Michigan Governor Signs Controversial Religious Freedom Adoption Law

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Moyank24, Jun 11, 2015.

  1. Moyank24 macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #1
    Source

    So much for the best interests of the children.

    And the fact that these agencies can discriminate without repercussion and still receive public funds is ridiculous.
     
  2. Technarchy macrumors 604

    Technarchy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    #2
    Why force a Jewish specialized adoption agency to place kids with Muslims?
     
  3. malman89 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Location:
    Michigan
    #3
    Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure none of these agencies are forced to place any of the kids referred to them. It's just in their best interest to do so as they're typically compensated based on units of service provided.

    Just another awful piece of legislation passed in this joke of a state. Passing crap like this while we have miniature craters in our roads. Can't find time to find a billion dollars for that, but can find time to pass plenty of stupid laws like this.
     
  4. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #4
    If Thomas Frank ever wants to do a sequel to "What's the Matter with Kansas?"...

    I'm just sayin', you know...Michigan.

    And why are we giving public money to anything faith-based? They want the government "out of their hair", but they love our money.
     
  5. Moyank24 thread starter macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #5
    If you're in the business of finding homes for children, the first priority should be the quality of the home/family. The vetting process should depend on that and not religion/sexuality/skin color, etc...

    Would you be in favor of turning down a more "qualified" muslim family in favor of a less "qualified" jewish family? Because really, who gives a **** about what's best for the kids? These laws are nothing more than selfishness.
     
  6. ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #6
    Yeah, I'm pretty confused. I thought the whole point was family values. What could be more family than quality of life for children? Yet even while children pile up in foster care waiting to be adopted, we fight to increase their prevalence while also reducing the number of eligible families in which to place them?

    Seems to me that we're letting ideology get in the way of ideals.
     
  7. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #7
    Who gets screwed over once again ......... the kids.
     
  8. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Delta Quadrant
    #8

    History shows that in other states, many faith-based adoption agencies in other states (Massachusetts, Illinois, California, and Washington DC) have closed because they were forced to go against their religious beliefs when it came to placing children in adoptive homes. I'm sure they believe that it's in the best interests of the child for the child to be raised in a traditional household with one mother and one father, and not in a gay household. But when forced by the state to serve gay applicants and place children with a same-sex couple, those agencies will choose to close rather than violate their religious beliefs. However, when those agencies close, it puts tremendous pressure on the adoption system. The remaining agencies get backlogged and causes major delays in placing children (not in the children's best interest, clearly).

    What's not being reported, and what has not been mentioned here, is that the new Michigan law includes language that requires that if an agency denies service based on religious beliefs, that agency is required to provide the applicant with a referral to another agency that would serve them. Here's the relevant text:

    Full text of the law is here: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(k1...object&objectname=mcl-722-124e-added&query=on


    In my view, this is a reasonable compromise. The faith-based agencies can operate in accordance with their faith and avoid closing as they have done in other states. If they are denied service, the gay couple applicants must be referred to an agency that can help them, so they still have an opportunity to adopt, just not through a faith-based agency. And, the child will find a home in as expedited a manner as possible.
     
  9. Moyank24 thread starter macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #9
    Who cares what they believe, especially if it isn't true? That's the whole point. What if they believe that red-headed parents are evil and it's not in the best interests of the children to be adopted by them. I guess that's cool too?

    And, frankly, if they are closing down shop because of this, THEY are the problem. Not the law. THEY are putting pressure on the adoption system. Not the law. THEY don't care about the best interests of the children.

    Oh, they have to provide a referral, a link to a website, and a list of other adoption agencies? Well that makes it all better. Like the people couldn't do that themselves? It's just a small, insignificant way to justify legalized discrimination. And it's ridiculous.
     
  10. Meister Suspended

    Meister

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    #10
    Because they are government funded, I guess.
     
  11. ElectronGuru, Jun 22, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2015

    ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #11
    I don't know about the history of cause, but in the history of effect:

    http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/children_waiting2012.pdf

    Children waiting for adoption in Massachusetts, Illinois, and California went down (DC isn't listed). Meanwhile, in Mississippi and Utah (the 2 most "protective" states), the number of children waiting to be adopted went up.

    Turns out, the sky didn't fall. If children were left waiting, it wasn't because PDHSB decided to withdraw their (conditional) love over some insult. Ideology of protecting children is getting in the way of actually protecting children.
     

Share This Page