Making the most

Supporters of gay adoption are making the most of a second chance to comment on whether Virginia's Board of Social Services should implement proposed regulations to force state-licensed groups-including Christian organizations-to place children with gay and lesbian adoptive and foster parents. ("Comments re-opened," Aug. 19)

On April 20 the board had struck proposed regulations that would have prohibited organizations that place children from discriminating based on sexual orientation. ("Comments closed," May 23) That decision followed a comment period in February and March during which the board received 1,026 comments from individuals opposing the nondiscrimination language, including four from child placement agencies around the state. Only 33 individuals supported the nondiscrimination language, about 3 percent.

At the time, however, Equality Virginia, the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups said they would seek a suspension of the rules to allow further public comment, claiming the comment period got little notice. Under the state's Administrative Process Act, the board must reopen comment if at least 25 people make such a request. The new comment period runs from Sept. 12 to Oct. 12.

By Thursday of last week comments were running strongly in favor of forcing faith-based agencies to place children with homosexual parents. Of 524 responses in the comment forum on Virginia Regulatory Town Hall's website, 380 supported the change to (over 70 percent) with 128 opposed. Other responses were either unclear in opinion or were posted more than once.

Lisa Morgan said, "Ward and June Cleaver are not the only pattern for success. Loving parents come in all types, and loving families are made up of adults who care for children and children who feel safe and loved."

Willie Caldwell posted, "If I am to be treated as a half class citizen, then I think I will only pay half of my taxes. Discrimination of any kind shouldn't be tolerated."

"My intolerance has a first name," Jay Phillips said. "It's bologna!" He added, "Discriminating against such a household on grounds of one's 'religious freedom' makes about as much sense as requiring the FDA to ban the sale of pork in the name of 'religious freedom.'"

Janice Jacob said, "Like the Emperor who in the famous fable was convinced he could go through the town without clothes, so is the unrealistic reasoning that foster children or children waiting to be adopted do not require the same opportunity to be raised by a male father and a female mother."

Other citizens such as Mike M opposed the changes. "Think of the children," he posted. "It is hard growing up in foster care or being adopted. Don't confuse or stress a child anymore by forcing them to have two fathers or two mothers."

Another citizen who called himself "Hopeful" said, "Is the need really that great? I'm wondering if there really is a great shortage as advertised as I have been registered with social services for 3 years and have only had 2 very short placements."

Kathryn Lando said, "…to impose on faith based agencies regulations that they feel violate God given laws is like imposing on a Church regulations as to what they can preach. Private adoption agencies are an asset to our total Child Protective Custody system. Don't hamper their efforts by denying their right to work within their conscience."

Comments can be posted here.

(http://townhall.virginia.gov/L/comments.cfm?stageid=5857.2)