g., Canada, Denmark, Norway) as where they are more apt to be condemned (e.g., United States), a shortened life span would appear broadly inherent to same-sex sexual practice, rather than the ‘fault’ of society or particular members of greater society. On the other hand, if the homosexual life span is significantly longer in societies where they enjoy greater acceptance, lesser health (and shorter
            life span) due to discrimination would be a more plausible explanation.”

            But don’t just rely on Cameron, who you WISH was ‘debunked,’ look to other studies which confirmed the findings:

            “In 1997, the International Journal of Epidemiology carried an article with the excitingly provocative title, “Modelling the impact of HIV disease on mortality in gay and bisexual men.”

            Just in case you misplaced your copy, I’ll mention that half a dozen scholars scrutinized vital statistics for several years from a large Canadian city. Their finding: Life expectancy at age 20 for gay or bisexual men was 8 to 20 years less than that for all men.

            “Those figures aren’t remarkable, knowing what we do about the devastating impact of HIV/AIDS among homosexuals. What was notable is what happened four years after the publication of the article.

            “The six authors wrote a letter to the editor of the publication in which their work originally appeared. They were displeased because — you guessed it — homophobic groups were using their data to intimate homosexual practices were somehow self-destructive.”

            – Bates, Homosexual life expectancy and the gay agenda (2005)

            Or even the Homosexuals who sued the Canadian National Health Service, and as one of their bases: (their words)

            It has been estimated that gay/bisexual men
            have a life expectancy 20 years less than the average
            man in Canada. In their book Caring For Lesbian and
            Gay People—A Clinical Guide
            , 1 authors Dr. Allan Peterkin and Dr. Cathy Risdon suggest that the life ex-
            pectancy of gay/bisexual men in Canada is 55 years.
            Less research has been conducted on the life ex-
            pectancy for lesbians in Canada but health indica-
            tors suggest that while it is not as low as that for gay
            men, it is still lower than the life expectancy of the
            general population .”

            Embarrassing innit?

          • torrentprime

            Canada, Denmark, and Norway are paragons of happy gay living? All homophobia has been eliminated there, and centuries ago? Thus all gay men who grew up in this century experienced none of the effects of homophobia at any point in their lives? Such a wonderful place!
            LOL
            You are assuming a) that the countries are SO accepting that there is no homophobia of any kind to affect the quality of gay life or to shorten it and b) this gay Eden has been in place long enough to affect all gays living or recently deceased, such that this study has two completely equal pools of gays and straights. You and I both know that though some of these countries are a decade or more ahead of the USA, gays don’t live in some progressive paradise there. It’s an invalid comparison. It’s like comparing kids that graduated from a top-notch, exclusive prep school with a class from a middle-class suburb, and saying, “Well, nothing ever goes really wrong in a suburb, right? So they had the same chances in life.”

    • portertx

      Yet Lesbians have the lowest occurrence of HIV/AIDS than another group lower than heterosexuals…

      • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

        Lesbians have their own health issues, such as susceptibility to various cancers, bacterial vaginosis, early death due to obesity, substance abuse and domestic violence. AIDS and HIV would not be issues in ‘pure’ WSW (women who sleep with women, in CDC paralance) because you don’t have the same mechanism of transmission which is the earmark of male deviants.

        But all this is a distractor and not an answer to the very real and extremely high rates of disease in male homosexuals. It was said that during the pre-AIDS period, infection with a STD carried no stigma within the gay community. The ritual of repeated infection and treatment had become part of the homosexual lifestyle

        Consider this from Randy Shilts, the famous homosexual activist (who ended up dying of disease):

        “Gay men were being washed by tide after tide of increasingly serious infections. First, it was syphilis and gonorrhea. Gay men made up about 80 percent of the 70,000 annual patient visits to the city’s (San Francisco) VD clinic. Easy treatment had imbued them with such a cavalier attitude toward venereal diseases that many gay men saved their waiting-line numbers, like little tokens of desirability, and the clinic was considered an easy place to pick up both a shot and a date. Then came hepatitis A and the enteric parasites, followed by the proliferation of hepatitis B, a disease that had transformed itself, via the popularity of an*l intercourse, from a blood-borne scourge into a venereal disease.”

        – Randy Shilts,, And the Band Played On: Politics, people, and the AIDS epidemic, (NY: St. Martins Press, 1987) p.18.

        http://ittakesbrains.com/OLeary-TheSyndemicOfSTDsAmongGayMen.html#note16

      • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

        Lesbians have their own health issues, such as susceptibility to various cancers, bacterial vaginosis, early death due to obesity, substance abuse and domestic violence. AIDS and HIV would not be issues in ‘pure’ WSW (women who sleep with women, in CDC paralance) because you don’t have the same mechanism of transmission which is the earmark of male deviants.

        But all this is a distractor and not an answer to the very real and extremely high rates of disease in male homosexuals. It was said that during the pre-AIDS period, infection with a STD carried no stigma within the gay community. The ritual of repeated infection and treatment had become part of the homosexual lifestyle

        Consider this from Randy Shilts, the famous homosexual activist (who ended up dying of disease):

        “Gay men were being washed by tide after tide of increasingly serious infections. First, it was syphilis and gonorrhea. Gay men made up about 80 percent of the 70,000 annual patient visits to the city’s (San Francisco) VD clinic. Easy treatment had imbued them with such a cavalier attitude toward venereal diseases that many gay men saved their waiting-line numbers, like little tokens of desirability, and the clinic was considered an easy place to pick up both a shot and a date. Then came hepatitis A and the enteric parasites, followed by the proliferation of hepatitis B, a disease that had transformed itself, via the popularity of an*l intercourse, from a blood-borne scourge into a venereal disease.”

        – Randy Shilts,, And the Band Played On: Politics, people, and the AIDS epidemic, (NY: St. Martins Press, 1987) p.18.

        http://ittakesbrains.com/OLeary-TheSyndemicOfSTDsAmongGayMen.html#note16

  • thisoldspouse

    So, your evidence is proof positive, but mine is “anecdotal.”

    How could I have missed seeing that coming?

    • torrentprime

      No, my challenge to you is: either admit that my one anecdote is just as good as yours
      Or
      to admit that single stories don’t mean much and we need to rely on scientific studies.
      Where do you stand?

      Hint: it’s not a contest either way anyway, since all the science shows that the kids of gay-headed households do just as well as kids from straight-headed households; Regnerus’ study has been backed away from by Regnerus’ colleagues and demolished in court.

  • Pingback: The Great ‘Gay’ Deception Grows: Woman in Tennessee Listed as ‘Father’ on Birth Certificate | Tennessee Christian News ™

  • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

    Actually, this is one of several activist judges, overruling the will of the people, along with the Consent of the Governed and imposing Government-forced deviancy on a state population. The first clue was that the Court held that the restriction against SSM did not have a rational basis.

    Given the broad rates of diseases and mental health issues, along with high societal costs and incredibly high propensity for homosexuals to engage in child molestation, there was absolutely no Rational Basis to overrule established law and impose positive harm onto society.

    Government exists, and particularly, State government, to protect the health, safety, morals and welfare of its citizens.

    Every single one of those aspects is severely damaged by the imposition of a pro-homosexual regime. The CDC reports that one in five homosexuals is already HIV positive, and the cost of treating each of the infected, at over $600,000 each, is shifted onto the taxpayer.

    Homosexuals, perhaps 2 percent of society, commit fully ONE THIRD of all child molestation, making their rates astronomically higher than the general population.

    This is just more damage on society, imposed by a dysfunctional government, nothing less.

    • torrentprime

      Pedophilia is not homosexuality – most molesters of the same gender actually identify as heterosexual. You’re just calling them gay because it fits your need to demonize gays.

      • Elder53

        Homosexuality is defined by behavior. If male pedophiles are molesting male victims, they are homosexual pedophiles.

        • torrentprime

          Nope.

          “As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: “The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however” (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143

          For the present discussion, the important point is that many child molesters cannot be meaningfully described as homosexuals, heterosexuals, or bisexuals (in the usual sense of those terms) because they are not really capable of a relationship with an adult man or woman. Instead of gender, their sexual attractions are based primarily on age. These individuals – who are often characterized as fixated – are attracted to children, not to men or women.

          Damn science keeps getting in the way.

    • torrentprime

      Oh, and “overruling the will of the people”. If only we lived in a direct democracy and not a constitutional republic, that would totally be relevant.

  • torrentprime

    All of which relates to sexual activity and sexual practice – i.e., protection. But simply waking up as a teenager and realizing, “Oh, i like boys and not girls,” does not have anything to do with that. Orientation does not equal behavior.

    • Mjolnir Hammerschlag

      That, in and of itself, is Gender Confusion or Gender Disordered. Normal men don’t prefer the Stink to the Pink.

      • torrentprime

        About 3-5% of them do, actually. Normally. Just as left-handedness and red hair is uncommon. Perfectly natural, though.
        Besides – about 1/3 of gay men don’t do “stink” anyway, and what about gay women?

  • Elder53

    Not everything that comes out of a scientist’s mouth is science, Torrent. I checked your link, and it turns out you’re referring to a rather polemical essay presented by unnamed UC-Davis psychologists who are clearly attempting to build a wall between homosexuality and pedophilia. Their methodology is to play word games. They define “homosexual” not by the obvious standard, whether somebody sleeps with the same sex, but by a sophistic standard: the age of the people to whom they are attracted. A male “homosexual” is defined as a male attracted to adult males. A “hebephile” is a man attracted to adolescent boys, and a “pedophile” is attracted to prepubescent children. Voila! Men who predate on young boys are therefore not homosexuals by definition, unless they also prefer adult males to adult females.

    I also checked your three links in the post a couple of slots above attacking the Regnerus study. Thanks for citing JoeMyGod! Best laugh I’ve had all day. All week!

    Regarding the academic integrity of the Regnerus study, the principal criticism appears to be that Regnerus compared apples to oranges, or children raised by intact heterosexual couples to children raised by same-sex couples that split up. The objection is understandable, but the problem is, same-sex relationships are so unstable that it’s just about impossible to find same-sex couples who stick together to raise children for twenty years, especially when you start with a large representative population and work backwards to find families raising children, as Regnerus did. You can’t blame Regnerus for same-sex couples being far more unstable than heterosexual couples, but, as others have noted on this comment string, unstable adult relationships are very harmful to the children they’re raising. The instability itself is an argument against allowing same-sex couples to adopt. Regnerus appears to be the only study of child-rearing outcomes that does not rely on subjects handpicked by the researchers.

    I wish the psychiatric community had turned such skeptical attention on Hooker and Kinsey, the two clearly fraudulent studies used to justify removing homosexuality from the DSM. Hooker claimed to prove that homosexuals are no more emotionally unstable than heterosexuals by recruiting her subjects, then culling the unstable ones from the subject pool! And of course, we all know what Kinsey did.

    • torrentprime

      Trying to pretend that “unnamed UC Davis psychologists” are the only ones in this debates is to reveal your own ignorance of the subject. Try this. It’s part of a larger debate of orientation and age and gender. I am sorry you’re not aware of it, but that doesn’t make it not true.

      As far as the “I couldn’t find any stable kids of homosexual relationships to use as data points” excuse goes, you are a) admitting, right out of the gate that the study can’t and doesn’t prove what it claims to prove because it didn’t compare apples to apples, and b) using as a lazy excuse “well, when comparing Group A to Group B, members of Group B just, like, don’t exist or something, so whomever we threw in to take their place as Group B is totally the same, right?”

      “unstable adult relationships are very harmful to the children they’re raising.” They are – should we outlaw divorce? Oh wait – when you talk about unstable adult relationships here, you’re only talking about teh gays, aren’t you? My mistake.

  • Pingback: Anonymous

  • Pingback: The Queering of Reality | The Political Hat

EmailTitle2

Sign up for BarbWire alerts!


EmailTitle2

Sign up for BarbWire alerts!