Florida ban on gay adoptions ruled unconstitutional

[JackBeck]

Source: Miami Herald

Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman Tuesday declared Florida's 50-year-old ban on gay adoptions unconstitutional -- a ruling state lawyers immediately said they would challenge.

The ruling sets the stage for Frank Gill, a gay man from North Miami, to adopt two foster children he has raised since 2004.

In a 53-page ruling, Judge Lederman said, ``It is clear that sexual orientation is not a predictor of a person's ability to parent.''

Two lawyers from the Florida Attorney General's Office said they would file an appeal Tuesday.



Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking-news/story/786605.html

[Hyper_Eye]

1. How about no appeal? Let the discrimination die. n/t

[msongs]

2. to do that would threaten the supremacy of religion over all person, believers or not nt

[happyslug]

39. Anti-homosexuality can be based on non-religious grounds.

Remember we ban MURDER, even through it is also banned in the Ten Commandments. Thus because something is BANNED by religion does NOT mean it can NOT be banned by law. In fact even if it is PART of someone's religion, if the law in general in nature, there is NO exception for religion to such laws (The peyote cases i.e. the Government could ban peyote even as to Native Americans who have used it for centuries, provided the law is general in nature NOT a law to outlaw the use by Native Americans).

The same rule can apply to Homosexuality (I am NOT going into whether Homosexuality should be banned but WHY it can be). If the General Population believes something to be wrong and the best way to ban such wrong (or to minimize it) is to make it illegal, then such laws are valid unless the law affects some other constitutionally protected right (i.e. if the General Population wants all blacks out of town, such laws are Unconstitutional, the supreme court a few years ago spread that to Homosexuality but with the change in the court membership that may change).

My point is religion is NOT a factor to overcome a General Law unless it affects some other constitutional protected subject, as to adoption I can see a Court saying that Homosexuality has a bad affect for children (and that may be limited to the fact that people believe a family with a father and mother is better then two mothers or fathers). I can make a NON-religious argument against same sex adoption based on the fact that such same sex couples will NOT expose the child to what 94% of the population entered into as adults, Heterosexual pair bonds. Notice that is a NON-religious base argument and even if religion is a factor in such same sex bands, so are non-religious arguments. Given that as a whole the religious arguments are secondary to the non-religious arguments, so like Murder, where the religious arguments are secondary to the secular arguments, the secular arguments are what the court will decide the case on.

[JackBeck]

3. I prefer watching this work its way through the legal system.

Rather than being put up for a vote by the people of Florida.

[happyslug]

38. So the decision is only valid in one county?

Thus if the father takes the child to another county, and the Judges in that County rules the law Constitutional, then take the children away from him.

Remember this ruling ONLY applies to the county the Child is presently in. It has NO affect in any other county unless those counts agree with this Judge.

Furthermore in most states whenever a law is declared unconstitutional the Attorney General MUST be informed before it is done AND must file any appeal to the State Supreme Court. This appears to be the case in Florida, i.e. given that the Judge ruled the law unconstitutional the Attorney General MUST file an appeal. Note I do NOT know the exact rule in Florida, but this appears to be the case. This is NOT the rule when it comes to the Federal Constitution, lower courts can make such a ruling and no appeal is required, but in many states when that happens the Attorney General MUST be made a party and file any appeal.

[seafan]

4. Florida ban on gay adoptions ruled unconstitutional

Source: Miami Herald

Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman Tuesday declared Florida's 50-year-old ban on gay adoptions unconstitutional -- a ruling state lawyers immediately said they would challenge.

The ruling sets the stage for Frank Gill, a gay man from North Miami, to adopt two foster children he has raised since 2004.

In a 53-page ruling, Judge Lederman said, ``It is clear that sexual orientation is not a predictor of a person's ability to parent.''

Two lawyers from the Florida Attorney General's Office said they would file an appeal Tuesday.

.....

Gill, who is raising the half-brothers, ages 4 and 8, said he was ''elated'' by the ruling and ``I cried tears of joy for the first time in my life.''

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/459/story/786605.html

[Scurrilous]

5. Great news!

:thumbsup:

[Ian David]

6. I hope Anita Bryant is spinning in her grave right now! n/t

[JackBeck]

7. I believe she's still alive. n/t

[Ian David]

8. So? n/t

[jobycom]

31. I think she's more undead than alive. Probably sleeps in a grave.

[Lost River Ledger]

41. Born 1940......She now lives in Edmond, Oklahoma

From wiki.....

The fallout from her political activism had a devastating effect on her business and entertainment career. Her contract with the Florida Citrus Commission was allowed to lapse in 1979 because of the controversy and the negative publicity generated by her political campaigns and the resulting boycott of Florida orange juice.<4>

Her marriage to Bob Green failed at that time, and in 1980 she divorced him, although he reportedly has said that his fundamentalist religious beliefs do not recognize civil divorce and that she is still his wife in God's eyes. Some observers feel that her husband pushed her to get involved in the political activism that eventually led to her downfall and loss of income. Kathie Lee Gifford, who worked as a live-in secretary/babysitter for the Greens in the early 1970s, said in her autobiography that Green had a ferocious temper and could be very possessive and emotionally abusive, and that Anita was not very happy.

Due to her divorce, many fundamentalist Christians shunned her. No longer invited to appear at their events, she lost a source of income. With her four children she moved from Miami to Selma, Alabama, and later to Atlanta, Georgia. In a Ladies Home Journal article she said, "The church needs to wake up and find some way to cope with divorce and women's problems."

In the same article in Ladies Home Journal she said that she felt sorry for all of the hateful things she had said and done during her campaigns.<5> She said that she had a more "live and let live" attitude, apparently indicating a significant shift in her worldview.

She married her second husband, Charlie Hobson Dry, in 1990, and they tried to reestablish her career in a series of small venues, including Branson, Missouri, and Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. Commercial success was elusive, however, due to the controversy from the past, and they left behind them a series of unpaid employees and creditors. Her career decline is detailed in her book, A New Day (1992). They filed for bankruptcy in Arkansas (1997) and in Tennessee (2001).

Anita Bryant returned to Barnsdall, Oklahoma, in 2005 for the town's 100th anniversary celebration and to have a street renamed in her honor. She returned to her high school in Tulsa on April 21, 2007, to perform in the school's annual musical revue. She now lives in Edmond, Oklahoma, and says she does charity work for various youth organizations while heading Anita Bryant Ministries International.

Anita Bryant appears to have resumed the anti-gay stance, however, in that Anita Bryant Ministries International presently features just two articles, both championing her long-standing opposition to the "homosexual agenda".<6>

[yardwork]

9. They'll just put it up for a vote and the ban will pass, as in Arkansas.

Arkansas voters just made it illegal for any gay people to adopt. Florida just passed a constitutional amendment against gay marriage. It passed by 63%.

[Ian David]

10. The same group that got that passed now wants to ban adoption by Native Americans, IIRC. n/t

[AllyCat]

27. What??? Oh jeez, what's next?

[pnwmom]

17. Florida isn't Arkansas. Maybe Sarah Silverman needs to get the

grandparents involved again.

:)

[yardwork]

24. I hope you're right, but Florida voters made gay unions and marriages illegal by a 63% vote.

[pnwmom]

34. Do you remember in what year they did that? n/t

[zipplewrath]

28. Probably, but....

The part about this that will make it tough to defend is that it only prevents adoption within the state of Florida. Adoptions from other states and countries are recognized (and have to be basically). Furthermore, lesbians are getting impregnated and having children. The birth mothers have their legal status, their partners are the only ones being prevented from adopting. Additionally, we have kids being pulled from homes for abuse that can't be placed AT ALL, or worse, can't be placed with blood relatives because they are gay. It's ridiculous and there's a real "do it for the children" aspect to the whole thing. There's just the possibility that it could be defeated if they try. Furthermore, if they aren't careful how they write it, the FSC will chuck it out in a minute over federal 14th amendment issues.

[Le Taz Hot]

11. Yess!!!!!!

A great victory for those children DESPERATELY needing good, loving homes and a victory for the LGBT equal rights fight. Good going, Florida!

[yardwork]

12. It will be overturned by the voters. Wait and see.

[kdmorris]

16. If it makes it to the ballot

Then we in Florida need to do a better job of helping the voters see things differently. As with Prop 8 in CA, "Yes on Amendment 2" had a ton of money thrown at it. No more sitting idly by, hoping it won't pass. We need to get off our asses and get out there and TALK to people.

[pnwmom]

18. In many states a constitutional right can't be overturned simply by a

referendum. In California right now that is a question behind the three Court appeals. . I think the California courts will rule against their referendum. In Florida -- anything could happen.

[demo dutch]

33. It will go back to the court who will rule it unconstitutional again

[seafan]

13. Slowly, but surely, the bigots will be banished.

Florida ban on gay adoptions ruled unconstitutional



Frank Gill holds one of the foster children he is caring for.
CARL JUSTE/MIAMI HERALD STAFF



Pray away the bigotry



Anita Bryant

[xchrom]

14. ...

:woohoo:

[sinkingfeeling]

15. Great news. It's the constant chipping away of these obnoxious bans that will someday see the

SCOTUS declare all people equal in the eyes of the law.

[barbtries]

19. click on the article

and add your opinion to the poll
WEB VOTE
Do you agree with the ruling?
Yes No
Do you agree with the ruling? Yes 102
87%
No 15
13%
Total Votes: 117

i hope this eases some of the pain fallout from all of the anti marriage amendments that passed on nov 4. i also find it encouraging that those laws will be struck down by the courts as they are clearly unconstitutional.

[madmom]

20. Wait ..what??? It's ok for gays to foster but not adopt? Say what????

[Lost River Ledger]

22. You got it! Idiocy isn’t it?

[Terran]

23. Good point!

Being a state government employee, though, I know that state agencies often operate in a more even-handed way in such matters than the private sector does. Foster care is run by the state while adoption agencies are regulated but largely private. Plus, adoption is more 'hot button' than foster care. The public doesn't care about foster care until they hear about abuse.

[CatholicEdHead]

21. This is great news

It is also a rallying point to the anti-gay groups who will feign outrage and try to overturn it (and make some money for themselves in the process. First marriage, then adoption, then who knows what next. I expect AFA alerts, the ultra-conservative Catholic sources will feign outrage by later today (Catholic Answers, EWTN, Ave Maria, (ir)Relevant Radio, etc...).

[evilkumquat]

25. I Love the "Two Parent" Argument:

Some bigots are approaching this with that tired old "a child needs two loving parents to be raised well" meme.

So, by inference, if a husband loses his wife in a car accident, the State should be allowed to take any children from the marriage if the widow doesn't get remarried quickly enough?

[AllyCat]

26. Sweet! Lets get rid of these uncivil laws once and for all, even if we have to

pick away at them a few at a time. Fairness for all!!

[Dappleganger]

29. A step in the right direction...

these bigots would rather that children be stripped away from the only stable home life they've ever had, than risk 'spreading teh gay'.

And just how many of them are willing to take *any* of these parent-less children into *their* homes to love and nurture them? The bigots are cutting off their nose to spite their face.

[Piewhacket]

30. Enough bigotry! Straight community rises to support human rights for all!

[demo dutch]

32. So 2 Judges have ruled this unconstitutional, now we'll wait for the Florida Supreme Court

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

35. Another one bites the dust.

[emlev]

36. Is it really a "50 year old ban on gay adoptions?"

I'd be surprised if the law was that old.

[Lost River Ledger]

40. Actually enacted in the 70s

[ksimons]

37. K&R

[petronius]

42. Florida is just so freakin'awesome these days!

I never thought the day would come when I'd say this, but I really wish CA could be more like FL... :wtf: