It's a father and his adopted son. It is the same as if he was a biological child of this man, for all legal purposes.

 

Yeah, how dare they make a mockery of parenthood. As an adoptive father I find this ludicrous.

 

Yeah, it's ludicrous that a couple has to do this to get certain privileges. I don't blame them one bit, but I also pray that it won't hurt any adoptions in the future.

Thankfully now with legalized SSM this adoptive loophole sham will no longer happen under these type of circumstances.

 

You being an adoptive father, and these guys doing what they did are two completely different scenarios. The one with the perspective issue just might be you deeming it ludicrous. Perhaps you're not making any attempt to understand? Perhaps there are factors you are not considering while indicating that I should try to understand a different perspective for a change. Why should I have a different perspective when I'm seeing it for what it is? Are you allowing yourself to see it for what it is?

 

In the past a gay couple could be together for years while some family members object, and while one might be in the hospital or die, family can swoop down and try to prevent the long term partner from visiting the other, or sometimes wills have been contested by family members because they never recognized the gay couple's union as real or significant when their greedy bigoted selves are only concerned with what they can get from the estate, and not the long term love that the two people have shared. Sometimes family had disowned their family member only to show up years later to cash in. These guys using a legal loophole with adoption to prevent this from happening is rooted in sensible reasons.

 

If these are things that you might not have previously considered, perhaps now you have enough new knowledge regarding such matters, and the capacity to understand that which perhaps you previously had not.

 

Again, when a biological father and son seek to marry I will share in your objection.

 

Before you get too high on your horse of enlightening me, aside from being an adoptive father, I am also the proud father of a gay daughter.

 

Adoption is difficult enough without scam artists using it to scam the system.

 

You may find it interesting that my daughter agrees.

 

Again, maybe you should try viewing things from a different perspective.

Before you get too high on your horse of enlightening me, aside from being an adoptive father, I am also the proud father of a gay daughter.

 

Adoption is difficult enough without scam artists using it to scam the system.

 

You may find it interesting that my daughter agrees.

 

Again, maybe you should try viewing things from a different perspective.

 

So perhaps the different perspective that I should take is it would've been better for these guys to leave themselves open to discrimination when they found a legal loophole to prevent that from happening because folks like you don't get it and find it unethical from your perspective?

 

The perspective I'm looking at it from is from these guys' shoes, and I'm not detecting from you that you've even considered as much, so I'm viewing from a perspective that appears to make the most sense in the matter, however you seem to be hoping that I take a different road and not empathize with their situation.

 

I'm sorry if you can't grasp that I empathize with their situation and understand their motives. If you're not capable of understanding I find it peculiar that you're challenging me to see it from a different perspective while you obviously cannot.

 

I get that your knee-jerk reaction to it is that it's wrong or unethical, but with a deeper understanding an examination of it perhaps you can see further than your knee.

 

Again, yours and their situation is completely different so I'm not completely understanding how it effects or is so appalling to you. If it is, so be it, but in this case I'm not seeing much reason to see it much differently than the way I do. If you're content with keeping your wall of objection up, have at it but you're really going to have to plead you case harder with more sensible logic for me to come to an "ah ha moment" where I see it with the objection as you do.

 

Is it me with the perspective issue, or is it you?

 

Personally it's really not that important for me to alter your perspective of the situation, why is it important to you that you try to alter mine?

B-Ball-Fan, I owe you an apology. I am completely guilty of merely reading the headline (until a minute ago), so my first post was clearly misinformed.

 

But the new issue that I think comes to light (and I don't know if you'll agree or disagree - I'm not looking to provoke an argument) is that I don't know what to think about this 'adoption.'

 

 

 

I guess it makes sense that the two did it for their "rights" (which I assume is tax breaks, health insurance, etc.). The problem IMO then is that whatever "rights" the two men protected by adoption cannot be protected for simply same-sex couples. There should be the same rights (tax benefits, health insurance, etc.) for same sex couples IMO. Just without calling it marriage, which is a discussion we will have to agree to disagree on.

 

Firstly, thank you for bringing to light that you posted while initially being misinformed. it's a classy move that takes guts to admit that you jumped to respond before having all the details, and I appreciate you clearing that up.

 

Speaking from personal experience, my partner of 20 years who passed away 4 years ago from a lengthy battle with cancer had me seeing first hand the potential issues that gay couples can experience by not being legally bounded. Thankfully I did not have to deal with too many hoops to jump through, and this was mostly because he had a very understanding family, and a good knowledgeable lawyer to handle his estate.

 

He lived in Cincinnati, Oh and I in Covington, Ky and for reasons that we were both established and comfortable with our living arrangements when we met, and as our union grew and continued, and me at the time working a 3rd shift position, found it of no particular benefit for us to move in together, but saw each other practically every day and were always in contact with each other, and there for each other at all times.

 

When he became ill it became necessary that I become his power of attorney so that I could write his checks for him and handle his financial affairs. However legally when he passed, although I was on top of every one of his needs and financial particulars, he and I lived in different states, and I was not biologically related to him, so the executor of his will needed to be a biological family member, and his closest family member lived in Minnesota, and my partner was originally from that area until he came to Cincinnati to work. If I had been a resident of Ohio I could have been his executor.

 

Because he had lived for years far from family members while he visited them multiple times yearly, he never confided in them that he was gay, nor did they know anything of me in his life.

 

When he was becoming more and more ill I expressed to him concern that I would have to work with his family members closely regarding his estate because besides him, I was literally the only one who knew all the relevant details of his financial affairs and would have to communicate with his family in order for his executer to smoothly be able to carry out his responsibilities.

 

I had concern that they would question who I was in his life, and if they'd be accepting and cooperative. Because he was seriously ill and way too weak to approach this heavy topic, he gave me the green light to confide in his family member/executer that we had been partners for 20 years. Although they knew nothing of me previously, they admitted that they suspected that he was gay and they were thankfully extremely accepting of the situation, and of me, and expressed their thankfulness of me being in his life to be close by him in good times and bad.

 

Although I could not legally be his executor, I truly was the acting executor with his family member's only responsibility to be signing papers, which he did without objection or conflict. With him living hours away, all necessary papers had to be mailed to him to sign and then returned. It was often complicated regarding insurance companies etc..., but his family member cooperated every step of the way, and we ultimately were able to get everything settled, though it was a very complicated tiresome long dragged out process. Honestly it was more complicated and involved than I can begin to express, but because of an understanding family and a good lawyer everything was taken care of in only the best and proper way possible.

 

With all of that said, and although it was complicated, it didn't have to go as smoothly as it did, and it only did because of his family member who was understanding and put up no obstacles. I was so completely thankful for that and it stresses me out to no end to think what others have had to deal with under similar circumstances with problematic families. I felt truly blessed and realize how completely lucky I was that it wasn't anymore complicated than it already was.

 

I'm satisfied that we now have legal same sex marriages, but even if that had never come to be, I still would have been just as satisfied if legally bounding was an option and it would not have been a concern to me if it wasn't called "Marriage". Recognizing it as a legal civil union with all the rights attached would have been acceptable enough for me.

So perhaps the different perspective that I should take is it would've been better for these guys to leave themselves open to discrimination when they found a legal loophole to prevent that from happening because folks like you don't get it and find it unethical from your perspective?

 

The perspective I'm looking at it from is from these guys' shoes, and I'm not detecting from you that you've even considered as much, so I'm viewing from a perspective that appears to make the most sense in the matter, however you seem to be hoping that I take a different road and not empathize with their situation.

 

I'm sorry if you can't grasp that I empathize with their situation and understand their motives. If you're not capable of understanding I find it peculiar that you're challenging me to see it from a different perspective while you obviously cannot.

 

I get that your knee-jerk reaction to it is that it's wrong or unethical, but with a deeper understanding an examination of it perhaps you can see further than your knee.

 

Again, yours and their situation is completely different so I'm not completely understanding how it effects or is so appalling to you. If it is, so be it, but in this case I'm not seeing much reason to see it much differently than the way I do. If you're content with keeping your wall of objection up, have at it but you're really going to have to plead you case harder with more sensible logic for me to come to an "ah ha moment" where I see it with the objection as you do.

 

Is it me with the perspective issue, or is it you?

 

Personally it's really not that important for me to alter your perspective of the situation, why is it important to you that you try to alter mine?

 

I have viewed it from your perspective. I do not believe, as you seem to, that the ends justify the means.

 

I am a supporter of those that are gay being treated equally under the law. I am not a supporter of anyone, gay or straight, circumventing the law, or making a sham of it, in order to take advantage of it. I can see just fine. I fear it is you that can't see the forest for the trees.

 

You keep saying this situation is completely different than mine. Unless you have adopted you cannot understand how every negative situation connected with adoption can affect adoption as a whole.

I have viewed it from your perspective. I do not believe, as you seem to, that the ends justify the means.

 

I am a supporter of those that are gay being treated equally under the law. I am not a supporter of anyone, gay or straight, circumventing the law, or making a sham of it, in order to take advantage of it. I can see just fine. I fear it is you that can't see the forest for the trees.

 

You keep saying this situation is completely different than mine. Unless you have adopted you cannot understand how every negative situation connected with adoption can affect adoption as a whole.

 

I have viewed it from your perspective. I do not believe as you seem to that the ends don't justify the means, and I believe that your worries and claims that their actions would be disruptive to the adoptive process over all and what it is normally intended for is an overly exaggerated reaction. Can you provide an example of how their actions have done what you suggest?

 

Sure, I agree that on the surface it may seem odd and can see where some could initially object, but when seeing it for what it is, how exactly has it wrongly affected you or others aiming to adopt? You seem to think that it does, but you still haven't indicated how.

 

Actually I find it as ingenious of them to find a way to assure that they are legally protected when at the time they did it, there was no legal protection for them. As Sportsguy41017 said, "I don't blame them one bit".

 

They managed to accomplish what they set out to do, and in doing so I'm guessing that although you have an objective reaction to it, there's nothing that they did that personally effected you any way shape or form.

 

I'm wondering if our discussion is still truly about the topic at hand, or your need to feel that you are right?

 

Remember, initially I never specifically addressed you on this topic and you responded to my post by saying "It would be nice if some would stop defending and try to understand something from a different perspective for a change." - suggesting that I'm somehow viewing this all wrong, or that since it's a gay topic I will just knee-jerkingly defend it without thought, all the while suggesting that I should alter my perspective to match yours.

 

Aside from claiming that it's ludicrous and a sham, and disruptive to the adoptive process and makes mockery of parenthood, provide an example of how it actually is and how what they did effected you personally, or others in any ill way. I'm not yet seeing that it has, all the while they found a way to protect their rights. Why do you object to that?

I object to it because they used a process that is designed to give children a loving home to circumvent the law.

 

Has it harmed me personally? No. It doesn't have to for me to object to it. It hasn't helped you but you support it.

 

As I stated earlier, unless you have adopted and been through the process, you have no idea how any negative stories affect adoption. I don't expect you to understand.

Is that really a thing? If a straight couple went in to adopt, would their road suddenly be so much harder because of this situation? That seems like the most insane thing I've seen since there was that thread about Jade Helm on here.

 

That just seems too much of a stretch for me to give any thought to that. I know the adoption process is hard. And I know it can frequently be filled with crap. But, does this actually make it harder? And if so, how? Because it was my understanding that both of these guys were older, maybe even old, when it happened.

No matter what circumstances are, its still a sick and perverted world we live in.

Anything now days doesnt shock me at all.

How can someone adopt an adult?

No matter what circumstances are, its still a sick and perverted world we live in.

Anything now days doesnt shock me at all.

 

So your first post attempting to promote a misinformed understanding of the topic wasn't enough that you felt the need to reiterate almost the same exact misleading inaccurate rhetoric a second time?

 

In case you haven't noticed, posters here on either side of the issue are now well aware of the particulars of this story while your speech still attempts to harp in a direction to indicate that something perverted is happening here.

 

Honestly, are you still going off of the misleading headline, or have you actually read the article to inform yourself of what this is actually about?

 

The cat is out of the bag, if you will, while you still sound like you are terribly late to the party.

 

I realize that for you it would still be oh so much more fun to run with misinformation, but at this point all of that misinformation regarding this story is residing only in your head, and is not based on reality.

 

Oh but forgive me for spoiling all of your fun.

 

There seems to be a couple of different approaches when discussing issues here at BGP. Those who lean towards logic, facts, and reality, while others are content with illogical misleading tabloidal misinformation firmly based in the fantasy land of the voices in their mind.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's somehow forever entertaining to hear the meanderings of those with limited capacities, but all the while it typically never adds too much in the ways of coherent mature adult discussions of the various topics we encounter.

 

Thanks anyhow for your contribution... as It does take all kinds.

So your first post attempting to promote a misinformed understanding of the topic wasn't enough that you felt the need to reiterate almost the same exact misleading inaccurate rhetoric a second time?

 

In case you haven't noticed, posters here on either side of the issue are now well aware of the particulars of this story while your speech still attempts to harp in a direction to indicate that something perverted is happening here.

 

Honestly, are you still going off of the misleading headline, or have you actually read the article to inform yourself of what this is actually about?

 

The cat is out of the bag, if you will, while you still sound like you are terribly late to the party.

 

I realize that for you it would still be oh so much more fun to run with misinformation, but at this point all of that misinformation regarding this story is residing only in your head, and is not based on reality.

 

Oh but forgive me for spoiling all of your fun.

 

There seems to be a couple of different approaches when discussing issues here at BGP. Those who lean towards logic, facts, and reality, while others are content with illogical misleading tabloidal misinformation firmly based in the fantasy land of the voices in their mind.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's somehow forever entertaining to hear the meanderings of those with limited capacities, but all the while it typically never adds too much in the ways of coherent mature adult discussions of the various topics we encounter.

 

Thanks anyhow for your contribution... as It does take all kinds.

 

Im not trying to go misinformed. What they did is yuck to me, does it matter or going to change my life. NO, its still my opinion to think what I may of it, which is disgusting.

But I also mentioned that anything now days is disgusting. It goes from Child porn, child peds, to what we see on news everyday.

Thats the problem, anyone who doesnt agree with the supposed to be accepted norm, is wrong.

I dont bow down to political correctness or bow down to having stuff shoved in my face trying to make me accept stuff I feel is wrong.

How can someone adopt an adult?

 

Pretty simple, really. The fact of the adoptee's age of majority means that he or she can grant his/her own consent and makes it very easy.

 

People do it for all sorts of reasons. Normally to establish a legal child for whatever benefits/purposes they may have.

Pretty simple, really. The fact of the adoptee's age of majority means that he or she can grant his/her own consent and makes it very easy.

 

People do it for all sorts of reasons. Normally to establish a legal child for whatever benefits/purposes they may have.

Learn something new everyday. Just seems like nothing more then a way to game the system. Where are the real positive benefits to allow this? Not saying there isn't a scenario where it's a good thing but sure can't think of one.

I object to it because they used a process that is designed to give children a loving home to circumvent the law.

-So has what they've done directly prevented giving children a loving home?

 

Has it harmed me personally? No. It doesn't have to for me to object to it. It hasn't helped you but you support it.

 

-I support what these guys did because as a gay guy I can identify with how the law previously left them with limited options to legally protect themselves. if SSM hadn't been legalized, I can't say that I personally wouldn't do the exact same they did if I were in the same situation. 4 years ago my partner passed away after we had been together for 20 years. Thankfully his estate was settled without too much issue, and although I hadn't ever considered this, but if he has previously adopted me so that we could be legally related, the process that I went through to finalize his estate would have been a million times less complicated than it was. As I had stated in another post, his family was accepting, so they did not present me with any obstacles, however just the simple fact that we were not legally related presented me hoops to jump through that wouldn't have existed if we had been.

 

As I stated earlier, unless you have adopted and been through the process, you have no idea how any negative stories affect adoption. I don't expect you to understand.

 

1.-So has what they've done directly prevented giving children a loving home?

 

2.-I support what these guys did because as a gay guy I can identify with how the law previously left them with limited options to legally protect themselves. if SSM hadn't been legalized, I can't say that I personally wouldn't do the exact same they did if I were in the same situation. 4 years ago my partner passed away after we had been together for 20 years. Thankfully his estate was settled without too much issue, and although I hadn't ever considered this, but if he has previously adopted me so that we could be legally related, the process that I went through to finalize his estate would have been a million times less complicated than it was. As I had stated in another post, his family was accepting, so they did not present me with any obstacles, however just the simple fact that we were not legally related presented me hoops to jump through that wouldn't have existed if we had been.

 

3.-You're right... I have not adopted or been through the process and have no idea how any negative stories affect it. Enlighten me if you will how what these two guys did had a negative effect on the process. You sound rather strong regarding this topic, so I'm assuming that you can provide some examples.