Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AP: Boston Catholic Charities Halts All Adoptions

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:16 PM
Original message
AP: Boston Catholic Charities Halts All Adoptions
BOSTON - The Boston Archdiocese's Catholic Charities said Friday it would stop providing adoption services because of a state law allowing gays and lesbians to adopt children.

The social services arm of the Roman Catholic archdiocese, which has provided adoption services for the state for about two decades, said the law runs counter to church teachings on homosexuality.

"The world was very different when Charities began this ministry at the threshold of the twentieth-century," the Rev. J. Bryan Hehir, president of Catholic Charities, said in a joint statement with trustees chairman Jeffrey Kaneb. "The world changed often and we adapted the ministry to meet changing times and needs. At all times we sought to place the welfare of children at the heart of our work.

"But now, we have encountered a dilemma we cannot resolve," they said.

Gov. Mitt Romney said he planned to file a bill that would allow religious organizations to seek an exemption from the state's anti-discrimination laws to provide adoption services.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060310/ap_on_re_us/gay_ado...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. Oh good grief
So would they rather them be with an abusive parent who is addicted to drugs and could end up running away or with a loving home? Me? I'd say a loving home. All that should matter is the enviornment the kid will grow up in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Saphire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. anyone who denies a child a stable loving home should be ashamed
Edited on Fri Mar-10-06 02:32 PM by lady of texas
of themselves. That's why my lesbian sister is the guardian of my children, and not my fundie in-laws. I know this post is about adoption, but just my 2 cents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. Interesting case
I don't like this precedent I must say.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. conservatives are going to push the anti-gay hate
message as hard as they can.

this is just one more example.

notice -- that catholic charities in this case wants to separate themselve out from every one else.

that should give you an idea about what conservative christians want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Your right this case will resonate
Should a church be forced to act against the principles it believes in?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. In my opinion, no.
They are doing the right thing in just getting out of the business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. but of course they won't stay out.
conservative christians are trying to set up a society within the society -- where they are special -- more special than everyone else.

this is going to make severe problems -- a little like the boy scouts blown way, way out of proportion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Isn't that the nature of religion though?
If you choose to live to a different standard than your neighbors, doesn't that seperate you out to a certain extent?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. except that in our context
that bends things for everyone -- they aren't the amish.

they know they are going to force everyone through their funnel to one degree or another whether they like it or not.

and that is why there are no {conservative or liberal} moderates in the current context.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Ah. So Church Adoption agencies should be required to place
Edited on Fri Mar-10-06 02:54 PM by bryant69
children with homosexual parents (regardless of whether this conflics with their beliefs)?

I guess maybe I don't understand that policy - certainly I appreciate that they will fight to keep other charities and governmental adoption agencies from placing kids with homosexuals - and I understand your objection to that.

On edit - This story is worded confusingly. It seems to imply that the current statute explicitely requires this catholic charity to place children with gay parents (or suffer law suits). On the other hand it's possible that this is a sort of preemptive strike against this statute, that actually does not require them to place children with gay parents (but merely allows them too).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. while understand your -- logic --
they are not trying -- and you know this -- to find a ground that is safe for just their beliefs.

you of course are willing to sit through periods of irrational extremism to wait for the publics pendulum to swing.

no matter the harm.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. OK.
I don't know how to respond to this.

Shoudl i go on the defensive? Screw that.

The truth is I am trying to balance two values - one is freedom of religion, and the other is tolerance and non-discrimination. You are jettisoning religious freedom to get what you want.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #21
37. Here's the balance: Don't get into businesses that your religious values
don't align with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #21
50. Bogus straw man
Edited on Sat Mar-11-06 11:42 AM by ruggerson
they have no constitutional mandate to be in the adoption business.

They CHOOSE to be in the adoption business.

If the state makes a law that prohibits bigotry and discrimination in adoption proceedings, then the Church decides:

a) to obey the law like the rest of society

or

b) to pull out of the adoption business.


Very simple, really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FredScuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. What about Muslim parents?
Or atheist parents?

Or Jewish parents?

Or Wiccan parents?

Does the Church have the right to supercede anti-discrimination laws?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. Good question.
If a catholic birth mother goes to her church and asks for specifically catholic parents to raise her child, should she be allowed to do that? Or are her wishes meaningless?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FredScuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. You tell me
She's giving up her baby.

I ask again....why should the Church be exempt from anti-discrimination laws?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #26
32. SO if they legalize gay marriage should churches be forced to perform them
The answer is they should be exempt from any law which encrouches on their freedom to practice their religion, within reason. Obviously the holy church of punching people for no reason should go to jail. On the other hand if the pork farmers of America rammed through a law requiring at least one serving of pork a week, well, I would expect either an exemption for Muslims and Jews or I would expect a lot of civil disobedience.

In this case, there are organizations that allow placement in gay families. And there are some that do not. I'm not sure I see the necessity in forcing the churches to provide a service that is already being provided by other organizations.

The application is Gay Marriage. Once the state says that gays can get marriaged, what is to stop anti-discrimination laws from being used to club churches into marrying gays?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FredScuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. nice straw man
who said anything about forcing the Church to perform same-sex marriages? The laws before the states right now only deal with the legal recognition of a same sex union on par with a heterosexual union....it has nothing to do with where they're performed and certainly does not force churches to perform them.

You can bring up all the extreme scenarios you'd like, but you still haven't answered my question....if the Church is going to involve itself in a civic action (adoption services), why should they be exempt from the anti-discrimination laws on the books specifically to protect those against whom the Church would discriminate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #33
38. It's not a strawman
Marriage is a civic action (i would argue it shouldn't be, but it certainly is now). You need a marriage liscence to perform it. Once gay marriage is legalized there could very well be people who are going to use this exact argument to suggest that Churches be forced to provide this service to them.

It's not an extreme scenario either, could happen in the next couple of years.

The answer to your question is freedom of religion. Perhaps freedom of religion has no value to you - but it is in the constitution and unless you can amend it out of their, well, it's going to complicate this issue.

A catholic charity provides adoption services, and, because of their religious beliefs, does not wish to adopt out children to parents who will not live up to catholic standards (you could say the same about any number of religions). For these people, apparently (I haven't ruled out the possibility that this is a stunt on the church's part), they feel that if they keep providing these services they will run afoul of the law.

I know that if I had a child I had to put up for adoption, I would want him raised in the standards of my faith, and would seek an organization that would do that.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #38
41. False. No church is required to perform ANY marriage it chooses not to.
A church service is purely the business of the church.

Adoption is a licenssed service with obligations to the state and its residents.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. Whatever. Is a church discriminatory if it refused to marry two men or
two women?

Should such behaivor be allowed by the law?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #44
46. Churches are free to discriminate in purely religious matters.
Edited on Sat Mar-11-06 10:46 AM by mondo joe
Who cares?

Adoption is a state regulated business/service.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #46
55. You keep saying state regulated business like it's some kind of magic
charm.

Marriages are liscensed by the state. The condition of being marriage involves a whole host of legal distinctions - including inheritance and hospital visits.

At any rate, whatever - Churches should be allowed to discriminate against those who do not hold to the values of their religion.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #55
56. You again misunderstand. The state regulates CIVIL marriage, not
Edited on Sat Mar-11-06 12:29 PM by mondo joe
religious ceremonies.

You can have a religious ceremony without benefit of state sanction (or the legal benefits associated with it). You can have a civil marriage without religion.

The state regulates ONLY the civil aspects of marriage.

Churches are allowed to discriminate in their own functions -- but not in administering state business like adoption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #56
64. But birth mothers are allowed to discriminate in who they
want their children to go to?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #64
65. Birth mothers don't contract birth through the state. They are private
individuals.

If they work with an agency in which they choose the adoptive parents they can choose anyone they like that meets approval for adoption.

But the agency contracts with the state. Very different thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #65
67. So Catholic Birth Services
Caters to membes of the catholic community who want kids raised in traditional families. Technically they would allow homosexuals to file for adoptiosn with them, but givin the wishes of the birth mothers, homosexuals will never be able to recieve an adoption through them.

Is that satisfactory?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #67
68. Depends on their system. I don't know if some, all or any birth mothers
Edited on Sat Mar-11-06 02:10 PM by mondo joe
are involved in placement through this particular service.

Edit to add: you might want to forget the assumption about the women who use this servivce -- I know a lesbian couple who adopted through a religion based service in an open adoption and the birth mother chose them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #68
69. Well not all religiions have the same beliefs
That's why thee are so many of them.

How would you tell discriminatory policies? Beyond the obvious "Your gay? Well you can't fill out an application then." Assuming they will "take" applications from homosexuals, is that all an agency would have to do to comply with this law?

It was a hypothetical in the last question by the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. Nor do all Catholics.
You might pick that up if you read some of the posts from Catholics on DU.

If you're suggesting there's no way to determine if discrimination exists, you might as well abandon all laws regarding discrimination.

One wayy you could tell in this case is if qualified gay applicants are passed over for available children by the agency - and since this service is focused on hard to place children that should be pretty easy to track.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #70
71. You enjoy condescending don't you?
At any rate you answered the question - if an agency failed to place kids with gay parents, regardless of the wishes of the birth parents, they would suffer consequences.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #71
72. I already did answer you.
Agencies work in different ways.

In some the agency makes the placement. Sometimes the birth parent(s) is more responsible for the selection.

If the agency is placing the kids they must abide by state regulation. They can't discriminate nor can they discriminate on behalf of the birth parent(s). And remember, once the birth parent(s) surrender a child they have no more say.

If this agency is placing hard to place kids it's extremely unlikely that the parents are making the placement. Instead the kids are likely wards of the state, and are being placed by the agency which must comply with the state regulations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #72
73. So if a Catholic birth parent wishes catholic parents for their children
they are responsible for finding the parents themselves, and any agency who helps them can be prosecuted for discrimination?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. I don't see why this is so hard for you to understand.
Some agencies essentially facilitate a parent placing a child with adoptive parents. They screen potential adoptive parents and present the choices to the bio parent. That agency can't discriminate.

More traditionally a parent simply surrenders a child, which then is in the custody of the state. The state is responsible for placing the child, and the bio parents no longer have anything to say about placement - they already placed the child with the state.

In the facilitator model a bio parent may say "I want to place my baby with someone as much like me as possible" and they can review the available applicants, they can choose one based on whatever they like, or they can change their mind and not surrender the child.

But they don't get to direct the state on what to do with a child they surrender to it, any more than they can direct the adoptive parents on what to do. When you surrender a child, you surrender your say in its future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #74
75. I disagree with that
But whatever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #75
76. You can disagree with gravity too, if you like. It's still true.
State adoption agencies aren't agents of biological parents. They are custodians of children surrended to the state, and are obliged to act in their best interest, not cater to those who surrender them.

This particular agency was focused on placing special needs kidss already custodians of the state, so there are no biological parents involved in the decision making.

By the way, brilliant use of "whatever".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #76
78. Can a free lance adoption agency be set up?
Or are they required to be liscensed by the state?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #78
79. Maybe you should research that topic for yourself. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #22
35. If she surrenders a child for adoption she may surrender her wishes
for placement as well -- there are a number of options available to people surrendering a child, and not all are the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #35
39. Should she be required to surrender her wishes?
Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #39
40. Depends on how she (or they) choose to arrange the surrender.
There are different options.

In only the most traditional would the parent(s) surrender all choice of their own.

But a parent surrendering a child is neither a business nor a licensed service provider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #40
43. That's an interesting distinction
My guess is that most of those who would place their children through the church would not want thier child going to homosexual parents - so the church takes the names of homosexual parents, but since most if not all of their adoptees can't go to homosexual parents . . . would they fall afoul of the law?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #43
45. That's an assumption. If you want to control placement, reserve the
choice for yourself.

If you leave the choice in the hands of the agency, you're done at the point of surrender.

If the church wants to participate in a state regulated business, they should expect to meet those regulations.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #18
57. Excuse my ignorance in this
but what exactly IS included in anti-discrimination legislation? Obviously race. Is religion? Is sexual orientation? Is gender?

Or are we still waiting for that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #16
34. If churches don't want to abide by adoption law they should get out of
the adoption business.

Just like pharmacists who don't want to fill prescriptions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FredScuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #34
48. Great point
The Church should not be forced to violate its sacred tenets...by the same token, we shouldn't move the goalposts to accomodate the Church's discriminatory practices either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #16
62. if they want to contract with the state, yes.
It's not that hard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seaglass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #16
63. They've already placed 7 kids in families with gay parents.
Edited on Sat Mar-11-06 01:17 PM by HopeLives
Kids that no one else wanted and it's worked well, as two of the board members that resigned have stated.

If they charge a penny for adoptions services, they are a business and they cannot discriminate, IMHO. The Catholic Charities in Baltimore charges $7000-$15,000 for adoptions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
53. I read that they have actually only place
about 700 kids in a decade or more. The State does the heavy work. It probably won't matter much in the general picture. Someone without the theological constraints will move in and fill up the vacuum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FredScuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. Principles?
Are they going to investigate every house they place a youth in to make sure meat isn't served on Fridays during Lent?

Well, that would be ridiculous, you might say. I agree...so is this.

One part of me says "Fantastic...get out of the adoption business, you hypocritical pedophile-protecting assholes", but another part knows that this will have a deep impact on the lives of the children who could have been helped by them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
36. Like PHARMACISTS, if they don't want to conform to the legal expectations
of providing a service they should get out of the business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy M Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
4. I would like to ask Romney why he thinks religious...
organizations should be exempt from anti-discrimination laws. The religious organizations should not be practicing discrimination but I'm afraid they are some of the biggest offenders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill McBlueState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
8. Well, we know where they stand now
Kids are going to be homeless now thanks to Catholics' religious beliefs. And yes, it is because of their religious beliefs.

Remember this the next time someone tells you we should respect all religious beliefs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northofdenali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
9. Isn't this the same diocese that was/is in MAJOR
trouble, both financially and legally, because of priest-molesters?

Sure, let pedophiles run your youth programs, but deny an orphaned child a home. Makes sense to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cats Against Frist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #9
25. I do believe it's the same one, but I'm not sure
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
miss_american_pie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
10. And another reason for separation of church and state
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smirkymonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
15. So the children have to pay the price for THEIR bigotry.
And what the fuck is Romney doing as Governor of Massachusettes anyway? That's like Ted Kennedy being governor of South Dakota.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FredScuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. and I love how the Fundies are casting this
That it's our fault for "favoring" the rights of adults over children. They need to get the fuck back in the Pilgrim boat and get their asses back to England.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
20. If they did this based on race they'd be vilified
How do they get away with this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cats Against Frist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
23. How do they stand on state laws that don't allow people to fuck children?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
24. I thought non state based agencies were allowed to discriminate
For example, my husband and I saw an advertisement for an adoption agency. They gave requirements for the prospective parents including an age range for both parents and required that the prospective parents have been married for at least two years.
This ad suggested that they would not allow anyone who did not meet those requirements to adopt through their agency.
I am not saying that homosexuals or anyone else should be prohibited from adopting. I just thought that agencies were allowed to set their own requirements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
27. The fools are signing their own death warrants....
... they're writing themselves out of the script of the future, becoming completely irrelevant to anything in the real world. Religion historically does this - then they get all upset 100s of years later, wondering why nobody pays attention to them.

and then a few more 100s of years later, they actually get around to apologizing.

idiots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KAT119 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
28. Catholic schools from 1st grade through Georgetown Univ. & know
lst hand the dark, dark underbelly of hierarchy of Catholic Church. The Cath. Church in my AZ. town has a wonderful Gay priest whom everyone loves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
29. but it's okay to molest them...
:puke:

I really hate organized religion. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
30. What if gays start adopting embryos?
Edited on Sat Mar-11-06 12:11 AM by DanCa
It's time that we start actively protesting the right wingers for proposing such a law. I am tired of these sick and evil people, who care more about an embryo than a living breathing human being, involve themselves in our government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 02:44 AM
Response to Original message
31. You Think They'd Need The Money Adoption Brings In
These adoptions are worth at least $30K each to them; considering their current legal woes and the penalties levied against them, you'd think they'd up their baby brokering to avoid selling off property.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
42. yes, the Christian thing to do is to leave children in orphanages
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FredScuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #42
47. Please sir
Edited on Sat Mar-11-06 11:14 AM by FredScuttle


Could I have some more? No? Alright then...as long as you don't place me with two homos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
49. The state is forcing the church to act against conscience
This time, the state is dictating to the church in this chapter of church-state confict. This is what the Founding Fathers warned us against: government meddling in religious affairs, and not just religious meddling in governmental affairs.

Since homosexuality (by practicing GLBT's) is in violation of the teachings of the Catholic Church, the church is being told to choose between violating their teachings and violating the law. IMO, it's bad law to force religious people to act against their conscience. Whether or not the church appears to "discriminate" is beside the point.

This law that forces the church to accept gays as potential adoptive parents is the flip side of oppressive laws such as Jim Crow and punishing girls, but not boys, as delinquents for having sex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #49
51. But they don't have to be in the adoption business
show me where in the constitution it states: Religious organizations must choose where orphaned children grow up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #49
54. Except that I think the church was doing the work on the behalf of the
state. Contract work - thus state work. Govt has the right to dictate the guidelines of work done for the state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #54
59. Precisely. Adoption is a state function, not a religious function.
The church isn't forced to run an adoption agency - that's their choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #49
58. No it's not. The church is not forced to be in the adoption business.
If you want to work in a state regulated business you need to comply with state regulation.

If the regulations conflict with your conscience don't get involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #49
61. no, it isn't.
If the state were somehow forcing the church to ordain gay clergy, or some such, then it would be forcing the church to act against its bigoted, stupid "conscience". AFAIK, though, contracting with the state to provide adoption services is not a central tenet of Catholic belief or conscience.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
52. What if the headline read:
The Boston Archdiocese's Catholic Charities said Friday it would stop providing adoption services because of a state law allowing blacks to adopt children.

Would some of you who are defending "freedom of religion" still defend the Church?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatholicEdHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
60. This edict came directly from Rome
I have read elsewhere. I think it is the CDF, with Archbishop Leveda, former head of the San Fran Archdiocese who has taken over Ratingzer (Ben XVI)'s job.

Yes, adoptions are optional for churches, but the 17 or so homosexual couples adoptive kids were placed with over the past 20-25yrs were often ones others rejected with emotional problems and/or serious handicaps.

I have no problems with homosexuals adopting kids as long as they pass the same tests as everyone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
66. Good. These child rapers should have nothing to do with children anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neil Lisst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
77. I'm sure Jesus is just SO proud of the Boston church.
Do you think any of these people ever GET the things Jesus said?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 19th 2014, 07:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC