I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
Aye, sedonaman.
,
- Status
,
C
CopticChristian
Guest
ISG,
This is so true. The Family Courts routinely look at what is “In the Best Interest of the Child”…as you say.
I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
Before pressure as brought about by same sex unions, the state was happy that Catholic Charities was providing a social service as the biggest organization doing a common good in the caring and placement of the state’s disadvantaged children and future citizens. The state knew among other requirements is that adoptive couples need to prove the ability to provide a stable home and moral environment, a moral environment for the children being a religious belief. Sure, it boils down to money in exchange for services. The funds are now dangled as a carrot, the state thinking Catholic Charities would or should fall in line with the agenda of granting new “rights” of adoption by same sex couples. The state has, in the case of the Catholic adoption agencies in Illinois, has therefore effected or forced a shutdown.
The power of the state is indeed at play in the name of “plural” society, a manifestation of what the Pope has referred to as the tyranny of moral relativism, this one spurred by homosexual activism. It led to the state disregarding the long term and best interests of children, our future, in the process of giving a victory to a minority of same sex adults who claim the “right” to be parents. Something is terribly wrong with this trending. We should all brace for an upside down world.
It’s ironic. Homosexuals rail against the Catholic Church for her teaching on the sinfulness of homosexual acts and her instruction for the faithful not to cooperate with institutionalizing something that is wrong, SS"M." It is forgotten that it was the Catholic Church that has proven to roll up her sleeves whenever wherever a disaster strikes. She was first in line with her works of mercy towards those suffering from AIDS during its epidemic eruption in the 80’s, in St. Vincent’s in New York, for example. The teaching has not changed and it will not, even if leads to shutdown of all Catholic adoption agencies.
I am glad you raised this, rossum. It is a very pertinent social consequence of gay ‘marriage.’ Followers of this thread should read the next post.
,
I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
[
SUMMER 2012**DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CATHOLIC ADOPTION SERVICES
USCCB FACT SHEET
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY UNDER ATTACK
A CONCRETE EXAMPLE**](http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...freedom/upload/Catholic-Adoption-Services.pdf)
Local Catholic Charities agencies around the country have long provided adoption and foster care services to the neediest children. Catholic Charities agencies often take on the most difficult placements, including older, abused children and children with disabilities and special needs.
When placing children with couples, Catholic Charities makes sure those children enjoy the advantage of having a mom and a dad who are married. In 2006, Catholic Charities of Boston, which had been one of the nation’s oldest adoption agencies, faced a very difficult choice: violate its conscience, or close its doors.
In order to be licensed by the state, Catholic Charities of Boston would have to obey state laws barring “sexual orientation discrimination.” And because marriage had been redefined in Massachusetts, Catholic Charities could not simply limit its placements to married couples. Catholic leaders asked the state legislature for a religious exemption but were refused. As a result, Catholic Charities of Boston was forced to shut down its adoption services.
Later that year, Catholic Charities San Francisco faced a similar untenable choice and was forced to end its adoption services as well.
In Washington, DC, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington—which has provided support to children and families for over eighty years—had a partnership with the District of Columbia for its foster care and public adoption program. However, in 2010, a law legalizing same sex marriage in the District took effect. The District then informed Catholic Charities that it would no longer be an eligible foster care and adoption partner. Why? Because, as a Catholic organization, Catholic Charities was committed to placing children with couples consisting only of a mother and a father who are married. Concerned District residents appealed to bring the issue of marriage before voters so that they could have a voice in the debate, but the D.C. Board of Elections repeatedly denied voters’ request to put marriage on the ballot.
Most recently, Catholic Charities affiliates in Illinois closed down instead of complying with a new requirement that they can no longer receive state money if they refuse to place children with same-sex couples as foster or adoptive parents. **“In the name of tolerance, we’re not being tolerated,” **said Bishop Thomas J. Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois, a civil and canon lawyer who fought for Catholic Charities to retain its religious freedom in Illinois.
**Is our most cherished freedom truly under threat?
**
Among many current challenges, several state governments have sought to trample on the conscience rights of Catholic charitable service providers. Religious liberty is more than freedom of worship; it includes our ability to make our contribution to the common good of all Americans without having to compromise our faith. Without religious liberty properly understood, all Americans suffer, including the neediest children seeking adoptive and foster families.
,
SUMMER 2012**DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CATHOLIC ADOPTION SERVICES
USCCB FACT SHEET
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY UNDER ATTACK
A CONCRETE EXAMPLE**](http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...freedom/upload/Catholic-Adoption-Services.pdf)
Local Catholic Charities agencies around the country have long provided adoption and foster care services to the neediest children. Catholic Charities agencies often take on the most difficult placements, including older, abused children and children with disabilities and special needs.
When placing children with couples, Catholic Charities makes sure those children enjoy the advantage of having a mom and a dad who are married. In 2006, Catholic Charities of Boston, which had been one of the nation’s oldest adoption agencies, faced a very difficult choice: violate its conscience, or close its doors.
In order to be licensed by the state, Catholic Charities of Boston would have to obey state laws barring “sexual orientation discrimination.” And because marriage had been redefined in Massachusetts, Catholic Charities could not simply limit its placements to married couples. Catholic leaders asked the state legislature for a religious exemption but were refused. As a result, Catholic Charities of Boston was forced to shut down its adoption services.
Later that year, Catholic Charities San Francisco faced a similar untenable choice and was forced to end its adoption services as well.
In Washington, DC, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington—which has provided support to children and families for over eighty years—had a partnership with the District of Columbia for its foster care and public adoption program. However, in 2010, a law legalizing same sex marriage in the District took effect. The District then informed Catholic Charities that it would no longer be an eligible foster care and adoption partner. Why? Because, as a Catholic organization, Catholic Charities was committed to placing children with couples consisting only of a mother and a father who are married. Concerned District residents appealed to bring the issue of marriage before voters so that they could have a voice in the debate, but the D.C. Board of Elections repeatedly denied voters’ request to put marriage on the ballot.
Most recently, Catholic Charities affiliates in Illinois closed down instead of complying with a new requirement that they can no longer receive state money if they refuse to place children with same-sex couples as foster or adoptive parents. **“In the name of tolerance, we’re not being tolerated,” **said Bishop Thomas J. Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois, a civil and canon lawyer who fought for Catholic Charities to retain its religious freedom in Illinois.
**Is our most cherished freedom truly under threat?
**
Among many current challenges, several state governments have sought to trample on the conscience rights of Catholic charitable service providers. Religious liberty is more than freedom of worship; it includes our ability to make our contribution to the common good of all Americans without having to compromise our faith. Without religious liberty properly understood, all Americans suffer, including the neediest children seeking adoptive and foster families.
,
A
aj10
Guest
My husband and I, married for many years, decided to adopt a child through the county where we live. We were, of course, required to attend classes. In one class, the social worker told the group that adoption services were expanding their ideas about who were eligable parents. Then the Social Worker brought in two men in their 50’s. We were told they were gay men in a long term relationship. When an infant girl became eligable for adoption ( a rare thing in county adoption services) these two men were contacted. “I am so exicted to be raising a little a girl.” said the more feminine of the men. His partner sighed, “Yes, he really hoped we would get to raise a little girl.” I was aghast! I knew of several heterosexual couples with children on the waiting list with the county and they gave a baby girl to two gay men? I am convinced that this is social engineering at the expense of a little girl, and not in the best interst of that child!
J
JimG
Guest
You are right. The natural needs of the child are being ignored in favor of the wishes of adults. It’s just social engineering.
And according to the post prior to yours, Catholic Charities of Boston had to close their adoption services not because they were accepting state funds. It was a matter of licensing. To be licensed to provide adoption services they had to agree to provide children to homosexual couples as adoptive parents, something which they could not do and remain a Catholic agency. This is going to happen all over the nation.
C
CopticChristian
Guest
JimG,
This closing of a Catholic Charity has to be considered a Social Consequence of Gay Marriage.
M
mitex
Guest
Please enlighten me! Which one of you has had their marriage destroyed by the gays! 
C
CopticChristian
Guest
Mitex,Please enlighten me! Which one of you has had their marriage destroyed by the gays!
Your question is not directed to any quote. It is not directed to the OP. Your rolling eyes indicate something. What is is you are asking?
Enlighten me. That means you need information or guidance for understanding.
Which one of you? You do not instruct as to who you are addressing.
Marriage destroyed by gays?
Now if I were you, with eyes rolling, asking for enlightenment then the best thing to do is to clarify your question, for a particular individual if need be and then explain what it is you meant by marriage destroyed by gays and why you asked that question. If you truly want an answer then you would have asked a clear question. Your eyes may not roll if you do that.
M
mitex
Guest
No seriously I want to hear from every married Catholic on this forum specifically with evidence how gays (including yours truly!) have destroyed your marriage. I’m listening!Mitex,
Your question is not directed to any quote. It is not directed to the OP. Your rolling eyes indicate something. What is is you are asking?
Enlighten me. That means you need information or guidance for understanding.
Which one of you? You do not instruct as to who you are addressing.
Marriage destroyed by gays?
Now if I were you, with eyes rolling, asking for enlightenment then the best thing to do is to clarify your question, for a particular individual if need be and then explain what it is you meant by marriage destroyed by gays and why you asked that question. If you truly want an answer then you would have asked a clear question. Your eyes may not roll if you do that.
M
mitex
Guest
What I’m getting at is there’s no destruction of heterosexual marriage from same-sex marriage. Your marriages are not affected.
S
stewstew03
Guest
You are missing the point, mitex. I don’t think anyone here has said that their marriage would be destroyed, personally, by same sex marriage. We’re talking about the unintended consequences for our culture and our society.
I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
Please enlighten me! Which one of you has had their marriage destroyed by the gays!
First, you sure posture in a very unseemly and ungracious manner in this thread. I don’t think the manner is necessarily connected to being and gay and celibate, which you declared about yourself in this forum.
Second, it is odd that you have not come across the answer to your question in the scores of threads on gay ‘marriage’ since you joined in January and after logging nearly 500 posts.
Third, if you really have not, please help yourself to this short video clip by Tim Staples, Director of Apologetics of Catholic Answers on Same Sex ‘Marriage.’ You know, Catholic Answers, this site of which you are a guest member? Mr. Staples answers it at 3:46. The whole thing is done in 6 minutes and 32 seconds.
And another where your question is also directly answered by Eve Tushnet here. Just scroll to the 7th paragraph, addressing “how can Bob and Jim getting married really affect your marriage?”
Fourth, you may want to read the posts upthread discussing real social consequences of gay ‘marriage.’ Dispassionate and civil posts are appreciated, if you please. Humor, also welcomed. Antagonism, no.
Thanks.
,
L
Lokabrenna
Guest
I’ve said this before, but here in Canada we’ve had same-sex marriage since 2005, and I haven’t heard about any religious groups being forced to marry couples at gunpoint (nor should they be, IMHO). My (straight) brothers and (straight) friends are all getting married. My one friend is expecting a baby, another is happily childfree. Our society doesn’t appear to be on the verge of collapse (we did just get rid of the penny though, maybe that’s a sign of the end times). If I ever do marry, it won’t be in a church, I’ll go see if my local kindred would be willing to perform the ceremony, and, failing that, there’s always the courthouse.
J
Joe_Corn
Guest
Not likely to force it on the church? Just like they are not forcing contraception? Wake up, this is the beginnings of the next persecution of the church. They already can’t work in adoptions over this perversion.
Children raised in these “loving” gay relationships have to be negatively effected - what do you think daddy and daddy having intercourse with each others rectums in the next room does to a child. Daddy and daddy show up at parent-teacher night, at my play, ball game etc.
This whole propaganda just stigmatizes people by telling them they are born that way and can’t and shouldn’t change.
B
Biblepoe
Guest
Did you not just read that churches are still permitted to deny a marriage ceremony to a couple on the grounds that it would be a mixed-race marriage?
Just so the thread isn’t derailed, I’ll just say that comparing the possibility of churches being forced to marry same-sex couples to forcing contraceptives to be covered by insurance provided by the Church’s health care is an apples to oranges comparison.
Are there any publish, peer-reviewed studies that back this up? There are studies that confirm that same-sex couples who adopt tend to be at least as good of parents as their straight counterparts.
Overall, your post comes across as paranoia stemming from baseless speculation.
S
sedonaman
Guest
Mega
!!!
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Your analogy is very weak. You could just as well argue that the government will force the Church to do all sorts of things because it currently forces the Church to maintain certain safety standards on the sidewalks around the church building. I’m not saying that your doomsday scenario of the government demanding sacramental marriage for gays is impossible, just that it is very unlikely speculation.
What do you think daddy and mommy having vaginal intercourse in the next room does to a child? I would think it would be somewhat distressing too if a child saw it, which is why parents are discrete.
This is distressing to the child precisely because of the social taboo on gays. I’m not saying that taboo is wrong. I’m just saying that your argument is circular if you use it to demonstrate that gay marriage is wrong. The argument as you have presented it amounts to “gay marriage is wrong because people think it is wrong.” There are better arguments to prove your point. Don’t settle for the cheap shots.
S
sedonaman
Guest
The burden of proof is on the advocate of social change, not its opponents. You have to demonstrate what social good justifies changing the definition of marriage.
“Previous generations of social experimenters have caused unimaginable misery for millions of people. None of them have ever been held accountable.
P
Publisher
Guest
It appears that the “advocates” of “social change” are doing just that…demonstrating the social benefit by including gay people as members of society worthy of entering into the social construct of civil marriage since it is slowly becoming a reality.
- Status