The State of Virginia is on track to enshrine even more discrimination in its laws, all in the name of religious freedom. Yesterday the State Senate passed a measure that would allow all private adoption agencies to discriminate in terms of who they allowed to adopt children based on religious or “moral” grounds.
As a practical matter this is a an anti-gay adoption bill that allows faith based and other private adoption agencies, which receive state funding, to continue to be funded by the state while also being able to use their prejudice as a criteria to prevent the adoption of children by those they find objectionable.
This law also includes placing children in foster care while awaiting adoption.
I have a real problem with these types of laws. It is great that organizations want to help with the process of adoption, but that desire should not give them a pass to discriminate. If any person or organization does not want to follow all the rules, then they should not be in the business. That is true whether one is a adoption agency or a pharmacist.
The arguments for this bill are pretty specious. From the Washington Postarticle on this:
But supporters of the legislation say it would protect religious freedom by ¬allowing birth parents to choose an agency — and as a result, adoptive parents — who adhere to their religious beliefs.
This one makes me crazy. If you are feel so strongly about how a child you are giving up for adoption should be raised, maybe, just maybe you should do it yourself. Please understand that I am not being callus here, I recognize that people sometimes have no choice in giving up a child, but once you do that, your wishes no longer matter, you have removed yourself from the decision making process.
And of course the conservatives are using their black-is-white up-is-down logic and claiming that this law prevents discrimination against them.
“This measure will chisel into law the principle that people of faith can adhere to their convictions without fear of reprisal from those who would discriminate against their religious beliefs regarding how we should raise our children,” said House Deputy Majority Leader C. Todd Gilbert(R-Shenandoah).
Let me say it once, for those in the cheap seats. Bigotry based on religious belief is still bigotry. If your god tells you to hate a certain group of people you might be cool with him or her,
but you are still a bigot.
There are, currently, 4,407 children in foster care in Virginia. 1,300 of them are looking for adoptive parents. By allowing some of the agencies that facilitate adoption to discriminate based on any old “moral” objection they want to throw up, means that more of those children will not have homes or parents. It is that simple.
While this is clearly pointed at gay citizens who want to adopt, the fact of the matter is this is going to impact lots of people it allows these agencies to deny placement based on age, gender, disability and, yes, sexual orientation.
But more importantly is the moral objection clause. This opens a can of worms that should not be allowed. Will these organizations decide that they won’t allow atheists to adopt? There is no religious protection in this. What about Catholics or Jews or Muslims?
We are reaching a logical conclusion with the interaction of religion and state services. It should be a simple matter. If a faith based organization wants to receive state money, then they must follow the rules of all organizations in that category.
If they do not like the rules, then they should not receive any money. Even then they should not be given a pass, as they are still going to be business. Let’s be clear, a religious business is still a business. There should be no distinction between businesses or non-profits that are run by religions and the ones that are not.
Religious freedom only applies to individuals. If your god tells you to be bigoted, well you are protected and allowed to be bigoted. However any business you are involved in, short of running an actual church, is something else. The rules need to be the same for everyone.
There are those in the religious communities that say this will force church groups out of social services, which they claim they are called to do. That is just not the case. There are ways to work around these issues and if there are not, then these groups should find other ways to serve the community.
It may very well be that if religious organizations are required to follow all the rules they will exit social services. That would be unfortunate, but it will not be the end of the world. The money that states are giving to religious organizations will be available to secular ones that actually focus on what is best for those served first, instead of a religious mission.
In the end, to me, I think that will make things better for everyone. If your religion is going to get in the way of providing social services, then you probably shouldn’t be providing them in the first place.
This is the whole problem with depending on churches and faith based organizations for these services in the first place. They have a conflict of interest. I know that many hospitals and universities were founded by religions, to serve the community. But as we move into the 21st Century, they must either adapt to the changing society they find themselves in or they need to be retired, just as we have retired the work houses and debtors prisons.
The floor is yours.