Posted on 03/05/2006 1:42:09 PM PST by Diana in Wisconsin
Ohio state Sen. Bob Hagan has for decades been one of the nation's most progressive-minded and intellectually adventurous state legislators. Imagine Madison Democratic state Rep. Mark Pocan with a Senate seat and two more decades of legislative experience.
So it comes as no surprise that Hagan, a Democrat from Youngstown, would blaze a new policymaking trail with a plan to reform adoption laws.
Hagan's proposal: Ban Republicans from adopting children.
In an e-mail dispatched to fellow legislators last week, the senator announced his plan to "introduce legislation in the near future that would ban households with one or more Republican voters from adopting children or acting as foster parents."
Explaining that "policymakers in (Ohio) have ignored this growing threat to our communities for far too long," Hagan wrote: "Credible research exists that strongly suggests that adopted children raised in Republican households, though significantly wealthier than their Democrat-raised counterparts, are more at risk for developing emotional problems, social stigmas, inflated egos, an alarming lack of tolerance for others they deem different than themselves, and an air of overconfidence to mask their insecurities.
"In addition," the Democrat noted, "I have spoken to many adopted children raised in Republican households who have admitted that 'well, it's just plain boring most of the time.'"
Hagan acknowledges that the "credible research" to which he refers cannot be quantified. But that should not be a problem, he explains, as a bill proposed by Republican state Rep. Ron Hood, R-Ashville, which would prohibit adoptions of children by gay and lesbian couples, suffers from a similar deficiency.
Since Hood's homophobic legislation is not backed by evidence that gay and lesbian parents are in any way detrimental to children, Hagan argues, why should his Republican-phobic legislation have to be grounded in anything more than emotions or ideology?
Hood's proposal, one of many similar measures being pushed around the country in a move by Republicans to stir up their voter base in advance of the 2006 and 2008 elections, would bar children from being placed for adoption or foster care in homes where the prospective parent or anyone else living in the house is gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered.
Hagan has no co-sponsors for his bill at this point, a circumstance that may have something to do with the fact that the legislation has been proposed, as he says, with "tongue planted firmly in cheek."
But Hagan does have a point for legislators in Ohio and other states who are wrestling with questions of whether to discriminate against upstanding and responsible citizens whose sexuality does not meet with the approval of the homophobic wing of the Republican Party.
"We need to see what we are doing," explained Hagan, who notes that, while Republicans seek to score cheap political points, there are close to 3,000 Ohio children awaiting adoption and close to 20,000 in foster care.
The conservative Cincinnati Enquirer agreed.
Noting that "Hood's offensive and discriminatory bill would hurt, not help, children," the usually pro-Republican newspaper observed in an editorial that "perhaps Hagan's modest proposal gave some folks a taste, however fleeting, of what it would be like to be labeled as a class somehow incapable, unworthy or unacceptable."
But Hagan has the best counter of all to the repeated attempts by Republican legislators to fake up issues involving gays and lesbians from constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriage like the one Wisconsin legislators were debating this week, to their new nationwide push on the adoption front. Speaking of Hood's proposal, Hagan says, "It flies in the face of reason when we need to reform our education system and address health care and environmental issues that we put energy and wasted time (into) legislation like this."
What a fear-mongering jerk. What an anti-hetero.
Check it out! Nichols writes an editorial as if this is valid legislation! Yeesh!
This jerk needs to be subjected to a "valid recall" and subsequent expulsion.
With that logic, there should be no restrictions whatsoever. Just letter any old pervert adopt children.
Okay, Mom and I can't adopt any more kids. Ping
bump
Too bad the "conservative" Cincinnati Enquirer won't allow any of their articles to be posted here.
What a maroon!
PING
Whaddu think?
I think that a ban on gays adopting children will play out as a losing proposition for those backing the ban.
A satirical flight of fancy, but very in ter esting...
"with 'tongue planted firmly in cheek.'"
I see that. The author acts as if this is real legislation though, to make his straw man arguments for gay adoption.
Not much.
Don't get too bent out of shape about this. Idiocy abounds.
Wouldn't be surprised if the Enquirer sued Madison.com for calling them that -- LOL.
You know, Brent Bozell could do us all a favor by, besides writing about MSM, starting a rating system similar to Consumers Union or the ADA/CU ratings. Rate papers and TV stations on quality of content, fairness, and so on. It could be multidimensional: the WSJ, for example, would rate as high quality, high tone, and slanted Republican but not social conservative, anti-statist, or Randite/objectivist/radical-capitalist. Some way to capture all that -- so you could discern RiNO news outlets and distinguish them from really conservative ones like the Indianapolis Star and the Manchester Union-Leader.
[Article] Since Hood's homophobic legislation is not backed by evidence...
LOL, I thought this was a news article until I got to this part...
Well, actually, the first sentence was a dead canary:
Ohio state Sen. Bob Hagan has for decades been one of the nation's most progressive-minded and intellectually adventurous state legislators. [Emphasis added.]
I wouldn't be opposed to a gay person adopting a child if for some reason that person was in other regards sufficiently better-qualified than other prospective adoptees.
For example, if a child is orphaned and the only surviving relative that wants the child happens to be gay, I would believe that placing the child with such a relative may be better than placement with a stranger.
That having been said, I find myself wondering if there is in some places a de facto ban on conservatives adopting children from state agencies, since there are waiting lists both of people seeking to adopt and children needing to be adopted.
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.