[Alberta's Child]

Part of the problem is that many of these hospitals with religious affiliations do so much business with government agencies that they can barely (if at all) be considered "religious" in any sense of the word.

Look what happened in some cities when governments began passing laws recognizing (and mandating) same-sex adoption. That drove many Catholic organizations to get out of adoption programs that they never should have been involved with in the first place.

[Albion Wilde]

...when governments began passing laws recognizing (and mandating) same-sex adoption. That drove many Catholic organizations to get out of adoption programs that they never should have been involved with in the first place.

Seems that confidential pastoral care, religious avoidance of baby-killing, maternity wards and adoption go hand-in-hand, to me. What is your objection?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Not quite sure what you mean, saying religious organizations should not have been involved in adoptions to begin with.

The Catholic Church has been involved with adoptions since the Acts of the Apostles. St. Lawrence, the deacon-martyr and so forth: caring for "orphans and widows and sojourners in the land" was "their thing." Since the Prophets of Israel, in fact.

The Church has a lot more business doing this, than the State.

Don't you think?