Gay Men Lose Challenge to Florida Gay Adoption Ban

AP ^ | 01/28/04 | AP

[Kieri]

Gay Men Lose Challenge to Florida Gay Adoption Ban

By Catherine Wilson Associated Press Writer Published: Jan 28, 2004

MIAMI (AP) - Four gay men lost a federal challenge Wednesday to the only blanket state law banning homosexuals from adopting children, a statute passed at the height of Anita Bryant's anti-homosexual campaign. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the men, who are foster parents seeking to adopt children in their care despite the 1977 law.

"Obviously we're crushed," said Paul Cates with the American Civil Liberties Union's Lesbian and Gay Rights Project.

Gov Jeb Bush said he was "pleased" by the ruling. It validates Florida's contention "that it is in the best interest of adoptive children, many of whom come from troubled and unstable backgrounds, to be placed in a home anchored both by a father and a mother," he said in a statement.

Florida is the only state in the nation with a complete ban on adoption by gays, whether married or single. The law linked to the movement led by Bryant has withstood several challenges in state court.

Florida argued the state has a right to legislate its "moral disapproval of homosexuality" and its belief that children need a married parent for healthy development.

"We exercise great caution when asked to take sides in an ongoing public policy debate," Judge Stanley Birch wrote in the unanimous decision by the three-judge panel. "Any argument that the Florida Legislature was misguided in its decision is one of legislative policy, not constitutional law."

Mathew Staver, president of Liberty Counsel, a conservative civil liberties legal group, hailed the decision. "In this age of judicial activism, it is refreshing to see a court assume its proper role and allow the people to set family policy," he said.

An after-hours call to the attorney who argued the state's case was not immediately returned.

The decision comes as states react to court rulings favoring gay marriage and a Supreme Court decision in June striking down laws criminalizing gay sex.

"We think the court is wrong in thinking that the Constitution lets the government assume that sexual orientation has anything to do with good parenting," the ACLU's Cates said.

The ACLU expects to take at least a week before deciding how to proceed. It could ask the full appeals court to consider the issue.

Edward Schiappa, a University of Minnesota law professor who follows gay rights issues, believes the case is destined for Supreme Court review next year. He believes the state will have a hard time defending the law there because of its inconsistent policy allowing gay foster parents while banning gay adoptive parents.

"This has become an extraordinarily hot political button," he said.

AP-ES-01-28-04 2053EST

[Pikachu_Dad]

Good.

It is curious that the ACLU will spend so much time on 'gay' mens rights and no time at all on 'regular' mens rights.

Well it would be if they were not a leftist organization.

[Enterprise]

Thank God this wasn't the 9th circus in California. But have patience, and the 9th circus will find a case to issue an opposite opinion and it will have to go to the Supremes, where we will get another 5-4 split in favor of more enlightened perversion.

[jla]

Good news ping

[GladesGuru]

ACLU isn't just leftist - as I remember, they were originally funded by the old USSR to defend Communists in America.

"The apple falleth not far from the tree."

[Polycarp IV]

Thanks!

The Vatican document "Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons" denounces gay couples adopting children.

"Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such (homosexual) unions would actually mean doing violence to these children ... (placing) them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development."

Ping. (As usual, if you would like to be added to or removed from my "conservative Catholics" ping list, just send me a FReepmail. Please realize that some of my "ping" posts are long.)

[VaBthang4]

HALLELUJAH!!!

[King Black Robe]

Thank God.

[little jeremiah]

Good news! I love it!

Homosexual Agenda [being slightly pushed back] Ping...

Happy day, I love it when homosexuals don't get what they want on a silver platter. Thanks to those who didn't bend over backwards (or would it be forwards?) to the ACLU creeps and their patrons, the "gay" activists.

If anyone wants on or off this ping list, inform me and I shall forthwith do thy bidding.

Thinking caps on yet?

[EdReform]

Florida argued the state has a right to legislate its "moral disapproval of homosexuality" and its belief that children need a married parent for healthy development.

Bump & Ping!

[pogo101]

Paging Justice Kennedy. Paging Justice Kennedy.

[jimkress]

These homosexuals are not gay, especially today.

[gieriscm]

Amazing. Sanity prevails in Florida.

[IronJack]

the state will have a hard time defending the law there because of its inconsistent policy allowing gay foster parents while banning gay adoptive parents.

Uh ... the solution here seems obvious ...

[GrandMoM]

to the ACLU creeps and their patrons, the "gay" activists.....or as others would call it "GAY MAFIA"

[IronJack]

the state has a right to legislate its "moral disapproval of homosexuality"

That is probably the most compelling statement in this decision. If this is upheld, think of how powerful a weapon has just been added to sanity's arsenal.

[Salvation]

Catholic Church bump!

[FormerLib]

"Obviously we're crushed," said Paul Cates with the American Civil Liberties Union's Lesbian and Gay Rights Project.

That's some of the best news that I've heard in a long time. There are going to be a lot of Americans walking around with smiles on their faces thanks to this ruling!

[Herodotus]

I would rather have two gay men adopt and raise to a proper conservative Christian manhood an otherwise forgotten boy than Britney Spears and her flavor of the month marry, divorce, marry, divorce, reproduce, abandon and forget about children. At least _some_ group of people is thinking about all the children in this country.

[upchuck]

IMHO, queers, fagots, lesbos, transgendered whatevers, et. al. should not be allowed near anyone less than 21 years of age.

It really amazes me what just 2-3% of the population has been able to do.

Truth be told, it makes me sick.