Posted on 02/17/2006 7:04:20 PM PST by Stellar Dendrite
Judge: Lesbian couple can be foster parents By JOHN SHULTZ The Kansas City Star
Missouri cannot block an openly gay Kansas City woman’s efforts to become a foster parent because of her sexual orientation, a Jackson County judge ruled today.
In her decision, Circuit Judge Sandra Midkiff ruled the state arbitrarily denied Lisa Johnston’s petition to become a foster parent because she is a lesbian.
Johnston and partner Dawn Roginski sought to become foster parents in 2003, but their efforts were stymied by an unwritten state social services policy prohibiting gays from becoming foster parents.
The state argued that Johnston lacked the “reputable character” required by state guidelines for approving foster parents because she was in violation of Missouri’s anti-sodomy law.
Midkiff dismissed the argument, citing a 2003 Supreme Court ruling that found a similar law in Texas to be unconstitutional. If the sodomy law was unenforceable, Midkiff ruled, Missouri had no legal basis for denying Johnston’s application. Johnston and Roginiski were found to be exceptional candidates otherwise by the state.
“I’m overwhelmed with joy,” said Johnston, who had yet to discuss the ruling with her attorney. “I feel like we were heard.”
The American Civil Liberties Union had taken up Johnston’s case.
The point is that any foster child this might bring into their home, doesn't have many options. A group home is the most likely. Physical abuse and rapes are quite common in a lot of group home situations. They are pretty scary places. A couple of nice lesbian women might seem pretty nice comparatively.
Not good. And Missouri people voted 87% for REAL marriage, IIRC.
Just another example of Judges Gone Wild, or Nazgul in action.
Because these two women aren't looking to adopt they are becoming foster parents. There is a lack of quality foster parents in most places and if these women are kind and provide a safe place for these children it is probably far better then the alternative.
Seems good on the outside but what about the exposure to that lifestyle I would consider it a form of child abuse !
They are approved as foster parents, NOT as adoptive parents. There are thousands of foster children available, and many are available for adoption. Many have physical or emotional problems, so most parents looking to adopt are not interested. They still need foster homes and good ones are pretty rare.
You get the camel's nose in the tent...
That's the way this is going to work. In no way do I think it's a good idea to let gays to begin adopting kids.
>>>Boy, are those kids lucky. I'm sure they'll grow up to be quite normal.>>>
Yes, because we know shuffling kids from orphanage to group home back to three or four different families will do them so good.
I agree. There is alot of abuse, rape and drug abuse in alot of the group homes. Even a lesbian couple can offer somewhat stable home, then so be it. I don't believe, as some here do, that every homosexual is a pedophile. That is like saying every hetersexual isn't.
>>>That's okay. You don't have to answer my question. It was a toughy. Let me try another one. See how much luck I have this time. Do you believe there is any sexual act that could be classified as "perverted"? or "weird"? or, heaven forbid "immoral"?>>>
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? I don't see children being taken from parents of swingers, strippers or people who *gasp* partake in marital sodomy (which was illegal until a few years ago BTW) There are porn stars as parents for crying out loud!
>>>uh huh. and...(speaking slowly) you don't think a woman who wants to have sexual relations with another woman has a slight mental problem?>>>
Personally, I think you have a mental problem. Jeez, you need some therapy.
This really irritates me. Lately I have health concerns, but for about ten years I wanted very badly to adopt a child---or just to be a foster parent. I was both motivated and qualified. My legal history was immaculate; I don't even jaywalk. Financially, modesty restrains me from disclosing how well off I was, but for sure I was a certifiable millionaire. I was a churchgoing, devout Catholic. I was widowed and had never been divorced. My reputation was without blemish, my medical record was blank and my credit rating was in the stratosphere. Heck, I even looked good.
Problem? Oh yes. Having no husband was a problem.
Apparently I'd have had better luck if I'd taken a lesbian lover.
Bad precedent. The door to full-scale adoption "rights" is swinging wider by the day.
Yeah, and bringing a society to accept having children out-of-wedlock isn't going to influence every couple to have them. But we have gone from about 2% in the white population to 20%. And 24% to 66% in the black population in a period of just a few decades.
I still hold that you don't cave on these issues. You create more problems than you solve.
>>>For myself, I would not want a faggy father or a dykey mom.
I don't think that we should force that fate on orphans either. It's cruel.>>>
So take them all in, since you want to deny these children ANY family, surely you have the means and ability to provide them with a family, right?
All the hypocrites on this thread make me sick. They want to decide that these children have NO family as opposed to a family they disagree with. I am not saying this is the optimal way, but damnit, where are all the heterosexual couples wanting to be foster parents?
But what is your solution in the mean time? With the children that are out there. You (I assume) are against abortion, but yet people here want the children to be born and not be given the opportunity for love. All for a political agenda.
Sad.
Let me guess ... she wants to be a foster "parent" for little girls ... .
That is a shame!!
In Georgia, they allow single people to foster and adopt. Maybe you should head down this way! I bet you'd make a great mom!
Depends on what you mean by "good," nicht wahr?
And that abuse would take the form of what? I don't see a lot of people showing absolutely any interest in the welfare of foster children until someone brings up gay foster parents, then suddenly everyone is outraged. If there were enough quality heterosexual foster parents to go around I think a good case could be made that they should always take priority over singles or gays. But given the lack of regular couples I don't see what choice the states have.
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.