Kruse Kronicle

“Kids take back seat to gay agenda” Jeff Jacoby

—

by

mwkruse
in , , ,

Kids take back seat to gay agenda is an opinion piece by Jeff Jacoby in the Boston Globe about Boston Catholic Charities leaving the adoption business because the state is forcing them to work with same-sex couples.

Note well: Catholic Charities made no effort to block same-sex couples from adopting. It asked no one to endorse its belief that homosexual adoption is wrong. It wanted only to go on finding loving parents for troubled children, without having to place any of those children in homes it deemed unsuitable. Gay or lesbian couples seeking to adopt would have remained free to do so through any other agency. In at least one Massachusetts diocese, in fact, the standing Catholic Charities policy had been to refer same-sex couples to other adoption agencies.

……

''As much as one may wish to live and let live," Harvard Law professor Mary Ann Glendon wrote in 2004, during the same-sex marriage debate in Massachusetts, ''the experience in other countries reveals that once these arrangements become law, there will be no live-and-let-live policy for those who differ. Gay-marriage proponents use the language of openness, tolerance, and diversity, yet one foreseeable effect of their success will be to usher in an era of intolerance and discrimination . . . Every person and every religion that disagrees will be labeled as bigoted and openly discriminated against. The ax will fall most heavily on religious persons and groups that don't go along. Religious institutions will be hit with lawsuits if they refuse to compromise their principles."

The ax fell on Catholic Charities just two years after those words were written. Where will it have fallen two years hence?

Where will we be in the next two years? We will have laws that prohibit adoption to Christians who hold orthodox Christian beliefs because they are unfit to be parents.

Comments

4 responses to ““Kids take back seat to gay agenda” Jeff Jacoby”

  1. will Avatar
    will

    So if I discriminate against Christians because my religion says I should, that’s bad, but if I discriminate against gays because my religion says I should, that’s okay? Am I interpreting your point of view correctly?
    Frankly, it looks to me like CC put the Catholic agenda ahead of kids’ welfare by choosing to shut down an adoption service rather than complying with the law.

    Reply
  2. Michael Kruse Avatar
    Michael Kruse

    Hi Will,
    “So if I discriminate against Christians because my religion says I should, that’s bad, but if I discriminate against gays because my religion says I should, that’s okay?”
    CC did not prevent any same-sex couple from adopting children. There were other agencies that would take their business and CC referred them to those agencies. We have a long tradition in this country of allowing religious institutions considerable leeway on issues where their moral/ethical values differ from the state. CC could have been exmepted from the requirements and same-sex couples would still have had many adoption options.
    But this wasn’t about kids was it? It was about a powerful lobby persuading the state to use its coercive powers to compel people to violate their morals. So I would ask, Do you want the government dictating to religious groups what their morals should be?
    Thanks for engaging!

    Reply
  3. will Avatar
    will

    “CC did not prevent any same-sex couple from adopting children. There were other agencies that would take their business and CC referred them to those agencies.”
    I’m sorry, but that’s like saying that if I don’t hire blacks or veterans, but refer them to someone else who can hire them, that’s acceptable in our society. And I just don’t see that.
    And you’re right, Michael, we have a history of granting leeway to churches, and many have taken that too far, to the point that they now try to dictate morals for others through public policy (I live in Colorado Springs, about 3 miles from Focus on the Family, so I’m quite familiar with that). But in response to that: first, just because we’ve done something for a long time doesn’t mean it was the right thing to do — after all, we had slavery for a long time, too. And second, with all that “leeway” the churches have had, perhaps THEY are the powerful lobby, and are merely getting a taste of their own medicine. Frankly, I see a lot more openly religious members of Congress than I see openly gay members; even the president’s evangelical. So who has the power here? When churches try to play the part of “the victim,” I just have to laugh. Or weep.
    You’re right, it wasn’t about kids — after all, Catholic Charities chose to shut down an avenue for adoptions rather than follow the law. They put their own agenda before the welfare of children.

    Reply
  4. Michael Kruse Avatar
    Michael Kruse

    Thanks for your come back, Will. I fully agree with you that there is a real tension here. Some of the most challenging Supreme Court cases go to just these issues.
    “I’m sorry, but that’s like saying that if I don’t hire blacks or veterans, but refer them to someone else who can hire them, that’s acceptable in our society. And I just don’t see that.”
    First, blacks and veterans are qualitatively different from a couple engaging in a behavior. Being black or a veteran is not related to an ongoing behavior. Homosexual is centrally defined by a behavior. The former is dealing with status while the later is dealing with behavior and to some (hotly debated) degree status. The homosexual acts, not their status, are counter to CC religious dictates.
    We allow certain Indian tribes to use otherwise illegal substances in worship. We don’t compel combat service of conscientious objectors. We don’t require Jehovah’s witnesses to say the pledge of allegiance to the flag or take an oath. Boy Scouts don’t have to except atheists as members and neither do campus religious groups of whatever religion. We do prohibit polygamy which affects Mormons but this is a restraint on their religious practices, not a compulsion to violate them. So why can’t Catholics offer adoption services alongside others with differing values? Revenge?
    Second, I hear your frustration with the Church scene but churches don’t make laws and can’t impose their will on anyone. These folks took their values into the public square and won elections. Conservative Christians have just as much right as anyone else to enter the public square and persuade people to their point of view. Those who oppose their views have the same options. If any political regime oversteps the rights of minorities we have courts and other checks built into our system to bring correction.
    Third, what I fear is that in your frustration with Churches your mindset pushes us toward a totalitarian state. Having religion separate from the state allows people to organize in ways that will challenge the moral climate of the nation. They have freedom (within limits) to say and live in ways that are counter to the majority. They can challenge and change the will of the people. The double edge sword is that while this makes space for conscientious objectors it also makes space for the folks in Colorado Springs you dislike. If no religious group can ever conduct their affairs in a way contrary to the majority morality, then we have a de facto state run religion with no room for corrective moral voices.
    In my post I wrote “…a powerful lobby persuading the state to use its coercive powers to compel people…” My primary issue here is with the state not the lobby. They over reached. However, as to the lobby, these are the folks who have advocated diversity and tolerance but at their first chance influence government to silence alternative voices. Nevertheless, they are not the ones who made the decision and they have every right to lobby. If you are to have freedom you have to protect your opponent’s freedom too.
    That is probably more than you cared to read but thanks for giving me a opportunity to mount my soapbox.
    Peace!

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Michael KruseCancel reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading