The Fight for a Family

The fight for the LGTB community doesn't just center around the debate for same-sex marriage, but also encompasses the struggle for homosexual couples to adopt children. Thousands of people are affected by anti-gay adoptions laws which are implemented around the country. There are laws that allow married gay and lesbian couples, and couples joined by “civil unions”, to adopt children. There are also laws that will allow a gay or lesbian person to adopt a child by themselves, even if they are living with a "partner", but only by themselves, not as a couple adopting the child together as a family. This type of discrimination is harmful to both parents who want to adopt children, as well as to children who could have a loving family, but is unable to because of hateful laws implemented throughout the country.

                After a close look at the opposition to gay and lesbian adoption, I have not found concrete reasons for gay and lesbian couples to be unable to adopt children. Much of the opposition comes from religious groups, and those in the Republican Party. In the article Texas Faces, Fights Anti-Gay Parenting Legislative Efforts by Ellen Wright, a Republican from Stephenville, stated “I believe strongly in the preservation of the traditional family, and I do not believe homosexuals should be allowed to continue adopting children in Texas. By allowing two people of the same sex to adopt children, the state of Texas has been sending a signal that it condones and approves of homosexual activity. I believe homosexuality is immoral, and the state of Texas should not endorse their alternative lifestyle by allowing homosexuals to adopt children.” This argument was used as a reason to create the “Defense of Families Act”, a bill that would stop gay and lesbian couples from being able to adopt in Texas. The article also reports that the state was trying to prevent gay and lesbian couples from being foster parents; such legislation would cost the state $50 million.

                In 2005, many states were coming up with amendments to recognize same-sex marriage. Although, we know now that not all of them passed. At least six states came up with anti-gay legislation against adoption by homosexual couples. In the article by Ellen Wright, Six States Face Anti-Gay Foster Care, Adoption Bills, Ellen discuses the six states that were possible adopting anti-gay legislation; Arkansas, Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee, Indiana, and Virginia. Some bills that were looked at by Congress were bills that limited adoption to heterosexual couples, and other bills stopped gay and lesbian people from becoming foster parents. Why shouldn’t gay and lesbian couples be able to adopt? Some arguments in the article Homosexual Rights and the Placement of Children, by Elizabeth Patterson, discusses arguments made for those opposing gay and lesbian adoptions. Those arguments include notions that children are better with heterosexual married couples; that children will be teased by peers if they are placed in homosexual households. Our society has a problem with bullying already, to lay extra blame on the homosexual community is immoral and unjust. Children are being teased all of the time, for many different reasons. The argument that children are better with married couples is an excuse. It seems that this argument is only used when it comes to homosexuals. If a single heterosexual person wanted to adopt a child would there be the same opposition to that adoption? In my research, I have never read about someone getting upset about a single heterosexual person trying to adopt. I believe this is an excuse, and it lacks foundation.

                In some states, laws go so far as to say  children should only be adopted by married heterosexual couples. In the article My Two Dads? Not in Florida, the author talks about the cases of five homosexual men who were trying to adopt children in Florida in 2004. The lawsuit was struck down by the 11^th US Circuit Court of Appeals, where the judges upheld Florida’s laws banning both homosexual couples as well as homosexual individuals from adopting children. Florida is the only state that will not allow homosexual individuals to adopt children. Most of the other states do not allow homosexual couples to be able to adopt children, but will allow an individual homosexual person who is not married to adopt a child. However, the article does point out that there are many other states where adoption by homosexual couples is acceptable. The article also reports that around 60 % of adoption agencies around the country accept applications from homosexuals, and those that are resistant seem to be the religious institutions.

                Homosexuals have been the target of discrimination for a long time, and will continue to be for an unknown period of time. The LGTB community has overcome many obstacles, including the right to publish magazines, the right to be homosexual, and the right to serve in the military freely. One battle that is still going on, affecting thousands of people, is the fight for the right of adoption. If there is a loving couple who wants to have children, but for whatever reason is not able to bear children, shouldn’t they be allowed to adopt even if they are homosexual? What a child needs most is a stable and loving family, and the family’s sexual orientation shouldn’t matter. I believe that as long as the person, or family, is able to show that they have a loving, supportive, and nurturing environment, they should be able to adopt children and start a family of their own.

References:

Kennedy, John. "My Two Dads? Not in Florida." Christianity Today, 48.4 (2004): 23.

Patterson, Elizabeth. "Homosexual Rights and the Placement of Children." Policy & Practice (19426828), 62.1 (2004): 28.

Wright, Ellen. "Six States Face Anti-Gay Foster Care, Adoption Bills." Lesbian News, 30.8 (2005): 14.

Wright, Ellen. "Texas Faces, Fights Anti-Gay Parenting Legislative Efforts." Lesbian News, 28.9 (2003): 16.

Seperate but Equal?

In school, teachers show students the horrific treatment of the African American people, and their struggle for equality. There were some parts of history where they were segregated in their schools, busses, and many of their day to day activities. The courts finally saw the discrimination for what it was. In 1954, in the well known case of Brown V. Board of Education, the Supreme Court ruled that separate but equal was discrimination which overruled the previous precedent set forth by the case of Plessey V. Ferguson. The same type of discrimination is being implemented today, but just on a different class of people. On November 4, 2008, California voters passed Proposition 8 which put an amendment in the constitution stating “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California” (protectmarriage.com). Proponents of Prop 8 argue that it would not affect the rights given to gay and lesbian partners, (protectmarriage.com)   Others would argue that Proposition 8 has many parallels to the segregation that was projected upon the African American community in the earlier decade of the 21^st century.

What is most disconcerting about this action is that it only took a simple majority of people to take away rights of a specific class. In May of 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that banning gay marriage was unconstitutional, which paved the way for legal, gay marriage in California. Between the months of May and November, 18,000 gay men and women were married (HRC.org). 18,000 is a lot of people in such a short amount of time. There were many people affected by the vote on proposition 8,the 18,000 people included. Although the California Supreme Court ruled that those who were married during that time period would retain their valid marriages, is that really true? If the words of proposition 8 are looked at more closely, it says that only a marriage between a man and women is VALID or RECOGNIZED in California. This could be interpreted that NO gay marriage would be recognized in California, including those who were married in the couple months when gay marriage was legal.

Although the proposition was passed, there have been lawsuits brought about to challenge the proposition. After the proposition passed, challenges were made to the State Supreme court challenging that the proposition was a revision of the constitution, in which case the procedure was not done correctly. The State Supreme Court struck this down and upheld proposition 8. Recently there has been a fight over the proposition in the federal court system in which the proposition was challenged on its constitutionality. In April of 2010 a federal court judge ruled that the proposition was unconstitutional because it unfairly targeted gay men and women (New York Times).  This was a temporary win for those in favor of gay marriage, however it was short lived due to the stay placed until the challenge reaches higher courts.

Even though there was a stay, some people believe that it should be lifted. Attorney General Kamala Harris is one of the supporters of equality who believes the stay should be lifted (Washington Post). These people believe that the stay should be lifted because the gay community has been through enough discrimination as it is. Supporters of the proposition believe that the wishes of the people should be granted until the Federal Supreme Court has decided on the case. I think that both sides have a great point, but I have to agree that the stay should continue. Although I do believe that proposition 8 should be struck down, I think if gay people were to be married and proposition 8 was found to be constitutional and stay in place, the marriages that took place while the decision was litigated in federal district court could later be questioned. Proposition 8 should be abolished because not only does it target a specific class of people, but it is justifying a separate but equal attitude. This type of attitude is unacceptable, and has plagued the existence of man for a long time. The fight for equality for the gay community still exists, and will exist until hatred depletes in the hearts of all. 

References:

"California's Proposition 8 (Same-Sex Marriage)." New York Times. 17 Aug. 2010. Web. 28 Mar. 2011. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/californias_proposition_8_samesex_marriage/index.html?scp=1&sq=california's%20proposition%208&st=cse

 "HRC | Prop 8 Upheld." HRC | Human Rights Campaign | Home. Web. 28 Mar. 2011. <http://www.hrc.org/10459.htm?gclid=CJ_2kp3M76cCFRphgwod8lTzZA>.

 Press, Associated. "Appeals Court Won’t Allow Gay Marriages in Calif. While Appeal of Prop. 8 Ban Proceeds - The Washington Post." The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - Washingtonpost.com. Web. 28 Mar. 2011. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/appeals-court-wont-allow-gay-marriages-in-calif-while-appeal-of-prop-8-ban-proceeds/2011/03/23/ABtL2EKB_story.html>.

"Protect Marriage - Yes on 8 » Ballot Arguments." Protect Marriage - Yes on 8 » Home Page.    Web. 28 Mar. 2011. <http://www.protectmarriage.com/about/ballot-arguments>.