Did you read either of the links above regarding legal parenthood in Vermont? The judge there was respecting the law.The biological mother often benefits. IMO, what we have here is a very Liberal judge--which isn't hard to believe in Vermont--has allowed his politics influence his legal decision.
I would love to see what percentage of the gay vote he got in the last election.
Now, I am going to admit that I was hasty when I stated that there's nothing to see here.
There are many red herrings being thrown around. This issue is not gay versus straight versus atheist versus Christian. Those are all big side shows, and it sounds like each parent has been deeply disrespectful of the other in those matters.
However, there's a states' rights issue, because it has not been established whether Virginia must respect Vermont's position.
If it makes you feel any better, I think Jenkins will lose when this gets to SCOTUS. This court has already upheld DOMA, and I don't see them turning around there.
btw, anyone looking for a more in-depth piece about this case, there is one here. I haven't had time to do more than skim it; it's about 6 pages long.
Sure, I read it. What are Vermont's laws regarding deadbeat dads who don't pay child support?Did you read either of the links above regarding legal parenthood in Vermont? The judge there was respecting the law.
Child support has never been referenced. It's a totally irrelevant argument until something *factual* about it is.
I can tell you from first hand experience that, legally, child support and visitation are two separate matters.Sure, I read it. What are Vermont's laws regarding deadbeat dads who don't pay child support?
Miller violated a visitation order. She lost custody. Period.
But, again, child support has never been referenced. So, this argument is irrelevant. Your feelings won't be hurt if I consider the child support segment of the convo closed, at least for me, until you can come back with actual facts, will you?
You seem level headed enough to grant a person his opinion, unlike some Libbos on this board. Hopefully I haven't overestimated you.
And hey, I found the answer on the child support:
It starts on the fifth page of the WAPO story.The women worked out an informal understanding that Isabella, then 17 months old, would live with Lisa, but Janet would pay several hundred dollars monthly in child support and visit Isabella regularly.
She and Janet were initially cordial. Janet sent money, came down some weekends to stay with her parents and visited Isabella.
I'd like to thank you for the compliment, and extend my hope that you are similarly level-headed and will concede a point when evidence is provided.