Are social workers more objective in general? Nope, they tend to be agenda driven.

I agree with you that the judgement seems legally sound. My point on the VT civil unions, not marriage (my mistake), is that a couple can not go there, enter into a union, and expect another state to honor it. We have now seen the outcome of this case, and as soon as I see a ruling, I will post about Janet Miller-Jenkins v. Lisa Miller-Jenkins. Exact same circumstances, just a different state.

2. I want to be clear that the opinion appears to be legally sound. However it is morally the wrong decision.

3. As for social workers being poor evaluators, at least they are more objective than Jones and Barlow were. And the uniformity of their opinions does add validity.

4. I am not a stranger to the situation. Without going into detail, it should be clear by my corrections to erroneous statements that I am not just depending on press releases to form my opinions.

Will Peejz attack snowy as a bigot? Or will her hypocrisy persist? Stay tuned…

I went to a college that turns out Social Workers. On the whole I’m not impressed because the professors were biased bigots or were otherwise clinically speaking, nuts.

The only good social workers I’ve met have a good, stable heterosexual home life.

Stop The ACLU never faulted them for not getting married in a state where they could.

In the eyes of the law, Barlow is the birth mother, period. It goes back to the Roe V Wade. A woman’s body, a womens right to choose, and the partner is not deemed a contributing factor unless money is the issue. If money is the issue, the partner will pay based on what the courts deem reasonable support for the child. How prevelant is it to see a father gain primary custody?

Joseph, I don’t put a lot of faith in social workers. Remember, these are the same people that don’t follow up on the child abuse cases and the kid ends up dead. (That is just my feeling on social workers). That aside, I wasn’t kidding about RvW. I am not talking about the abortion issue, but the ramifications of how the laws were written, with regards to the partner, after that decision.

Your second argument, comparing Keri Jones to a daycare worker, is a poor analogy. Not many daycare workers work with a biological mother to find a sperm donor that shares the characteristics of both the biomom and the daycare worker. Daycare workers usually receive pay for their nose wiping services. Instead of being paid, Jones spent thousands to bring that little girl into the world and thousands more to be able to visit the girl.

If Jones had been fighting for custody or guardianship, I might be more inclined to agree with you. But for a fit mother to be denied visitation because the other person who decided to bring the girl into the world was the biomom is not a success for any campaign. The voices of the right think that by denying marriage and limiting adoption to these families, that they will somehow cease to exist. Instead, they continue but are more vulnerable because strangers disapprove.