Lesbian attorney general may have just ended Christian adoption services in Michigan

[MindWars]

Lesbian attorney general may have just ended Christian adoption services in Michigan

LANSING, Michigan, March 26, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — Michigan’s Attorney General Dana Nessel has announced that taxpayer-funded adoption agencies with religious objections to placing children in homes of homosexual “married” couples will no longer be able to cite their faith as a legitimate reason to opt out of providing that service. The move has the effect of forcing religious adoption agencies to violate their consciences if they want state money.
---------------------------------------------


Awwwwww the tax payer adoption agency brought down by scum again but the fight should keep going so these scum bag skanks never win. They want you to kill your kid instead. Planned-parenthood want you to kill that baby so they can sell those parts you idiots.

 

[deanrd]

Every so often I forget how much Republicans hate gay people. Then they remind us.

Can you guess which states where you could be fired from your job simply for being gay?

I get it. Republicans hate gay people. In fact, they’re the party of hate.
Not something we can really deny any longer. All you have to do is look at their policies and their statements.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Michigan will be sued for violating people's 1st amendment rights.
Left Wingers are dumb bigots.

 

[Montrovant]

Michigan will be sued for violating people's 1st amendment rights.
Left Wingers are dumb bigots.

How are they violating First Amendment rights? As I read it, those adoption agencies can still function, but they will not receive government funds. While it may be a bad decision, it does not seem to be a violation of First Amendment rights in any way.

The OP article didn't state it that I saw, but apparently this decision was a settlement from a lawsuit. Here's another article about it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/reli...parents/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e6e52f20b97b

And here's a link directly to the settlement agreement: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/ag/Settlement_Agreement_with_Sig_Pages_-_FINAL_650100_7.pdf

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Only hurting the children and prospective parents. But when have the left ever given two shits about a child?

 

[bodecea]

Lesbian attorney general may have just ended Christian adoption services in Michigan

LANSING, Michigan, March 26, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — Michigan’s Attorney General Dana Nessel has announced that taxpayer-funded adoption agencies with religious objections to placing children in homes of homosexual “married” couples will no longer be able to cite their faith as a legitimate reason to opt out of providing that service. The move has the effect of forcing religious adoption agencies to violate their consciences if they want state money.
---------------------------------------------


Awwwwww the tax payer adoption agency brought down by scum again but the fight should keep going so these scum bag skanks never win. They want you to kill your kid instead. Planned-parenthood want you to kill that baby so they can sell those parts you idiots.

Taxpayer-funded is the operative phrase here.....if you don't get public funds, you can discriminate aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllllll you want.

 

[bodecea]

Only hurting the children and prospective parents. But when have the left ever given two shits about a child?

How do you feel about taxpayer money going to a muslim adoption agency where they place children in conservatively muslim families?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Only hurting the children and prospective parents. But when have the left ever given two shits about a child?

How do you feel about taxpayer money going to a muslim adoption agency where they place children in conservatively muslim families?

Go squawk about CRC or whatever latest crap you think is clever. I have absolutely no use for you or your ramblings

 

[martybegan]

Michigan will be sued for violating people's 1st amendment rights.
Left Wingers are dumb bigots.

How are they violating First Amendment rights? As I read it, those adoption agencies can still function, but they will not receive government funds. While it may be a bad decision, it does not seem to be a violation of First Amendment rights in any way.

The OP article didn't state it that I saw, but apparently this decision was a settlement from a lawsuit. Here's another article about it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/reli...parents/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e6e52f20b97b

And here's a link directly to the settlement agreement: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/ag/Settlement_Agreement_with_Sig_Pages_-_FINAL_650100_7.pdf

They would be denying them based on their protected viewpoints.

 

[martybegan]

Only hurting the children and prospective parents. But when have the left ever given two shits about a child?

How do you feel about taxpayer money going to a muslim adoption agency where they place children in conservatively muslim families?

I say the more adoptions the better, especially if the kids came from a Muslim background.

Gays can create an adoption agency that only caters to gay couples for all I care.

This is just another example of progressives not being able to stand anyone who thinks differently from them.

 

[theHawk]

Only hurting the children and prospective parents. But when have the left ever given two shits about a child?

How do you feel about taxpayer money going to a muslim adoption agency where they place children in conservatively muslim families?

Letting kids be adopted by Muslims is just as bad if not worse than allowing gays to adopt children. Muslims like to abuse children, sexually as well. Plus they will be raised as Muslims which is un-American and dangerous to society as a whole.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Lesbian attorney general may have just ended Christian adoption services in Michigan

LANSING, Michigan, March 26, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — Michigan’s Attorney General Dana Nessel has announced that taxpayer-funded adoption agencies with religious objections to placing children in homes of homosexual “married” couples will no longer be able to cite their faith as a legitimate reason to opt out of providing that service. The move has the effect of forcing religious adoption agencies to violate their consciences if they want state money.
---------------------------------------------


Awwwwww the tax payer adoption agency brought down by scum again but the fight should keep going so these scum bag skanks never win. They want you to kill your kid instead. Planned-parenthood want you to kill that baby so they can sell those parts you idiots.

I didn't know our new AG was a christophobe lesbo.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Every so often I forget how much Republicans hate gay people. Then they remind us.

Can you guess which states where you could be fired from your job simply for being gay?

I get it. Republicans hate gay people. In fact, they’re the party of hate.
Not something we can really deny any longer. All you have to do is look at their policies and their statements.

Christophobe!

 

[Montrovant]

Michigan will be sued for violating people's 1st amendment rights.
Left Wingers are dumb bigots.

How are they violating First Amendment rights? As I read it, those adoption agencies can still function, but they will not receive government funds. While it may be a bad decision, it does not seem to be a violation of First Amendment rights in any way.

The OP article didn't state it that I saw, but apparently this decision was a settlement from a lawsuit. Here's another article about it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/reli...parents/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e6e52f20b97b

And here's a link directly to the settlement agreement: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/ag/Settlement_Agreement_with_Sig_Pages_-_FINAL_650100_7.pdf

They would be denying them based on their protected viewpoints.

Would they? Or would they be denying them for discriminating against a protected class, violating state law?

I've no idea how courts would view it, really. How much a person or business should be able to discriminate based on religious beliefs is one of the more controversial legal questions of recent years.

 

[martybegan]

Michigan will be sued for violating people's 1st amendment rights.
Left Wingers are dumb bigots.

How are they violating First Amendment rights? As I read it, those adoption agencies can still function, but they will not receive government funds. While it may be a bad decision, it does not seem to be a violation of First Amendment rights in any way.

The OP article didn't state it that I saw, but apparently this decision was a settlement from a lawsuit. Here's another article about it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/reli...parents/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e6e52f20b97b

And here's a link directly to the settlement agreement: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/ag/Settlement_Agreement_with_Sig_Pages_-_FINAL_650100_7.pdf

They would be denying them based on their protected viewpoints.

Would they? Or would they be denying them for discriminating against a protected class, violating state law?

I've no idea how courts would view it, really. How much a person or business should be able to discriminate based on religious beliefs is one of the more controversial legal questions of recent years.

But then wouldn't the Christians be a protected class, being persecuted for their own viewpoints? And in this case by the government?

It's not controversial if you apply some common sense. If the Christian agency was the only game in town, it would be an issue, but nothing is stopping gays, muslims, or even Satanists from making their own adoption agencies to try to place unwanted or uncared for children with people who want them.

 

[Montrovant]

Only hurting the children and prospective parents. But when have the left ever given two shits about a child?

How do you feel about taxpayer money going to a muslim adoption agency where they place children in conservatively muslim families?

Letting kids be adopted by Muslims is just as bad if not worse than allowing gays to adopt children. Muslims like to abuse children, sexually as well. Plus they will be raised as Muslims which is un-American and dangerous to society as a whole.

You feel like you have a good handle on how the billion+ Muslims around the world raise their children, do you?

Also, I was under the impression that religious freedom was a fundamental American concept. Do you disagree? Are there any other religious beliefs you think are un-American, or is it only Islam?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The more Christians can be prohibited from adopting or fostering children the more available for gays.

 

[Montrovant]

Michigan will be sued for violating people's 1st amendment rights.
Left Wingers are dumb bigots.

How are they violating First Amendment rights? As I read it, those adoption agencies can still function, but they will not receive government funds. While it may be a bad decision, it does not seem to be a violation of First Amendment rights in any way.

The OP article didn't state it that I saw, but apparently this decision was a settlement from a lawsuit. Here's another article about it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/reli...parents/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e6e52f20b97b

And here's a link directly to the settlement agreement: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/ag/Settlement_Agreement_with_Sig_Pages_-_FINAL_650100_7.pdf

They would be denying them based on their protected viewpoints.

Would they? Or would they be denying them for discriminating against a protected class, violating state law?

I've no idea how courts would view it, really. How much a person or business should be able to discriminate based on religious beliefs is one of the more controversial legal questions of recent years.

But then wouldn't the Christians be a protected class, being persecuted for their own viewpoints? And in this case by the government?

It's not controversial if you apply some common sense. If the Christian agency was the only game in town, it would be an issue, but nothing is stopping gays, muslims, or even Satanists from making their own adoption agencies to try to place unwanted or uncared for children with people who want them.

Is it simply common sense? After all, is anyone stopping a Christian agency from operating without receiving state funds? Are the agencies being persecuted at all, or simply denied funds? Is the denial based on their viewpoints, or how they act upon those viewpoints? Is the government condoning discrimination against LGBT people if they fund organizations which do so?

Calling it a matter of applying common sense is an oversimplification in my opinion.

 

[martybegan]

Michigan will be sued for violating people's 1st amendment rights.
Left Wingers are dumb bigots.

How are they violating First Amendment rights? As I read it, those adoption agencies can still function, but they will not receive government funds. While it may be a bad decision, it does not seem to be a violation of First Amendment rights in any way.

The OP article didn't state it that I saw, but apparently this decision was a settlement from a lawsuit. Here's another article about it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/reli...parents/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e6e52f20b97b

And here's a link directly to the settlement agreement: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/ag/Settlement_Agreement_with_Sig_Pages_-_FINAL_650100_7.pdf

They would be denying them based on their protected viewpoints.

Would they? Or would they be denying them for discriminating against a protected class, violating state law?

I've no idea how courts would view it, really. How much a person or business should be able to discriminate based on religious beliefs is one of the more controversial legal questions of recent years.

But then wouldn't the Christians be a protected class, being persecuted for their own viewpoints? And in this case by the government?

It's not controversial if you apply some common sense. If the Christian agency was the only game in town, it would be an issue, but nothing is stopping gays, muslims, or even Satanists from making their own adoption agencies to try to place unwanted or uncared for children with people who want them.

Is it simply common sense? After all, is anyone stopping a Christian agency from operating without receiving state funds? Are the agencies being persecuted at all, or simply denied funds? Is the denial based on their viewpoints, or how they act upon those viewpoints? Is the government condoning discrimination against LGBT people if they fund organizations which do so?

Calling it a matter of applying common sense is an oversimplification in my opinion.

The other option is to get State funds out of it entirely. But when they are involved you are now getting into viewpoint discrimination if you deny the Christian group and not some other group which may have other requirements they follow.

Again, this isn't a sole actor issue here, A LGBT group could form an adoption agency and say they only place with LGBT couples. As long as there are other options out there, viewpoints are all considered, and no one is excluded.

 

[Kittymom1026]

There's a black lady in Charlotte, NC who runs an adoption agency for black children called Another Choice. I first heard of her when she helped a couple adopt a baby on the Discovery Channel's series, Adoption Stories. She usually has children who are older and siblings who they want to keep together but this couple wanted an infant, and even though she told them it might be impossible, one actually became available. They went on to adopt another baby and then the wife got pregnant. The husband was also a big brother to a boy and they included him in all of the family gatherings and events. That was years ago, but she still runs the agency.

This is her.....