Chief Justice John Roberts is the father of two children, Jack and Josie, both 12. They 
were adopted four months apart as babies in 2000, after Roberts and his wife, Jane, then 45, spent several years trying to adopt, according to the Associated Press.
In perhaps one of the most stunningly incompetent spokesperson moves on record, John Eastman, chairman of the National Organization for Marriage, trashed Roberts’ family only weeks before two marriage equality cases will be heard by SCOTUS.
According to the Eastman:
“You’re looking at what is the best course society wide to get you the optimal result in the widest variety of cases. That often is not open to people in individual cases. Certainly adoption in families headed, like Chief Roberts’ family is, by a heterosexual couple, is by far the second-best option.”
Second best option, huh? Really? I wonder how Roberts’ children feel knowing they got Option 2.
Seriously, what an absolute idiot and embarrassment Eastman is to the so-called “pro-family” movement. We have long known that these folks were intolerant troglodytes. We have also screamed from the roof tops that gays were their first targets, but since they are religious zealots they have targets on the backs of anyone who does not fit their version of sexual purity and family perfection. Had they stripped away our rights, it would have been open season on a whole bevy of people.
It is also worth noting that what children need is love — and that comes in many forms and from all kinds of family structures. For example, I would consider a child being raised by NOM’s Brian Brown, Robert George, Maggie Gallagher, or John Eastman to be stuck in an unfortunate, and even inferior, family situation.
In a diverse world, the homes of these folks would impart bigotry that would retard the social and psychological growth of their children. They have a hell of a lot of nerve pretending that they represent an optimal environment to raise kids, when they are the antithesis of good parenting. A gay couple raising biological children, or a home like that of the Roberts’ family, is significantly more likely to raise good kids, in my view, than those who rant and rave about protecting the traditional family.
If some good came of Eastman’s snafu, it is that America can now see his true colors and the danger of NOM’s ugly and backward agenda.
Sometimes the radical anti-gay activists in the in-your-face pro-homophobia lobby are their own worst enemies. Especially when they mess up and tell the truth, as in this case. You are right, after gay American taxpayers and families are censored, silenced and removed from the public square, it will be open season on any other type of family which doesn’t fit the pro-homophobia movement’s ideals.
Then there’s the story of how, 12 years ago, Peter Mercurio and his (now) husband Danny adopted their son, whom Danny found abandoned in a subway station with his umbilical cord still attached to him. I hope that Eastman’s family-based bigotry reaches Roberts and that Roberts smacks these heterosupremacist theocRATS down big time, by nationalizing an end to sexual orientation apartheid in marriage law.
So the argument that Eastman makes is saying that adoption is the second best option for these kids (in comparison to being raised by the biological parents) right? This statement, from an objective view, is accurate. The first best option would be for a child to be raised by his or her parents. We may think that some biological parents might not be suitable to raise their children but that’s only in hindsight. If they really aren’t suitable to raise the child, i.e. financially unable, being too young, etc., then adoption is a great choice. But regardless, that still makes adoption–for the purpose of this argument–the second best option. That doesn’t mean it’s a bad option at all, it just means it’s the second in line. This article really seems to attack someone’s statement for no real reason except to be a radical overreaction to someone’s statement. And this comment is from someone who is totally in support of equal rights and who has multiple family members who are gay so this is a personal issue for me. I don’t know the back ground of the people in this article but with the information given, this article is just attacking on a point that is actually true. Adoption is the second best option. Parents hate to give up their children but if they must then that doesn’t mean adoption is bad, it’s just second best.
Mind-numbing stupidity. Thanks, NOM!
Please excuse me, your honor, but try being treated this way your whole life, with more than often coming from your elected leaders, while you’re just an ordinary citizen with no name of interest to reporters. I trust more in you now that you have had a chance to feel what it’s like to be told your family is second-class and not good enough, to be lobbied against by people who exist to eat away at you, piece by piece. For this, they will answer to God as He, like the United States Constitution, calls all his children created in his image. But unlike the constitution, He has not failed to protect us. He has sent us for a reason, and for these attacks on His children, done under His name in vein, without His teachings of decency and love, how many more will choose Hell for this hatred against his children? When the time comes and he calls for them to answer, these hateful, wretched groups of fearful, misguided souls better learn quickly how to beg for the Mercy they have failed to give to others.
Your honor, Justice John Roberts, you must repeal this law. You must protect my grandchild. I fought to protect every letter on that Constitution, but we never fought for Defense of Marriage. Church and State separations. Equal citizens. Protection from other branches when they have done wrong. Right the wrong. Let us see the day every member of our families can have happiness and peace. Let this old vet see his American grandchildren treated like Americans before he is called to answer to the sins he has committed so many years ago to protect our children from corruption and atrocity. Repeal this anti-American hatred taped onto the constitution so many fraught for, so help me god, or I will call to you for answers for what would be no less than complete total failure of the United States Federal Government to its people and doctrine in what would be a very unpleasant inquiry as to why the government is making such a ruckus of liberty as to require an 85 year old man to get out of his chair
George & Wilma, Cincinnati, O.
Mark I have to totally disagree with you – and so does our teenage son.
Regards.
The data shows that children do best when they are raised by two people–the sex of those people doesn’t seem to matter all that much. But, there are a lot of other factors involved. Those people have to put the interests of that child first and take an active role in the child’s development. The biological relation to the child is of secondary importance.
But, we also have to live in the real world. It’s not always possible for there to be two parents–and if a single parent has the wherewithall to really be there for the child there is no reason the child can’t thrive. That said, single parenting is hard. It’s best when there is a community who have the child’s interests in mind.