392 Comments

It is not consideration as *foster parents* but as *adoptive parents* which is the main concern of the Fosterkids: being shuffled around from home to home is something which they say the Philly situation is prolonging.

Expand full comment

And my point is, because of its size and scope, the RCC has a greater capability to move rapists around than most other denominations.

Expand full comment

They do get somegovernment money, mostly for foster care expenses, but nobody is getting rich from adoption. I used to work at an adoption agency and most of the money involved goes to the bureaucracy and fees (especially for international adoption) and to feeding the kids

Expand full comment

No one has replied to you yet.

Expand full comment

Considerg the largest ethnicity within the Catholic Church in the United States are mutli-racial by the US definitions of the term (i.e., "Hispanic") they wouldn't (and don't) say a damn thing.

Expand full comment

Best explaination I've seen yet... including from my nephew who practices at the SC and usually is able to dumb down rulings for non-lawyers.

Expand full comment

The ruling didn't involve a church, but an agency run by a church. Not a disntction without a difference. Churches can set their own criteria for membership (and, could limit their membership to persons of one or another "race"). The agency providing a public accomodation can't. However, if your read the expaliner Jaime wrote, CSS was not a public accommodation, but a contracted service provider, one of several, which had its own criteria... unfortunately inciuding its own definition of who was, and wasn't, qualified to receive its services.

Expand full comment

Gotcha ! Thank you.

Expand full comment

Au contraire.

Expand full comment

If there was a church run Org that only adopted kids out to white familiars, that shit would get shit down in a heartbeat

As someone in the LGBTQ community, the fact that homophobia isn’t taken at the same level of seriousness as racism, speaks volumes to how far we have yet to go…

Expand full comment

You mean because if the Lutherans have x number of rapey clergy the RCC must have 2x? Not a difference I see as significant.

Expand full comment

Our rights exist at the whim of our Holy Roman Catholic Supreme Court. You want an example of establishing a religion in our government? Look no further. I don't really care what any religious person believes, as long as they aren't in a position to impose their religious ideas on my life. But I listen to Alito's speeches and I know he and his fellow Justices think it's fine to view the law through the lens of their particular religious biases.

Expand full comment

The tricky thing, hypothetically, is in places smaller than Philadelphia, you might only have one agency within any reasonable distance, and it could be a religious one. Pregnant people are already running into problems in areas where the only nearby hospitals are Catholic.

Expand full comment

I loved when Katharine Jefferts Schori was the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church and she got asked something or other about whether she’d uphold the “Biblical tradition of marriage.” She said, “Which Biblical tradition of marriage?” And just let that hang in the air for a beat or two before pivoting to something about the Anglican Communion.

Expand full comment

What are you arguing? Is there something you think should be done about LGBTQ folks?

Expand full comment

They need help overcoming their "LGBTQ-ness" and anyone who tells them otherwise is hurting them.

Expand full comment