What? No it's not. Because HE'S not reversed. He's doing the reversing. Later on in this argument you use "Back to the Future" and When time is reversed, MARTY isn't reversed. It's not like he becomes a zygote and zips back into his fathers dick, right? That's sorta the same argument I'm making about Jason, since Superman isn't going back in time with Lois at the fortress. It very MUCH matters where someone is physically at the time of the reversal in the SUPERMAN movies. At least it matters where SUPERMAN is.
Actually, Marty was about to be "zipped back into his father's dick" when his parents were in danger of not mating.
But your point that it matters where Superman is in those flicks when time is reversed is merely an assumption. [and Samuel L. Jackson said, "When you make an assumption, you make an ass out of you, and umption.")] Please point out in Superman I or II where there is evidence that Lois is pregnant or that a kid was on the way. Singer's kid plot isn't justified retroactively, and it doesn't make it any more relevant. It was one idea among a million possible ideas for anyone's 21st century "reboot"/"rehash"/"whatever" of the Superman franchise. If Singer included a Superman Brother, or Krypto the SuperPup, would that have to be tied into Supes II, just because the movie was released, even if they weren't the greatest additions?
This isn't about me "not liking" SR. It's about ignoring it FOR THE PURPOSES OF A SUPERMAN II FAN EDIT, simply because it's not a real sequel. It's not a true follow-up. It's reuses actual lines of dialogue word-for-word from the old flicks (which remakes do... sequels don't... pretty simple). The whole Superman's kid thing is fine by itself in a new work made by Singer, and no one's telling you to destroy your copy of the movie. But it didn't exist in 1981, like III and IV. My point is, everything is ALREADY tied together AS-IS. Keeping SR in mind for a Supes II edit is pointless, as it already "ties in" (no matter how half-assed). In making a movie that is the best of both worlds (those worlds being Lester and Donner), Singer is not part of those worlds, and his flick ain't either. The super-kiss should be included if it works out to the be a good story choice, based on the existing II flicks and scripts and whatnot. If it makes people feel better about SR's existence, fine. It just has no bearing on a new alternate version Superman II. I'm not trying to negate SR-- again, it was always be there, so watch it 'til your heart's content.
As far as other Superman comic stories to base a film off of, there are countless good ones that are sadly left untapped.