Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » GOODBYE READERS

    Filed at 7:10 am under by dcobranchi

    I’m sure this one will piss off a few folks here. It’s a very nice (and poignant) tale of two women who are raising (and home educating) four boys. They don’t come off as strident lesbians with some agenda. They’re just folks.

    “All I ever wanted is this,” Appleby says as the boys romp through the living room. “A family, a home, a garden. It’s everything. I couldn’t be happier.”

    But this comfortable life together did not start out without a few roadblocks.

    Custody battles over whether the children would remain in the home with Hoerner and Appleby led to months of psychiatric evaluations, counseling and drug screens.

    “I went through hell,” Appleby says. “We’re not freaks. We’re just like everybody else.”

    They’re considering moving to Canada to be legally married, but can’t because they need to be near elderly parents and don’t want to separate the boys from their father.

    Can someone tell me how keeping these two women from marrying is supporting families?

    5 Responses to “GOODBYE READERS”

    Comment by
    January 29th, 2005
    at 9:09 am

    I am as conservative Christian as they come, but this is one area where I disagree with most of my brothers and sisters. I think there are a lot worse things harming families than same-sex marriage. We’ve already tanked marriage, it’s entered into too casually, not taken seriously once entered into, and too casually dissolved (i.e. “I’m not happy”). Guess what, marriage is not a happiness guarantee. I think what a lot of Christians are afraid of, if they would look deeply, is that these “sinners” will actually be more committed, considering all they’ve gone through to get married, than those getting married “properly”, and show us all up. Don’t get me wrong, I think that lifestyle is against what the Bible teaches, and that is my yardstick. But there are a lot of other ways we fall way short of the standard ourselves, perhaps we should start there before attacking others.

    Comment by
    January 29th, 2005
    at 11:32 am

    For me it comes down to freedom of religion (or “freedom from religion” if you prefer).

    A secular government should not be concerned with whether gay marriage is a sin according to some religions. It ought to be looking only at it from a human rights, and economic benefits, perspective.

    If gay relationships are sinful in a person’s religious view, then than person should not engage in them. I’d honestly prefer to see the gov’t out of the sexual morality business altogether, where consenting adults are concerned.

    Comment by
    January 29th, 2005
    at 6:24 pm

    Also in the news this week, PBS Kids show “Postcards from Buster” features a different state each episode. It’s part animation (like Arthur) and part real people. An episode called Sugartime featuring Vermont is being pulled because one of the families shown is headed by two women. It isn’t featured or really mentioned, according to PBS, but since it appears at all, they have decided to pull it, or limit distribution. The nation’s new education secretary is shocked that public money was spent on this episode.


    Comment by
    Eric Holcombe
    January 29th, 2005
    at 6:53 pm

    “They don’t come off as strident lesbians with some agenda.”

    You may be right, but the paper does. This is pretty much standard fare these days- homosexuals are “just like” heterosexuals except Christians hate them. Also, the Thelma & Louise angle is usually promoted – apparently it’s slightly more appealing than Adam & Steve. They can be mothers, but two guys are just perverts. And I’m guessing the state custody laws would keep the kids “close to their fathers” – just like any (other) heterosexual divorce.

    I just don’t identify much with someone who had no interest in the opposite sex, but married twice anyway, had multiple children in each relationship, and broke up both of those families to be with the next partner (man or woman). Yeah, I like guns, have a garden, do chores, but I didn’ t get married and father three children under the guise of “doing the right thing” under pressure from my hometown populace. It seems to blame all this discontinuity of “familiy” on the state because she can’t marry her third partner is a little much.

    Comment by
    January 30th, 2005
    at 5:59 am

    Can’t get rid of me that easily, Daryl. :p

    I don’t have issues with same-sex marriages. It’s a contract between humans, I don’t care what other people do in their spare time in regards to sex. The government already regulates it, license fees, filing, etc. How can they define it based purely on religious definition?