and I to adopt internationally. The whole idea of, "You can adopt this
child, but the mother can change their mind within X days" is insane.
You either accept that the adopted parents are the parents or you
don't allow the adoption. Period. It's laws like this (not Megan's
Law, but the adoption with a grace period thing) that belittle the
whole concept of adotpion and make the parents feel like temporary
guardians, not true parents.
So in case it isn't obvious - I'm sensitive about stuff like this. ;)
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 17:36:58 -0600, dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
> However, Mr Propp does not appear to be a danger to anyone and it is
> ridiculous that he should have to register.
>
> Dana
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: S. Isaac Dealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 19:10:26 -0400
> Subject: Megan's Law was Re: Senate rejects move to ban same-sex marriage
> To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I remember reading a story once in which the author had envisioned
> Megan's law being a "slippery slope" and at some point it becoming
> required to post a sign in front of your house with a list of all the
> crimes you'd committed (littering, vandalism, loitering, jay-walking)
> with a number. So when a couple moves into town and doesn't post a
> sign, everyone in the town gets all pissed off because they believe it
> will devalue their property. They go through all sorts of measures to
> try and dig up dirt on the couple to force them to post a sign or to
> make them commit some misdemeanor so they'd have to post it.
> Eventually one of the new couple leaves and one of the existing
> residents being completely fed up with everyone else goes out in the
> middle of the night and paints over everyone else's signs with various
> different things that the townsfolk were conspiring against the new
> couple. He adds "vandalism" to his own sign with the town population
> number next to it.
>
> > that's what the story said... assuming your husband had
> > joint custody.
> > The story I saw did not say why they felt so strongly that
> > it was not
> > in the interest of the child, but it did say that the
> > father had not
> > consented to the adoption and spent thousands of dollars
> > looking for
> > his son. Let me see if I can find a link.
>
> > http://makeashorterlink.com/?D4FC218E8
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
