Christian Mother files Federal Lawsuit against SC Foster Care Agency

[AGENT J]

What’s wrong with discrimination? That’s a good thing. Whenever you choose to buy an apple instead of a pear you are discriminating.

WHo said all discrimination is wrong? LOL not me
. illegal discrimination asnd violating a person rights are though to people that respect rights and America anyway

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

They can go through the state directly or use a different agency.

And those kids stuck with the Christian service get to wallow in group homes while willing parents are turned away.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

And those kids stuck with the Christian service get to wallow in group homes while willing parents are turned away.

Yes life is hard when your own parents abandon you.

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

Yes life is hard when your own parents abandon you.

It's even harder when the Christians in charge don't let you go to a loving home because they believe in the wrong flavor of God.

 

[AmNat]

And those kids stuck with the Christian service get to wallow in group homes while willing parents are turned away.

Do they actually have control over particular children in group homes?

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

Do they actually have control over particular children in group homes?

I have no idea. But every foster family turned away is a couple kids who has to stay in the group home. No way around it.

 

[AmNat]

I have no idea. But every foster family turned away is a couple kids who has to stay in the group home. No way around it.

If a family is unwilling/unable to become a foster family without this agency then they wouldn't become one in its absence. There is no sense in which shutting them down will benefit children.

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

If a family is unwilling/unable to become a foster family without this agency then they wouldn't become one in its absence. There is no sense in which shutting them down will benefit children.

You can't bemoan the plight of orphans out of one side of your mouth, and throw up additional barriers to foster parents out of the other.

Unless you can argue that a child would be better off in a group home than a wrong flavor God home, you're defending the indefensible.

 

[AmNat]

You can't bemoan the plight of orphans out of one side of your mouth, and throw up additional barriers to foster parents out of the other.

Unless you can argue that a child would be better off in a group home than a wrong flavor God home, you're defending the indefensible.

I have not argued anything, because no point of argument has been raised. I've merely pointed out that the left's long standing hostility to religious foster/adoption agencies does not make sense from the POV of caring about children, but only from simple enmity toward religion.

 

[Glitch]

You don’t have to agree because the idea that the first amendment protects you from religious discrimination or creates a duty to not preference religion is less then 60 years old and was instituted through leftist subversion of the courts.

I don't. I agree because the original author of that particular clause in the First Amendment stipulated that there should be "a wall of separation between church and state." Government may not establish, show preferences toward, or discriminate against any religious belief, or the lack thereof. The US government is required to be absolutely neutral on the issue of religion, and that was the way it was originally established, as a secular nation.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.

Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all of his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

Thomas Jefferson, In a Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, October 7, 1801.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court in Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1878) considered the above quote:

Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured.

It has absolutely nothing to do with whatever you think might have happened since 1961.

 

[Somerville]

Most of the responses here seem to be ignoring the basic claim made by the plaintiff and why the actions of the adoption agency should be seen as un-Constitutional.

The agency receives tax-payer funding, yet it pays no taxes. If it wishes to discriminate, that is their religious right, HOWEVER, the agency should then not receive any financial assistance from any government body.

 

[roguenuke]

Religious organizations are allowed to discriminate bbasedon religion.

Religious organizations should not be deciding where foster children go since such children are technically wards of the state. They should have to abide by state laws in regards to not being allowed to discriminate.

 

[ClaraD]

If they denied her for being the wrong religion, they are in the wrong....that said...I would expect any foster parent to respect the religion of the foster children they have in their care. So, for instance if the child is Baptist, they should not be trying to convert that child to Catholic...or if the child is Muslim the same...they respect is mutual and the rights are mutual.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

If they denied her for being the wrong religion, they are in the wrong....that said...I would expect any foster parent to respect the religion of the foster children they have in their care. So, for instance if the child is Baptist, they should not be trying to convert that child to Catholic...or if the child is Muslim the same...they respect is mutual and the rights are mutual.

I was raised in foster care most of my childhood. It was always understood that I was becoming a part of that family, not they were becoming a part of me. They had their religious practices, and I was expected to participate as appropriate. Religious training, in and of itself is not bad. But when an adoption agency, funded by the government, turns away otherwise fit parents, based solely on their religion, that is a problem.

 

[Somerville]

The case continues despite the fact that Sleepy Joe was supposed kill all those anti-Christian lawsuits

Filing #95

Jan 20, 2022
FIFTH AMENDED CONFERENCE AND SCHEDULING ORDER; Discovery due by 2/18/2022, Motion in Limine due by 3/25/2022, Motions due by 3/18/2022, Bench Trial Deadline 5/2/2022, Mediation Due by 2/25/2022. All other dates set out. Signed by Honorable Joseph Dawson, III on 1/20/22. (rweb, ) Modified on 1/20/2022 to edit text (rweb, ). (Entered: 01/20/2022)

 

[NWRatCon]

Just read an interesting fact, one that I had never seen before. The four consistently 'conservative' justices on the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh, Thomas, Gorsuch and Alito plus Chief Justice Roberts are all Catholics. I wonder how they will rule if the religious discrimination case makes their docket.

Sotomayor and Barrett are Catholic, too. Breyer and Kagan are Jewish. There are no protestants on the SC bench.

 

[NWRatCon]

Religious organizations are allowed to discriminate bbasedon religion.

The operative question here is, are they allowed to discriminatewhen performing a government function? That's the point I keep trying to keep the focus on.

 

[Bodecea]

Yes life is hard when your own parents abandon you.

A promotion of abortion over adoption.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Maybe I'm in the wrong section of the US but it seems strange for a Protestant organization to discriminate against a Catholic (or vice versa) these days.