God Dammit America.
I want to actually read the amendment to the referenced bill, because I want to approach this with a balanced opinion, but this article doesn’t cite it. The article doesn’t at all say what bill it was.
Now, because I live in Oklahoma, I clicked on the link in the article that mentioned Oklahoma passing a law that “let welfare agencies discriminate against same-sex couples who want to foster or adopt children.” The linked-to article then immediately starts out with “Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin has signed into law a bill allowing faith-based adoption and foster care agencies, even those with state contracts, to turn away prospective parents who pose a conflict with their religious beliefs.”
and… Yes? So? They’re faith-based organizations who hold to certain beliefs, and they want to be selective with regard to parents based on certain principles they hold to.
Well okay then. Moving on.
Then they shouldn’t get state contracts.
Do they? Maybe they shouldn’t.
They do, and they shouldn’t.
Why should I be denied the right to adopt, the right to be a parent, because of something that doesn’t interfere with them?
You shouldn’t, if it doesn’t, but they think it does.
Honestly, I have really no tolerance for people’s senseless bigotry. I don’t respect anyone’s beliefs that involve condemning the totally innocent lifestyles of others. People that hold those beliefs need to modernize and get with times of the century that they’re living in. If they have a problem with providing a service to people, then they shouldn’t even be in that business. If you’re adopting kids out not because you want those kids to have homes but because you want to put them in homes that you see as compliant with your religious lifestyle then you need to step aside and let someone with a respectable moral compass takeover.
For myself, were I in the position, I would not deny you. But I can see the position of people in these organizations who perceive homosexuality as a harmful lifestyle choice. People often compare it to racism, but I don’t really agree with that comparison. As though all discriminatory activity, or selectivity, is created equal.
This is totally cold comfort. Imagine if I said that I wanted people to be able to discriminate against Christians, and you lived in a shithole that was full of people that didn’t want to serve you because of your religion, and I said, “Well, I personally would never discriminate against you. If I, mfm, were serving you then I wouldn’t discriminate, but I think everyone that wants to should! And you should respect that! You should respect the daycare that doesn’t want to take care of your kid because of your religious differences. You should respect the real-estate agents that won’t sell your property because they are uncomfortable working with you. You should respect the restaurants and bakers that won’t serve you.” What if a Mormon adoption service wouldn’t give kids to black parents or interracial couples back when that Church was super racist? How is that different? It would still have been their shitty religious belief. What if a Muslim agency was refusing to give any orphans or unwanted kids to people that they deemed infidels or apostates? They’re totally allowed to hold those backwards beliefs, but are they allowed to discriminate against people and disrupt their lives because of their shitty beliefs? No! They shouldn’t be anyway.
I do agree that love is love; that people who judge do so out of ignorance of the facts and of the teachings of their own faith; and that even if homosexuality is a sin, it is no more sinful than a myriad of other things people do on a daily basis. And I agree that government support should be called into question.
Called into question? Government support should be revoked immediately. It’s a violation of the separation of church and state for the government to work with discriminatory religious services.
But I don’t believe a baker should be required to bake a wedding cake for someone if he doesn’t want to do it. Doesn’t matter why he doesn’t want to, but if he doesn’t then he shouldn’t have to. If he faces public backlash for it then so be it. He could face backlash for baking bad cake as easily as baking no cake. JEDIT: At the same time, I think respect should also be a thing. The person providing said service should be able to respectfully decline, and the person denied the service should respect their choice. Either party getting pissy about it is juvenile.
I really hate this line of thinking. Why should the person denied service be expected to respect that service’s choice? I don’t believe that anyone should respect the asshole that wants to discriminate against them. Should all those black people have respected the diners that respectfully told them they didn’t want them their? The cook at that diner really didn’t want black people there, and it’s his business! What if, instead of a wedding cake, it was some Christian that didn’t want any same-sex couples staying in his hotel? Where do you draw the line? If someone fucks me or you over because of their bullshit philosophy, then we should get pissy about it! The gay people getting angry over being denied service are not the equivalent of the Christian getting backlash over denying them service. Just like the Civil Rights Movement was not juvenile for fighting back against the racist assholes that were denying black people services.
Of course it’s a flame. When people condemn someone for an immutable characteristic, they tend to get flamed. What’s wrong with flaming something that is terrible? I think that most people’s religions are repugnant and immoral, but you don’t see me out and about preaching that they’re morally bankrupt and hellbound and bane of the country. You don’t see me out discriminating against people. Why can’t they abstain from that shit too? Whenever someone’s religion starts affecting innocent people, then it’s the religious person that needs to change. Society and everyone in it shouldn’t have to regress in order to wait for all these fundamentalists to catch up with the Civil Rights Act.
Do you think private adoptions should be unlawful? Do you think parents shouldn’t be able to discriminate in who they give their baby to?
Parents can do whatever they want, but a third-party private adoption service can’t discriminate based on arbitrary characteristics if they have state contracts.