Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill against gay couples

[TheProgressivePatriot]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

Yet another manifestation of rightwing fear, ignorance, bigotry, and hate.

“The U.S. Supreme Court last June reversed an Arkansas Supreme Court ruling and ordered all states to treat same-sex couples the same as heterosexual couples in the issuance of birth certificates. This and other court rulings have made adoption by same-sex couples legal in all 50 states.” ibid

Yet another manifestation of the right’s contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and the rule of law.

And once again, you show everyone that you know NOTHING about what you are speaking.

Then do enlighten us O' wise one. How is it constitutional to treat same sex couples differently?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I don't have to make it happen. Its already done for me since a man and woman partnership is the only way for reproduction to take place.

Non sequitur lame ass logical fallacy. IN other words it makes no damned sense. There is no logic . By not allowing gays to adopt, all of those children who have lost a parent to death or divorce, all the ones born to single parents and all of those in the foster care system who have NO parents, will magically have a mom and a dad? Listen to yourself!

May the Gods and Goddesses bless you always.

Those who want both a mom and dad should most definitely get their wish since it is the child who is most impacted by the act of adoption. That right there is what not enough people ever think about. To me, what the child wants should be the top priority and if they don't care what kind of couple it is that they go home with, then okay, that is all on them.

The Lord created people, but it was people who created their lifestyles.

That is just willful ignorance or shameless lying

Why would the Lord go and create something only to prohibit it later on?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

Brilllliant! Lets say that there is a 2 year old special needs child in need of a home. The only people to come forward who are willing and able to take her is a Lesbian couple. The child does not even know what Lesbians are. How long do we wait for another couple to come along.? Or, do we wait until the child is old enough to make an informed decision? What age would that be. Logic and reason are not your strong points.

Logic and reason are obviously not your strong points either. With it being a special needs child, the child would not know a lot of things, which is why its so important that the child have at least one form of normalcy which all begins at home: a mom and a dad. Why shouldn't they have a normal set of parents when so much is already missing from their picture?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

Thank you for admitting that you are so hateful and obtuse that you think that a child is better off remaining a ward of the state or in an orphanage than being adopted by a same sex couple.

May the God and Goddesses help you!!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I don't have to make it happen. Its already done for me since a man and woman partnership is the only way for reproduction to take place.

Non sequitur lame ass logical fallacy. IN other words it makes no damned sense. There is no logic . By not allowing gays to adopt, all of those children who have lost a parent to death or divorce, all the ones born to single parents and all of those in the foster care system who have NO parents, will magically have a mom and a dad? Listen to yourself!

May the Gods and Goddesses bless you always.

Those who want both a mom and dad should most definitely get their wish since it is the child who is most impacted by the act of adoption. That right there is what not enough people ever think about. To me, what the child wants should be the top priority and if they don't care what kind of couple it is that they go home with, then okay, that is all on them.

The Lord created people, but it was people who created their lifestyles.

That is just willful ignorance or shameless lying

Why would the Lord go and create something only to prohibit it later on?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

Brilllliant! Lets say that there is a 2 year old special needs child in need of a home. The only people to come forward who are willing and able to take her is a Lesbian couple. The child does not even know what Lesbians are. How long do we wait for another couple to come along.? Or, do we wait until the child is old enough to make an informed decision? What age would that be. Logic and reason are not your strong points.

Logic and reason are obviously not your strong points either. With it being a special needs child, the child would not know a lot of things, which is why its so important that the child have at least one form of normalcy which all begins at home: a mom and a dad. Why shouldn't they have a normal set of parents when so much is already missing from their picture?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

I realize that it is futile to try to educate you because you are too invested in your bigotry and will not want to hear anything that challenged your pre conceived and ridged ideas about gays as parent, but I posting this anyway.....just in case:

New Study: No Difference Between Gay & Straight Adoptive Parents http://www.edgemedianetwork.com/news/family/147523/new_study:_no_difference_between_gay_&_straight_adoptive_parents

by David Perry

Contributor

Monday Jul 29, 2013

A recently released study by the Williams Institute confirms there is no difference in the behavioral outcomes of adopted children raised in same-sex households when compared to those raised by heterosexual couples.

"Parents’ sexual orientation is not related to children’s emotional and behavioral outcomes," confirms Williams Visiting Scholar Abbie Goldberg, who co-authored the study with JuliAnna Z. Smith of the University of Massachusetts. A national think tank at University of California, Los Angeles Law, the Williams Institute conducts independent research relating to sexual orientation, gender identity law, and public policy.

The study, "Predictors of Psychological Adjustment in Early Placed Adopted Children With Lesbian, Gay, and Heterosexual Parents," analyzed 120 two-parent adoptive families, comprising of 40 same-sex female couples, 35 same-sex male, and 45 different-sex couples, looking at aspects of the pre- and post-adoptive developments of the children.

For all couples, the child was under 1.5 years of age, and was the first and only child adopted. The findings are consistent with an emerging body of research showing that parents’ sexual orientation are not related to children’s emotional and behavioral outcomes, and the Williams Institute study is unique in that it is longitudinal - i.e. follows couples over time - and includes adopted children, as well as includes three types of parents: gay, lesbian, and heterosexual (Goldberg explains how past same-sex parent studies tended to focus on lesbian parents).

Here is more:

In a project launched last month, a team at Columbia Law School has collected on one website the abstracts of all peer-reviewed studies that have addressed this question since 1980 so that anyone can examine the research directly, and not rely on talking heads or potential groupthink. Even when we might not agree with a study’s conclusions—with how a researcher interpreted the data—we still included it if it went through peer review and was relevant to the topic at hand. Peer review, of course, isn’t perfect, but it’s one of the best ways the world has to ensure that research conclusions are at least the product of good-faith efforts to get at the truth.

The Columbia project is the largest collection of peer-reviewed scholarship on gay parenting to date. What does it show? We found 71 studies concluding that kids with gay parents fare no worse than others and only four concluding that they had problems. But those four studies all suffered from the same gross limitation: The children with gay parents were lumped in with children of family breakup, a cohort known to face higher risks linked to the trauma of family dissolution.


Even the notion that some try to put forth, that there are no good studies is wrong...the studies, while not perfect do give us a very good idea on the conclusions and that is that gay homes are not better nor worse.

Here is a link to all the studies

http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

And more:

T

he Australian Study of Child Health in Same-Sex Families is the world’s largest attempt to study how children raised by same-sex couples compare to children raised by heterosexual couples. According to a preliminary report on the study of 500 children across the country of Australia, these young people are not only thriving, but also have higher rates of family cohesion than other families:



An interim report found there was no statistical difference between children of same-sex couples and the rest of the population on indicators including self-esteem, emotional behaviour and the amount of time spent with parents.



However, children of same-sex couples scored higher than the national average for overall health and family cohesion, measuring how well a family gets along. http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2013/06/05/2106751/same-sex-parenting-study/

Children raised by same-sex couples appear to do as well as those raised by parents of both sexes, suggests an international research review that challenges the long-ingrained belief that children need male and female parents for healthy adjustment.

"It's more about the quality of the parenting than the gender of the parents," says Judith Stacey of New York University, co-author of the comprehensive review. It will be published Friday in the Journal of Marriage and Family. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-21-parentgender21_ST_N.htm

There is plenty more where that came from. You are truly pathetic. You hate gays more than you ever cared about the kids and use your lies and ignorance to punish gay people at the expense of the children. You should be ashamed but I doubt that you will be.

 

[rightwinger]

Why are conservatives always such assholes when it comes to homosexuals?

 

[Political Junky]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

It'll never hold up.

 

[rightwinger]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

Public funding. If they receive public funding then they have to follow non discrimination laws. Otherwise, it is up to them.

Won’t take long for the courts to inform them of the fact

 

[Aba Incieni]

Why are conservatives always such assholes when it comes to homosexuals?

(psssst...homos are all about the asshole).

 

[bodecea]

Organizations that receive taxpayer money should and must be required to serve all of the people. Legislatures should not protect people's open bigotry against others under the false "religious belief" theory. The Kansas government is obligated to protect the rights of all Kansans who want to adopt as well as somebody's cult. They are taxpayers, too, and they don't get a tax exemption like these cults do.

I understand that Kansas is a mess anyway. It's not difficult to understand how it got that way.

Should race based organization also be banned from receiving tax money.

Example, plz.

la raza

That's a group that only allows a certain race to join?

 

[yiostheoy]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

A good idea but probably NOT constitutional at the Federal level.

 

[yiostheoy]

What if a state tried to chase out all their h o m o 's ?

That would also be a good idea but probably not constitutional at the Federal level either.

It's tricky when your government has a Bill Of Rights.

 

[Lysistrata]

Organizations that receive taxpayer money should and must be required to serve all of the people. Legislatures should not protect people's open bigotry against others under the false "religious belief" theory. The Kansas government is obligated to protect the rights of all Kansans who want to adopt as well as somebody's cult. They are taxpayers, too, and they don't get a tax exemption like these cults do.

I understand that Kansas is a mess anyway. It's not difficult to understand how it got that way.

Should race based organization also be banned from receiving tax money.

Are they bigoted as these organizations are? Name race-based organizations that practice this kind of bigotry. Go head. Name them and then we will ask their leaders. Be honest, now.

 

[bodecea]

Why are conservatives always such assholes when it comes to homosexuals?

(psssst...homos are all about the asshole).

Not all of us.

 

[Aba Incieni]

Why are conservatives always such assholes when it comes to homosexuals?

(psssst...homos are all about the asshole).

Not all of us.

Then what does the G stand for.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Organizations that receive taxpayer money should and must be required to serve all of the people. Legislatures should not protect people's open bigotry against others under the false "religious belief" theory. The Kansas government is obligated to protect the rights of all Kansans who want to adopt as well as somebody's cult. They are taxpayers, too, and they don't get a tax exemption like these cults do.

I understand that Kansas is a mess anyway. It's not difficult to understand how it got that way.

Should race based organization also be banned from receiving tax money.

Are they bigoted as these organizations are? Name race-based organizations that practice this kind of bigotry. Go head. Name them and then we will ask their leaders. Be honest, now.

All race based organizations are racist, and racist organizations should not receive government funding based on the 14th Amendment equal protection clause.

 

[Pete7469]

I consider bigots who repeat these kinds of lies to be morally bankrupt.

Does anyone give a fuck who regressiveparasite considers to be a "bigot"?

Never mind the fact the dick snot gargling pervert has no concept of morality.


.


.

 

[Lysistrata]

Organizations that receive taxpayer money should and must be required to serve all of the people. Legislatures should not protect people's open bigotry against others under the false "religious belief" theory. The Kansas government is obligated to protect the rights of all Kansans who want to adopt as well as somebody's cult. They are taxpayers, too, and they don't get a tax exemption like these cults do.

I understand that Kansas is a mess anyway. It's not difficult to understand how it got that way.

Should race based organization also be banned from receiving tax money.

Are they bigoted as these organizations are? Name race-based organizations that practice this kind of bigotry. Go head. Name them and then we will ask their leaders. Be honest, now.

All race based organizations are racist, and racist organizations should not receive government funding based on the 14th Amendment equal protection clause.

Name one. After that, name organizations that are sectarian-religion based. After that, explain why LGBTs are not covered by the Fourteenth Amendment.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Organizations that receive taxpayer money should and must be required to serve all of the people. Legislatures should not protect people's open bigotry against others under the false "religious belief" theory. The Kansas government is obligated to protect the rights of all Kansans who want to adopt as well as somebody's cult. They are taxpayers, too, and they don't get a tax exemption like these cults do.

I understand that Kansas is a mess anyway. It's not difficult to understand how it got that way.

Should race based organization also be banned from receiving tax money.

Are they bigoted as these organizations are? Name race-based organizations that practice this kind of bigotry. Go head. Name them and then we will ask their leaders. Be honest, now.

All race based organizations are racist, and racist organizations should not receive government funding based on the 14th Amendment equal protection clause.

Name one. After that, name organizations that are sectarian-religion based. After that, explain why LGBTs are not covered by the Fourteenth Amendment.

la raza, blm, nation of islam, klan, black panthers, race based student orgs, race based employee orgs, race based political orgs.....
LGBT.... are behaviors, they are not like race, people can't change their race
religion is very specifically protected under the 1st Amendment

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

la raza, blm, nation of islam, klan, black panthers, race based student orgs, race based employee orgs, race based political orgs.....

And which of those are funded by tax dollars , Smiley??

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

LGBT.... are behaviors, they are not like race, people can't change their race

Ignorant, Bigoted Bovine Excrement

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Why are conservatives always such assholes when it comes to homosexuals?

It's really the government they tend to hate. You, of course, love it since it keeps you in clothing.

My guess is that homosexuals would assimilate quite well if they were not so fucking militant about it.

But, nooooooooooo, they just have to have it their way and in the course of things screw up institutions that have been around longer than the gay rights movement.

Most gays I know think all this is bullshit and wish the headline grabbers would move out of the country.