OK, so I have been off of the wagon lately when it comes to being a good blogger-so many things to write about, so little time! But reading this article on the Tennessean's website a minute ago made me come straight over to blogger to have a little chat with yall.
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090302/NEWS0201/903020340?GID=B+KEZk89r0NJXGCVWrjuYySW15uYg7FJsL9k6SaKODM%3D
Seriously, please read this article, all five pages of it. I know it is long, but my blood is STILL boiling. So that you know what I'm getting you into here, the article is about a law proposed by two State Representatives from Memphis-one Democrat and one Republican-to prohibit unmarried couples from adopting children from state custody in Tennessee. I have no idea where to even begin on how sad this is for children in state custody who are adoptable (over 300 at the end of January, according to the article, and over 7,000 in state custody period, who may eventually be adoptable). Here's the thing folks: I am very familiar from a variety of work experiences with children in foster care. Many of them have special needs-mental, physical, both-and people are not lining up begging to become their parents. These are the "hard to place" children. The ones that have been left behind-by their own parents/families, by other foster parents, by the educational system....you name it. But many of them are loving, bright, beautiful children that want to have a family, and I am willing to go out on a limb and say that they would not be that picky about what kind of family they got, as long as they were loved.
So if a stable, qualified adult wishes to give one of these children a permanent, loving, stable home-I DO NOT CARE if that person is black, white, gay, straight, Christian, Catholic, Jewish, married, living in "sin", living alone, living with 2 cats and a goldfish-I want that child to have a permanent home. PERMANENCY is what is best for children.
Apparently these crazies from Memphis only think that straight, married couples are qualified to be parents. OH MY GOD. Seriously? Are we STILL on that "traditional" family model being the "be all, end all"? Because half of marriages end in divorce, guys. And what are we saying to all the kids who are being raised by non-married couples-or, my gosh, gay couples???? That their family is WRONG? See, that is what I think this is really about. I mean, why else target "non-married" couples, other than to target the folks who can't legally be married in the eyes of the law? These two men want to prevent gays from adopting because somehow they think the kids will catch it or something. Like gay is a disease. SERIOUSLY? While I am sure that avoiding giving children to heterosexual couples who just don't want to get married for whatever reason is an added bonus to these fools, the crux of the matter is that they don't think gay people should be allowed to have kids, and this is step one in preventing that from happening.
But where are we going to draw the line here? Because what will happen is that straight or gay non-married couples will start filing for adoption as singles. So are we then going to decide that singles can't adopt? Well I am single. Does that make me categorically unqualified to raise a child? What about my friends that are single moms? Do they need to worry that the state is going to come take their child and give it to a married couple so that the child will be raised in an acceptable family? Does being married to someone of the opposite sex suddenly make you a better parent?
The good news is that DCS doesn't support this, the Tn. Commission on Children and Youth doesn't support this-anyone who has seen the heartbreak of a child who only wants to be loved by someone-ANYONE-and taken in to a permanent home, seems to be against this.
I would invite Reps. Crazy and Crazier to spend a day talking with a children in state custody. Look through the "notebook" of children who are available for adoption-all 300+ and then tell every one of them that they must stay in foster care, never knowing if they will have a permanent home base to come back to after they graduate high school. Wondering what will happen to them the day they turn 18 and no one is legally responsible for them anymore. Wondering why no one loved them enough to make them their child.
Then tell that child that there were people who wanted him/her, but unfortunately they weren't married and its against the law. See if that child gives a hoot.
The best part? Neither of them would talk to the reporter about this story-one even going to far as to say that if you wanted to know his reasons for introducing the legislation, you could call his office and he would take you into his office privately and tell you his reasons. What a cowardly jerk.
I can't say anything else about this without having a coronary.
No comments:
Post a Comment