Bob McDonnell | Gay Adoption | Human Rights Campaign | News

Watch: Anti-Gay VA Delegate and HRC Rep. Debate Gay Adoption

Vagayadoption

Anti-gay delegate Bob Marshall, who is leading the charge against adoption by gay couples in Virginia, debates Human Rights Campaign Family Project Director Ellen Kahn about a proposal that would allow such adoptions.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Says Marshall: "The primary problem here is that Governor Kaine, and now...Governor McDonnell's office hasnt done anything about it so far....is that they want private adoption agencies like Catholic Charities to be compelled to accept applications from individuals whose behavior constitutes a violation of a 6,000-year-old moral code ...There is no real justification for imposing this on private agencies who believe [homosexuality] is a disordered behavior."

Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell indicated earlier today that he opposes adoption regulations proposed by his predecessor Tim Kaine in 2009 that would allow gay and lesbian couples to adopt children in the state. Currently, married couples, and single men and women regardless of sexual orientation can adopt. 

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Earlier...
VA Gov. Bob McDonnell: I Don't Want Gay Couples Adopting Children [tr]
Governor Bob McDonnell Considers Measure Allowing Gay Couples to Adopt Children in Virginia [tr]

Should Gay Couples Have The Right To Adopt Children in Virginia?: MyFoxDC.com

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Showing my ignorance here, but do "private adoption agencies" receive any state funding?

    Posted by: Harrison | Apr 5, 2011 8:34:35 PM


  2. There is no real justification of imposing their (allegedly) 6000 year old barbarism on society

    Posted by: Steve | Apr 5, 2011 9:05:16 PM


  3. aghhh the electronics tell me this man is drowning in his his own hatred

    Posted by: John Normile | Apr 5, 2011 9:25:46 PM


  4. If they're not getting public money, i don't see why religious adoption agencies can't set their own standards. But if they are that's a different story.

    Posted by: 11 | Apr 5, 2011 9:28:19 PM


  5. she really handed it back to him-good for ms. kahn!

    the anchor woman was surprisingly supportive of ms. kahn's POV as well which i found pretty refreshing.

    Posted by: alguien | Apr 5, 2011 9:28:19 PM


  6. Alguien - That's the DC FOX affiliate, and DC itself is a pretty liberal city. The vast majority of our newscasters are at the very least fair-minded, and a couple of the networks (FOX included) have gay reporters on staff.

    Posted by: Billy | Apr 5, 2011 9:53:50 PM


  7. Okay, wait a minute, why would anyone trust an agency related to the Catholic church with children?!

    Posted by: Rich | Apr 5, 2011 10:08:44 PM


  8. Hinduism is a violation of that same moral code. So is Buddhism. So are Judaism and Christianity, depending on which phase of that moral code you want to focus on.

    So can religious adoption agencies discriminate on the basis of religion? No, they can't. Singling out just us and no one else for discrimination is bigotry.

    Posted by: BobN | Apr 5, 2011 10:31:01 PM


  9. If I were still able to abide living in VA---which I did for longer than I care to admit---and I really wanted a child, I'd just say I were straight. Even if they came to check out out my house, I don't think anything would scream gay. Hell, if I wanted a child that badly, I wouldn't want to raise it in VA. But if I did, I could even create a fake history of hetero romances and screw them over at their insane game.

    Would they try to take the kid away a few years down the road were I to "come clean"? Were it not for the fact that a child could suffer awful consequences, it's an interesting legal question. Or what if I said I was straight when I adopted but then realized my true nature a few weeks, months, or years later? Unless it were an open adoption (with the birth mother or parents still involved), I doubt there's endless follow-up. They lack the resources; they're only rich in hate.

    The bigger point is, Screw Virginia and 95% of its dinosaur politicians (dinosaur not necessarily because of age, but because of viewpoints). I'd be willing to be that he said "6,000 years" because he believes that's when the Earth was formed, like so many anti-knowledge wingnuts.

    Posted by: Paul R | Apr 6, 2011 1:15:02 AM


  10. As Newt Gingrich once postulated, I think it's long due that the Catholic Church return to running orphanages. Imagine the "Godly" work those Catholic clergy could accomplish.

    Posted by: pat | Apr 6, 2011 2:11:30 AM


  11. Just the facts ma'am:

    1. Just by mentioning a "6,000 year old moral code" says he's a Fundamentalist. Fundies are NOT Roman Catholic; they treat Catholicism like they treat homosexuality.

    2. The vast majority of Roman Catholics, both of the cloth and laymen, think of this pope like the last one (he's nuts). Remember, this is the same guy that is against the pill (how many Catholic women have never used the pill?). And every gay religious retreat I've ever been on has been hosted by Roman Catholic clergy (and no, they don't try to change us. In fact they preach that we're just fine the way we are.).

    Posted by: Brad | Apr 6, 2011 6:30:39 AM


  12. Okay I live in VA and I'm not sure exactly what's going on with this whole thing. Currently, gays can adopt in Virginia at all state funded adoption agencies, or agencies that receive any Federal grants. My friends just adopted a little girl last year.

    What this bill is speaking to are those agencies that are privately funded and religious agencies that don't receive federal or state monies.

    To force them to do this would violate the "free exercise" clause of the First Admendment. Unlike hospitals that must receive funding from outside agencies to stay afloat (like Bon Secour), these are privately funded and therefore the invisible hand of the marketplace can sort this out rather than mess with Constitutional rights (something I don't like).

    Don't support those adoption agencies (and its not just Catholic agencies, its Jewish agencies in this state, and others as well) and support those private agencies that do by giving them your money.

    Posted by: Rin | Apr 6, 2011 7:36:53 AM


  13. "6000 year old moral code" = the earth is flat, you will fall off the edge if you wander too far away.

    Posted by: BartB | Apr 6, 2011 9:08:20 AM


  14. How is it decided if a child will go to a religious adoption agency or become a ward of the state? In essence the parent is giving up their right to a child when they place their kid up for adoption. Why would the state allow, regardless of funding or not funding, an agency to dictate who that kid can be adopted by based on a moral belief? The state has ultimate authority over any and all children up for adoption because they children are still US Citizens and therefore the Constitution is law of the land not 6000 year old garbage.

    Posted by: Andrew | Apr 6, 2011 11:08:53 AM


  15. Andrew,

    usually the agencies either work as a pass through or the mother giving the child up makes that decision (state versus private).

    Anyone can adopt a child by putting an ad and speaking to an individual who is pregnant.

    It is the biological parent, not the state who makes that decision--including whether they release the child to an agency, private agency, or go between two party.

    They also have (I think) 72 hours to reverse the situation.

    If they child is given as a ward of the state (less common because the mother receives no monies for the hospitalization) then the state decides upon suitable parents who have been through their programs.

    Posted by: Rin | Apr 6, 2011 2:51:21 PM


  16. @Billy-which reporters/network affiliates? Philip Stewart? Topper? Shame on me for not knowing!

    Posted by: K | Apr 6, 2011 4:30:29 PM


  17. I don't understand that clown's saying that morality doesn't change. What rock has he been living under?

    I'm so damn sick of illiterate conservatives.

    Posted by: Danny | Apr 6, 2011 5:30:58 PM


  18. and how is it that gay couples are less desirable parents than single gay persons? I'm really scratching my head on this one. This same restriction went by the wayside in Florida last year I think.

    Posted by: Danny | Apr 6, 2011 5:33:46 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Wingnut Cindy Jacobs Suggests Gays in the Military are Responsible for Recent Earthquakes and Tsunami« «