Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, February 24, 2020

Next term the justices will hear oral argument in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, a challenge by several foster parents and Catholic Social Services to the city's policy of cutting off referrals of foster children to CSS for placement because the agency would not certify same-sex couples as foster parents.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"close

Fox News Flash top headlines for Feb. 24
The Supreme Court announced Monday that it has agreed to hear a case involving a Catholic social services agency that sued the city of Philadelphia for cutting ties with them over their refusal to place children in foster care with same-sex couples."

Question: Do same sex couples pay the same taxes as everyone else.

#1 | Posted by danni at 2020-02-24 12:47 PM | Reply

Look, homosexuals have legal rights to get married , but to try and create some facsimile of a family through adoption is just bizarre and a disservice to the child. With that being said if you don't like Catholic Social Services adoption policies go elsewhere.

#2 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2020-02-24 01:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Look, homosexuals have legal rights to get married , but to try and create some facsimile of a family through adoption is just bizarre and a disservice to the child.".....who would be so much happier with some Bible thumping born agin Christians...Halleluiah!!
Here in S. Florida the religious nuts went to court to try and prevent a gay couple from adopting the children who had HIV that they cared for, I'm sorry that's just sick.

#3 | Posted by danni at 2020-02-24 01:38 PM | Reply

Families come in all shapes and descriptions.

#4 | Posted by danni at 2020-02-24 01:39 PM | Reply

"but to try and create some facsimile of a family through adoption is just bizarre and a disservice to the child."

facsimile of a family... truly contemptible, Gracie.

#5 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-02-24 01:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#5 If that is what Catholic Charities believes, it's their choice. People are not limited to using their agency. If a baker doesn't want to bake a wedding cake for a same sex marriage find a different baker. Quit trying to impose your beliefs on others. It really is that simple.

#6 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2020-02-24 02:02 PM | Reply

#6 - Exactly! So the city of Philadelphia went and found a different baker for their cake. Why is the catholic church all buthurt. They don't want to provide the service as per the cities requirements, so the city is going elsewhere.

#7 | Posted by schmanch at 2020-02-24 02:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Have to agree, if people want to adopt, the are not forced to use Catholic Charities.

There are other options.

These people should be able to adopt if they chose.

Catholic Charities should not be forced to go against their beliefs.

Not sure why leftists have to be this way.

#8 | Posted by sawdust at 2020-02-24 08:56 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Not sure why leftists have to be this way.
#8 | POSTED BY SAWDUST

Last I checked, Catholic Charities do NOT have a waiting list of available parents willing to adopt.

Yet they DO have a waiting list of kids ready to be adopted. Hence, CC stance on this in keeping kids from potentially loving households solely based on an archaic, baseless belief that homosexual couples are incapable and/or dangerous to the well-being of a child is an absolute shame.

With that said:

Not sure why Righties or Lefties would be against a child being adopted who does not have a home. Sometimes the betterment of a child's situation and upbringing should be paramount to anyone's political or religious beliefs. I know, call me ------- crazy.

#9 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 09:03 PM | Reply

Have to agree, if people want to adopt, the are not forced to use Catholic Charities.

There are other options.

These people should be able to adopt if they chose.

Catholic Charities should not be forced to go against their beliefs.

Not sure why leftists have to be this way.

#8 | POSTED BY SAWDUST

They are authoritarian D-bags.

#10 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:03 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

They are authoritarian D-bags.
#10 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Your thoughts on #9 would be appreciated.

#11 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 09:05 PM | Reply

I agree with #10...

On #9 I also agree.

Do not know whey anyone would not want a child to find a good home.

I also do not know why anyone would want to force someone to violate their religious beliefs.

#12 | Posted by sawdust at 2020-02-24 09:12 PM | Reply

Your thoughts on #9 would be appreciated.

#11 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

Thoughts on what?

I just reread your post and I don't know what you are looking for from me.

#13 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:12 PM | Reply

I also do not know why anyone would want to force someone to violate their religious beliefs.

#12 | POSTED BY SAWDUST

They are authoritarian D-bags.

#10 | POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2020-02-24 09:03 PM |


People are mean and vindictive.

#14 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:15 PM | Reply

just reread your post and I don't know what you are looking for from me.
#13 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Your opinion on the matter of CSS not allowing children to be adopted into homosexual couples' homes. You've offered your opinion on why lefties "have to be" against this policy without opining about the central issue.

So, what's your opinion on the thoughts I laid out in #9.

Is it really that complicated that you feel compelled to respond: "I don't know what you are looking for from me"?

Or are you trolling. I now feel compelled to clarify your trolling in almost every interaction I have with you; would be nice if I didn't.

#15 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 09:18 PM | Reply

People are mean and vindictive.
#14 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

One of the main reasons I walked away from the Catholic Church 19 years ago.

#16 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 09:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Beach,

As it pertains to adoption I say open all of the flood-gates.

If Christian-based organizations limit their recipients to hetero-couples - fine.

If other agencies have broader-pool, including same-sex couples - fine.

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

People are mean and vindictive.
#14 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

One of the main reasons I walked away from the Catholic Church 19 years ago.

#16 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

The New Testament has some great stuff. Look, I no longer practice religion either, but my experiences with Catholicism were mostly positive.

#19 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:23 PM | Reply

People are mean and vindictive.
#14 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Especially religious conservatives. Bunch of angry, ignorant deplorable people.

#20 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-02-24 09:25 PM | Reply

You're one of the dumber posters on the DR.

Lucky for him Sniper sets the bar.

#21 | Posted by REDIAL at 2020-02-24 09:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Religion has killed hundreds of millions of people and subjected the rest of humanity to misery and ignorance.

It's the biggest blight on human existence. ...

#18 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

During the 20th Century Godless Communism murdered more than 100 million people.

But, yeah, blame all of the world's problems on religion (implicitly Christianity and Judaism), because that is what you are good at.

#22 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:27 PM | Reply

my experiences with Catholicism were mostly positive.

Makes sense. That's where you were taught to grab your ankles and let Jesus enter you.

#23 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-02-24 09:27 PM | Reply

JeefJ is one of the meanest SOBs I've ever encountered on this site. He even sends me private emails slamming my wife.

#24 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2020-02-24 09:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Look, I no longer practice religion either, but my experiences with Catholicism were mostly positive.
#19 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

The Catholic community I grew up in was amazing and I carry zero regret being involved in it. The Catholic Church, however, is very very different animal considering the cover-ups.

Would you disagree?

#25 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 09:27 PM | Reply

During the 20th Century Godless Communism murdered more than 100 million people.

So, it's got a ways to go to catch up to the slaughterhouse that is religion.

Got it. Thanks.

#26 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-02-24 09:28 PM | Reply

You're one of the dumber posters on the DR.
---
Lucky for him Sniper sets the bar.

#21 | POSTED BY REDIAL

Hey! I thought I set the bar! I don't understand why you Canucks are incapable of giving us Michiganders our due.

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:29 PM | Reply

Lucky for him Sniper sets the bar.

Sniper owns that bar. Many a righty challenges him for it daily.

But they're just not as dumb. Not for a lack of trying.

#28 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-02-24 09:29 PM | Reply

-Last I checked, Catholic Charities do NOT have a waiting list of available parents willing to adopt.

Link? I'm sure it depends on a variety of factors such as where you are, what race/ethnicity you are willing to adopt, etc...

Most folks I know who went through Catholic Charities waited over a year.

And the law doesn't prevent same sex couples from adopting and there are other services to utilize.

#29 | Posted by eberly at 2020-02-24 09:30 PM | Reply

The Catholic community I grew up in was amazing and I carry zero regret being involved in it. The Catholic Church, however, is very very different animal considering the cover-ups.

Would you disagree?

#25 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

Not at all. The Catholic Church has horrific scandals that go back centuries - including the sale of indulgences.

#30 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:30 PM | Reply

If Christian-based organizations limit their recipients to hetero-couples - fine.
If other agencies have broader-pool, including same-sex couples - fine.
#17 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I just don't understand how you or anyone else would support an adoption agency that refuses to place children into potentially loving households without logical reasons to do so. If you're suggesting keeping children out of same sex households only to remain in the adoption/foster system is in a child's best interest, then so be it. I find your stance to be completely wrong and baseless, but so be it.

So, is that your stance?

#31 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 09:31 PM | Reply

JeefJ is one of the meanest SOBs I've ever encountered on this site. He even sends me private emails slamming my wife.

#24 | POSTED BY LIVE_OR_DIE

That's true but I quit doing that once I heard you purchased a big 26.75" Weber kettle.. That just earns respect.

#32 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:33 PM | Reply

So, is that your stance?

#31 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

My stance is that I support all of them.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:34 PM | Reply

Hey! I thought I set the bar! I don't understand why you Canucks are incapable of giving us Michiganders our due.

We canucks can differentiate between dumb and merely ignorant. :-)

#34 | Posted by REDIAL at 2020-02-24 09:38 PM | Reply

#33 - one could say you have a "wide" stance

#35 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2020-02-24 09:39 PM | Reply

Sorry to interrupt.

Jeffj, I finally went down and got Allopurinol. Wish you had mentioned it was only $8 a month I'd of done it months ago.;^)

Carry on folks.

#36 | Posted by bruceaz at 2020-02-24 09:39 PM | Reply

My stance is that I support all of them.
#33 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Would you support a law barring adoption agencies, religious or not, from allowing homosexual couples from adopting?

This is like pulling teeth.

#37 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 09:40 PM | Reply

#35 - after you're done raging about that devastating slam, we should talk smokers, I'm planning on buying something new

#38 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2020-02-24 09:41 PM | Reply

This is just another thread where people's civil rights are shht on by the religious right.

#39 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-02-24 09:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This is just another thread where people's civil rights are shht on by the religious right.

POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2020-02-24 09:44 PM | REPLY

Yeppers. A bunch of right winged religious bigots.

#40 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-02-24 09:50 PM | Reply

Jeffj, I finally went down and got Allopurinol. Wish you had mentioned it was only $8 a month I'd of done it months ago.;^)

Carry on folks.

#36 | POSTED BY BRUCEAZ

1 pill per day keeps the crystals at bay. Great to hear, Bruce.

#41 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:54 PM | Reply

#35 - after you're done raging about that devastating slam, we should talk smokers, I'm planning on buying something new

#38 | POSTED BY LIVE_OR_DIE

I can help you with this. You know how to reach me.

#42 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 09:56 PM | Reply

Would you support a law barring adoption agencies, religious or not, from allowing homosexual couples from adopting?

#37 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

I don't understand what you are asking - I read your question 3 times - so, I will assign a position to your question and hopefully advance this....

I am cool with adoption agencies that limit their scope to same-sex couples as it's the best possible environment to raise a child.

I am also cool with adoption agencies that are more open with their requirements, including same-sex couples.

I think all of these adoption agencies perform vital work and I think they can coexist without the heavy hand of government intervening.

#43 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-24 10:01 PM | Reply

I am cool with adoption agencies that limit their scope to same-sex couples as it's the best possible environment to raise a child.
--JEFFJ

This is the logic I'm attempting to tap into. I just don't get it. Knowing that kids age out of foster care and adoption systems because of a lack of adults willing to adopt, why would you be okay with an agency holding onto children in the system instead of allowing adults to adopt them? Sure it's not the "best possible environment," but it's also far better than not having a home at all. You're suggesting that foster kids are better off in the system as opposed to in a home with caring adults, which is the exact stance of CSS. Can you please explain this logic?

#44 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 10:11 PM | Reply

#42 - just sent you an email, again, no rush, I know you're still seething from those earlier posts of mine

#45 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2020-02-24 10:11 PM | Reply

I think what Jeff is saying is that Catholic Charities should be allowed to have their own set of discrimination based on their religious faith. People can just go down the street to another agency.

But.....I'm cool with whatever the SCOTUS rules.

I don't know how many adoptions Catholic Charities facilitates compared to all the other agencies.....but I imagine there are a lot of options out there.

Perhaps there are other facts in this case that change what I'm assuming.....either way, I'm fine with the SCOTUS ruling.

#46 | Posted by eberly at 2020-02-24 10:11 PM | Reply

"Knowing that kids age out of foster care and adoption systems because of a lack of adults willing to adopt, why would you be okay with an agency holding onto children in the system instead of allowing adults to adopt them?"

Is there anything prohibiting this couple from going down the street to another agency to adopt the same child?

#47 | Posted by eberly at 2020-02-24 10:13 PM | Reply

Keep in mind JEFFJ, that the kids that do end up aging out of the system are at significantly higher risk of dropping out of school and engaging in crime. So just because being adopted into a homosexual couple's home is not the ideal environment, it is FAR better than the alternative. Why do you believe this to be preferable than forcing adoption agencies to consider same-sex couples as potential parents?

#48 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 10:14 PM | Reply

Is there anything prohibiting this couple from going down the street to another agency to adopt the same child?
#47 | POSTED BY EBERLY

To answer your question, no there's not. But it's not the same sex couple I worry about. It's the kid that would have been adopted by the same sex couple that ultimately is not because of policies set forth by CSS.

If same sex couples were given more access to adopting children, there would be less children aging out of the system, which from my perspective is a serious issue, especially as it relates to crime.

#49 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 10:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

49

I understand your point and anything that delays getting these kids out should be challenged...and perhaps that's the basis for the SCOTUS to be hearing this case.

good point.

#50 | Posted by eberly at 2020-02-24 10:22 PM | Reply

good point.
#50 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Hot ---- on a platter.

That made my night.

Thanks, EB.

#51 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-24 10:28 PM | Reply

my pleasure...you were making good arguments throughout this thread.

#52 | Posted by eberly at 2020-02-24 10:52 PM | Reply

The issue in the case of this article isn't if the catholic church can deny gay couples adoptions, the issue here is whether the city of Philadelphia can deny the catholic church public funding because of the church denying gay couples equal adoption rights. It is well within the cities rights to tell the catholic church or any other organization to go pound sand if they do not want to be inclusive in their adoption practices.

#53 | Posted by schmanch at 2020-02-25 07:25 AM | Reply

The fact that SCOTUS agreed to hear this appeal makes it pretty obvious they're going to rule 5-4 in favor of bigotry.

#54 | Posted by JOE at 2020-02-25 07:42 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

As a Catholic, I wouldn't want the state too force anyone to violate their religious beliefs. Since the city doesn't share those beliefs, it is taking its business elsewhere. The charity is expecting the city to do exactly what it's railing against.... Forcing them to do business with an organization they disagree with and that's just wrong. The charity isn't being discriminated against, and it's free to operate with people that do share its philosophy.

I am not exactly sure why they are upset.

#55 | Posted by ABH at 2020-02-25 08:12 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I am not exactly sure why they are upset."

Because they will lose money and clout. Their bragging rights re number of adoptions they made possible will be diminished.

#56 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-02-25 08:17 AM | Reply

#53

That's what I was trying to figure out. The summary made it seem like it was just about referrals and I don't really see where the church has a right to demand the city do business with them.

If they were being shut down that would be a whole different issue but they aren't. So I don't even see how it's a case let alone SCOTUS level.

I fear Joe is right, the fact that the court agreed to this one makes me inclined to believe that churches will be allowed to force the government to fund them no matter what.

#57 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2020-02-25 09:52 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The more I think about this, the more I am leaning toward the church being right. Not because I believe it's cool they discriminate.... But because shutting down any avenue towards getting kids adopted is a generally bad idea. I am sure the city has a plethora of places to go that will place kids in homes with same sex couples, so they aren't limiting themselves there. But turning off one spigot, doesn't necessarily mean more flow elsewhere in the system. Adsorption is a real problem and kids need homes the city should be doing business with everyone working toward that goal.

Hmmm. I will have to think about this more.

#58 | Posted by ABH at 2020-02-25 11:20 AM | Reply

#48 Beach

So long as adoption agencies exist that will place adoptive children into gay couple homes I'm fine with Christian based adoption agencies limiting their scope to hetero couple homes.

#59 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-25 01:23 PM | Reply

#59

But you are also fine with them forcing the city to use them?

#60 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2020-02-25 03:18 PM | Reply

The city should be free to set rules for which agencies it refers to, as long as the rules serve the kids.
Agencies should be free to restrict the parents they work with as long as there isn't a monopoly.

I worked with a gay couple that adopted two troubled boys through their church. Their goal was to keep the boys out of prison and alive. They succeeded. They are more caring than me and my wife. Thank god those boys had found a loving home.

#61 | Posted by bored at 2020-02-25 03:45 PM | Reply

Forcing, no. But I don't think the city should have stopped using them. If they were the ONLY service the city was using, or they are only allowed to use one, by all means, sever ties. But if toy can do business with all of the adoption service organizations, where your disagreement with one is counterbalanced by another, why bother closing the avenue? In the end it's the most vulnerable... Orphaned children... Who are hurt.

#62 | Posted by ABH at 2020-02-25 03:47 PM | Reply

If a child is Catholic, can that child be adopted by a same sex couple?

#63 | Posted by Petrous at 2020-02-25 07:18 PM | Reply

Adsorption is a real problem and kids need homes the city should be doing business with everyone working toward that goal.
Hmmm. I will have to think about this more.
#58 | POSTED BY ABH

CSS could change their stance and policy knowing if they don't, less kids will be adopted.

Where's the old catholic virtue of fortitude; knowing when to sacrifice (in this case compromise) for the betterment of a just cause?

#64 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-25 08:24 PM | Reply

In the end it's the most vulnerable... Orphaned children... Who are hurt.
#62 | POSTED BY ABH

Ultimately, if the City doesn't back down and the CSS doesn't back down, children will be harmed.

This is a ---- situation that COULD be rectified by CSS, and the Church in general, changing their stance/policy. The fact that they don't puts them in the moral wrong, IMO. Protecting religious beliefs over the well-being of children is simply selfish, and IMO, illogical.

#65 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2020-02-25 08:27 PM | Reply

I would have loved to adopt, but I can't afford the cost. Many folk I know are like me. I dont have 10's of thousands of dollars. But, I have a home with empty rooms. It wasnt in the cards to have more kids.

#66 | Posted by Petrous at 2020-02-25 08:33 PM | Reply

#66

If you foster first usually adoption is free or subsidized. Additionally an adopted child is usually eligible for medicaid and the medicaid coverage for children is pretty darn good, some limited doctor selection but really the only issue we have run into is dental care for other than basic. Serious dental work there are very few dentists that take medicaid but most basic service is covered 100%.

My youngest is adopted so I'm not just talking out my butt here.

#67 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2020-02-25 11:43 PM | Reply

Look, homosexuals have legal rights to get married , but to try and create some facsimile of a family through adoption is just bizarre and a disservice to the child. With that being said if you don't like Catholic Social Services adoption policies go elsewhere.

#2 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

Better a gay couple than a gold bricker with delusions of grandeur.

#68 | Posted by jpw at 2020-02-26 08:59 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I also do not know why anyone would want to force someone to violate their religious beliefs.
#12 | POSTED BY SAWDUST

Because most religion is mental illness that functions in near total opposition to its teachings.

The Catholic Church has shown itself to be first and foremost a business who's primary concern is the bottom line, which is probably what's driving this.

But hey, if they want to take tax dollars then they have to provide the service IN FULL that they're paid to provide.

#69 | Posted by jpw at 2020-02-26 09:08 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If Christian-based organizations limit their recipients to hetero-couples - fine.
If other agencies have broader-pool, including same-sex couples - fine.

#17 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

And if a city doesn't want to give it's tax dollars to an organization that's limiting adoptions based on their own prejudices what then?

#70 | Posted by jpw at 2020-02-26 09:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The fact that SCOTUS agreed to hear this appeal makes it pretty obvious they're going to rule 5-4 in favor of bigotry.

#54 | POSTED BY JOE

The religious right has to get back to cementing their particular bronze age goat herder myth as the law of the land lest they continue to be "victims".

#71 | Posted by jpw at 2020-02-26 09:39 AM | Reply

I am not exactly sure why they are upset.

#55 | POSTED BY ABH

$$$

whyy.org

That's not just gonna pay for itself.

#72 | Posted by jpw at 2020-02-26 09:40 AM | Reply

I fear Joe is right, the fact that the court agreed to this one makes me inclined to believe that churches will be allowed to force the government to fund them no matter what.

#57 | POSTED BY TAOWARRIOR

Which was always the right's interpretation of the first amendment all along.

Yet again they'll crap all over the Constitution while claiming they love it and are trying to save it.

#73 | Posted by jpw at 2020-02-26 09:42 AM | Reply

but to try and create some facsimile of a family through adoption is just bizarre and a disservice to the child.
#2 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

Gracie, you dumb cow. Adoptions are an attempt at a facsimile of a family, for the child.

But. Apparently you'd rather have the child stuck in an orphanage than living with two adults who will raise and care for the child.

You spread misery in your wake.

Hell has a special place for you and your ilk.

#74 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-02-26 11:34 AM | Reply

"but to try and create some facsimile of a family through adoption is just bizarre and a disservice to the child."

I personally know several families which include a same sex couple and several chidren. I can only tell you this for sure....Gracie is a hate filled person who doesn't know what the hell she is even talking about.
I know one such family quite well, you'd think that at least one of three kids would have turned out gay....you'd be wrong. They are all quite successful, married in heterosexual marriages and their kids love their grandparents.

#75 | Posted by danni at 2020-02-26 12:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

With that being said if you don't like Catholic Social Services adoption policies go elsewhere.

#2 | POSTED BY GRACIEAMAZED

It's actually very simple. If they don't want to serve all taxpayers equally then stop taking tax-payers Money.

Some of those taxpayers are gay. Perhaps the CSS should give refunds for services owed but not rendered?

#76 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-02-26 01:24 PM | Reply

Religious people wanting special treatment again just because they misinterpreted some mythology built before most people could read or write that it makes them special and entitled to ignore the laws that everyone have to follow.

#77 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2020-02-26 01:42 PM | Reply

"Families come in all shapes and descriptions."

I agree with you 100%...but check this out:

I lived in North Dakota for about eight years. During that time I knew two couples who tried to adopt Native American babies. As crazy as it sounds, when a Native American baby is put up for adoption, first dibs go to other Native Americans. Family members first...then any other NAs.

So, it's pretty stupid...but not unprecedented. And not just limited to people who have a problem with gay people. As far as I'm concerned, if you want to provide a good home to an unwanted child, most of the other stuff should be of minimal consideration.

#78 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-02-26 08:12 PM | Reply

During that time I knew two couples who tried to adopt Native American babies.

They should have given them a couple pox blankets and burnt their village down. Stealing the children amidst the mayhem.

Thanks for your anecdote.

#79 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-02-26 08:41 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort