Arkansas Judge Overturns Morality

Mountain Journal News ^ | 29 Dec 2004

[TheBattman]

While you are saying a prayer for me, you might think about praying for help escaping the lifestyle you have apparently chosen for yourself and/or to condone.

You might choose to read up on the subject in the best handbook for life - called The Bible. IF you don't have one, let me know, I would be glad to get you one.

[University Professor]

I was an expert witness supporting the Arkansas regulation prohibiting homosexuals from being foster parents, on the basis of the best interests of the children. But the judge struck down the regulation prohibiting foster parenting by households with a homosexually behaving adult (Howard vs. CWARB case).

I found the trial of Howard v. CWARB to be utterly corrupt because both the plaintiffs and the state were represented by attorneys affiliated with the ACLU. The ACLU brought the plaintiffs case against the state. The state Child Welfare Board was represented by an active ACLU member, namely Kathy Hall.

I know for a fact that the Arkansas Bar has an ongoing investigation of Kathy Hall for this apparent gross conflict of interest. The Arkansas Bar is currently investigating the way in which Kathy Hall very clearly appears to have sabotaged the state's defense.

In another recent Arkansas case involving a homosexual youth, ACLU's Leslie Cooper (plaintiff's lawyer for Howard v. CWARB) and Kathy Hall (defendant's lawyer for Howard v. CWARB) served as co-counsel. I discovered the facts of this on the ACLU website.

I am shocked that Judge Tim Fox did not declare a mistrial because he was notified about this conflict of interest by another attorney in October. The CWARB and the Governor should file for a mistrial because ACLU activist attorneys were representing both the plaintiff and the defendant (the state) in Howard v. CWARB.

Because of their conduct, I just filed suit in Federal Court in Arkansas today against Kathy Hall and the other ACLU attorneys involved in this case.

Unfortunately in his written decision, Judge Tim Fox overlooked the scientific studies I presented as an expert witness in the case that show that the majority of foster children have psychological disorders resulting from their losses and maltreatment, and that any increased source of stress interferes with recovery from psychological disorder. This evidence clearly pertains to the welfare of the foster children which ran counter to the Judge's legal basis for his ruling in which he said the regulation was enforcing morality and did not pertain to the welfare of the child (which is probably why he ignored the scientific evidence I presented).

I hope you can get the truth out to the public on this scandal.

Sincerely,

George A. Rekers, Ph.D.
Professor of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science
University of South Carolina School of Medicine

[Dimensio]

What about the testimony of witnesses who said that foster children in the same household as a homosexual adult were no less well adjusted than other foster children? Did you think that it was invalid, or should the judge have disregarded it all in favor of yours simply because you're special?

From the stories that I read, the judge did not just rule on "public morality", but also found that children in such households weren't adversely affected.

It would seem to me that the judge didn't simply "disregard" your testimony, as you claim, but that he took the word of the plaintiff witnesses over yours. It might help your credibility if your tailored your arguments to that fact rather than distorting the nature of the ruling.

[steplock]

Anyone who will display their sexual perversions openly and then demand that everone cheer them and declare them normal .....

We would not allow a child to be placed in a heterosexual whorehouse either! What about allowing habitual criminals to adopt? Hey - that's only a "lifestyle", no?

If homosexuals are allowed to adopt children, then where do we stop with the abnormal? well -- bestiality is a choice also is it not? sado-masochists? pedophiles?

You will cry that of course we shouldn't put the children in jeapordy with pedophiles, but what the hell do you think NAMBLA is except homosexuals who want the right to rape little boys - and all the homosexual organizations openly endorse NAMBLA (North America Man-Boy Love Assoc - or something like that).

No - homosexuality is NOT NORMAL - otherwise you could procreate (without the aid of another -gasp!- sex). Nature, unaided, culls out the defective.

I know homosexuals, I have friends who are homosexuals and I respect them as people. They don't hide their partners either. But they do not practice perversion openly and corrupt children. I do not accept that from anyone no matter what their preference is.

We should also never allow people with diminished mental capacity to adopt either. People with mental imbalances are dangerous to children.

Let's take this treasonous judge --- if you do not make laws according to the prevailing morals of the communisty - what do you make laws for?

answer: if you are a politician-lawyer-judge --- for whoever pays the highest price! Until "We, the People" enact the Second Amendment again.

[Dimensio]

Anyone who will display their sexual perversions openly and then demand that everone cheer them and declare them normal .....

Huh?

We would not allow a child to be placed in a heterosexual whorehouse either!

Who said putting children in any kind of whorehouse? Why is it that so many people are throwing in these red herrings? Are your arguments against allowing children in foster homes where a homosexual is present so weak and devoid of merit that you have to wave your hands around in an attempt to distract from the real issue?

What about allowing habitual criminals to adopt? Hey - that's only a "lifestyle", no?

Tell you what. Tell me why we shouldn't allow habitual criminals to adopt (note: I agree that habitual criminals should not be allowed to adopt). Then find a way to relate that reasoning to not allowing children to enter foster care where a homosexual is present. Right now, I don't quite see how the two issues are related.

If homosexuals are allowed to adopt children, then where do we stop with the abnormal? well -- bestiality is a choice also is it not? sado-masochists? pedophiles?

Again, is your argument against allowing homosexuals to be present in foster homes so weak that you have to toss in these red herrings?

You will cry that of course we shouldn't put the children in jeapordy with pedophiles, but what the hell do you think NAMBLA is except homosexuals who want the right to rape little boys - and all the homosexual organizations openly endorse NAMBLA (North America Man-Boy Love Assoc - or something like that).

You would help your credibility if you didn't lie and claim that homosexuals universally support NAMBLA.

Do you know what the Rene Guyon Society is? It's a group of heterosexuals who believe that adult-child sexual contact is healthy and normal. By your reasoning, we should keep foster children out of the care of heterosexuals.

No - homosexuality is NOT NORMAL

Left-handedness is also NOT NORMAL. Going from red herrings to irrelevant factiods. The frequency of homosexuality within the population has no bearing on whether or not it poses a direct harm to children.

otherwise you could procreate (without the aid of another -gasp!- sex). Nature, unaided, culls out the defective.

Ah, so homosexuality is now "bad" because two people of the same gender cannot procreate. I'm sorry, I don't see how the lack of procreative ability equals "bad thing". I can't reproduce simply by taking a shower, so should I stop bathing?

I know homosexuals, I have friends who are homosexuals and I respect them as people.

Which is why you associate all homosexuals with NAMBLA, right? Lots of respect there.

They don't hide their partners either.

I don't see why they should.

But they do not practice perversion openly and corrupt children.

And any homosexual who would do this should not be near children, nor should any heterosexual who would do this. This is yet another red herring.

I do not accept that from anyone no matter what their preference is.

Well, you won't get argument from me. Apparently, however, you are under the mistaken impression that this ruling was about "allowing homosexuals to practice their perversion openly and corrupt children".

We should also never allow people with diminished mental capacity to adopt either. People with mental imbalances are dangerous to children.

Red herring.

Let's take this treasonous judge --- if you do not make laws according to the prevailing morals of the communisty - what do you make laws for?

Deliberate evasion of the point. The judge ruled that DHS did not have the authority to regulate morality, not the state. The judge's ruling was based on the fact that DHS did not have the authority to make regulations simply based upon "moral" decisions (not that the state can't make such regulations) and that the state failed to show that children suffer any harm from being in households where homosexuals are present.

answer: if you are a politician-lawyer-judge --- for whoever pays the highest price! Until "We, the People" enact the Second Amendment again.

Is that a death threat? Is your position really so devoid of factual arguments that you're willing to resort to violence to silence any attempt to inject rationality into the matter?

[missanne]

Yes it is a problem..any elected state rep or senator can write a law, but the problem I think is we don't have enough senators and reps with the testicular fortitude to pass it through the committee process and into the chambers for a vote...... We need more Republicans in both chambers and we don't have it.

What we need is a movement of ordinary folks calling their Reps and Senators pushing them to realize this ain't going to happen in AR! Children need a mom and a dad (of the opposite sex)! It going to fall back on us the citizens to make them feel the heat! Support your local county Republican Party! Join it, work it, know who your elected officals are and make sure they KNOW you and your VALUES or we will lose this one.

[Dimensio]

We need more Republicans in both chambers and we don't have it.

Actually, as a result of reactionary screeching not based upon logic or reason, there's a push in the Arkansas state legislature to rewrite the law to give DHS the authority "regulate morality" in addition to their other duties and it does have bipartisan support from legislators who could care less about reality and who wish to ignore the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever that the now overturned restriction in any way "protected children".

Children need a mom and a dad (of the opposite sex)!

So would you support restricting foster children exclusively to households with married couples? I understand that the now overturned restriction originally started with a plan to prevent children from being taken into foster homes by single adults of any sexual orientation, but that much got scrapped.

[Ahban]

I think we do have enough to get it passed once someone confronts them with it. Even Democrats will vote for it once the choice is before them. Sen. Holt has shown that if you stick to your guns on the right issues, you can take a tremendous, vicious, and personal wave of assaults from the print media and still come out highly popular. The other, more timid, legislators were watching.

[Ahban]

Thanks for that first hand report. It sounds like you have uncovered a serious problem. That is what I love about the Freeper network- we have lot's of reporters on the scene

[Ahban]

You sure are quick to accuse others of lying, distorting, etc. The Professor was a first hand witness to this event whereas the rest of us are just reading stories.

Since you are so quick to accuse others of lies and distoritions I am sure you won't mind being held to the same standard- I don't believe anything you say on this issue. I don't trust you on it because it is so clear that you are willing to say anything, and be hateful to any number of people, in an effort to justify this wickedness.

[Dimensio]

The Professor was a first hand witness to this event whereas the rest of us are just reading stories.

And the judge's ruling is a matter of public record. It's not hard to discover that the Professor is at the very least being misleading about the judge's ruling.

I don't trust you on it because it is so clear that you are willing to say anything, and be hateful to any number of people, in an effort to justify this wickedness.

Yes. I ask for reasonable justification while other people are openly comparing all homosexuals to child molesters, rapists and murderers and I'm the one being unreasonable.

[Ahban]

Not "all" perhaps- that is you trying to put words in the mouths of others, but a diproportionate number of child molesters ARE homosexuals.

And the judge's ruling is, by definition, the judge's side of the story. With the insanity coming out of the courts these days, I am more inclined to accept the Professor's version.

[RightOnline]

Save it. A couple of gays cooing over a baby is a far cry from raising a child. I have raised / am raising seven, so I'm qualified to say that.

They need a mother AND a father.......and a moral upbringing. Don't pretend or be naive enough to believe that two gays are capable of that.

[RightOnline]

First, I'm not "homophobic". That implies "fear", and I am not afraid of gays. It's a stupid word coined by the gay community and liberals.......don't use it here.

Second, I don't have preconceived notions about gays. I know exactly what makes someone gay. It's 100% based upon their sexual preferences for members of their same sex; hardly a reason to celebrate them, and hardly a proper role model in ANY sense for children, especially young children. Kids do need male and female influences in their parents, period. Now do I really have to explain to you why??

[goldstategop]

I guess laws prohibiting crime and banning public indecency are also unconstitutional now. As I keep saying, liberal judges are the bane of our society.

[TheBattman]

When you get in an argument of morality with someone who has no moral compass, you just can't win, no matter how true and accurate you are.

We know that if God had intended for Homosexuals to have and raise children, they would be biologically capable of doing just that. But guess what - they can't.

I personally am growing tired of this troll/Christian baiting homosexual and this thread. He/It is trying to get us to look like fools when he/she/it already has nothing to loose.

Hope you all have fun....

And to pjacobs - I pray that some day, you will finally come to the realization that you are a sinner (we all are) and that you need something more than your deviant lifestyle to be complete - and that is the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ who came to this Earth, humbled himself, and died a horrific death to pay for your sins and the sins of the whole world. Without HIM, your short life on this Earth will be followed by an eternity you cannot fathom.

[steplock]

Prospero Ano Nuevo, Battman!

I don't mind the trolls. or liberals on this board as long as they are honest about themselves - it gives us a lively discussion.

Only when there is no discussion ands simply trading of "talking points" does it become useless noise. Unfortunately the left wing radicals have been thoroughly dumbed-down by their own propaganda techniques where they cannot think for themselves anymore and can ONLY spout what they have been programmed for.

It used to be called "propaganda", "Brainwashing", now they are calling it "progressive thinking" ... talk about the ultimate oxymoron!!