How could anyone say that these two would not be good parents?
"They were completely traumatized for a while," Gill recalled. "At first the only way I could get [the 4-year-old] to interact was when he played with the dog."The child was so accustomed to taking care of the baby that he would grab the bottle out of Gill's hand and feed his brother. When the bottle was two-thirds empty, the 4-year-old would refill it, knowing exactly how much milk to pour."He would insist on holding his brother and burping him," said Gill.When the baby dirtied his diaper, the 4-year-old came to Gill with a Pamper in his hand. "He knew his job. This is what he did. He had to be the parent to this baby," Gill said. "But, I explained to him, 'You get to play, you get to be the child. You don't have to take care of your brother.'"That greatly upset the 4-year-old and it took a long for him to learn how to be a kid, Gill said. As a compromise, the boy -- now 8 -- has a full-time caretaker job, to give the dog its food and water.
And I especially can't get the "foster yes, adoption no" idea. If gays are good enough to take care of the unwanted, help them for a few years and then give them away to a different (hetero) family, it means they are thought of as not such a bad influence or evil household if they are given kids for a period of few years, right? But somehow stability, creating full family in the eyes of the law, giving the kids the opportunity to feel they are not in a temporary place to be traumatized again by moving to strangers, no, that's not good?
I hope they won't appeal, it's good the governor is happy with the ruling.