Skip to comments.Gillibrand bill encourages LGBT adoption (cuts of federal $$$ to entities that won't let them adopt)
Posted on 10/31/2011 6:39:24 PM PDT by markomalley
For the first time in Senate history, a bill has been introduced to encourage agencies not to discriminate against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender couples seeking to adopt.
As more and more LGBT couples are getting married and starting families, we have a great opportunity to place children without a family into happy homes, said Sen. Kirsten E. Gillibrand, New York Democrat and lead sponsor of the Every Child Deserves a Family Act, Monday at the Huffington Post.
The past year has seen many moves toward gay equality, and the momentum is there to build on our progress, she said, noting the repeal of dont ask, dont tell, passage of gay marriage in New York and the unprecedented assault on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in the U.S. Senate and in the courts.
Ms. Gillibrands bill would deny federal funding to any entity that considers sexual orientation, gender identity or marital status when contemplating prospective foster or adoptive families. A companion bill already has been introduced in the House by Rep. Fortney Pete Stark, California Democrat.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
A direct shot against the bow for all Catholic adoption agencies. Yet another reason to reject all federal funding. With shekels come shackles.
Protion of sex deviance, and destruction of the family=Marxist/Communist Ideals.
Gotta let those lesbos turn little boys into “princesses” donja know.
This is the same person who acted like a Conservative a few years back.. Even supported gun rights. The “bam bam” she turned into a left wing idiot. I just do not understand how someone is so sleezy and yes HATEFUL. Although if you take .gov money you have to dance to their tune.
It’s not unusual for women to say they would rather kill their babies then let them be “adopted out.” This sort of thing makes adoption an even less desirable alternative.
This wench needs to be defeated next year... Shes Chuckies lap dog.
The inevitable conclusion of this is that the Federal Government will end up involved in another fuction it is not suited for, and less children will end up finding loving homes. Homosexuals make up 2% of the population. A tiny percentage of all homosexuals choose monogamous relationships and want to adopt, but their "rights" trump everything.
I can not imagine any reason, whatsoever, for any Christian agency to take federal money to take care of children. That said, it’s dead in the house, so we can await The Present in the White House to order this by executive order next.
Isn’t she the one that Dingy Harry said was hot?
Riiiiight. As if this is being done in the best interests of the children instead of what's best for the gay activist agenda.
According to her bio on Wiki, she's Roman Catholic herself. Go figure.
As more GLBT get married?????? Just what is it that the Bisexuals are doing ???? Marrying a man and a woman each??? I have a gay male friend who married a lesbian woman and no one objected. They latter got divorced and she now lives with another lesbian. I have a male transsexual acquaintance who has at seperate times “married” a straight man and latter a lesbian woman, and finally another transsexual man. At any rate I am getting quite confused about the whole thing...
“According to her bio on Wiki, she’s Roman Catholic herself. Go figure.”
As a Roman Catholic, I must say it is a disgrace that so many attacks on the family originate in the schismatic American Catholic Church. Every member of the hierarchy that doesn’t publicly excommunicate the “Catholic” politicians pushing these attacks on the Church should be sacked; they have created a “shadow Church” with no visible link to Christianity.
The article says the Catholic agencies have already stepped back from running child placement services because they have been forced into dealing with LGBT couples.
The real kicker in this article is that a reivew of 59 studies was recently published that contradicts the proposed leglislation. The conclusion of the review was that broad statements equating the rearing of children in gay/lesbian households to the rearing of children in straight households cannot be supported. Gillibrand runs counter to the recent research (and centuries of common sense) in favor of an ideology that promotes gay/lesbian activiism.
Gillibrand is Roman Catholic herself, at least per her bio on Wikipedia.
So children are to be sentenced to a life with queers, freaks and perverts without even a trial?
The skank senator from New York. She was Cuomo’s bitch at Hud.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
Why in the name of all that is holy is the Federal Government involved in adoptions anyway?? When our government forces perversion onto children - IT'S TIME TO TAKE A STAND AND SAY "ENOUGH!!! NO MORE!" Our tax money goes to fund not only insanely useless junk but pure, unadulterated evil. The way for people to become free of this particular evil (and actually many others...) is to STOP BITING THE POISON APPLE!! If an organization or school stops taking federal money - well by golly, then can tell the federal government to shove their evil perverted and communist freedom grabbing agenda where the sun doesn't shine!
“For the first time in Senate history, a bill has been introduced to encourage agencies not to discriminate against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender couples seeking to adopt.”
Constitutional ? Nope.
How can we let children be raised without the balance a father and mother provide?
Whatever happened to freedom of conscience and personal choice?
Why not let the mothers giving their children decide what kind of household they want their child raised in?
Wouldn’t that be the most ‘liberal’ thing to do?
This is also about letting perverts have full access to other people’s children. The days of ancient Rome when male queers were allowed to sell, trade, and use young boys are returning to modern times. Those icons of the gay community, Jeff Dahmer and John Gacey, led the way.
you don’t mind if I say that K Gillibrand is a despicable whore, do you?
There should not be federl funding of ANY adoption agencies. Disagree? Find it for me in the Constitution.
In some states, Catholic Charities was doing adoption/foster care BEFORE the state/federal government got involved, just as Father Damien de Veuster did for the Lepers here in Hawaii BEFORE the Hawaiian Monarchy went to see what he was doing in Molokai. The new federal bills in House (STARK-D-CA) HR 1681 (currently with 83 co-sponsors or almost 1/4 of the House) and Senate (Gillibrand-D-NY) S. 1770 just mimic what happened in Massachusetts (2006), DC (2010), and Illinois (just now transferring all cases) BTW, the day after Gillibrand introduced, I had a whole lot of energy and started: http://saintdamienadvocates.org
That specifically is for fighting all this (I used to be a foster family agency social worker, worked a few adoption cases too) as I see this as pretty massive and needing ‘Big Motion.’ Already sent letters out to speak at various places, did first ‘2 minute talk’ on Oahu over this (people were aghast, had no idea), here in Hawaii, and sent letters out nationwide also on doing more about this. It’s a fight. Take Care!
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Don’t forget Harry Hay
I thought we had two branches, House and Senate. There is no way this bill would get through the House. If it were to get passed in the House, the Republican Party would cease to exist.
I believe Gillibrand is up for reelection again next year, so let’s all do what we can to make sure she loses.
Talk and email everyone you know, write letters to editors about this issue, and here are a few other issues that might encourage many voters to vote against her:
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, has a 100% rating from NARAL and Planned Parenthood, and is such a strong abortion proponent that she even voted No on restricting UN funding for population control policies, which would mean your tax dollars would pay for abortions in foreign countries.
Sen. Gillibrand voted 98% with her Party, which obviously includes the massive spending the Democratic Party added to the debt.
Gillibrand was for our Second Amendment rights as congresswoman in her relatively conservative district, BUT weak on our Second Amendment rights after she became U.S. Senator and was told publicly to change her position by Sen. Schumer.
The Democrats want to keep the country focused on this nonsense to keep the focus off of the economy.
It’s a planned distraction, that’s all. Republicans should just refuse to even discuss the issue. Tell the interviewer that we have more important things on our minds right now and that we will deal with social issues when we get the economic issues out of the way.
The social issues are the most important issues, so I will never be silent on them. Over one million unborn children are slaughered year after year. However, we can discuss the economy at the same time.
“Republican Bob Turner won handily over the Democratic candidate in a district that no a Republican has won since 1923. His opponent’s vote in favor of same-sex “marriage” in the New York legislature played an important role in the Republican’s victory. Every significant GOP candidate for president is pro-life; most are opposed to same-sex “marriage”;
To summarize, Americans are deeply troubled by the financial crisis that affects each of us and threatens our nation’s economic security. We are equally disturbed by the worsening moral climate under the radical left policies of President Obama and the liberal elites who both deny and seek to undermine the nation’s Judeo-Christian foundation and heritage. The nation has rarely seen a voting public more motivated to bring back fiscal stability and sound moral principles to the public square.
You need to put the social issues at the bottom of your list until we get rid of the left. The left uses the social issues to tear us apart and destroy the moral fabric that holds us together, but it is the economic issues that are most important to the left. The social issues are just a tool. We need to hit them where it will hurt the most and that is on the economic issues.
After we get them out of office, we will have the time and the power to fix the social issues. The way it stands now, we are helpless against the left’s strangle hold on the academia and our youth.
“You need to put the social issues at the bottom of your list ..”
The left would love that, and meanwhile 4,000 unborn innocents are murdered each day.
I gave you an example of a congressman who won the election in a liberal district BECAUSE he was a social conservative. We CAN do it all.
Conservatism is a way of life, and there’s more to being a conservatism than being ONLY a fiscal conservative.
Add another 'no', please...
Ah yes. Encourage the deviants to adopt children and then appear shocked and appalled when homosexual pedofiles run rampant across the country.
Oh please, I am not proposing any legislative changes. I am proposing that we do not bother to argue the point with liberals. They know where we stand and we don’t need to waste time or effort arguing with them.
Who are the liberals we are arguing with?
Sorry, but I’m afraid I don’t know what you are talking about.
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.