Gay Activists/ACLU Applaud "Peoria Solution" Ending Catholic Foster Care


Gay activists are crowing because one Catholic diocese in Illinois has ended its legal battle to preserve the freedom to place kids with a mom and dad, choosing instead to transfer the 300+ children in their care to a new outfit that will do adoptions to same-sex couples (the three remaining Catholic dioceses continue to pursue legal recourse):

New Civil Rights Movement: "...if a diocese can make the serious and sober decision that it needs to reconfigure itself out from under Catholic orthodoxy in order to best serve children in need, then at least some well-​meaning Catholics understand the competing demands of doctrine and reality..."

The ACLU: "The new organization will not be bound by the religious tenets asserted by Catholic Charities, and instead will follow the law and DCFS' mandate requiring that the state's wards have the opportunity to be cared for by all potential caring and qualified foster and adoptive parents, including gays and lesbians."


  1. M. Jones
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    The is so sad and sickens me to see religious freedom and liberties eliminated in the name of SS"M" Extremism.

  2. Louis E.
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    Children's interests are best served by laws treating being in a same-sex sexual relationship as a disqualification for adopting a child.

  3. Mikhail
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    Hopefully the people will reverse the Illinois civil unions law with a referendum

  4. Davide
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    Of course homosex advocates and the ACLU applaud this. They actually believe denying a infant the fundemental human right to be raised by a mother and father is a good thing. How do we argue with stupidity? With homosexual advocacy its always about them first, everyone else including hetrosexuals and especially kids second.

  5. jamie Ward
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

    Maybe I missed something. Aren't the same people running and working at the "new" adoption agency? Were these people able to offer better services to help needy children when it said "catholic" than they are now?

  6. Barb Chamberlan
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

    New Civil Rights Movement: "We smashed your face into the ground. We're so glad you agree with us."

  7. Louis E.
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    Jamie,they were free to exercise higher standards as to who they dealt with,but the state was interfering.If there is no way to save those children from being put in the custody of same-sex couples it's best not to be complicit in that abuse.

  8. john
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 2:03 pm | Permalink


  9. Little man
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

    Yes, jamie Ward, you missed something, as usual. It is called compassion towards children. Another thing you missed is how foster parents are chosen. Maybe call it hidden civil disobedience, as with those who sit and pout because they didn't get a marriage license in NCarolina. A license is (a license), you have to qualify. Catholic Charities cares for its staff, who lost their job. That's another form of compassion you don't know about.

  10. Rover Serton
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 8:02 pm | Permalink

    Davide: As I suspected when you earlier said you were SSA. You are a fraud like the NOM money grubbers. If you are going to pretend to be gay, you can't then take the homophobic position and keep any credability. Lying for the cause. well played sir, well played.

  11. Louis E.
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 9:37 pm | Permalink

    Rover Serton,the "homophobic position" is the only correct one,and being afflicted by same-sex attraction does not relieve anyone of the responsibility to denounce and condemn same-sex sexual activity.

  12. John Noe
    Posted October 20, 2011 at 10:05 pm | Permalink

    ACLU applauds the suffering of innocent children.

  13. Daughter of Eve
    Posted October 21, 2011 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    Rover, what "homophobic position?"

    Doesn't an infant have the right to expect care from both his/her parents? Don't we expect individuals who make a baby to step up and take responsibility for the care and feeding of that little person?

    Are those who choose to engage in homosexual behavior barred from entering into a licensed marriage with another consenting adult of the opposite sex? If a homosexual person makes a baby (which can only happen with the cooperation of an opposite-sexed person) isn't he or she responsible to that other adult, and to child they co-create?

    Crying "homophobia" is a diversion from your true message: those who engage in homosexual behavior are not to be held to the same standards of responsibility or accountability in procreation, as other citizens.