Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's be careful about accusing the government with discrimination when gays' applications for adoption are turned down. These agencies are looking out for the best interests of the child, and without going off on a tangent, it needs to be said that research is beginning to show that some children are damaged psychologically from the lack of a traditional mom-dad family structure.
This is different. This is the government discriminating.
No it isn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
P.S. yes there would be private agencies that might discriminate
So why did you categorically assume that it was only the government? Could it be that your interest was solely to dodge a repudiation of a perspective you preferred by trying to deceive us into thinking you had a legitimate point when you didn't?
Private adoption outpaces government adoption in this country. In 2007, only 37% of adoptions went through the foster care system. The rest of the adoptions were either private, domestic adoptions, or international adoptions. Even excluding the international adoptions, which admittedly is beyond reasonable control, private exceeded public by over 15,000 adoptions. [Source: NSAP, 2007.]
So why did you categorically assume that it was only the government? Could it be that your interest was solely to dodge a repudiation of a perspective you preferred by trying to deceive us into thinking you had a legitimate point when you didn't?
I wasn't trying to make a point.
Quote:
Private adoption outpaces government adoption in this country. In 2007, only 37% of adoptions went through the foster care system. The rest of the adoptions were either private, domestic adoptions, or international adoptions. Even excluding the international adoptions, which admittedly is beyond reasonable control, private exceeded public by over 15,000 adoptions. [Source: NSAP, 2007.]
And I don't think the government should discriminate against gay couples. I would hope private ones wouldn't either and I'd bet most wouldn't.
To be clear, you do understand there is a difference between refusing to adopt to any and all gay people because they are gay versus willing to adopt to straight people, but refusing to adopt to specific straight people for specific reasons not related to their being straight?
Hey, guess what? They refuse to adopt to convicted criminals, people who have insufficient income and/or a lack of an appropriate place for a child to live, poor employment history, etc., etc.
Do you see any of those people who were turned down screaming and wailing discrimination and threatening to kill them over that or burn down their businesses? NO, you do not.
You see that difference? Right?
Gays need to grow the hell up and work with businesses that will work with them just like everyone else (at least reasonable people who don't think they're so damn "special") does. I and many other people don't go to a restaurant or mechanic that gives us inadequate service. We go to businesses that provide good service without making a big stink over it, or threatening to kill people and burn down their businesses.
But gay people are being denied by adoption services. If our society cannot manage fairness and justice with regard to relatively innocuous matters, how can we ever expect to rectify the truly critical institutionalized discrimination?
Wow, that was a quick change of subject, away from RFRAs and how they supposedly 'spread hate.'
The question is, if RFRA's are a license to discriminate and spread hate, where is the discrimination and hate caused by the federal and state RFRAs ? Are there thousands or hundreds or even dozens of businesses who've been using those laws to discriminate against gays or blacks or any other groups ?
Wow, that was a quick change of subject, away from RFRAs and how they supposedly 'spread hate.'
The question is, if RFRA's are a license to discriminate and spread hate, where is the discrimination and hate caused by the federal and state RFRAs ? Are there thousands or hundreds or even dozens of businesses who've been using those laws to discriminate against gays or blacks or any other groups ?
They just make this stuff up.
He cannot name a single instance of how a state or federal RFRA law has resulted in a homosexual being antagonized or mistreated in any way. But he can keep repeating this baseless assertion, again and again, even though he knows it is not true.
Hey, guess what? They refuse to adopt to convicted criminals, people who have insufficient income and/or a lack of an appropriate place for a child to live, poor employment history, etc., etc.
Do you see any of those people who were turned down screaming and wailing discrimination and threatening to kill them over that or burn down their businesses? NO, you do not.
You see that difference? Right?
Gays need to grow the hell up and work with businesses that will work with them just like everyone else (at least reasonable people who don't think they're so damn "special") does. I and many other people don't go to a restaurant or mechanic that gives us inadequate service. We go to businesses that provide good service without making a big stink over it, or threatening to kill people and burn down their businesses.
Enough, already! Keep that special kind of gay hatred for others to yourselves.
Being discriminating and being discriminated against are two totally different things.
Adoption criteria should include the above, it should not include immutable characteristics like race or sexual orientation. All men are created equal. Right?
Being discriminating and being discriminated against are two totally different things.
The government cannot discriminate. Closely held private corporations have First Amendment and/or RFRA rights. SCOTUS has already ruled on that in the Hobby Lobby case.
Get over it and work with a closely held private corporation agency/business that will work with gays, if that's what you wish. Period.
Then that 'someone else' should not be in a business that caters to the public.
What you are essentially arguing is "whose freedom is BETTER, or MORE DESERVING, or MORE MORAL"?
Equality under the law. Ever hear of that?
To enact laws that deny a specific group or groups of citizens their rights is un-American and unconstitutional.
That is exactly correct, which is why it is an outrage for law makers to make a law denying an individual their rights. Groups have no rights other than the collective rights each individual of a particular group possesses.
Some of you have bought into this false construct of "group rights", as if individuals forming a collective enjoy greater rights which trump an individual's rights. That is pure nonsense.
Freedom isn't always convenient, such as freedom of speech. In order to preserve my right of freedom of speech, I must be willing to accept yours too, even if I don't agree with what you have to say. It is the act of accepting your freedom of speech which ultimately protects my own. And by the same token, should I support efforts to deny you your right, in so doing, I destroy my own.Whether I agree or disagree with what you have to say is irrelevant to the point of your right to speak.
By the same measure, your right to associate with, or do business with someone is your individual right, and the reasons you may or may not choose to do so is your business and your choice. Let's take a hypothetical situation as an example .... let's say you own a construction firm, and I want to hire you to build my company a structure. You are an animal rights advocate, and a devout vegan, believing it is wrong to kill animals for consumption. The structure I want you to build for me will serve as a processing plant, slaughterhouse. This to you is in direct conflict with your deep seated and fundamental position on the treatment of animals. Should I be able to FORCE you to build my structure? And if your answer is yes, then what happens to your rights, if I can force you to work for me? Should my rights superceed yours? OF COURSE NOT. If you are not free to choose who you work for or provide services to, then you are by no means free at all.
Let's try another .... let's say you own a cafe', and I come in to eat .... problem is, I'm not real big on bathing, and I smell horrendous!! I smell so bad that nobody wants to be near me, and people just leave the moment I come in. Since I live just a block away, I choose to come in every single day, right at the busiest time ... lunch hour. And each day, your cafe empties of all your other customers who cannot sit and eat their lunch because of how badly I smell. You are losing tons of business because of me and my poor bathing habits. Should you have the right to deny me service ... ask me to leave, or should you be forced to serve me, while losing all of your other paying customers? You see, this is not about who has greater rights ... stinky me, or those several others with sensitive noses ... this is about YOUR right to protect your business, and your livelihood, therefore, in order to do that, you MUST possess the right to choose who you will serve in your cafe'.
Furthermore, it doesn't matter what your "reason" is for refusing to serve me, whether it's because I smell so bad, or just look dirty, or perhaps I'm just loud and obnoxious and tend to annoy everyone around me. Perhaps your cafe is a Jewish deli ... and I like to wear my NAZI teeshirt with the big swastika on it? The reasons why I might be offensive and annoying to your other patrons is endless, but irrelevant. You must possess the right to deny service to anyone for any reason .... some reasons might be valid, some reasons might be ridiculous or even prejudicial .... it doesn't matter ... it's the right, not the reason that is at the heart of the matter. I do not have the right to dismiss your reason as invalid or unfair as a means to deny you your freedom of choice.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
