Gay Couple saves baby- raise a son

A wonderful story of good people.

Who did a good thing.

Who just happen to be gay.

And that is relevant to this story- because they could only get married once the law was changed- but they were a family before they were married.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...son-in-the-subway/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

The story of how Danny and I were married last July in a Manhattan courtroom, with our son, Kevin, beside us, began 12 years earlier, in a dark, damp subway station.

Danny called me that day, frantic. “I found a baby!” he shouted. “I called 911, but I don’t think they believed me. No one’s coming. I don’t want to leave the baby alone. Get down here and flag down a police car or something.” By nature Danny is a remarkably calm person, so when I felt his heart pounding through the phone line, I knew I had to run.

When I got to the A/C/E subway exit on Eighth Avenue, Danny was still there, waiting for help to arrive. The baby, who had been left on the ground in a corner behind the turnstiles, was light-brown skinned and quiet, probably about a day old, wrapped in an oversize black sweatshirt.

In the following weeks, after family court had taken custody of “Baby ACE,” as he was nicknamed, Danny told the story over and over again, first to every local TV news station, then to family members, friends, co-workers and acquaintances. The story spread like an urban myth: You’re never going to believe what my friend’s cousin’s co-worker found in the subway. What neither of us knew, or could have predicted, was that Danny had not just saved an abandoned infant; he had found our son.

Three months later, Danny appeared in family court to give an account of finding the baby. Suddenly, the judge asked, “Would you be interested in adopting this baby?” The question stunned everyone in the courtroom, everyone except for Danny, who answered, simply, “Yes.”

“But I know it’s not that easy,” he said.

“Well, it can be,” assured the judge before barking out orders to commence with making him and, by extension, me, parents-to-be.

My first reaction, when I heard, went something like: “Are you insane? How could you say yes without consulting me?” Let’s just say, I nailed the “jerk” part of knee-jerk.

In three years as a couple, we had never discussed adopting a child. Why would we? Our lives were not geared for child rearing. I was an aspiring playwright working as a part-time word processor and Danny was a respected yet wildly underpaid social worker. We had a roommate sleeping behind a partition in our living room to help pay the rent. Even if our financial and logistical circumstances had been different, we knew how many challenges gay couples usually faced when they want to adopt. And while Danny had patience and selflessness galore, I didn’t. I didn’t know how to change a diaper, let alone nurture a child.

But here was fate, practically giving us a baby. How could we refuse? Eventually, my fearful mind spent, my heart seized control to assure me I could handle parenthood.

We spent that year as foster parents while our caseworker checked up on us and the baby’s welfare. During that time we often wondered about the judge. Did she know Danny was a social worker and therefore thought he would make a good parent? Would she have asked him to adopt if she knew Danny was gay and in a relationship? At the final hearing, after she had signed the official adoption order, I raised my hand. “Your honor, we’ve been wondering why you asked Danny if he was interested in adopting?”

“I had a hunch,” she just said. “Was I wrong?” And with that she rose from her chair, congratulated us, and exited the courtroom.

And that was how we left it, as Baby ACE became Kevin, and grew from an infant to a boy. That is, until 2011, when New York State allowed Danny and me to legally marry.

“Why don’t you ask the judge who performed my adoption to marry you and Dad?” Kevin suggested one morning on our walk to school.

“Great idea,” I replied. “Would you like to meet her?”

“Sure. Think she’d remember me?”

“There’s only one way to find out.”

After dropping Kevin off, I composed a query letter and sent it to the catchall e-mail address listed for the Manhattan family court. Within hours, a court attorney called to say that, of course, the judge remembered us, and was thrilled by the idea of officiating our marriage. All we had to do was pick a date and time.

When we ventured back to family court for the first time in over 10 years, I imagined that the judge might be nervous to come face to face with the results of one of her placement decisions — what if Kevin wasn’t happy and wished he had different parents? Kevin was nervous too. When he was a toddler, Danny and I made him a storybook that explained how we became a family, and it included an illustration of the judge, gavel in hand. A character from his book was about to jump off the page as a real person. What if she didn’t approve of the way he turned out?

Kevin reached out to shake her hand.

“Can I give you hug?” she asked. When they separated, the judge asked Kevin about school, his interests, hobbies, friends and expressed her delight that we were there.

When we finally remembered the purpose of the visit, and Danny and I moved into position to exchange vows, I reflected on the improbable circumstances that delivered all of us to this moment. We weren’t supposed to be there, two men, with a son we had never dreamed of by our side, getting married by a woman who changed and enriched our lives more than she would ever know. But there we were, thanks to a fateful discovery and a judicious hunch.

 

Touching story, it really highlights the biggest part of those against gay rights tactics...we are human, we live, we love we form relationships, we make families, we raise children, we grow old together.

In essence we are human. And the goal of the propagandist is to make one segment of humanity forget that another segment of humanity isn't human. That's why hey fall back to the old fear mongering tactics, try to to paint gays as less than human, as monsters.

But when you show them real life, real people...it gets harder and harder to try to make people forget that we are human as well.

 

but yet...


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/gay-conn-couple-accused-rape-face-trial-article-1.1310010

 

They should make a movie about this couple on whatever is the gay Hallmark channel, but whether or not they ever married has no relevance to their act of kindness.

 

I think you missed the point.

Absolutely their act of kindness had nothing to do with their being married.

But they were not allowed to be married when they did it- and now they are.

They were a family before they were allowed to legally be married, but once they were married, their family had all of the legal protections that families enjoy.

My point- they are now legally treated like any other family.

And they weren't before.

 

nothing changed then, except for the tax break privleges they now get that they didn't before. So tell me again how their rights were being violated prior?

 

nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

]except for the tax break privleges they now get that they didn't before.

You answered your own question- though it is not a complete answer- it is an answer.

 

That's all they ever think about is taxes. A lot changed for this couple, like inheritance, child custody and a whole lot of other things. But all they care about is taxes- and what we do in the bedroom.

 

The homophobes do seem quite upset that homosexuals who are married can have the same tax status as heterosexuals who are married.

 

They try to act as if that's all there is to it. It's disingenuous, and I'm being kind.

 

tax breaks aren't rights....

when you start eemanding privleges... you are now not about equal rights.... and I'm under no moral, or ethical obligation to support that.


Billy's mom bought him all the heman figures when I was a kid.... I wanted them too, but my parents said no.... life's not fair.

 

You do seem quite upset that homosexuals who are married can have the same tax status as heterosexuals who are married- i.e. you seem upset that homosexuals are treated equally under the law.

 

they already were treated equally.... quick, call me homophobic....

 

You do seem quite upset that homosexuals who are married can have the same tax status as heterosexuals who are married- i.e. you seem upset that homosexuals are treated equally under the law.

Now that they can be legally married- and now that DOMA has been found unconstitutional- now they are treated equally.

 

because the country is broke... and handing out more entitlements is not the answer. You'd have a better chance convincing me to give up hetero marraige tax breaks than to extend them to every special interest group that doesn't understand the difference between rights and privleges...

 

To bad that no one is pushing to end marriage breaks for heterosexuals. If getting the government out of marriage was even on the table it is what I would be endorsing but it isn't.

It was never even mentioned until homosexuals started getting the same tax breaks.

 

Of course. There was no discussion of "getting the government out of marriage" until we started demanding equal treatment under the law.

 

gays have always been allowed to marry, under the same restrictions heteros can marry...



must be opposite gender
not related
only one



find me one instance where a gay, following those above guidelines, has been refused a marrage license because he was gay.... just one.... because only THEN, would gays be discriminated against in marraige.

 

Edits in red
Your exact same argument has been used before, only the characters have changed.

The issue the courts have had, is your side can present no legal evidence of why a gay couple should not be able to sign a non-religious contract.

 

Exactly. The right tries to use these silly arguments all the time- no one is fooled.

 

Oh are you under the mistaken impression that I think that it is possible to convince you of anything other than your preconceived notions?

You do seem quite upset that homosexuals who are married can have the same tax status as heterosexuals who are married- i.e. you seem upset that homosexuals are treated equally under the law.

Now that they can be legally married- and now that DOMA has been found unconstitutional- now they are treated equally.

 

homosexuals already are treated equally since they already could get married.

- - - Updated - - -

except you can't choose to quit being black....

 

they already can sign non-religious contracts..... they just want tax breaks, which aren't constitutionally protected.

 

you can't quit being Homosexual either...

or heterosexual for that matter...


only bisexuals have a choice, I understand though why bisexuals think the rest of us must be attracted to both sexes, they know of no other way... they too were born that way, just like heterosexuals and homosexuals were born that way...


.

 

http://www.wnd.com/2007/07/42385/


seems this guy did....


or heterosexual for that matter...[/quote]


seems some women, after being beaten by men enough, turn lesbian....
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_reason_some_women_become_lesbian

aaahhh, the convenient 'catch-all' if they turn back straight or beaten lesbian... it must be because they were really bi the entire time.... lol