From Box Turtle Bulletin, some great news:
Miami-Date Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman has declared Florida’s gay adoption ban unconstitutional, saying, ”It is clear that sexual orientation is not a predictor of a person’s ability to parent.” This ruling grants Frank Gill, a gay foster father in North Miami, the go-ahead to adopt two foster children he has been raising since 2004. The two children are ages 4 and 8, making Frank virtually the only parent the younger child has ever known.
Lawyers for the state of Florida immediately said they would appeal the ruling. During the hearings, attorneys for the state brought in so-called “experts” George Rekers and Walter Schumm, both of whom are closely associated with Paul Cameron. Rekers used his own particular brand of junk science to support the state’s position that gays should be barred from adopting, adding that he believed the ban should extend to Native Americans for the same reasons.
From the Orlando Sentinel:
“These children are thriving. These words we don’t often hear within these walls. That’s uncontroverted,” said Circuit Judge Cindy S. Lederman. “They’re a good family. They’re a family in every way except in the eyes of the law. These children have a right to permanency,” the judge said. “The only real permanency is adoption in the home where they are thriving. … There is no rational basis to preclude homosexuals from adopting.”
Nice article.
If 2 gays live in a healthy relationship and decide to extend their wealth of goodness to a child who needs it ,…. then they are special.
Yeesh, talk about acting out the old line about “first they came for…”
First they came for the gays, then the “promiscuous” heterosexuals, then the Native Americans. Then the people with a genetic predisposition toward mental illness and substance abuse, even if those people had never shown any signs of either. Then the Republicans active in the GOP, because letting children be adopted by active Republicans would increase the possibility that the children would be around racists, even though the overwhelming majority of Republicans aren’t racists.
Why not? It’s not like there are thousands of children in foster case who need a good home.
Thank god – the judge is rational. Seldom does one get to hear about people being sensible (hopefully because it happens so often it’s not newsworthy?).
We’ll see what happens if this gets to the Florida Supreme Court. Crist just made 2 conservative appointments, but you never know.
Heh Rekers an expert…I read one of his NARTH “leader U” articles where his past research on correcting (read: heavy coercion with parental approval and parents playing a role in it) gender deviances (or what he perceives as such). He’s Kenneth Zucker’s predecessor in many ways.
The judge may be right that children adopted by homoexual couples do not (by the criteria he’s using) show any difference from children adopted by heterosexual couples. But how does that bear on the question of whether or not this is constitutional? What protections or rights oes the Florida State Constitution recognize for homosexuals?
Man, gay Native American’s must really be f*cked.
who is this Rekers asshole? So what happens to the MILLIONS of children born to parents who’ve had more than 18 sexual partners, or native americans, or gay people, etc And really, 18? WTF is so special about that number. How does ANYONE take this man seriously? Are we just supposed to strip promiscuous parents of their parental rights?
Yay for the judge with the common sense. WTF to that other jackass.
…how does anybody acting on behalf of a state government get away with relying on an “expert witness” who propounds that kind of abject bigotry? is this some uniquely Floridian kind of insanity, or are these attorneys’ pink slips in the mail as they should be?
Only 18 sexual partners? So that would exclude pretty much anyone who had a lot of fun in college.
“While at Harvard University, Dr. Rekers published the first experimental treatment study demonstrating that childhood cross-gender identity could be therapeutically reversed to a normal gender identity that matches the child’s anatomy.
…
Dr. Rekers is a past recipient of the NARTH Sigmund Freud Award for his research contributions on child gender identity disorder.”
He’s ex-gay version trans. The source for this is his wiki page (search for George Alan Rekers).
The judge may be right that children adopted by homoexual couples do not (by the criteria he’s using) show any difference from children adopted by heterosexual couples.
The criteria she’s using and I’m unaware of any decently conducted study that shows any difference in outcomes between children raised by gay or lesbian couples and children raised by straight couples, with the possible exception of an increased openness toward homosexuality (but no difference in probability of being gay or straight…just a decreased likelihood of being prejudiced against gays.)
Besides the preamble?
We, the people of the State of Florida, being grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, in order to secure its benefits, perfect our government, insure domestic tranquility, maintain public order, and guarantee equal civil and political rights to all, do ordain and establish this constitution.
and Article I, Section 2:
All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law
and depending on your definition of “particular persons” re: special laws, Article III, Section 11(16):
There shall be no special law or general law of local application pertaining to…legitimation or adoption of persons.
But, hey, I’m not a lawyer so that last one may be inapplicable. Doesn’t seem necessary, anyway, given the previous two.
Fundies have a bunch of weasel words they use to get around these sentiments regarding marriage, but none of those empty phrases can even pretend to relate to the adopting of children.
And really, 18? WTF is so special about that number.
Mr. Rekers himself must have had sixteen sexual partners before committing to a lifetime of monogamy. Obviously, therefore, anything over eighteen would be Just Way Overboard And Wrong. Anything under eighteen? Well, you know, perfectly understandable and normal, if symptomatic of our damaged society, and of course you ought to be ashamed of it now that you’re grown and know better, but oh! you stud, you! weren’t you the wild one! boyz will be boyz heh heh heh.
Isn’t that usually how evaluations of ‘promiscuity’ work?
RonF,
The judge affirmed the right of the children to not be arbitrarily deprived by the state of their best available family situation. As the Orlando Sentinel articles says:
“They’re a good family. They’re a family in every way except in the eyes of the law. These children have a right to permanency,” the judge said. “The only real permanency is adoption in the home where they are thriving. … There is no rational basis to preclude homosexuals from adopting.”
I presume you know that the rational basis test is the least restrictive of judical standards, one that almost never invalidates a law. The judge didn’t resort to the assumption that homosexual couples had any explicit rights, only that the legislature had no right to arbitrarily break up families and deprive children of good homes. Gay and lesbian Floridians require no greater constitutional protection than members of any other arbitrary group for this criteria to apply. The state has no legitimate interest in breaking up good families.
I’d love to see these “experts” adopt all the kids they would deny decent homes and families. No wait, I wouldn’t.
In the 1970s the Swiss put the children of Rom in their foster system. They not only wouldn’t let them adopt, they weren’t even seen as fit to raise their own children.