Posted on 10/27/2009 7:20:35 PM PDT by Rhonda Robinson
While organizing our filing system, I ran across my adoption papers. My mother gave them to me a couple of years ago for my own records. The cost of my adoption was a 300.00 donation to Catholic Charities in Chicago, I was six days old.
I am blessed to be in the family, in which I was placed. My mother tells me there were lots of rules to comply with. The agency wanted to make sure I had a stable and secure home.
In reality, no one can predict how a family will one day turn out. Ours certainly had its twists of fate as I was growing up. No agency inspections or criteria can predict the future or guarantee a happy life for a child. Although my parents did eventually divorce after almost two decades of marriage, I know that neither could have loved me more had I been born to them.
I have to wonder if tomorrow’s children will be so lucky.
On October 15th a bill (H.R. 3827) was introduced in the House of Representatives that would trump states’ rights to set adoption standards, and would effectively shut down religious based agencies.
The stated purpose of the bill is, “To prohibit discrimination in adoption or foster care placements based on the sexual orientation, gender identification, or marital status of any prospective adoptive or foster parent.”
The bill is penned as “Every Child Needs a Family” –well of course they do. But that is not the issue here. Because once again, the definition of “family” is the core issue, it has little to do with anything a child needs. This bill might more accurately be named, “Anyone can raise a child”.
Never before in history has it been socially acceptable for same sex partners to adopt children. The need for a family is natural, children in a same sex relationship is not.
As the definition of a family has been smeared and smudged into the political shade of gray, children have become the real life social experiments.
Take for example, Lisa Miller, who left the homosexual lifestyle, and her live-in girlfriend Janet Jenkins. She had a biological daughter named Isabella. Isabella was only 17 months old when her mommy left that lifestyle and became an evangelical Christian. Janet then sought full custody of Isabella, claiming she too was a parent.
Even though Janet never attempted to adopt Isabella at anytime, activist judges virtually created a law from the bench by declaring that Isabella indeed had two mommies. This woman, a stranger to Isabella, was given liberal unsupervised visitation rights.
Whose rights are protected here? The mother who gave birth? The little girl? No. Only a woman demanding her “right” to be a mother, for no other reason than she lived with the real mother at the time of the child’s birth.
This bill doesn’t protect children either. Again, it’s all about the demands of those who claim they have a right to what they can’t naturally produce. The bill states in part,
“(1) PROHIBITION- An entity that receives Federal assistance and is involved in adoption or foster care placements may not--
(A) categorically deny to any person the opportunity to become an adoptive or a foster parent solely on the basis of the sexual orientation, gender identification, or marital status of the person;
(B) delay or deny the placement of a child for adoption or into foster care, or otherwise discriminate in making a placement decision, solely on the basis of the sexual orientation, gender identification, or marital status of any prospective adoptive or foster parent; or
(C) deny or limit the parental rights of an adoptive parent based on the adoptive parent’s sexual orientation, gender identification, or marital status.”
Gender identification can’t even be considered part of the adoption process. Notice that it is all about the “parental rights” of an adoptive parent. This “parent” hasn’t yet adopted the child and (he/she) has parental rights.
Lisa is still fighting for her parental rights. She’s fighting for Isabella to have the right to normal family life. If “Every Child Needs a Family” passes into law, who will be there to see that a child’s natural right to a father and a mother will be protected?
As I said, no agency, or government can create a perfect family outcome, but really, what every child needs, is not even considered.
You, rabscuttle385, on the other hand write something I would only expect from a jerk.
“Oops! Page Not Found”
Please stop by the FReepathon thread and give it a bump. If you haven’t donated yet, please give it some thought.
Thank you!
Whoops, I’m not able to connect with your link ...
What???
How is post 2 that of a jerk?
Well, if supporting FR makes one a jerk, then count me in...
;-)
If there's anyone being a jerk on FR, it's you.
All I did was welcome an obvious newbie to FR and suggest that the newbie leave a donation for FR, since folks like me are tired of carrying all the dead weight.
If suggesting that newbies help in financing FR's operations makes me a jerk, then so be it.
It’s a Sorry, Charlie, kind of thing...
Good article. Thanks for posting.
This legislation could encourage more troubled women to opt for abortion. I wouldn’t doubt the folks who penned it had this in mind.
The liberal approach to unplanned pregnancy is an abomination.
Pray for them.
We’re all tired of supporting FR, as the latest next generation of blog-pimps post their links to generate hits.
They don’t care to get involved in any sort of discussion. They just want the hits.
HARP’s
Hit And Run Posters.
Stay the course, Rab....
You know, I really hadn’t thought of that. You could be right.
Rats. That’s what happens when you try to do too many things at once. I’ll see if I can fix that. Sorry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.