Reverend Lovejoy: "I know one of you is responsible for this. So repeat after me. If I withhold the truth, may I go straight to Hell where I will eat naught but burning hot coals and drink naught but burning hot cola [all the kids recite in unison] where fiery demons will punch me in the back, where my soul will be chopped into confetti and be strewn upon a parade of murderers and single mothers..."
Something truly shocking happened in Arkansas last week. 57% of the voters passed a law that will forbid unmarried couples from adopting or providing foster care for anyone under 18.
So starting January 1, if grandma or aunt has a live-in boyfriend, they cannot provide foster care or adopt their own grandchild or nephew. But grandma and auntie are "collateral damage" because the openly-stated targets of this law were gay and lesbian couples.
If you think that the welfare of the child is the purpose behind the law - these groups had their day in court to prove any link between child welfare and gay parents and they failed.
An Arkansas trial court decided, and the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed, that there is no rational relationship between gay or lesbian parents and the health, safety, and welfare of the foster children. According to the Arkansas courts, the facts demonstrated that there was no correlation between the health, welfare, and safety of foster children and a foster parent who was gay or lesbian or who resided in a household with a gay or lesbian, and the Arkansas Department of Human Services admitted that no known complaints were ever made in those situations.
They can't prove it's harmful to kids, it just contradicts their moral code. Truly mind boggling. It's yet another disappointment to learn that Focus on the Family are the malevolent moral police behind this bigoted law that actually reduces the available foster homes and adoptive parents in Arkansas. Given the simultaneous push from these organizations of adoption instead of abortion, this strikes me as perverse.
I hold out hope that this new law will be found unconstitutional. If you don't have to prove a connection to the welfare of the child, then it's simply the majority opinion that determines who are fit parents. Right now, your opinion may happen to be the majority, but that could change.
"That the desires of the majority of the people are often for injustice and inhumanity against the minority, is demonstrated by every page of the history of the whole world" - John Adams
5 comments:
Apparently they would prefer that kids in foster care be shuffled from one foster and group home to the next instead of being with a loving family that would provide support and safety. This all because of sexual orientation.
Who are they to put boundaries on what constitutes a "good" parent? I'm sure that if they had done research they would find the stories of many well adjusted children who are thriving in a good home...one that just happens to be with a same sex couple.
Excellent point Jenny. I am sure that the numbers are staggering as to the number of children victimized, abused, or simply unloved in a heterosexual household (dare I even say a heterosexual christian household). I find it laughable that the group behind this amendment believes they have the corner on what makes a good family.
The structure of this law is unusual. Instead of defining what is best for children, it lops off a segment from even being considered. But it does so in an awkward way that is both over-inclusive (prohibits a heterosexual relative who lives with an unmarried boyfriend) and under-inclusive (because it relies on sexual cohabitation, a single gay or lesbian could adopt):
"A minor may not be adopted or placed in a foster home if the individual seeking to adopt or to serve as a foster parent is cohabiting with a sexual partner outside of a marriage which is valid under the constitution and laws of this state."
Poorly conceived and poorly drafted. But I would really be interested if anyone who believes a gay or lesbian couple should not be allowed to adopt has any credible evidence that gay and lesbian parents are a threat to children's health or welfare.
might "turn the child gay" whatever that means.
Two of my kids are adopted. One international and one domestic. It's interesting that China has now also banned gays and singles as candidates for parenthood. What's next for Arkansas? Will that government start taking kids from parents after they divorce and take a new live-in lover? If not, why not?
Regarding Focus on the Family, how ironic that their mission is to protect the family. Apparently if life is unfair and takes your parents, you no longer qualify for their protection. Dr. Dobson, focus on your own damn family.
Post a Comment