• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Florida ban on gay adoptions ruled unconstitutional

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
:yes:

BY CAROL MARBIN MILLER


A Miami-Dade circuit judge Tuesday declared Florida's 30-year-old ban on gay adoption unconstitutional, allowing a North Miami man to adopt two foster kids he has raised since 2004.

In a 53-page order that sets the stage for what could become a constitutional showdown, Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman permitted 47-year-old Frank Gill to adopt the 4- and 8-year-old boys he and his partner have raised since just before Christmas four years ago. A child abuse investigator had asked Gill to care for the boys temporarily; they were never able to return to their birth parents.

''This is the forum where we try to heal children, find permanent families for them so they can get another chance at what every child should know and feel from birth, and go on to lead productive lives,'' Lederman said in court before releasing the order. ``We pray for them to thrive, but that is a word we rarely hear in dependency court.''

''These children are thriving; it is uncontroverted,'' the judge added.

Moments after Lederman released the ruling, attorneys for Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum announced they would appeal the decision to the Third District Court of Appeal in Miami.

''We respect the court's decision,'' said attorney Valerie Martin, who had argued in support of the ban during a weeklong trial Oct. 1-6. But, she added: ``Based upon the wishes of our client, the Department of Children & Families, we have filed a notice of appeal this morning.''

The attorney general's office had argued that gay men and lesbians are disproportionately more likely to suffer from mental illness or a substance abuse problem than straight people, rendering them less fit to parent -- especially children in foster care who already are under tremendous stress.

Gov. Charlie Crist, a former attorney general who has expressed support for the adoption ban, declined to comment Tuesday, saying he hadn't yet reviewed the ruling.
Gill, who is raising the half-brothers with his partner of eight years, said he was ''elated'' by the ruling.

''I cried tears of joy for the first time in my life,'' he told reporters outside Miami's juvenile courthouse at 3300 NW 27th Ave. His mother appeared with him in court.
The ban on adoption by gay families, he said, does not lead to more children being raised in traditional households, since foster and adoptive families have long been in short supply in Florida.

Instead, he said, ``It results in more children being left without any parents at all. They don't have a mom or a dad.''

Lederman, who overseas Miami's juvenile and child welfare courts, is the second judge this year to declare the state's blanket ban on adoption by gay men and lesbians unconstitutional.

In August, Monroe Circuit Judge David John Audlin Jr. wrote that Florida's 1977 gay adoption ban arose out of ''unveiled expressions of bigotry'' when the state was experiencing a severe backlash to demands for civil rights by gay people in Miami.
''Disqualifying every gay Floridian from raising a family, enjoying grandchildren or carrying on the family name, based on nothing more than lawful sexual conduct, while assuring child abusers, terrorists, drug dealers, rapists and murderers at least individualized consideration, `` Audlin wrote, was so ``disproportionately severe'' that it violates the state and U.S. Constitutions.

In her ruling, Lederman said children taken into state care have a ''fundamental'' right to be raised in a permanent adoptive home if they cannot be reunited with birth parents. Children whose foster parents are gay, she said, can be deprived of that right under the current law.

''The challenged statute, in precluding otherwise qualified homosexuals from adopting available children, does not promote the interests of children and, in effect, causes harm to the children it is meant to protect,'' Lederman wrote.

The judge added: ``There is no question the blanket exclusion of gay applicants defeats Florida's goal of providing [foster] children a permanent family through adoption.''

In a ruling that, at times, reads more like a social science research paper, Lederman dissected 30 years worth of psychological and sociological research, concluding that studies overwhelmingly have shown that gay people can parent every bit as effectively as straight people and do no harm to their children.

''Based on the evidence presented from experts from all over this country and abroad,'' Lederman wrote, ``it is clear that sexual orientation is not a predictor of a person's ability to parent. Sexual orientation no more leads to psychiatric disorders, alcohol and substance abuse, relationship instability, a lower life expectancy or sexual disorders than race, gender, socioeconomic class or any other demographic characteristic.

''The most important factor in ensuring a well-adjusted child is the quality of parenting,'' Lederman wrote.

Florida ban on gay adoptions ruled unconstitutional - Breaking News - Dade - MiamiHerald.com
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
That's good to hear.

I notice that the article mentioned the state and federal constitutions; how much of a bearing will this case have on other states with similar laws?
 

Mister_T

Forum Relic
Premium Member
Excellent news!

It always astonished me that some people would rather have children be parent-less than be raised in a home by two willing and able adults.
 

MoonWater

Warrior Bard
Premium Member
:rainbow::rainbow1::woohoo::clap2::jiggy::rainbow1::rainbow:

Another step to equality has been taken. It's only a matter of time now:yes:
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
About time.

It should also be noted that in Florida a gay man was awarded as foster parent of the year in 1998.
 

methylatedghosts

Can't brain. Has dumb.
In a ruling that, at times, reads more like a social science research paper, Lederman dissected 30 years worth of psychological and sociological research, concluding that studies overwhelmingly have shown that gay people can parent every bit as effectively as straight people and do no harm to their children.
Sad that it's taken people to do actual research to figure this out....

Sad that it's taken so long for people to imagine that this is in fact possible...

However, a big step in a great direction!!! Wonderful news!
 

madcap

Eternal Optimist
This is great news.

I hope that something similar happens in Arkansas, where voters just approved a measure outlawing adoptions or foster care by any unmarried couple -- clearly an attempt to ban gays from adopting while trying to head off at the pass the kind of ruling just handed down in Florida.
 

blackout

Violet.
This is great news.

I hope that something similar happens in Arkansas, where voters just approved a measure outlawing adoptions or foster care by any unmarried couple -- clearly an attempt to ban gays from adopting while trying to head off at the pass the kind of ruling just handed down in Florida.

:(

And here is just one more example of why the government
should have absolutely NOTHING to do with "marriage" at all.
Giving "licences" and all. What a crock of BS.
"Marriage" should be a personal/religious concept only. IMHO.

I'm sorry. I just don't even see how this is constitutional.
All this blatant discrimination.
All over a damned piece of paper.

And when these married couples get divorced?
Do they then take the kids away?

Stupidity.
 
Last edited:

madcap

Eternal Optimist
And when these married couples get divorced?
Do they then take the kids away?

Or if you're an unmarried couple with adopted children, and you move in from out of state? Or you adopt a baby from China or Russia? I don't see where it ends.

And here is just one more example of why the government
should have absolutely NOTHING to do with "marriage" at all.

I agree with the sentiment, though I think we still need a civil contract -- a legal way of bringing someone into your family, and you into theirs. But it doesn't have to be called marriage.
 

blackout

Violet.
Or if you're an unmarried couple with adopted children, and you move in from out of state? Or you adopt a baby from China or Russia? I don't see where it ends.



I agree with the sentiment, though I think we still need a civil contract -- a legal way of bringing someone into your family, and you into theirs. But it doesn't have to be called marriage.

Agreed. And civil contracts should be allowable for any combination of people.
Just as business contracts are. Same concept... but domestic in nature.
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
btw, hate to be a downer, but while this is wonderful news, I would like to see us start winning these victories electorally rather than in the courts.
 

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
btw, hate to be a downer, but while this is wonderful news, I would like to see us start winning these victories electorally rather than in the courts.
Understood. But a lot of our most cherished civil rights victories were gained thru the courts.

As for winning electorally, people have blamed all sorts of groups for the recent defeats from Mormons to African Americans. Yet the one demographic group that voted against BGLT rights more than any other was older folks. I'm not pointing to that in order to disparage older folks - again I say that the only people responsible are those who actually voted against us. But it does indicate that full equality for BGLT folks is just a matter of time... literally.
 
Last edited:
Top