Why A Florida Judge Overturned The Gay Adoption Ban

The plaintiffs in the case were two gay men in a long-term relationship (read: married but for the superstitions of mongrels) who already had a biological son. They had fostered several kids for many years, and these gays were asked by name to take in two VERY neglected children. From Ed Brayton:

The children arrived at the home of Petitioner and Tom Roe, Sr., domestic partners, and Tom Roe, Sr.'s then eight-year old biological son, Tom Roe, Jr., on the evening of December 11, 2004. John, the elder sibling, arrived with his four-month old brother wearing a dirty adult sized t-shirt and sneakers four sizes too small that seemed more like flip-flops than shoes. Both children were suffering from scalp ringworm. Although John was clearly suffering from a severe case of ringworm, the medication brought from John's home to treat his scalp was unopened and expired. James, too, suffered from an untreated ear infection, as evidenced by the one-month old, nearly unused, medication. John did not speak and had no affect. He had one concern: changing, feeding, and caring for his baby brother. It was clear from the children's first evening at the Petitioner-Roe home that the baby's main caretaker was John, his four year old brother.

On that December evening, John and James left a world of chronic neglect, emotional impoverishment and deprivation to enter a new world, foreign to them, that was nurturing, safe, structured and stimulating. Although Petitioner and Roe had fostered other children, caring for John was the most challenging of their foster care experiences. For the first few months, John seemed depressed and presented a void, unresponsive demeanor and appearance. Upon arriving at the Petitioner home, John did not speak a word for about one week. After two weeks, he began to mumble imperceptible utterances. After about one month, John finally began speaking. Petitioner quickly learned that John had never seen a book, could not distinguish letters from numbers, could not identify colors and could not count. He could not hold a pencil. He had never been in an early childhood program or day care. Nevertheless, John's potential for educational development was apparent. Although he had not had any formal education, John could sing and pick up lyrics very quickly. Early on, Petitioner and Roe noticed that John hoarded food by requesting additional servings at the start of dinnertime and later hiding the extra food in his room. John eventually grew out of this behavior, due in part to a tactic employed by Petitioner and Roe of showing John, in advance of mealtime, the more than sufficient amount of food on the stove prepared and available for the family.

But what will really turn your stomach is the defense experts from the state of Florida, one of the biggest, wealthiest, and most influential states in this great union. They're enough to make you spit up. And, after nearly 4 years of the 2 children growing up in the gays' home, this is what they wanted to stop:

The Court also heard testimony from Ronald Gilbert, the children's Guardian Ad Litem since June 2005. Mr. Gilbert, who has served as Guardian Ad Litem to over 100 children, visits the Petitioner-Roe household monthly to observe the children and the family. Based on Mr. Gilbert's observations, the children are in excellent health, well behaved, performing well in school and bonded to Petitioner, Roe and Tom Roe, Jr. During his visits, the Guardian regularly sees the three children playing and hugging one another like brothers. Based on his interactions and observations of other foster parents, Mr. Gilbert believes Petitioner and Roe are model parents. In fact, he testified that in all of his 100 cases as a Guardian Ad Litem, the Petitioner home is one of the most caring and nurturing placements he has encountered. He further opines that adoption is the preferred form of permanency over permanent guardianship because John and James deserve parents. According to the Guardian, the children would suffer mentally and physically if separated from Petitioner, Roe and Tom Roe, Jr. The Guardian Ad Litem's official recommendation is to allow the Petitioner to adopt the children and states it is in the manifest best interest of the children.

What century are we in again?

Ed note: The gays initially refused to take these children in because they were thinking of relocating to a different state. They agreed to take the children in because, at least, they could give two disadvantaged kids a good Christmas. The gays canceled their plans and stayed in Florida; their new sons were more important to them than to Florida Christians.