Great Oped by Dan Savage in the NYT today

[Moderator]

The Arkansas gay adoption ban is possibly even viler than CA prop puke-truly disgraceful and discriminatory. (Savage was also on the Colbert report recently and gave a kickass interview.)


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/12/opinion/12savage.html?em

Op-Ed Contributor
Anti-Gay, Anti-Family
By DAN SAVAGE
Published: November 11, 2008

*snip*
But while Californians march and gay activists contemplate a national boycott of Utah — the Mormon Church largely bankrolled Proposition 8 — an even more ominous new law in Arkansas has drawn little notice.

That state’s Proposed Initiative Act No. 1, approved by nearly 57 percent of voters last week, bans people who are “cohabitating outside a valid marriage” from serving as foster parents or adopting children. While the measure bans both gay and straight members of cohabitating couples as foster or adoptive parents, the Arkansas Family Council wrote it expressly to thwart “the gay agenda.” Right now, there are 3,700 other children across Arkansas in state custody; 1,000 of them are available for adoption. The overwhelming majority of these children have been abused, neglected or abandoned by their heterosexual parents.

Even before the law passed, the state estimated that it had only about a quarter of the foster parents it needed. Beginning on Jan. 1, a grandmother in Arkansas cohabitating with her opposite-sex partner because marrying might reduce their pension benefits is barred from taking in her own grandchild; a gay man living with his male partner cannot adopt his deceased sister’s children.

Social conservatives are threatening to roll out Arkansas-style adoption bans in other states. And the timing couldn’t be worse: in tough economic times, the numbers of abused and neglected children in need of foster care rises. But good times or bad, no movement that would turn away qualified parents and condemn children to a broken foster care system should be considered “pro-family.”
*snip*

More at the link.

I think Savage makes a great point which was what first struck me when I heard about it:

Most ominous, once “pro-family” groups start arguing that gay couples are unfit to raise children we might adopt, how long before they argue that we’re unfit to raise those we’ve already adopted? If lesbian couples are unfit to care for foster children, are they fit to care for their own biological children? The loss in California last week was heartbreaking. But what may be coming next is terrifying.

[nam78_two]

1. Oh crap-I didn't mean to post as moderator

My mistake.

[amdezurik]

3. BUSTED!

LOL

[racaulk]

10. LOL!

I knew "Moderator" wasn't a real user! :rofl:

But seriously, thank you for posting this article. My partner and I are considering adoption at some point in the future, and the potential consequences of these anti-gay initiatives are frightening.

K&R

[nam78_two]

18. You are very welcome

I am a committed straight ally and I think this adoption ban is thoroughly disgusting. It is unconstitutional imo-that is why they shadily made it about "single people" -they couldn't have gotten away with it had they kept it the way they initially had it-real clever :eyes:.

[amdezurik]

2. shame on Arkansas

and that shame needs to be on the morning shows. Get a couple of those grandmothers on there and others who will have to watch as their relatives are sent off to god know where to foster under god knows what conditions.

[nam78_two]

4. Indeed and it hasn't gotten that much attention when it should

Utterly disgraceful :thumbsdown:.

[BrklynLiberal]

5. ..and once again, this is not only Gay Rights, it is civil rights. Everyone needs to be concerned.

I know I do not have to post that Martin Niemoller quote again...

[sinkingfeeling]

6. Single people need not apply as well. There is a group here taking the ugly thing to court.

They're using a unique argument: those who believe cohabitation is a 'sin' are legislating their religious beliefs on others.

Remember Arkansas is a state that ranks dead last in the number of college educated people; has the second highest divorce rate in the country; the ninth highest rate of unwed mothers; and the second highest number of 'evangelicals who vote' (Mostly Southern Baptists, who believe women are second class people)!!

[nam78_two]

7. They only made it about single people because they were afraid

that a court would (rightly) throw it out if they specifically made it about gay people. It is complete bullshit-they are really targeting gay people.

[RedLetterRev]

8. Well, California might be first in our sights

but Arkansas can certainly be next. No letup, no retreat. The wackogelicals have kicked over one hornet's nest too many.

[lightningandsnow]

9. That's awful.

They think a kid is better off bouncing between foster homes, never having a family to call their own, than with gay parents?

:cry:

[Creideiki]

12. It's worse than that

Single people wouldn't even be allowed to be foster parents.

[ThatPoetGuy]

11. It doesn't redeem Dan Savage.

He's a vile, warmongering piece of garbage. To the best of my knowledge, he's never recanted the disgusting things he said about liberals, or the blind support for George W. Bush's hideous, purposeless invasion of Iraq.

Savage is up there with the worst of the all-out, Bush-worshipping, self-serving, braindead Neocon scum. He's a pathetic, dishonest goon who has innocent blood on his hands.

No, I'm not talking about Michael Savage. I'm talking about Dan Savage.

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=12237

[Creideiki]

13. Hooray for single-issue voters

Oh, wait. I forgot. It's bad to be a single-issue gay voter, but just fine to be a single-issue abortion rights, ecology, or anti-war voter. Thanks for reminding me.

[ThatPoetGuy]

21. You haven't read the article.

Dan Savage didn't just support the war. He suggested that everyone who opposed the war is a coward, an idiot, and a traitor. He went as far as Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity at their worst. And, as far as I can see, he hasn't retracted ANY of it.

At a critical moment in American history, Dan Savage turned against the liberals. Against Americans. He portrayed Bush's war as a timeless act of heroism and said that anyone who didn't support Bush's war is a terrorist-lover. I'm sorry, but even Joe freaking Lieberman never went half as far.

If you read what Dan Savage wrote, you'll see that his attack on human decency isn't remotely equivalent to the kind of homophobia we see -- and fight -- every day. The equivalent for gay rights would be a prominent "liberal" who called for the arrest of every gay person in America. Do you think people on DU would turn a blind eye to that? Of course not.

[mondo joe]

14. I have a whole set of issues with Dan Savage, stemming from befoer his national fame.

But he's been spot-on on the marriage issue, and has been a good ambassador.

[readmoreoften]

19. Geez, he should keep his trap shut beyond his column. Is this the same Dan Savage?

I never pegged him for a neocon.

[nam78_two]

20. Dan Savage likes Bush??

Well this is the first I have heard of that or war-mongering etc. :shrug:-I am having a hard time processing Savage as a Bush loving, liberal hating guy....

Well at any rate, he is spot on with this issue- this oped and his comments on the Colbert Report were spot on. He is right on this issue-but that other oped is really awful. Damn...I would never have imagined Savage writing that tripe...

[bluedawg12]

23. Savage was wrong on Oct 17 – Oct 23, 2002

on the run up to the war and in the midst of post 9-11 frenzy. He is right on this.

[Hissyspit]

25. He called for impeachment.

He was wrong. He should have admitted it more, but he came around somewhat - eventually - and he is correct on this issue. There is no way to erase what he wrote and said back then and we will forever be disappointed in him, but he did try to help start a national impeachment movement.

[nichomachus]

15. I've always said gay marriage is not the issue

They want the whole ball of wax. Gay marriage was just the easiest place to get the wedge in. This is why this is not a gay rights issue. It's a civil rights issue that effects each and every one of you.

It also is the best argument against those who say we should just give up the word "marriage" and/or settle for separate, but equal civil unions (which are never equal). That's a phony issue.

We need to hold the line right here and not give them a fucking inch.

[northernsoul]

17. Amen to that

Coming from me, that'll be a godless/free-thinking "amen" however.

[bluedawg12]

22. It is totally a justice issue, civil rights issue

and equal access to rights under the law.

It is in an over arching sense a human rights issue.

Been thinking about this today, during a long walk, and about some of the responses we saw from fellow progressives.

I don't think you can call yourself a progressive and say you are against human rights. Period.

[Zuiderelle]

16. That certainly is terrifying.

[bluedawg12]

24. I was listening to some rw douche about three years ago

on CSPAN, giving a lecture in Minn. to a Church group shilling his book - why gender matters- and his whole argument was that kids need a male and figure roll model and in his talk he cited some studies from rw researchers, usually from some Univ. in some deep red state at that time ( now flipped by P.E. Obama) he went on for an hour and that was his whole message that a two parent family is not acceptable it has to be male and female. I remember feeling like I was in some totalitarian Reich or something and being scapegoated it was really nauseating.

He spouted a whole lot of junk science. One day I'll do a little search on this. IN the meantime, it is an old argument and one they will trot out again and again - we need to be wary, very wary.

ETA: Correction, the book was: authored by Glenn T. Stanton
and the title was: Why Marriage Matters: Reasons to Believe in Marriage in Postmodern Society.

Glenn T. Stanton is the Senior Research Analyst for Marriage and Sexuality at Focus on the Family, as well as the author of Why Marriage Matters: Reasons to Believe in Marriage in Postmodern Society.

If anyone wants a glimpse into their logic here is an article from 2002 where he lays out his reasons:
http://sbclife.net/Articles/2002/06/Sla7.asp
that web site is the Journal of the Southern Baptist Convention.

[bluedawg12]

26. I just researched one of the articles cited in Stanton's article

and it actually dispoves what he is saying about gay parenting as being harmful:
.........
Pediatrics. 2002 Feb;109(2):341-4. Links
Technical report: coparent or second-parent adoption by same-sex parents.Perrin EC; Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health.

Technical report: coparent or second-parent adoption by same-sex parents.Perrin EC; Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health.
A growing body of scientific literature demonstrates that children who grow up with 1 or 2 gay and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual. Children's optimal development seems to be influenced more by the nature of the relationships and interactions within the family unit than by the particular structural form it takes.
..........

[terrya]

27. Very powerful and scary op-ed by Dan Savage. Thanks for posting this.