Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill against gay couples

[Wry Catcher]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

Kansas has enough economic troubles, now they will need to fund more foster homes.

See the Conservative experiment in Kansas, and how well it performed:

The Great Kansas Tax Cut Experiment Crashes And Burns

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Breaking News!! Thousands of people all over America are claiming that they have the right to engage in bestiality and marry their children under the 14th Amendment based on same sex marriage

Home

Hyperbole won't win the day in court for you either. Millions of polygamists are claiming they have the right to marry. Will you deny them? How exactly? Don't quote me that in alternative lifestyles that somehow the number "two" is sacred in marriage...

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Is that ^^ going to be an argument your LGBT cult will pitch to the USSC when this behavioral issue comes up finally front and center? Five cartoons of a cow crying?

 

[dblack]

You really gotta cut back on the gay porn.

But Losers say there's nothing wrong with it.

There's not. But if folks like you and Sil don't like it, as you claim, why are you so obsessed with it?

If there's nothing wrong with it, why would say to stop watching it?

So you'll stop whining about it?

I support the heteros.

By watching gay porn? Really taking one for the team, eh?

 

[Aba Incieni]

But Losers say there's nothing wrong with it.

There's not. But if folks like you and Sil don't like it, as you claim, why are you so obsessed with it?

If there's nothing wrong with it, why would say to stop watching it?

So you'll stop whining about it?

I support the heteros.

By watching gay porn? Really taking one for the team, eh?

You said for me not to, not that I ever did.

Because I support the hetero cause. You?

#HeteroPride.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Breaking News!! Thousands of people all over America are claiming that they have the right to engage in bestiality and marry their children under the 14th Amendment based on same sex marriage

Home

Hyperbole won't win the day in court for you either. Millions of polygamists are claiming they have the right to marry. Will you deny them? How exactly? Don't quote me that in alternative lifestyles that somehow the number "two" is sacred in marriage...

I would try to explain it to you but your pathetically abysmal knowledge of constitutional law, and distorted sense of reality would make that pretty much a waist of my time.

Millions of polygamists are claiming they have the right to marry???.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Millions of polygamists are claiming they have the right to marry.

2 men with 29 wives and 160 children between them sentenced to house arrest following polygamy conviction

Tip leads to arrest of polygamist Mormon sect leader Lyle Jeffs, FBI says - CNN

Leader of Polygamist Mormon Sect Is Arrested

Funny how legalized same sex marriage did not keep these guys out of trouble. How do you explain that ?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Millions of polygamists are claiming they have the right to marry

The few that actually did got kicked out of court

U.S. Supreme Court won’t hear ‘Sister Wives’ polygamy case

 

[Aba Incieni]

The new SCOTUS will probably rule that homos are an abomination. Build internment camps for them and let them **** each other to death.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

Well first, the title of your thread is inaccurate.
It was not against gay couples, it was supportive of the rights of faith based organizations to practice their faith.
I know you all do not think freedom of religion is important, but it just happens to be one of the founding pillars of our country.
The gay couples are absolutely free to go to any non faith based adoption agency they want.

Now breathe....and count to 3. Everything is OK.

 

[Gracie]

I know you all do not think freedom of religion is important, but it just happens to be one of the founding pillars of our country.

You know nothing about me so cease with the assumptions that you do.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I know you all do not think freedom of religion is important, but it just happens to be one of the founding pillars of our country.

You know nothing about me so cease with the assumptions that you do.

"You all" is referring to the people going apeshit in this thread...not you specifically.
But the thread title is inaccurate.

 

[Gracie]

I know you all do not think freedom of religion is important, but it just happens to be one of the founding pillars of our country.

You know nothing about me so cease with the assumptions that you do.

"You all" is referring to the people going apeshit in this thread...not you specifically.
But the thread title is inaccurate.

The title of the thread is what was on the website I found it on, that I copied and pasted. Quite some time ago, I might add. Go ***** at them.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

Well first, the title of your thread is inaccurate.
It was not against gay couples, it was supportive of the rights of faith based organizations to practice their faith.
I know you all do not think freedom of religion is important, but it just happens to be one of the founding pillars of our country.
The gay couples are absolutely free to go to any non faith based adoption agency they want.

Now breathe....and count to 3. Everything is OK.

1.The tittle is not inaccurate. It reads : "Critic say....." And only an idiot would believe that it is not directed at same sex couples.

2. Freedom of religion, like all freedoms are not absolute. They must be exercised with mindfulness of who your actions effect

3. Not considering same sex couple may well mean that some children will not be adopted. It harms children, but I never knew an apologist for bigots who cared much about that.

4.Being turned away is discrimination. It is at minimum an inconvenience and possibly a humiliating and demeaning experience.

5 Finding the right match between prospective adoptive parents and children is a complicated process. Couples may become aware of children who are in need of a home by various means before going to the agency. Every possibility for a match must be considered. Again , Children will be harmed

6. Religious freedom means that you can openly practice your faith without fear. It does not mean that you can wield it like a weapon against those who you disapprove of.

7. These agencies accept public funds while discriminating in the name of religion. That is unconstitutional

 

[iamwhatiseem]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

Well first, the title of your thread is inaccurate.
It was not against gay couples, it was supportive of the rights of faith based organizations to practice their faith.
I know you all do not think freedom of religion is important, but it just happens to be one of the founding pillars of our country.
The gay couples are absolutely free to go to any non faith based adoption agency they want.

Now breathe....and count to 3. Everything is OK.

1.The tittle is not inaccurate. It reads : "Critic say....." And only an idiot would believe that it is not directed at same sex couples.

2. Freedom of religion, like all freedoms are not absolute. They must be exercised with mindfulness of who your actions effect

3. Not considering same sex couple may well mean that some children will not be adopted. It harms children, but I never knew an apologist for bigots who cared much about that.

4.Being turned away is discrimination. It is at minimum an inconvenience and possibly a humiliating and demeaning experience.

5 Finding the right match between prospective adoptive parents and children is a complicated process. Couples may become aware of children who are in need of a home by various means before going to the agency. Every possibility for a match must be considered. Again , Children will be harmed

6. Religious freedom means that you can openly practice your faith without fear. It does not mean that you can wield it like a weapon against those who you disapprove of.

7. These agencies accept public funds while discriminating in the name of religion. That is unconstitutional

Nope.
You have an opinion, and that is fine.
Mine is different.
I am not religious, but I am aware that religious freedom is a HUGE part of our history. And is well protected. And should remain so.
If an organization is founded and operated by a religion, they should have full right to reasonably exercise their beliefs, which include the right to refuse to go against those beliefs.
The gay couples have other options.And those are unaffected.
And BTW, the Supreme Court agrees with me. And for damn sure will keep agreeing for decades to come.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

May 4 (Reuters) - The Kansas Legislature on Friday approved a bill that allows faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on religious beliefs, and the state's governor said he would sign it.

Under the measure, the Kansas Department for Children and Families cannot block any foster or adoption agency, including those that receive public funds, from participating in its programs only because it refuses to adopt or place children with gay people.

Opponents of the bill said they will likely mount a legal challenge.

Kansas lawmakers pass adoption bill critics say is biased against gay couples

Mixed emotions about this. As with ALL adoptions, every couple should pass a rigid strict test of some sort to make sure they are of sound mind. Which should already be the case, right?
And....if the agency that is handling the adoption states it is against their religious beliefs, that should be protected. Parents wanting to adopt can do so from other agencies that are not religious in nature, one would think.

Your thoughts?

Well first, the title of your thread is inaccurate.
It was not against gay couples, it was supportive of the rights of faith based organizations to practice their faith.
I know you all do not think freedom of religion is important, but it just happens to be one of the founding pillars of our country.
The gay couples are absolutely free to go to any non faith based adoption agency they want.

Now breathe....and count to 3. Everything is OK.

1.The tittle is not inaccurate. It reads : "Critic say....." And only an idiot would believe that it is not directed at same sex couples.

2. Freedom of religion, like all freedoms are not absolute. They must be exercised with mindfulness of who your actions effect

3. Not considering same sex couple may well mean that some children will not be adopted. It harms children, but I never knew an apologist for bigots who cared much about that.

4.Being turned away is discrimination. It is at minimum an inconvenience and possibly a humiliating and demeaning experience.

5 Finding the right match between prospective adoptive parents and children is a complicated process. Couples may become aware of children who are in need of a home by various means before going to the agency. Every possibility for a match must be considered. Again , Children will be harmed

6. Religious freedom means that you can openly practice your faith without fear. It does not mean that you can wield it like a weapon against those who you disapprove of.

7. These agencies accept public funds while discriminating in the name of religion. That is unconstitutional

Nope.
You have an opinion, and that is fine.
Mine is different.
I am not religious, but I am aware that religious freedom is a HUGE part of our history. And is well protected. And should remain so.
If an organization is founded and operated by a religion, they should have full right to reasonably exercise their beliefs, which include the right to refuse to go against those beliefs.
The gay couples have other options.And those are unaffected.
And BTW, the Supreme Court agrees with me. And for damn sure will keep agreeing for decades to come.

Fine, have your opinion. But just so that you know, repeating your -however many times you wish to- does not negate or refute the points that I made. Children will be hurt in the name of God and religious freedom

 

[Syriusly]

Would you say it spews out like the death sperm of an AIDS guy cumming in some homo's butt, sentencing him to a slow death from vomiting and diarrhea?

You really gotta cut back on the gay porn.

But Losers say there's nothing wrong with it.

Plus it's hard to avoid when it parades in front of kiddies down main street in most towns across the US since the 1960s.

Yep- those gays holding hands are on parade- and clearly a threat to kids.....

 

[Syriusly]

It would halt married homos from adopting children.

Just pass a law stopping the adoptions.

I personally don't care if deviant faggots "play house" and pretend to be married.

They can adopt cats.

I don't even care if they **** their cats.

The bottom line really is, if they had just shut the **** up years ago when people stopped jumping out of pick up trucks and kicking their asses, no one would care what they did. It wasn't good enough though. They insisted on having special rights and shoving their deviance in everyone's face.

.

And by 'special rights' you mean not having assholes jump out of pickup trucks and kicking their asses?

 

[Syriusly]

If they don't receive tax payer money it's their house their rules.

I'm a Taxpayer, and I don't want MY taxes funding the sodomites agenda.

I'm a Taxpayer, and I don't want my taxes funding the Christian bigotry agenda.

 

[Syriusly]

Breaking News!! Thousands of people all over America are claiming that they have the right to engage in bestiality and marry their children under the 14th Amendment based on same sex marriage

Home

Hyperbole won't win the day in court for you either. Millions of polygamists are claiming they have the right to marry. Will you deny them?

Where are all of those polygamists legally marrying each other?

Ever since Obergefell you have been telling us that polygamists can now legally have plural marriages.

Where are they>

Why are you denying them marriage?

LOL