[Emproph]

From post # 10 above:

Originally Posted by Emproph

Good commentary in the Orlando Sentinel

I don’t know that there’s much new here, other than the mention that the state has filed an appeal.

Here’s the link if you want to read the whole thing, it’s not that long.

Here's a few snippets:

So the state is suing to prevent this gay couple from adopting in order to prevent conservative "Christians" from banning gay foster parenting.

--The link in my post above, #10, and in the quote above, now redirects to the Chicago Tribune, and I cannot find it through searches on that site.

--The article was dated December 11th, 2008, and was called: State's hypocrisy on gay adoptions could tear apart this family

--It is also missing from the Orland Sentinel’s Mike Thomas (author) page (his articles are in the order of date), nor can I find it in searches on that site either.

--Every Google search I have tried where others websites have linked to the article also redirect to the Chicago Tribune.

--On the Orlando Sentinel Mike Thomas blog page, for Dec 11th, there is only a short statement about the case, and a link to the ACLU, which has several PDF links regarding the case and Florida adoption laws.

--I was finally able to find a cached version of the article, but I had to find each page separately - as linking to the other page (from the cached page), again, goes to the Chicago tribune.
-------------
I contacted Mike Thomas a couple days ago by the email listed in the article to see if he was aware of all this. He has not yet responded.

So I am posting the article in full here for the sake of record.

Cached Page 1:

State’s hypocrisy on gay adoptions could tear apart this family
Mike Thomas | COMMENTARY
December 11, 2008

Frank Gill and his partner rescued two abused brothers, now ages 4 and 8, from a Miami crack house. The foster parents provided a loving home that healed physical and emotional damage.

And now the Department of Children and Families, which gave the boys over to Gill, is trying to break up the family, spending $260,000 so far on the legal effort.

Agency officials know this is wrong, which is why DCF Secretary George Sheldon won't talk to me.

Here is more on this twisted, sad story, which I first wrote about last week.

Frank Gill is gay.

The state recruits gays to serve as foster parents because many provide nurturing shelter for Florida's growing number of abandoned and abused kids.

The state normally would encourage Gill's request to adopt the brothers.

But a 1977 law bans gay adoptions in Florida.

So we have this hypocritical situation in which the state acknowledges gays as good parents while at the same time denying them parenthood.

The law was enacted at the behest of former beauty queen Anita Bryant, who went on a religious crusade against homosexuals in the 1970s. Her rationale for banning gay adoptions was this: "Since homosexuals cannot reproduce, they must recruit and freshen their ranks."

Do you think this is Gill's intent? The older brother he took in was so infected with ringworm the boy looked bald. He was unresponsive. It took Gill two years to gain his trust. A boy who didn't talk and never had seen a book is now a happy kid who rides bikes with his friends and does his homework every night before bed.

But in line with Bryant's thinking, Attorney General Bill McCollum's office put on a Byzantine case against Gill's adoption request. A Miami judge rejected the state's arguments and ruled Gill could adopt the boy, prompting an immediate appeal from the state.

The attorney general's main expert witnesses was George Rekers, a Miami clinical psychologist and Baptist minister who believes gays are immoral and has written that gay activists are trying to legalize pedophilia. He argues gays are more prone to depressive disorders, substance abuse and unstable relationships, disqualifying them as adoptive parents.

Gill's attorneys refuted the state with nationally known experts in health, adoption and child welfare from the John Hopkins University School of Medicine, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the UCLA School of Public Health, Rutgers University and the University of Miami medical school.

If I could sum up their testimony, it was this: The quality of the parenting is what matters, not the sexual orientation of the parent.

This goes to the heart of the case: Do we judge people as individuals or by group stereotypes?

If an Iraq War veteran and his wife wanted to adopt a child, should the state reject them because, statistically, soldiers who have experienced combat have a 62 percent increased risk of divorce? Should an American Indian be rejected because, statistically, they have higher rates of alcoholism and depression?

The Attorney General's Office would take us back to a dark racist past when people weren't individuals but the sum of their stereotypes.

"The state looked for credible, well-respected social scientists to testify in court on its behalf," said Bob Rosenwald, one of Gill's attorneys. "But there were no serious scientists who would take its position."

Not even for the $60,900 the state paid Rekers.

Cached Page 2:

McCollum refused to be interviewed. His spokeswoman said the office simply is serving as counsel for the Department of Children and Family Services. A DCF spokesman categorized the two agencies as working in "partnership."

Nobody wants to take credit for this train wreck.

So what is going on?

DCF is fighting Gill because it fears a political backlash from social conservatives if he is allowed to adopt the boys. They could bring intense political pressure to ban gay foster parents. That would be devastating, particularly as the economy worsens, the number of abuse cases rises and the state's resources dwindle.

Social conservatives also could try to put a ban on gay adoptions in the constitution. They would argue that children need a father and mother, as if there are Ozzie and Harriets lined up to take kids like these brothers. There is a reason they have remained in Gill's care. Nobody else wants them.

Here is the profile of a boy up for adoption named Robert: "The possibility of a short life expectancy exists. Robert is receiving specialized therapies to help address his medical needs. He requires twenty-four hour care . . . ''

Any takers?

If Frank Gill offered to care for Robert, would you object?

This is not about what's best for kids. It's a political agenda by people who consider homosexuals sinful deviants. And the image of gays living in stable relationships, driving minivans, and caring for damaged children undercuts their cause and their moral superiority.

So they will do what it takes to prevent that. If two brothers are ripped from their family and even from each other as a result, so be it.

And now among their allies they can include DCF Secretary George Sheldon, Gov. Charlie Crist and Attorney General Bill McCollum.

Mike Thomas can be reached at 407-420-5525 or mthomas@orlandosentinel.com.

There’s so much to comment on there, but when I could no longer find a working link to the article, these are the portions of it that immediately came to mind that may have lead its deletion:

DCF is fighting Gill because it fears a political backlash from social conservatives if he is allowed to adopt the boys. They could bring intense political pressure to ban gay foster parents. That would be devastating, particularly as the economy worsens, the number of abuse cases rises and the state's resources dwindle.

This is not about what's best for kids. It's a political agenda by people who consider homosexuals sinful deviants. And the image of gays living in stable relationships, driving minivans, and caring for damaged children undercuts their cause and their moral superiority.

And now among their allies they can include DCF Secretary George Sheldon, Gov. Charlie Crist and Attorney General Bill McCollum.

Now that’s stepping on some toes in razor tongue fashion, and rightfully so.

But my question is, is that the reason the article was deleted?