For those who are staunch anti-abortion

[ForGood]

This all makes my head and heart hurt.

 

[Rence]

Let’s make this easy

Can you OR the Attorney General prove / offer evidence that Catholic Charities discriminated?

As of yet, The Attorney General has not done so

Yet… he/ she ruled against Catholic Charities. NO COURT / DUE PROCESS - He / She can bring suit / defend… but NOT decide Legal or Illegal.

In violation, not only, of the Illinois Human Rights Act. The very law the Attorney General is saying Catholic Charities violated ]… BUT the Federal 14th Amendment, as well.

Ok, let’s make this easy Catholic Charities doesn’t make it a secret that it turns away gay couples and singles who are co-habitating. They don’t need to be “charged” with anything because it is Catholic Charities that (rightfully) publicly refuses to follow the rules set forth by the State. The State does not have to renew any of its contracts. Contracts are accepted by bid. If ten companies bid on a contract, why would the State accept a bid from an entity that publicly refuses to follow the rules, when there are others that are completely accepting.

 

[Rence]

I still don’t understand the logic behind this arguement. If the contention is that adoption is a secular institution and that only the state grants adoptions, not the church, then what is the problem?

The problem is, the State has set specific rules regarding not discriminating, and people who have been rejected for reasons such as sexual orientation or for being single and cohabitating have gone back to the State and filed complaints that the adoption agency in question is not in compliance with th State’s laws.

The state can continue to grant adoptions to whoever they want. All the church does is match children up with prosepctive parents and provide legal documentation and help. It’s the judge that decides if the adoption goes through. If homosexual couples want to adopt children through other agencies, then they are still allowed to do it.
I don’t really understand what the benefit of this law is supposed to be anyway. Why is the state concerned with who the church doesn’t pick? No kids are being harmed by who the church doesn’t pick. If the concern was who the church did pick, for example if they were using the kids for slave labor, then I could see a concern. I can see absolutely no injustice in the way things were handled before this law was passed and as far as I’m concerned it’s merely an attempt to punish religious institutions for their beliefs and in reality the only ones being punished are the children who have to wait in foster care until the paperwork gets through. I should like to see some evidence that this has not caused a backup in adoption proceedings. I’ve looked online and I haven’t found anything to suggest that the other agencies are picking up the slack. Also, I’d like to know if these agencies are as affordable as Catholic Charities was. I don’t know what the “adoption market” in Illinois is like, but I know of lots of families who’ve adopted and they’ve almost all gone through CC because other private adoption firms are too expensive.

It’s just like anything else the State regulates: they have their rules and those who want to contract with the State have to follow them. From the State’s perspective, the backup in adoption proceedings stems from the applicant being rejected and bounced around for reasons in conflict with the laws that the State has set forth.

 

[kimmielittle]

The problem is, the State has set specific rules regarding not discriminating, and people who have been rejected for reasons such as sexual orientation or for being single and cohabitating have gone back to the State and filed complaints that the adoption agency in question is not in compliance with th State’s laws.

You have no evidence of this…And The Attorney General has not offered any.

Have you seen the complaints?
Have you seen any rebuttals of those complaints?

Unless you have evidence of this… you are spreading rumors.

They Catholic Charities ] do deserve;;; IF indeed, there are complaints a chance to address those - Donja think?

Yet, none have been presented.

It’s just like anything else the State regulates: they have their rules and those who want to contract with the State have to follow them. From the State’s perspective, the backup in adoption proceedings stems from the applicant being rejected and bounced around for reasons in conflict with the laws that the State has set forth.

You might have a point…IF you can prove that the Illinois Human Rights bill was violated -

It will take the courts to decide if Catholic Charities is protected under the Illinois Human Rights Act Religious Clause… AND it has been in front of the Court for some time now…WITHOUT a decision. AND The Attorney General is well aware that it’s in front of the Court …WITHOUT a decision

It is NOT the place of a State Attorneys General to punish…or impose their will.

His / Her oath of Office as an “Officer Of The Court” is to uphold the Constitution.

AGAIN the 14th Amendment of the Constitution

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;

nor without due process of the law; nor deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

In other words The Attorney General can not impose any sentence, He has to allow due process. The Sentencing of the Law belongs to the Court - Not the Attorney General.

Why do we have Juries / trials ? If the Attorney General did indeed have this power to impose sentences / restrictions …O.J Simpson and Casey Anthony would not have needed a trial.

 

[kimmielittle]

Ok, let’s make this easy Catholic Charities doesn’t make it a secret that it turns away gay couples and singles who are co-habitating.

Can you prove that Catholic Charities isn’t protected by the Religions Clause within the Illinois Human Rights Act?

The Court hasn’t

They don’t need to be “charged” with anything

Actually wrong. The Attorney General HAS charged and imposed sentence.

The Attorney General has punished / restricted Catholic Charities for being in Violation of the Illinois Human Rights Act - Without due process.

If the Courts haven’t ruled on the Illinois Human Rights Act Religious Clause… yet - How can Catholic Charities be in violation?

Who made the Attorney General the Judge and Jury?

 

[Allegra]

The problem is, the State has set specific rules regarding not discriminating, and people who have been rejected for reasons such as sexual orientation or for being single and cohabitating have gone back to the State and filed complaints that the adoption agency in question is not in compliance with th State’s laws.

It’s just like anything else the State regulates: they have their rules and those who want to contract with the State have to follow them. From the State’s perspective, the backup in adoption proceedings stems from the applicant being rejected and bounced around for reasons in conflict with the laws that the State has set forth.

I think we have a misunderstanding here. The question isn’t whether or not the state has the soverignty to make and enforce a law. I think we are all agreed on that. The question is whether or not this particular law is just or beneficial to the people of Illinois. A law isn’t right simply because it exists. I would argue that this law is unjust primarily in that it was designed to discriminate against religiously based adoption agencies and secondarily it deprives the children of Illinois a well-reputed, experienced, and safe adoption service for no good reason. Single people and homosexuals were already able to adopt children from other agencies. What benefit was there to forcing Catholic Charities to cease operation? I would love to see some evidence that this law has in any way decreased the backup of pending adoptions. If it has, I’d be thrilled to hear that all these kids are finally getting the homes they deserve. I also have my doubts about some of these other agencies. I suspect their purpose is more geared toward the “rights” of the adults then making sure they are providing these children with safe, loving homes.

 

[Don_Machiavelli]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Just FYI, I did not mean for this to be a flame war. I simply made this thread to get the idea out there. I have not had time yet to express my ACTUAL opinion on the matter.

 

[Allegra]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Just FYI, I did not mean for this to be a flame war. I simply made this thread to get the idea out there. I have not had time yet to express my ACTUAL opinion on the matter.

What do you mean? You didn’t expect people to argue over the statement that anyone who can’t take the whole world’s children under their roof isn’t really anti-abortion? Really? Actually, I think its been kept fairly respectful. Your opinion must be long if you haven’t had time to write it yet.

 

[estesbob]

Can you prove that Catholic Charities isn’t protected by the Religions Clause within the Illinois Human Rights Act?

The Court hasn’t

Actually wrong. The Attorney General HAS charged and imposed sentence.

The Attorney General has punished / restricted Catholic Charities for being in Violation of the Illinois Human Rights Act - Without due process.

If the Courts haven’t ruled on the Illinois Human Rights Act Religious Clause… yet - How can Catholic Charities be in violation?

Who made the Attorney General the Judge and Jury?

It appears that so far the Courts disagree with Rence:

Illinois Catholics win initial court battle over ‘gay’ adoption

onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=1387642

 

[Allegra]

It appears that so far the Courts disagree with Rence:

Illinois Catholics win initial court battle over ‘gay’ adoption

onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=1387642

Unfortunately, I don’t find this particularly encouraging. All this means is that CC is going to be allowed to finish placing the children they’ve already been contracted with. Decent, yes, but not really a movement toward fixing the problem.

 

[kimmielittle]

It appears that so far the Courts disagree with Rence:

Illinois Catholics win initial court battle over ‘gay’ adoption

onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=1387642

Thank you for this link

From that link:

“The problem is the governor of Illinois and the attorney general of Illinois took a different track and have** tried to read the religious freedom protection out** of the Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act,”

Bolding mine ]

He’s being more polite… than I am.

Agenda driven…is my call.

 

[estesbob]

Unfortunately, I don’t find this particularly encouraging. All this means is that CC is going to be allowed to finish placing the children they’ve already been contracted with. Decent, yes, but not really a movement toward fixing the problem.

I believe it is more significant than that. Illinois would be hard-pressed to deny renewing Catholic charities contracts given this ruling.

 

[kimmielittle]

Unfortunately, I don’t find this particularly encouraging. All this means is that CC is going to be allowed to finish placing the children they’ve already been contracted with. Decent, yes, but not really a movement toward fixing the problem.

Hiyas

It is stopping imposition of sentence without due process.

It allows the Court the to decide. Not the whim of the Attorney General.

The matter is scheduled to go before Judge John Schmidt again in August for a final decision,

 

[kimmielittle]

What if this Attorney General decided ONLY Catholic Charities can receive funding, and imposed his / her will…without due process?

 

[Rence]

You have no evidence of this…And The Attorney General has not offered any.

The evidence is in Catholic Charities’ own policies Catholic Charities policies echo the Church’s policies, which don’t allow gay couples or single-co-habitating applicants to adopt.

Do you have any evidence that Catholic Charities will adopt out a child to a gay couple? Show me this evidence, because Catholic Charities already showed mine.

Have you seen the complaints?
Have you seen any rebuttals of those complaints?
Unless you have evidence of this… you are spreading rumors.

Yes, I have seen them. Yes, I have seen rebuttals. And yes, I’ve seen people travel to China to get infants for adoption and bring them back to the States because they couldn’t do so in the States at the time. Sorry, these aren’t rumors. They’re people I know.

They Catholic Charities ] do deserve;;; IF indeed, there are complaints a chance to address those - Donja think?

They already have. It’s in their policies, which are based on Church policies. This is not a secret.

Yet, none have been presented.

The proof is out of the words of representatives of Catholic Charities. They speak loud and clear for themselves.

You might have a point…IF you can prove that the Illinois Human Rights bill was violated -

It will take the courts to decide if Catholic Charities is protected under the Illinois Human Rights Act Religious Clause… AND it has been in front of the Court for some time now…WITHOUT a decision. AND The Attorney General is well aware that it’s in front of the Court …WITHOUT a decision

It is NOT the place of a State Attorneys General to punish…or impose their will.

His / Her oath of Office as an “Officer Of The Court” is to uphold the Constitution.

AGAIN the 14th Amendment of the Constitution

The State has the right to accept or reject bids for contracts. Catholic Charities has been threatening to end it’s adoption agencies if gay unions were passed, and said they would not follow the rules publicly. Pick up a newspaper. It’s been a bone of contention for quite some time. So why are they whining about the State not accepting their contract bid? They said they were going to close their operation on their own if the bill passed, which it did. Now they’re complaining when the choice to not renew the contract comes from the State. There is no guarantee that the State will accept every contract. And they don’t. And this time, their contract with Catholic Charities was the one not accepted.

In other words The Attorney General can not impose any sentence, He has to allow due process. The Sentencing of the Law belongs to the Court - Not the Attorney General.

Why do we have Juries / trials ? If the Attorney General did indeed have this power to impose sentences / restrictions …O.J Simpson and Casey Anthony would not have needed a trial.

No one charged Catholic Charities with anything, nor imposed any sentence. They merely didn’t renew a contract, they rejected a contract bid. The State doesn’t need due process to reject a contract.

 

[Allegra]

What if this Attorney General decided ONLY Catholic Charities can receive funding, and imposed his / her will…without due process?

This isn’t a funding issue, it’s a liscence to opperate issue. If that happened, it would be injust.

 

[Rence]

Can you prove that Catholic Charities isn’t protected by the Religions Clause within the Illinois Human Rights Act?

The Court hasn’t

Actually wrong. The Attorney General HAS charged and imposed sentence.

The Attorney General has punished / restricted Catholic Charities for being in Violation of the Illinois Human Rights Act - Without due process.

If the Courts haven’t ruled on the Illinois Human Rights Act Religious Clause… yet - How can Catholic Charities be in violation?

Who made the Attorney General the Judge and Jury?

Catholic Charities themselves are stating their refusal to adhere to the policy to not discriminate against applicants due to sexual orienation and co-habitating. They speak for themselves with regard to the State’s rules and manadory policies. The proof is in their own public statements. If they’re not going to follow the State’s rules, and they publicly state so, the State doesn’t have to accept their bid for a contract. The result of their public refusal to follow the State’s rules resulted in the State not renewing the contract. All they can do is appeal and wait for their appeal to be addressed. That’s how it works.

 

[wynnejj]

… are you yourself willing to adopt the unwanted puppy/kitty and convince your friends to adopt them as well?

This is an interest of mine, as it seems that it is the same animal rights radicals who want the government to ban kill shelters also do not like the government paying for animal welfare (which reasonable no-animal rights folk support)

Discuss!

The real essential question is “Does unborn man = animal?”.

Hard to perceive with our senses but as Catholics, we know!
The real presence of the Soul in Man occurs at conception…
The real presence of Jesus in the Host occurs at the consecration…
Both represent a sacred incarnation.

 

[Rence]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Just FYI, I did not mean for this to be a flame war. I simply made this thread to get the idea out there. I have not had time yet to express my ACTUAL opinion on the matter.

Don, abortion has nothing to do with adoption. Your claim that pro-lifers should pick up the slack for pregnant women who (for whatever reason) think they lack the ability to do so is unfounded - because the resources are there for the choosing. For every reason a woman says she has to have an abortion, I can come up with at least two to rebut that claim and point her to the resources…

 

[kimmielittle]

This isn’t a funding issue,

Understood

I used ‘funding’ to try and drive my point…

it’s a liscence to opperate issue. If that happened, it would be injust.

ABSOLUTELY