The news broke late last Friday. This via the Associated Press:
Legislation that would allow private adoption agencies to deny placements that conflict with their religious or moral beliefs, including opposition to homosexuality, sailed through the Virginia House of Delegates by a wide margin and without debate Friday.
The House passed the Republican-backed bill 71-28 a day after rejecting several amendments offered by Democrats aimed at softening the measure. Earlier Friday, the Senate Rehabilitation and Social Services Committee endorsed its version of the bill on an 8-7 party-line vote, sending it to the floor for a vote next week. Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell is expected to sign the bill if it reaches his desk.
Del. Todd Gilbert, R-Woodstock and sponsor of the House bill, says it protects religious freedom.
22 Comments
Are the religions allowed to deny adoption to anyone/everyone they feel is not acceptable to their tenets of faith?
Am I allowed to withhold that portion of my federal/state tax that goes to the religious adoption agencies?
This is a no-brainier, this will be challenged and it will lose.
Am I allowed to withold that portion of my tax dollars that goes to secualr adoption agencies, secular schools, secular hospitals, Pand Parenthood, illegal immigrants...?
Faith based initiatives/ adoption agencies may come to rue this day. Courts will now determine what right they have to continue to receive federal/state tax dollars which would appear to be in violation of both separation of Church/State and in violation of anti-discrimination laws. Why not make it easier on yourself: just discontinue the acceptance of tax dollars and you can do as you please. This has always been an option for you.
So if I run an Islamic adoption agency that receives funding from the state, I can refuse to adopt state-sponsored children to loving, two-parent, and stable Christian homes. Nice.
This is the same freedom that Jewish adoption agencies may place Jew babies with Jewish families.
You guys ever heard of the first amendment? The one that garuntees the freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof? Who are you guys to proclaim that religious organizations should be cut off by the state for refusing to compromise their religious convictions based on edicts that are found nowhere in the US Constitution?
Your overall message is that homosexual dogma is king and civil and religious liberties are secondary. Nice!
Of course there are many other adoption agencies that don't have the same criteria as faith-based agencies. They will place children with, for example, same sex couples. Those who don't meet the criteria of faith-based agencies could always go to one of these other agencies, except for the fact that some couples wish to force acceptance of their relationship upon everyone. So much for tolerance of differing beliefs.
I would turn down the tax dollars before adopting to homos.
Byron, then we agree. If all of you believed this there would be no problem.
I believe the keyword here is "Private". These agencies are not public and should be able to operate per their conscience.
Jenifer, yes they are private agencies that have contracts with the state.
Jenifer, this is the very point. If it is private and not dependent on public monies, so be it. All will agree. If the agency uses even one dollar of my money. It's not okay. Nor would it be for you if the tables were turned.
OT: Prop 8 ruling to be announced on Tuesday. this is going to be great.
Mike J. A Valentine's gift if ever there was one!
Wow! It's tomorrow...an early Valentine's gift.
Everyone who accepts money from a powerful source is at risk of being required to do something unacceptable in order to keep the money. I would advise every religious agency to run, not walk, any federal money right back to where it came from. Do your work without federal money. Stay away from the federal government. Stand up for your freedom. and show that you mean it by staying free of government connections.
There should be a clear difference between "receiving state money" and "having a contract with the state".If the government refuses to authorize agencies to place children unless they lower their standards to the states,there is no avenue for those for whom the state's standards are insufficient to place children only with those who meet higher standards with or without state subsidy.
Do marriage corruption supporters also believe school voucher legislation to be unconstitutional as well?
"In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court said the school voucher program does not constitute the establishment of religion."
Meanwhile children suffer.
Yoshi,at least we can end the suffering intrinsic in their being consigned to the greedy hands of same-sex couples refusing to admit the unfitness of their relationships to be exposed to children.