Why did Catholic Charities get out of the child adoption services in MA?

[TaleWgnDg]

.
Why did Catholic Charities get out of the child adoption services in MA? That's right. Catholic Charities (in Massachusetts) has chosen to get out of the child adoption services, entirely! It will no longer handle gay (parent) adoptions of children in Massachusetts. It will no longer handle heterosexual (parent) adoptions of children in Massachusetts.

Why? Because it painted itself into a legal corner in which it could not get out of . . . unless it removed itself entirely from Massachusetts child adoption services.

Well, what happened?

Massachusetts has a law on its books that does not allow discrimination against gays who want to adopt children. The Roman Catholic Church through its Catholic Charities in Massachusetts suddenly -- after an edict from Rome -- refused to handle cases of gay parents seeking adoption of children. The Board of Directors of Catholic Charities had a revolt. Many Board members quit instead of being a part of discrimination against gays. Those Board members claimed that Catholic Charities would not be serving the best interests of the children if it discriminated against gays who sought adoption.

Thereafter, Catholic Charities seemed to seek out Governor Romney for an executive order go-around that would allow Catholic Charities to discriminate against gays seeking child adoptions. No can do under Massachusetts law. Catholic Charities then sought legislative help for a go-around to the anti-discrimination laws in Massachusetts. Again, Catholic Charities hit a brick wall because the Massachusetts state legislature refused.

Then reality hit the fan. Uuummmm, the wallet, that is. Oops.

Catholic Charities suddenly realized that if it discriminated in its adoption services, claiming and seeking a "religious freedom" exception to the Massachusetts law, then Catholic Charities would lose money. Lots of money. Yes, United Way could not contribute to Boston Catholic Charities (as it did last year with a gift of $1.2 million) if Catholic Charities discriminated against gays seeking to adopt children. Catholic Charities would also be placing private charitable contributions in doubt as well. The Boston Globe reports that "Catholic Charities relies heavily on private contributions from corporations, foundations, and individual donors. In the last fiscal year, it received $6.6 million -- or 24 percent of its total revenue -- from these private sources."

So, if Catholic Charities is set to lose millions in annual contributions if it discriminates against gays seeking to adopt children in Massachusetts, what happens next? Of course, Catholic Charities then puts a band-aid upon the entire matter by backing out of the adoption of children services entirely!! It figures that if its out of the adoption services business entirely, then it isn't discriminating, correct? Indeed. BTW, who the hell are these lawyers who give (soon-to-be-Cardinal) O'Malley all this glorious but stupid legal advice and without appropriate legal foresight? Surely, Rogers has been fired?!

In any event, did I call it correctly on this one? Yup. I said "(f)ollow the money on this baby. Seriously. I'll bet the house that money will be the determining factor w/ this beaut." And, that turned out to be true. The Boston Globe reports that Catholic Charities will stop providing child adoption services in Massachusetts "because state law allows gays and lesbians to adopt (children)." (Soon-to-be Cardinal) O'Malley is claiming "religious freedom" while The Holy See claims gays as parents do harm to children. An unsubstantiated claim, BTW.

The unfortunate and sad losers in all of this are the kids. Yes, the children. As one who has worked long and hard in the legal area of state intervention and as a child's legal advocate particularly special needs kids, I find it unconscionable that the Roman Catholic Church has taken such a hard and wrongful step back into discrimination. The kids lose out. More kids will remain without adoptive parents. Parents who are willing, fit, and able to care for our state's most needy children -- special needs kids who seek adoption. Catholic Charities has provided adoptive services for these kids for almost a century. Suddenly, Rome says "no!" No, It's "immoral" and "harmful" to place kids in the homes of gays. How unintelligent, self-righteous, and unsubstantiated can it get?


___________________________________

For background material about this issue, see this DU thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=158x7867

[xchrom]

1. this is a temporary situation.

no way have they or any other conservative christian group given up the fight re: gay adoption or marriage.

they're not interested in the inch they're given -- they're interested in the mile.

religous freedom isn't the goal -- it's to get every one to play by their rules.

you can expect to see every kind of study they can drag the bottom of the cess pool to dig up that will what kind of nightmares gay folk are.

this is simply a regrouping effort.

[TaleWgnDg]

2. Headlines, Boston Globe, Saturday, March 11, 2006 . . .

.

Boston Globe, headlines, Saturday, March 11, 2006

(1.) "Catholic Charities stuns state, ends adoptions - Gay issue stirred move by state agency," Boston Globe, headlines, Saturday, March 11, 2006, Patricia Wen, Globe Staff Reporter, http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/11/catholic_charities_stuns_state_ends_adoptions

(2.) "Church's rift with Beacon Hill grows," Boston Globe, page 1, Saturday, March 11, 2006, Michael Paulson, Globe Staff Reporter, http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/11/churchs_rift_with_beacon_hill_grows


http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/03/11/adoptions/

Wha? The Boston Globe couldn't see this coming? Oh, come on! The handwriting was on the wall! How else could Catholic Charities handle it but to go out of the adoption business, entirely, in Massachusetts. Rome placed Boston's Catholic Charities in a box w/ no key to get out.

The follow-up question is what's next? Will Catholic Charities, due to its policies and procedures as mandated from Rome, be forced out of Massachusetts children's foster care services too? All due, of course, to Rome's twisted and ill-advised stance on gay marriage and gay parenting.

.

[triakis36]

3. If such a large firm is backing out of the business

It's a perfect opportunity for the other agencies to come in and mop up that 31%. Who needs the CC anyway. It's time for right minded people to take up the slack and handle adoptions with more compassion and understanding anyway. I say good riddance.

[TaleWgnDg]

4. Welcome to DU, triakis36 . . . n/t

[TaleWgnDg]

5. For those interested in researching . . .

.
For those interested in researching . . . my (OP's) fourth paragraph that states:

Massachusetts has a law on its books that does not allow discrimination against gays who want to adopt children. The Roman Catholic Church through its Catholic Charities in Massachusetts suddenly -- after an edict from Rome -- refused to handle cases of gay parents seeking adoption of children. The Board of Directors of Catholic Charities had a revolt. Many Board members quit instead of being a part of discrimination against gays. Those Board members claimed that Catholic Charities would not be serving the best interests of the children if it discriminated against gays who sought adoption.
(OP's 4th paragraph, above)

You will find Rome's edict here on its official Vatican website; the document at issue is entitled, "CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING PROPOSALS TO GIVE LEGAL RECOGNITION TO UNIONS BETWEEN HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS," and its author is then Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, as authorized by Pope John Paul II on March 28, 2003; Cardinal Ratzinger is now Pope Benedict XVI as of April 2005. Do a document "find" search for "immoral" and "violence" . . . words that may sound ineffectual to those unfamiliar w/ Roman Catholic writings including Canon Law, but are instead some of the harshest words used in such writings.

Again, these extremely harsh religious allegations are completely unfounded and unsubstantiated in law and in family/children's psychiatry/psychology.

.