Posted on 01/29/2004 4:47:50 PM PST by gobucks
From the 11th Circut:
*snip*
"Two years later, in light of the length of Does stay in Loftons household, DCF offered Lofton the compromise of becoming Does legal guardian. This arrangement would have allowed Doe to leave the foster care system and DCF supervision.
However, because it would have cost Lofton over $300 a month in lost foster care subsidies and would have jeopardized Does Medicaid coverage, Lofton declined the guardianship option unless it was an interim stage toward adoption. Under Florida law, DCF could not accommodate this condition, and the present litigation ensued."
*snip*
CONCLUSION:
"We exercise great caution we asked to take sides in an ongoing public policy debate, such as the current one over the compatibility over homosexual conduct with the duties of adoptive parenthood." See Reno, 507 U.S. at 315, 113 S. Ct. at 1454; Schall v. Martin, 467 U.S. 253, 281, 104 5. Ct. 2403, 2419 (1984).
The State of Florida has made the determination that it is not in the best interests of its displaced children to be adopted by individuals who engage in current, voluntary homosexual activity, Cox, 627 So. 2d at 1215, and we have found nothing in the Constitution that forbids this policy judgment.
Thus, any argument that the Florida legislature was misguided in its decision is one of legislative policy, not constitutional law. The legislature is the proper forum for this debate, and we do not sit as a superlegislature to award by judicial decree what was not achievable by political consensus. Thomasson v. Perry, 80 F.3d 915, 923 (4th Cir. 1996). The judgment ofthe district court is AFFIRMED.
(Excerpt) Read more at ca11.uscourts.gov ...
I'd add that it also establishes precedent against gay marriage.
So we can't jail 'em, so what? We, the People, retain power to refuse to recognize 'em in every other manner of public policy.
Thus, any argument that the Florida legislature was misguided in its decision is one of legislative policy, not constitutional law. The legislature is the proper forum for this debate, and we do not sit as a superlegislature to award by judicial decree what was not achievable by political consensus.
Excellent, excellent news!
This is 180 degrees opposite of what Democrats want, and 180 degrees opposite of how scumbag liberal activist (Democrat) courts like the 9th Circus (and recently, with O'Connor's rapid decline, the US Supreme Court) routinely rule. Rulings like this one give me hope that the nation can still be saved.
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.