Agnostic.com

9 16

LINK Supreme Court Rules For Catholic Foster Care Agency Over Philadelphia Gay Rights Law

The Supreme Court on Thursday said that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment when it froze the contract of a Catholic Foster Care Agency that refused to work with same-sex couples

barjoe 9 June 17
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

9 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

4

Those crazy Christians would rather have an orphan live in a shelter than living in a LGBTQ family.

3

So here's a, to me, pretty obvious question: if you are gay & hope to adopt, why would you ever apply to an organization with "Catholic" as the first word in in its' name?

So the city decertified Catholic adoption services because they wouldn't place kids in same sex homes.

I have to agree one would have to question the sense to that. 🤔

@oldFloyd Philadelphia city policy was that it's discriminatory, because it is.

@barjoe I'm not arguing that point and I agree with you that it's wrong but if I was a couple in that situation I wouldn't go to a church orphanage looking to adopt that's just because it does not make sense to me because they're going to put their stupid bias on it, that's all.

@oldFloyd The decision actually allows the city to have its policy, it just had to enforce it in an equitable manor.

2

Seems like this nanny state really is moving closer and closer to “Legislating” morality.

3

I see that it is still OK with the supreme court for religious institutions to discriminate against Gay People.

Why the surprise? Christian bibles and the Hebrew Torah say being gay is very sinful to say the least.

More to the point, if the Court had ruled otherwise the Foster care agency may have closed and hurt people not otherwise involved.

@Alienbeing Why would you assume I was surprised? I wasn't, just making a statement about the stupidity of the supreme court.

@Redheadedgammy The Court rules unanimously. Threefore you must think all the Justices are stupid. Perhaps if you read the ruling you'd know why they ruled unanimously.

@Alienbeing you sure assume a lot about me. I did read their ruling.

@Redheadedgammy You sure don't post as if you read it. YOU said "...about the stupidity of the supreme court". I cited the unanimous ruling because it is currently very rare to have a unanimous decision. That fact alone shoud tell you it was not stupid, nor were the Justice's stupid. IN FACT the ruling appears to be more based on prior Philadelphia exceptions than it says anything about gay adoption. YOUR post said "discriminate against Gay people", when that obviously was not the case.

Therefore I properly assume you didn't understand the ruling.

@Alienbeing might be best if you stopped assuming anything.

@Redheadedgammy If you have something to say, say it and stop hiding.

@Alienbeing WTF is your deal with me dude? I’m not hiding from you or anyone. Leave me the fuck alone.

5

To be expected from our Catholic majority Supreme Court.

The ruling was unanimous. Hopefully you know all the Justices are not Roman Catholic.

@Alienbeing I can read English, thank you! Perhaps you don’t know the difference between “majority” and “all”?
[americamagazine.org]

@Barnie2years I do know that ALL 9 Justices concured with the decision. That is what unanimous means. It was NOT a majority decision, therefore who may or may not have been Roman Catholic is irrelevant.

IN FACT the ruling was based on the fact that Philadelphia had made previous exceptions and had no obvious reason to make their decision.

Your "to be expected" reply ignored the reason for the decision and indicated you thought the decision was based on a religious belief.

Do you read English with comprehension?

@Barnie2years I don’t know what his problem is, but he just got his ass blocked by me. I really don’t care for know it all assholes.

@Redheadedgammy I was going to, but just decided to let him rant! I only continue circular arguments for so so long. Thanks for the support!

@Barnie2years Nothing circular. I'd love to see your tkae on what is circular. As far as Redheadgranny goes, good riddance.

@Alienbeing bye!

@Barnie2years Another persoon who can't express themselves.

3

I think children should have the right to know about and choose same-sex couples if they want or least have a say. Keeping this information and choice from them is subverting their human rights.

They are informed about religious choices of their parents and if they have any preferences by age 5 or 6 the courts and adoption agencies take this into account when matching up prospective parents. Race is also discussed so the idea or option of same-sex couples should also be put on the table and considered.

Leelu Level 7 June 17, 2021
4

Two steps forward and three steps backwards.

4

It's like we woke up and it's 100 years ago, the rights of women, minorities, LGBTQ are all being slaughtered.

MizJ Level 8 June 17, 2021

Yes and where people are being slaughtered daily by gun toting nutjobs as well as it's the norm to try to violently overthrow the gov and threaten to kill other politicians because you don't like them.

@Leelu I don't know why these people think they are in some way being threatened. No one forces them to get abortions or to give up their guns. I couldn't care less if they choose religion as long as it doesn't infringe upon my right to live free of religion.

5

What about the rights of those children to be adopted by good people?

Leelu Level 7 June 17, 2021

Apparently none of that matters, only the power of the Jesus freaks counts. Truly horrifying.

There are other agencies, I’d presume.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:603962
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.