Federal judge rules adoption agency can’t ban gays & lesbians

Dec 2015
12,687
7,923
In Your Heart!
Federal judge rules adoption agency can’t ban gays & lesbians
By Alex Bollinger

"U.S. District Judge Petrese Tucker rejected CSS’s arguments. She ruled that CSS’s contract with the city to provide services in exchange for money makes it a public accommodation."
"Moreover, the contract itself includes a nondiscrimination clause, which means that CSS violated both city law and its own contract."





################################################################################

Great and proper ruling to bring JUSTICE to this dire situation. Once again we are reminded of how Republicans want to continue discriminating against the LGBT Community for no good reason. That's something that gives many Americans a reason to Vote Them OUT Of Office Next Time Around! While thousands of children remain truly home-less, that is without a good place to truly call "home" and a good set of parents the GOP simply continues to want to keep them in foster homes and orphanages. Such cruelty! It is an incredibly outrageous stance. KUDOS to the Federal Judge who saw just what is happening and ruled in favor of Gays and Lesbians who want to become parents which is the right thing to do for the children. Let's not forget that professional child organizations/associations have declared that same-sex parents make good parents and should be given the opportunity to adopt children.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Jun 2018
2,151
426
Ford, Washington
Federal judge rules adoption agency can’t ban gays & lesbians
By Alex Bollinger










################################################################################

Great and proper ruling to bring JUSTICE to this dire situation. Once again we are reminded of how Republicans want to continue discriminating against the LGBT Community for no good reason. That's something that gives many Americans a reason to Vote Them OUT Of Office Next Time Around! While thousands of children remain truly home-less, that is without a good place to truly call "home" and a good set of parents the GOP simply continues to want to keep them in foster homes and orphanages. Such cruelty! It is an incredibly outrageous stance. KUDOS to the Federal Judge who saw just what is happening and ruled in favor of Gays and Lesbians who want to become parents which is the right thing to do for the children. Let's not forget that professional child organizations/associations have declared that same-sex parents make good parents and should be given the opportunity to adopt children.
American Christians have the right to their religious beliefs. I assume that this will be appealed.
 

Crusher

Former Staff
Aug 2011
28,373
9,276
Heaven Above
American Christians have the right to their religious beliefs. I assume that this will be appealed.
I hope not. Too many kids need a loving parent, or parents. I don't give two shits if they are gay or straight as long as they provide a safe and loving environment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
Dec 2015
12,687
7,923
In Your Heart!
I hope not. Too many kids need a loving parent, or parents. I don't give two shits if they are gay or straight as long as they provide a safe and loving environment.
There is talk of an appeal which was expected. However, it is a sheer travesty to learn that they would appeal in order to continue to discriminate against the adoption of children in need of good homes with loving parents. You are a conservative voice of reason, Crusher, I only wish more thought as you do in this regard. Unfortunately, on that side bigotry, prejudice and discrimination seems to continue to take front-row center.

What I have always thought is that those places that want to do children that way, that is, to prohibit them from being adopted by Gay parents solely on prejudice should not have that kind of voice since they are already plenty prejudiced. There should be a regulation to allow the children themselves to decide whether they want to be adopted by same-sex parents and live with them or not and don't let them kid you, children are much more advanced in their way of thinking than many adults give them credit for, I have learned. They think responsibly and know and understand what's going on. Therefore, they should have the right to decide whom they want to live with rather than to have a bigoted person or persons make that decision for them. After all, they would not be the ones who would be living with the adoptive parents to begin with. Those who would be too young to make that decision by themselves there should be a court-appointed person that is completely NEUTRAL in same-sex parentage to help make that decision. In general, most kids would instinctively know who they would want to go live with or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Jun 2018
2,151
426
Ford, Washington
I hope not. Too many kids need a loving parent, or parents. I don't give two shits if they are gay or straight as long as they provide a safe and loving environment.
That's fine. However, it's a Christian organization. Other adoption agencies can operate according to their beliefs. Live and let live.
 

Crusher

Former Staff
Aug 2011
28,373
9,276
Heaven Above
That's fine. However, it's a Christian organization. Other adoption agencies can operate according to their beliefs. Live and let live.
I can see that point. If there are plenty of other places for gays to adopt, I don't have an issue with a Christian agency living by its religious beliefs. I don't like when gays or any group shop for a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Dec 2015
12,687
7,923
In Your Heart!
That's fine. However, it's a Christian organization. Other adoption agencies can operate according to their beliefs. Live and let live.
The problem is that the court found that they were not operating the way the law dictates therefore they had to step in and issue the ruling from the Federal bench as they did.

From the OP:

"CSS admitted to discriminating against same-sex couples. It said that it does not certify same-sex couples as foster parents, even if they are qualified under state law. It also refused home studies for same-sex couples considering adoption. "
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
78,042
47,797
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
The problem is that the court found that they were not operating the way the law dictates therefore they had to step in and issue the ruling from the Federal bench as they did.
Being qualified under state law only means the agency may adopt a child out to the qualifying couple, not that it must do so. If it is a private religious organization that does not take public money (and I do not know whether this is the case), then it would seem it could act according to the dictates of its conscience. The issue here was contract law, not civil rights; CSS's contract with the city brought certain requirements that have nothing to do with the rights of gays to adopt.
 
Dec 2015
12,687
7,923
In Your Heart!
Being qualified under state law only means the agency may adopt a child out to the qualifying couple, not that it must do so. If it is a private religious organization that does not take public money (and I do not know whether this is the case), then it would seem it could act according to the dictates of its conscience. The issue here was contract law, not civil rights; CSS's contract with the city brought certain requirements that have nothing to do with the rights of gays to adopt.
Therefore, that's why CSS lost in the Federal Court for precisely that reason.
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
78,042
47,797
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
Therefore, that's why CSS lost in the Federal Court for precisely that reason.
Yes, because of contract enforcement, not civil rights. Of course, in the unlikely event an appeals court rules that such conditions in a contract are illegal/unconstitutional - "unlikely" because there is no right to a government contract - then that provision of the contract would be void and CSS could move forward as it pleases, at least until the contract runs out, and it would not be entitled to a renewal.