The organization provided foster certs to households headed by both married and single persons, but not unmarried couples. That's the catch. The church believes that marriage is a union between a man and woman, it regards all same-sex couples as unmarried. The organization WILL provide foster certs for both married opposite-sex couples as well as unmarried individuals (including gay and lesbians) but NOT for same-sex couples or unmarried opposite-sex couples.
It's a matter of only recognizing "religious marriage" and not "government marriage." If anything, it could be argued that they're discriminating against marital status, not LGB's
Anyway, while the article claims "Orange man takes away rights of gays," that's actually not at all what this is about. Philadelphia specifically targeted the Catholic adoption organizations while offering exemptions to other secular organizations. Legally, Philadelphia can't pick and choose which secular beliefs it wants to exempt, and which ones it doesn't. This is very much a religious discrimination case, and nothing to do with gay rights. Had Philly not offered exemptions to others, the Supreme Court Brief would probably not have sided on behalf of the adoption agency.
A single man cant adopt, why should two men be able to?
The brief in question:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-123/144793/20200603145511974_19-123tsacUnitedStates.pdf
The organization provided foster certs to households headed by both married and single persons, but not unmarried couples. That's the catch. The church believes that marriage is a union between a man and woman, it regards all same-sex couples as unmarried. The organization WILL provide foster certs for both married opposite-sex couples as well as unmarried individuals (including gay and lesbians) but NOT for same-sex couples or unmarried opposite-sex couples.
It's a matter of only recognizing "religious marriage" and not "government marriage." If anything, it could be argued that they're discriminating against marital status, not LGB's
Anyway, while the article claims "Orange man takes away rights of gays," that's actually not at all what this is about. Philadelphia specifically targeted the Catholic adoption organizations while offering exemptions to other secular organizations. Legally, Philadelphia can't pick and choose which secular beliefs it wants to exempt, and which ones it doesn't. This is very much a religious discrimination case, and nothing to do with gay rights. Had Philly not offered exemptions to others, the Supreme Court Brief would probably not have sided on behalf of the adoption agency.
If the child is lucky enough to be let born and live, then leftists try to deny him/her diversity as parents.