Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can Atheists Be Parents?
Time ^ | Dec. 07, 1970

Posted on 01/02/2008 4:38:37 PM PST by Dawnsblood

After six years of childless marriage, John and Cynthia Burke of Newark decided to adopt a baby boy through a state agency. Since the Burkes were young, scandal-free and solvent, they had no trouble with the New Jersey Bureau of Children's Services—until investigators came to the line on the application that asked for the couple's religious affiliation.

(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: New Jersey
KEYWORDS: 1970; adoption; atheist; law
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-49 next last

1 posted on 01/02/2008 4:38:40 PM PST by Dawnsblood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood

“Can Atheists Be Parents?”

Yes however they understand when they look into their child’s eyes and smiles, they only see worm food.


2 posted on 01/02/2008 4:40:03 PM PST by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood
I misread the headline as "CAN ATHEISTS BE PRIESTS?"

Ha.

3 posted on 01/02/2008 4:41:38 PM PST by jdm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdm

Yeah, sure, but they have to do to the schools for it just like everybody else.


4 posted on 01/02/2008 4:43:57 PM PST by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood

Alternate headline: “Can Time be in more love with Atheists”?


5 posted on 01/02/2008 4:45:23 PM PST by Sam's Army
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edcoil

What a dumb ass thing to say.


6 posted on 01/02/2008 4:45:29 PM PST by ShadowDancer ("To succeed in life, you need three things: a wishbone, a backbone and a funny bone.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood

Only by accident.


7 posted on 01/02/2008 4:45:37 PM PST by kjam22 (see me play the guitar here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noHy7Cuoucc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood; Admin Moderator

Exuse me, but the date you posted on the article was “ 1/7/08”. This article was published 12/07/1970, 37 years ago.


8 posted on 01/02/2008 4:45:51 PM PST by Paleo Conservative (I'm not celebrating Kwanza!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood
The freedom to practice religion includes the freedom to practice no religion.

My Protestant faith is so strong is needs no legislation to strengthen it.

9 posted on 01/02/2008 4:45:57 PM PST by MindBender26 (Is FR worth our time anymore? All the "fun" sees to be gone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edcoil

Care to explain that idiotic comment?


10 posted on 01/02/2008 4:47:11 PM PST by darkangel82 (And the band played on....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood

Makes me wonder if there are other issues at hand. Seems pretty arbitrary to reject because of a lack of religion.


11 posted on 01/02/2008 4:47:15 PM PST by onja ("The government of England is a limited mockery.") (France was a complete mockery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Time was online back in 1970? Algore had the internet invented by then?


12 posted on 01/02/2008 4:47:35 PM PST by jdm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

My apologies, you are correct.


13 posted on 01/02/2008 4:47:45 PM PST by Dawnsblood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood
Since the woman is a “pantheist”, which means she believes in God in some form, why didn’t these two join a Unitarian Church so they’d have a religion to put down on the adoption forms? If they really wanted a baby, they would have done something that accommodated his atheism while (ethically) enabling them to claim a religion. I think there’s more to this story. (Antoher point: a woman giving her baby up for adoption is free to choose the religion of the adoptive parents. How many such women do you think say it’s fine if their baby’s parents are atheists?)
14 posted on 01/02/2008 4:47:56 PM PST by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood
Last year the Burkes presented their adopted son, David, now 31, with a baby sister, Eleanor Katherine, now 17 months, whom they acquired from the same East Orange agency.

I think I'd be more concerned about the age of the parents. If they have a 31 year old adopted son, they'd have to be rather old to be adopting a 17 month old girl. Considering this article was published 37 years ago, the 31 year old son would now be 68, and the girl would now be 38½ years old.

15 posted on 01/02/2008 4:51:59 PM PST by Paleo Conservative (I'm not celebrating Kwanza!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edcoil
Yes however they understand when they look into their child’s eyes and smiles, they only see worm food.

No, we see a beautiful child that we hope to raise to be a good person and a benefit to humanity. What a depressing outlook you're projecting onto others.

16 posted on 01/02/2008 4:52:49 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood

I think even athiests are able to figure out how to insert tab A in slot B. Thats about all it takes to become parents.


17 posted on 01/02/2008 4:54:12 PM PST by festus (Fred Thompson '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood
Eleanor Katherine, now 17 months, whom they acquired

Isn't that a heartwarming statement. "Acquired." Like a land transaction. God help us all.

18 posted on 01/02/2008 4:57:41 PM PST by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdm

I saw the same thing. My eyes are failing fast :(


19 posted on 01/02/2008 4:58:10 PM PST by Past Your Eyes (You knew the job was dangerous when you took it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dawnsblood
For any who care to know, it was reversed on appeal. Sorry about the old article.
20 posted on 01/02/2008 4:59:49 PM PST by Dawnsblood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-49 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson