« Ayaan Hirsi Ali: "I Really Wonder What You Are Doing Here at Harvard" | Main | More Reports from Harvard on Ayaan Hirsi Ali »

May 10, 2006

Comments

sarah

You are clearly misinformed about the Catholic Charities action in closing down their adoption services in Boston.

Their closing was not the result of gay activists.

Obviously, if they were placing children with qualified gay and lesbian parents for the last two decades, common sense would tell anyone that gay and lesbian parents were not the ones challenging anything. Though if common sense did not flick that switch, a google search would.

Of approximately 700 children adopted through Boston CC, 13 were placed with gay and lesbian parents. As small as that number is, it was too large for CC, even though ALL 13, according to Catholic Charities own records, were labeled "hard to place."

This means none of these children may have found a home had gay and lesbian families not opened their hearts and homes.

Furthermore, Catholic Charities closing was not actually the decision of Catholic Charities. A significant point you miss in your posting.

All 42 members of the CC board (child welfare experts) voted to continue under their current policy (i.e. take each case as they come and determine qualification). This was a unanimous decision by the CC board.

It was the four bishops of Massachusetts overrode the decision of the CC board (again, who are experts), after the state refused to grant the Bishops request to allow CC, as a tax-exempt organization, to break the states equal protection laws.

Your post is quite colorful, and will certainly raise passion, however, this decision had little to do with Catholic Charities, OR gays and lesbians - neither of whom pushed for its closing.

Please publish true facts.

A simple google search will turn ALL of these points up, quite easily.

misskelly

The Catholic bishops did announce that they would no longer allow CC to place children with gay parents, in accordance with the teaching of the Catholic faith (each child deserves a mother and a father). That decision led to halting CC from doing ANY adoptions, because of the conflict with the Mass regs banning discrimination against gays and lesbians. If CC continued with adoptions and stopped placing kids with gay couples, they would certainly have been sued. People were lining up to do so. I wish CC was up for a legal battle here, I would've liked to see this go to the courts and wrestle with it there. But CC elected not to risk litigation, and they stopped doing adoptions altogether. They would have been sued, and at risk of losing corporate donations for all their other social services programs too.

All of the 720 kids that CC has placed in good homes for the past 20 years have been special needs kids, not just the 13. CC has placed more than special needs kids (medical/emotional problems, sibling groups, minority children) than all the other state-approved adoption agencies combined.

This regrettable decision was not directly caused by gay activists. But it arises from the conflict that Maggie Gallagher talks about in that article, religious freedom versus gay rights. How can it be that our society cannot find a middle ground that allows CC to continue with adoptions and allows gay parents to adopt through other channels? (As they already do!) Nothing short of a pretty radical gay agenda will do nowadays. The rainbow flag includes everybody except religious people.

The comments to this entry are closed.

September 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  
Blog powered by Typepad