TMG-L ArchivesArchiver > TMG > 2011-01 > 1294587931
From: Bob Velke <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] [Bulk] Re: Same-sex couple with child
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 10:45:31 -0500
References: <00BA9D890108130D022501A034@Judy-PC> <4D292EFA.email@example.com> <4D293807.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4D294BEA.email@example.com><4D298E9E.firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> Anyway, I asked the question because I've learned over many years that
>> it is the best way to determine whether anything (except unintended
>> offense) is to be gained by further discussion on this topic. In the
>> case of you and me, I think not.
> I have no idea what that means
It means that since we cannot agree on a fundamental principal (whether
a child's blood lines should be calculated through an adoptive parent),
can we not just agree to disagree?
>> but it comes across to ME as an intended offence.
I'm sorry to hear that because I took pains to avoid that impression.
>>> As far as I am concerned if my dads brother was adopted he is my uncle.
>>> If he had children they are my cousins. If I adopt a child they are my
>>> child, and their children are my grandchildren.
>> I'm truly happy for you<g>.
> So can you figure a way to let me show that in TMG reports without me
> having to switch around primary designations?
As you say, you can already do it in TMG. The question is whether I'll
make it easier. The answer is no, sorry. And for the sake of present
and future generations of researchers who will encounter those reports,
I trust that no other software will either.
Wholly Genes, Inc.
|Re: [TMG] [Bulk] Re: Same-sex couple with child by Bob Velke <>|