TEXAS: State House Votes To Allow Religious Adoption Agencies To Turn Away Gays
-
Faith-based adoption agencies in Texas would be able to reject prospective parents on religious grounds under a bill the state House preliminarily approved Tuesday over strong objections from Democratic lawmakers who said it would ultimately harm children and deny good people the right to care for them.
Under House Bill 3859, which advanced on a 94-51 vote, providers would be protected from legal retaliation if they assert their “sincerely held religious beliefs” while caring for abused and neglected children. The measure would allow them to place a child in a religion-based school; deny referrals for abortion-related contraceptives, drugs or devices; and refuse to contract with other organizations that don’t share their religious beliefs.
Rep. James Frank, the Wichita Falls Republican who authored the bill and an adoptive father, said repeatedly during a lengthy debate Tuesday that his legislation is not meant to be exclusionary but to give providers some certainty when it comes to legal disputes. He described opposition to the bill as “fabricated hysteria.”
-
Faith-based adoption agencies in Texas would be able to reject prospective parents on religious grounds under a bill the state House preliminarily approved Tuesday over strong objections from Democratic lawmakers who said it would ultimately harm children and deny good people the right to care for them.
Under House Bill 3859, which advanced on a 94-51 vote, providers would be protected from legal retaliation if they assert their “sincerely held religious beliefs” while caring for abused and neglected children. The measure would allow them to place a child in a religion-based school; deny referrals for abortion-related contraceptives, drugs or devices; and refuse to contract with other organizations that don’t share their religious beliefs.
Rep. James Frank, the Wichita Falls Republican who authored the bill and an adoptive father, said repeatedly during a lengthy debate Tuesday that his legislation is not meant to be exclusionary but to give providers some certainty when it comes to legal disputes. He described opposition to the bill as “fabricated hysteria.”
The key word you brushed over is "FAITH" based adoption agencies. One of the protections of religion is that they can do pretty much anything they want - because of the separation of church and state. I don't agree with that, but it is the law. I don't think that most if any of the activities of churches should be tax exempt.. but that is also the way the laws work.
-
The key word you brushed over is "FAITH" based adoption agencies. One of the protections of religion is that they can do pretty much anything they want - because of the separation of church and state. I don't agree with that, but it is the law. I don't think that most if any of the activities of churches should be tax exempt.. but that is also the way the laws work.
Then they deserve to lose their tax-exempt status. If you're taking my tax dollars, you're not allowed to exclude. Period.
-
One of the protections of religion is that they can do pretty much anything they want - because of the separation of church and state.
Frederick pulled this one right out of thin air, because separation of church and state does not mean religious institutions can "do pretty much anything they want." Second, this law also applies to religious-based agencies that get state funding. It would also let agencies discriminate against Jews and Muslims, for that matter, as well as LGBT people.
-
If the organization is faith based I don't have a problem with it.
If you're gay and you want a baby go to a non faith based adoption agency.
-
If you're gay and you want a baby go to a non faith based adoption agency.
Longing for the days of separate drinking fountains too?
-
If you're gay and you want a baby go to a non faith based adoption agency.
Longing for the days of separate drinking fountains too?
Oh a sarcastic remark. How quaint.
The religious shouldn't be FORCED to accept us. That ensures they won't accept us. They'll dig their heels in deeper.
Their religion says we're in the wrong. So yeah separation in this case IS warranted. Get your babies and your gay wedding cakes from people who are open to dealing with you. Forcing shit like this is why we have the scumbag president we have. The homophobes and religious right dug their heels in deeper as a reaction to a president with liberal policies. The more we force our agenda the more resistance we're going to encounter.
-
Second, this law also applies to religious-based agencies that get state funding. It would also let agencies discriminate against Jews and Muslims, for that matter, as well as LGBT people.
It would allow jewish and muslim agencies to turn away those they don't like too. So no discrimination there.
-
Second, this law also applies to religious-based agencies that get state funding. It would also let agencies discriminate against Jews and Muslims, for that matter, as well as LGBT people.
It would allow jewish and muslim agencies to turn away those they don't like too. So no discrimination there.
Well, no, based on what you just said, this law would allow all kinds of "discrimination there." But thanks for showing your true colors on this.
-
LOL, you were the one trying to make it into a "christians can discriminate against everyone" type issue and I pointed out that the law was not specific to christians. It allows ALL religions to discriminate against those they don't like.
Despite your lame attempt to label me as something or other, I don't like laws like this based on equality. I can't discriminate against believers (of any faith) but they can discriminate against me.
I also support the concept of "separation of church and state" and that includes NOT giving state funds to religious groups for any reason.
We see through your thinly veiled attempt to claim "muslims will be victimized" in that. Of course muslims hate gays more than most other groups.
-
Absolutely agree - if a private, faith-based agency is not going to provide equal access to services like a public, non-faith-based one, the public support of tax exemption should be removed.
-
LOL, you were the one trying to make it into a "christians can discriminate against everyone" type issue and I pointed out that the law was not specific to christians. It allows ALL religions to discriminate against those they don't like.
Despite your lame attempt to label me as something or other, I don't like laws like this based on equality. I can't discriminate against believers (of any faith) but they can discriminate against me.
I also support the concept of "separation of church and state" and that includes NOT giving state funds to religious groups for any reason.
We see through your thinly veiled attempt to claim "muslims will be victimized" in that. Of course muslims hate gays more than most other groups.
I never understood that.. the government funding religion, either directly or through tax exemption. It kinda defeats the whole "separation of church and state" in my opinion.
-
The key word you brushed over is "FAITH" based adoption agencies. One of the protections of religion is that they can do pretty much anything they want - because of the separation of church and state. I don't agree with that, but it is the law. I don't think that most if any of the activities of churches should be tax exempt.. but that is also the way the laws work.
Then they deserve to lose their tax-exempt status. If you're taking my tax dollars, you're not allowed to exclude. Period.
OMG! We agree on something! :cheers:
-
One of the protections of religion is that they can do pretty much anything they want - because of the separation of church and state.
Frederick pulled this one right out of thin air, because separation of church and state does not mean religious institutions can "do pretty much anything they want." Second, this law also applies to religious-based agencies that get state funding. It would also let agencies discriminate against Jews and Muslims, for that matter, as well as LGBT people.
As a matter of fact.. separation of church and state DOES mean the churches can do pretty much anything they want. This is how cults become some a problem such as with David Koresh, Jim Jones, Warren Jeffs, and David Miscavige.
Koresh was having incestuous sex with minors… as was Jeffs.. and Miscavige's wife has not been seen nor heard of at all since 2006 when she defied him. (By the way.. I didn't know this until recently, but Miscavige is only 5 foot 1! That's 3 inches shorter than Tom Cruise!)
-
As a matter of fact.. separation of church and state DOES mean the churches can do pretty much anything they want. This is how cults become some a problem such as with David Koresh, Jim Jones, Warren Jeffs, and David Miscavige.
Koresh was having incestuous sex with minors… as was Jeffs.. and Miscavige's wife has not been seen nor heard of at all since 2006 when she defied him. (By the way.. I didn't know this until recently, but Miscavige is only 5 foot 1! That's 3 inches shorter than Tom Cruise!)
But David Koresh and Warren Jeffs were shut down for this, among other things, and Jim Jones was being investigated and saw the end when he had his meltdown. I don't think religious organizations should be tax exempt either, but you are tripping over your own argument.
-
As a matter of fact.. separation of church and state DOES mean the churches can do pretty much anything they want. This is how cults become some a problem such as with David Koresh, Jim Jones, Warren Jeffs, and David Miscavige.
Koresh was having incestuous sex with minors… as was Jeffs.. and Miscavige's wife has not been seen nor heard of at all since 2006 when she defied him. (By the way.. I didn't know this until recently, but Miscavige is only 5 foot 1! That's 3 inches shorter than Tom Cruise!)
But David Koresh and Warren Jeffs were shut down for this, among other things, and Jim Jones was being investigated and saw the end when he had his meltdown. I don't think religious organizations should be tax exempt either, but you are tripping over your own argument.
Mmm.. I was talking about the protections given religious groups that allow them to do just about anything they want.
Koresh nor Jeffs (nor Jones) were shut down. Koresh and Jones went out in an abrupt orgy of mass suicides / homicides.
They didn't shut Jeffs down at all. They put him in jail, but the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints continues to operate.. in fact Jeffs somewhat controls it from prison. The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are a split division from the Mormons, because the Mormons gave up polygamy, whereas the FCLDS did not.. and STILL practice polygamy. The bible is loaded with polygamy and a ton of other bullshit. It's bad enough being tied down with one woman, but several? That is hell on earth!
Maybe that is what hell is all about.. those Muslims dying and getting 72 virgins after death, who remain virgins after death, and do nothing but nag the hell out of the men and grow old and haggard.As for adoption. People like Koresh and Jeffs don't need to adopt. They just have babies with their multiple wives, and even with their own daughters.
-
Some of you all need to go back to school or quit getting your civics lessons from tweets and soundbites.
"Separation" of church and State are nowhere to be found in the Constitution. The first amendment is:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.By telling a FAITH-based agency who and how they have to serve the government would be encroaching on the free exercise of religion. This really affects nobody, except some gay couple that wanders down to their local FAITH-based adoption agency and demands to be served by them. There are other ways to adopt.
-
But David Koresh and Warren Jeffs were shut down for this, among other things, and Jim Jones was being investigated and saw the end when he had his meltdown. I don't think religious organizations should be tax exempt either, but you are tripping over your own argument.
Koresh was brought down by the ATF on alleged weapons violations. Any accusation of child rape have never been even close to substantiated and are refuted by survivors of the Waco siege.
Jim Jones was brought down by his own drug addiction which fueled his paranoia and his coterie believed he was the Christ. He was being investigated for Social Security fraud and civil rights abuses of his elderly followers.
Jeffs is imprisoned and was taken down for child rape.
-
The separation of church and state ends when tax dollars are given to perform actions for the state.
-
The separation of church and state ends when tax dollars are given to perform actions for the state.
There is no codified separation. There is the no state establishment of a church. Giving money to a private company for a service is no different than giving money to a church for the same service.
