Gay Marriages with kids?

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Alan Jones

Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Alan Jones » 25 mai 2005 00:52:24

I had someone ask for my advice, and I had none. There issue was a family
member who was gay and got married in one of the places that allows it. AND
they had a child. (I think whether it was adopted or they were women and one
got pregnant is irrelevant).

The genealogy software I use "ASSUMES" that the spouse is of the opposite
gender. What do other people do with people like this in their family
trees?

I know I have heard that people will not put the relationship in because
they don't have children, but now people are having children and the child
belongs to both of them.

I am looking for advice and what works.

Robert Heiling

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Robert Heiling » 25 mai 2005 02:04:42

Alan Jones wrote:

I had someone ask for my advice, and I had none. There issue was a family
member who was gay and got married in one of the places that allows it. AND
they had a child. (I think whether it was adopted or they were women and one
got pregnant is irrelevant).

The genealogy software I use "ASSUMES" that the spouse is of the opposite
gender. What do other people do with people like this in their family
trees?

I know I have heard that people will not put the relationship in because
they don't have children, but now people are having children and the child
belongs to both of them.

I am looking for advice and what works.

In the software I use (TMG), I simply enter a Marriage for whatever date they
choose. So far as children are concerned, I record them in the correct
biological relationship to each parent - i.e. natural or adopted. That implies
that the child's relationship to the parents could be: both adopted; one
adopted, one natural; both natural (if science makes possible). If your software
doesn't permit this, the you need different software.

HTH
Bob

D. Stussy

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av D. Stussy » 25 mai 2005 02:49:24

On Tue, 24 May 2005, Alan Jones wrote:
I had someone ask for my advice, and I had none. There issue was a family
member who was gay and got married in one of the places that allows it. AND
they had a child. (I think whether it was adopted or they were women and one
got pregnant is irrelevant).

So a man can't father a child? Hmmmmmmmm..... I must have been doing
something wrong all these years. Alternatively, call the Vatican - a miracle
has happened: A woman got another pregnant!

The genealogy software I use "ASSUMES" that the spouse is of the opposite
gender. What do other people do with people like this in their family
trees?

That sounds like your problem. Get a new program.

Why this would be any different from any other situation where one parent is
biologically related to the child(ren) and the other (of the other sex) is
adoptive (or simply an additional spouse)?

I know I have heard that people will not put the relationship in because
they don't have children, but now people are having children and the child
belongs to both of them.

What do they know about biology that the rest of us don't?

> I am looking for advice and what works.

Charles

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Charles » 25 mai 2005 03:37:37

I think it is very much relevant if the child was adopted. Only one can be
the biological parent (if either of them are). If you record it otherwise
it's just lies and you are doing genealogy a great misjustice.

Gay and lesbians should be concidered partnerships, civil unions or "other",
no matter what some states allow. "Holy matrimony" is not possible with gay
and lesbian couples.

Send them a Bible and a Prayer.


"Alan Jones" <alanjones10@cox.net> wrote in message
news:07Pke.2886$tp.757@fed1read05...
I had someone ask for my advice, and I had none. There issue was a family
member who was gay and got married in one of the places that allows it. AND
they had a child. (I think whether it was adopted or they were women and
one got pregnant is irrelevant).

The genealogy software I use "ASSUMES" that the spouse is of the opposite
gender. What do other people do with people like this in their family
trees?

I know I have heard that people will not put the relationship in because
they don't have children, but now people are having children and the child
belongs to both of them.

I am looking for advice and what works.




Huntersglenn

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Huntersglenn » 25 mai 2005 04:04:47

Excuse me, but there are adopted children in my extended family, and I
can assure you that their fathers and mothers would be appalled at your
assumption that it would be a "great misjustice" for those children to
not be regarded as theirs.

As for the other -- the original poster wasn't asking for political or
religious opinions, but rather how to show people in a genealogy program.

Cathy

Charles wrote:
I think it is very much relevant if the child was adopted. Only one can be
the biological parent (if either of them are). If you record it otherwise
it's just lies and you are doing genealogy a great misjustice.

Gay and lesbians should be concidered partnerships, civil unions or "other",
no matter what some states allow. "Holy matrimony" is not possible with gay
and lesbian couples.

Send them a Bible and a Prayer.


Herman Viaene

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Herman Viaene » 25 mai 2005 09:15:22

Alan Jones wrote:

I had someone ask for my advice, and I had none. There issue was a family
member who was gay and got married in one of the places that allows it.
AND they had a child. (I think whether it was adopted or they were women
and one got pregnant is irrelevant).

The genealogy software I use "ASSUMES" that the spouse is of the opposite
gender. What do other people do with people like this in their family
trees?

I know I have heard that people will not put the relationship in because
they don't have children, but now people are having children and the child
belongs to both of them.

I am looking for advice and what works.
Well, your genealogy software is a bit 'old-fashioned' in this way. I would

advize to look for another one. I use Gramps on Linux (don't remember right
now if there is a Windows version), and I know this program can handle the
situation, there might be other programs around that do this as well.

Herman Viaene

ALIDA SPRY

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av ALIDA SPRY » 25 mai 2005 14:51:09

Well, while I agree that perhaps Charles should have chosen a better way to
express himself, he is correct in saying that adopted children should be
indicated as such from a genealogical standpoint. Before you jump on my
case though, I would like to say that my husband is adopted and I have
entered his relationship to his parents as just that.

Charles is correct about staying true to the whole concept of genealogy.
While I happen to also agree that gay and lesbian relationships should not
be considered marriages, I happen to agree with you Cathy, that the origianl
poster was not asking about what we belive to be correct, simply how to
enter the information in a genealogy program.

~Alida

"Huntersglenn" <huntersglenn@cox.net> wrote in message
news:NURke.35029$aB.17597@lakeread03...
Excuse me, but there are adopted children in my extended family, and I can
assure you that their fathers and mothers would be appalled at your
assumption that it would be a "great misjustice" for those children to not
be regarded as theirs.

As for the other -- the original poster wasn't asking for political or
religious opinions, but rather how to show people in a genealogy program.

Cathy

Charles wrote:
I think it is very much relevant if the child was adopted. Only one can
be the biological parent (if either of them are). If you record it
otherwise it's just lies and you are doing genealogy a great misjustice.

Gay and lesbians should be concidered partnerships, civil unions or
"other", no matter what some states allow. "Holy matrimony" is not
possible with gay and lesbian couples.

Send them a Bible and a Prayer.

singhals

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av singhals » 25 mai 2005 15:13:22

Alan Jones wrote:

I had someone ask for my advice, and I had none. There issue was a family
member who was gay and got married in one of the places that allows it. AND
they had a child. (I think whether it was adopted or they were women and one
got pregnant is irrelevant).


Uhhh... I don't, actually. If some man got pregnant, we *ALL* want to
hear about that! I've got JAMA on the other line. (BG)

The genealogy software I use "ASSUMES" that the spouse is of the opposite
gender. What do other people do with people like this in their family
trees?

Plan A: Change Programs
Plan B: Lie to the program you've got

I know I have heard that people will not put the relationship in because
they don't have children, but now people are having children and the child
belongs to both of them.

Two issues there, one major, one niggling -- a child cannot (yet)
"belong" to both of two males; physical impossibility outside a lab.
Niggling, there seems to be some question about whether any human can
"belong" to another in the sense of ownership.

So technically, the child is (a) genetically kin to one of 'em (b) not
genetically kin to one of 'em, or (c) genetically kin to neither. When
I have that issue in male-female families, I enter a spouse named
"Doesn't EXIST" of the appropriate sex, attach the child, then enter a
2nd marriage for the involved adult.

Cheryl

Huntersglenn

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Huntersglenn » 25 mai 2005 18:28:28

Going back to the original post -- the poster wasn't saying that an
adopted child wouldn't be shown as such, just that the status of the
child wasn't of relevance to the question of how to show the "spouse"
and how to show the child in relationship to either the spouse or both
parents.

My irritation with what Charles posted wasn't with noting that children
were adopted, but rather with his wording about it being a "great
misjustice" for genealogy if an adopted child isn't shown as such.
While showing an adoption might matter genetically, since the child
would only carry genes from one parent, or neither, depending on the
type of adoption, I don't believe that it's crucial to genealogy as a
whole. Genealogy is just as much about documenting heritages as it is
about documenting genetics, and an adopted child has the same heritage
as his or her parents (and I'm not dismissing those parents who adopt a
child from another country, race or culture and then make sure that the
child knows about their heritage from their biological parent(s)).

If you go back far enough in your family genealgoy, you'll reach a point
where you're making an educated guess as to the parents of your
ancestors (and some of us don't have to go back very far to reach this
point). We're just as likely to be wrong with those guesses as we are
to be right, so the idea that indicating only blood relationships is
crucial to genealogy comes to a screeching halt once that point is
reached. To say that your family tree would be damaged if an adopted
child is not listed as adopted is a bit extreme, especially considering
that many of us have unverified relationships for our ancestors entered
into our various genealogy programs.

But, that's just my opinion.

Cathy

ALIDA SPRY wrote:
Well, while I agree that perhaps Charles should have chosen a better way to
express himself, he is correct in saying that adopted children should be
indicated as such from a genealogical standpoint. Before you jump on my
case though, I would like to say that my husband is adopted and I have
entered his relationship to his parents as just that.

Charles is correct about staying true to the whole concept of genealogy.
While I happen to also agree that gay and lesbian relationships should not
be considered marriages, I happen to agree with you Cathy, that the origianl
poster was not asking about what we belive to be correct, simply how to
enter the information in a genealogy program.

~Alida

"Huntersglenn" <huntersglenn@cox.net> wrote in message
news:NURke.35029$aB.17597@lakeread03...

Excuse me, but there are adopted children in my extended family, and I can
assure you that their fathers and mothers would be appalled at your
assumption that it would be a "great misjustice" for those children to not
be regarded as theirs.

As for the other -- the original poster wasn't asking for political or
religious opinions, but rather how to show people in a genealogy program.

Cathy

Charles wrote:

I think it is very much relevant if the child was adopted. Only one can
be the biological parent (if either of them are). If you record it
otherwise it's just lies and you are doing genealogy a great misjustice.

Gay and lesbians should be concidered partnerships, civil unions or
"other", no matter what some states allow. "Holy matrimony" is not
possible with gay and lesbian couples.

Send them a Bible and a Prayer.



Dave

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Dave » 25 mai 2005 20:32:41

Gay and lesbians should be concidered partnerships, civil unions or
"other",
no matter what some states allow. "Holy matrimony" is not possible with
gay
and lesbian couples.


I'll bet that not everyone in your genealogy was wedded in "Holy Matrimony"
but they probably were married in a Civil Marriage which has nothing to do
with religion. Some localities are granting civil marriage to same-sex
couples; Massachusetts, Canada, The Netherlands, Belgium and these are
different that civil unions available in Vermont, soon Conecticut and in
some other European countries. I have a cousin married in Germany. Her Civil
Marriage date is different than her Religious marriage date.

Otto Jørgensen

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Otto Jørgensen » 25 mai 2005 21:17:25

On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:32:41 GMT, in alt.genealogy "Dave"
<dave.scheipers@nospam.att.net> wrote:

I'll bet that not everyone in your genealogy was wedded in "Holy Matrimony"
but they probably were married in a Civil Marriage which has nothing to do
with religion. Some localities are granting civil marriage to same-sex
couples; Massachusetts, Canada, The Netherlands, Belgium and these are
different that civil unions available in Vermont, soon Conecticut and in
some other European countries. I have a cousin married in Germany. Her Civil
Marriage date is different than her Religious marriage date.

And in some countries there is no difference in the relgious marriage
or civilian marriage.
Why should there be differeces here. It is up to the couple to decide
what and where

--
Otto Jørgensen
http://home.online.no/~otjoerge/bk/
All email is checked by NIS2005

Otto Jørgensen

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Otto Jørgensen » 25 mai 2005 21:22:47

On Tue, 24 May 2005 16:52:24 -0700, in alt.genealogy "Alan Jones"
<alanjones10@cox.net> wrote:

I had someone ask for my advice, and I had none. There issue was a family
member who was gay and got married in one of the places that allows it. AND
they had a child. (I think whether it was adopted or they were women and one
got pregnant is irrelevant).

The genealogy software I use "ASSUMES" that the spouse is of the opposite
gender. What do other people do with people like this in their family
trees?

I know I have heard that people will not put the relationship in because
they don't have children, but now people are having children and the child
belongs to both of them.

find a program that handle marriage of people of same gender. It is

not a problem to find program that handle this. And you should add the
information as it is and not make any mix here

You can not use the fact that people do not have children, but what
about a uncle and aunt that do not have children, What should you do+
Omit them?

--
Otto Jørgensen
http://home.online.no/~otjoerge/bk/
All email is checked by NIS2005

Otto Jørgensen

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av Otto Jørgensen » 25 mai 2005 21:23:46

On Wed, 25 May 2005 02:37:37 GMT, in alt.genealogy "Charles"
<dude@somewhere.com> wrote:

I think it is very much relevant if the child was adopted. Only one can be
the biological parent (if either of them are). If you record it otherwise
it's just lies and you are doing genealogy a great misjustice.

Gay and lesbians should be concidered partnerships, civil unions or "other",
no matter what some states allow. "Holy matrimony" is not possible with gay
and lesbian couples.

this is depending on lawregulation in some countries, but not all over

--
Otto Jørgensen
http://home.online.no/~otjoerge/bk/
All email is checked by NIS2005

michael kenefick

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av michael kenefick » 26 mai 2005 00:07:47

In my FTM ver 9.0, I can manually edit the other person to be the sex that they
are, after I have entered the information (as though it were a normal M / F
relationship). Now, from my prospective the children may be biological to one
of the persons in the relationship. The tree should be marked this way. Else
mark the children as adopted. For the other "parent" they may be listed as
Friend / Foster / Step / Family Member / Private in the relationship to the
children. If they are legally allowed to adopt then this can be changed easily
enough.

Mike.

Alan Jones wrote:

I had someone ask for my advice, and I had none. There issue was a family
member who was gay and got married in one of the places that allows it. AND
they had a child. (I think whether it was adopted or they were women and one
got pregnant is irrelevant).

The genealogy software I use "ASSUMES" that the spouse is of the opposite
gender. What do other people do with people like this in their family
trees?

I know I have heard that people will not put the relationship in because
they don't have children, but now people are having children and the child
belongs to both of them.

I am looking for advice and what works.

geothermal

Re: Gay Marriages with kids?

Legg inn av geothermal » 26 mai 2005 02:14:49

Huntersglenn wrote:

Going back to the original post -- the poster wasn't saying that an
adopted child wouldn't be shown as such, just that the status of the
child wasn't of relevance to the question of how to show the "spouse"
and how to show the child in relationship to either the spouse or both
parents.

My irritation with what Charles posted wasn't with noting that children
were adopted, but rather with his wording about it being a "great
misjustice" for genealogy if an adopted child isn't shown as such. While
showing an adoption might matter genetically, since the child would only
carry genes from one parent, or neither, depending on the type of
adoption, I don't believe that it's crucial to genealogy as a whole.
Genealogy is just as much about documenting heritages as it is about
documenting genetics, and an adopted child has the same heritage as his
or her parents (and I'm not dismissing those parents who adopt a child
from another country, race or culture and then make sure that the child
knows about their heritage from their biological parent(s)).

If you go back far enough in your family genealgoy, you'll reach a point
where you're making an educated guess as to the parents of your
ancestors (and some of us don't have to go back very far to reach this
point). We're just as likely to be wrong with those guesses as we are
to be right, so the idea that indicating only blood relationships is
crucial to genealogy comes to a screeching halt once that point is
reached. To say that your family tree would be damaged if an adopted
child is not listed as adopted is a bit extreme, especially considering
that many of us have unverified relationships for our ancestors entered
into our various genealogy programs.

But, that's just my opinion.

Cathy

Great post Cathy ! Summed up my thoughts exactly ! Charles is out of
line to preach dogma here. Hopefully Charles will visit Massachusetts
sometime and need medical assistance from a gay person who is married,
and then he might be "saved" by christian behavior.

Jonathan

Svar

Gå tilbake til «alt.genealogy»