1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Maude
  8. The Braiser

WATCH: Cat Cora Speaks Out Against The Injustice Of Adopting Her Own Children

Cat Cora appeared on The Jeff Probst Show today to bake with precocious 8-year-olds and speak out about her family life. Interestingly, she was slated for a segment adjacent to one with the stars of Married To The Army: Alaska, an OWN reality show about army wives in the Great White North.

After the Wives cleared out, Cat took the stage in a red satin kimono with chunky black sparkle trim (how very festive!) to talk about everything from being the first (and only) female Iron Chef, to being the first lady inducted into the Culinary Hall of Fame, to the sheer absurdity she finds in the fact that she had to adopt her own children.

Cat and her wife Jennifer aren’t legally married but in a domestic partnership, because same-sex marriage wasn’t an option for them at the time. Of course, that means that Cat had to legally adopt the three boys her wife legally birthed, and Jen had to legally adopt the one son Cat birthed in order to share legal rights over them as parents. (Fun fact: Cat and Jennifer were actually both pregnant at the same time!)

Is it wrong of us to assume that the Supreme Court’s announcement that it will take up same-sex marriage one hour after this segment aired has everything to do with Cat Cora? Probably, but we’re going to start spreading that rumor, anyway. Check out the clip below.

3 thoughts on “WATCH: Cat Cora Speaks Out Against The Injustice Of Adopting Her Own Children

  1. Hope the Supreme Court settles this favorably once and for all. Marriage is a Civil Right, not something that should be decided state to state or at the whim of the voters.

    Go, Cat & Jennifer! May you be able to leave behind this weird legal stuff and just enjoy being a family soon.

    • What about “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?” Then there is the 14th Amendment which states, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”

      If people are being denied the right to marriage, to a civil institution that bestows certain legal, financial and governmental privileges on those partaking of marriage, then those people are having their Civil Rights violated. I would hope we would not need another amendment (like 15, 19 or 26) to specify the rights of people based specifically on gender- or sexual-orientation, but if that is what it takes, let’s get it done.

Leave a Reply