NATION

PASSWORD

Trump Says Adoption Agency Should be Allowed to Refuse LGBT

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)
User avatar
Kannap
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58872
Founded: May 07, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Trump Says Adoption Agency Should be Allowed to Refuse LGBT

Postby Kannap » Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:46 pm

The Trump administration submitted a brief to the Supreme Court on Wednesday arguing that a taxpayer-funded organization should be able to refuse to work with same-sex couples and others whom the group considers to be in violation of its religious beliefs.

The brief was filed by the Department of Justice in the case Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, which centers on the refusal of Catholic Social Services, a religious nonprofit that operates a child welfare agency in Philadelphia, to place adoptive and foster children with same-sex couples in violation of the city’s nondiscrimination ordinance.

In its brief, the government argued that “Philadelphia has impermissibly discriminated against religious exercise,” and that the city’s actions “reflect unconstitutional hostility toward Catholic Social Services’ religious beliefs.”

The latter argument cites a recent Supreme Court case in which the government intervened on behalf of baker Jack Phillips who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple due to his religious beliefs. The high court awarded a narrow victory to Phillips on the grounds that the Colorado Human Rights Commission had shown hostility toward his religious views.

Catholic Social Services sued Philadelphia in 2018 after the city ended its contract with the faith-based service provider upon learning the organization would not consider same-sex couples as potential parents for foster children. The organization argued that to provide these services to gay couples violated its constitutional rights to free religious exercise and free speech.

Catholic Social Services lost the case in district court and subsequently appealed to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which unanimously affirmed the lower court’s ruling in April 2019. Attorneys for the organization then appealed to the Supreme Court in February.

“I’m relieved to hear that the Supreme Court will weigh in on faith-based adoption and foster care,” Lori Windham, senior counsel at Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is representing Catholic Social Services, said in February. “Over the last few years, agencies have been closing their doors across the country, and all the while children are pouring into the system.”

Civil rights advocates, however, warned of the far-reaching consequences of ruling for Catholic Social Services.

“While this case involves rejecting LGBTQ families, if the Court accepts the claims made in this case, not only will this hurt children in foster care by reducing the number of families to care for them, but anyone who depends on a wide range of government services will be at risk of discrimination based on their sexual orientation, religion or any other characteristic that fails a provider’s religious litmus test,” Leslie Cooper, deputy director of the ACLU’s LGBT and HIV Project, told NBC News.

The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Under President Donald Trump, the Department of Justice has not shied away from weighing in on LGBTQ rights cases at the Supreme Court. In addition to the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, the department also submitted a brief on behalf of a funeral home accused of firing an employee, Aimee Stephens, when she came out as transgender. The high court’s ruling in that case could come down any time.

In January 2019, the administration granted a waiver to Miracle Hill Ministries in South Carolina, allowing it to deny services to same-sex or non-Christian couples and continue as a state-supported foster care agency.

Eleven states have laws that allow state-licensed agencies to claim religious exemptions in the foster care and adoption process, and others are considering similar measures.

LGBTQ advocates say these laws and policies only worsen the problem of a lack of available foster families. There were about 443,000 children in foster care across the United States in 2017, according to a Department of Health and Human Services report published that year. Each year, around 50,000 children are adopted through the child welfare system, but about 20,000 others “age out” before being placed with an adoptive family, the department reports.

Studies show LGBTQ families foster and adopt at higher rates and are more likely to take in older, special needs and minority children. Over 21 percent of gay couples are raising adopted children, compared with 3 percent of straight couples, and nearly 3 percent of gay couples have foster children, compared with 0.4 percent of straight couples, according to a 2018 report from the Williams Institute at UCLA Law.

“Our government provides critical social services to people in need, including through partnerships with private secular and religious organizations,” Cooper said. “Discrimination has no place there.”

The Supreme Court will hear Fulton v. City of Philadelphia during its next term, which begins in October.

Source


So what say you NSG? Do you think LGBT people have a right to adopt and raise children? Do you think religious adoption agencies have a right to refuse to allow LGBT people to adopt solely based on their sexuality? Any other thoughts?

Personally, I think there are a lot of children - nearly 450,000 - in foster care across the United States and that we should not discriminate on adoption on the basis of sexuality. Otherwise, we might as well refuse people the right to adopt on the basis of their skin color or gender. I do firmly believe that LGBT people have the right to adopt and raise children just as much as heterosexual people do.

I think its wrong for religious adoption agencies to refuse to allow LGBT people to adopt, but I can see why there would be an argument for why they should be allowed to. However, if they refuse to allow LGBT people to adopt solely on the basis of their sexuality, that should be recognized for the discrimination it is and they should not be allowed to receive taxpayer funding. There should be adequate options for parents capable of raising children to be able to adopt.
23 years old, gay male, Presbyterian, North Carolinian. Pumpkin Spice everything.
TET's resident ostrich
Political Party: Not affiliated/Independent
Hawkins/Walker 2020
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
Luna Amore wrote:note to self, insert clever reference to Kannap
T H E M O U N T A I N S A R E C A L L I N G A N D I M U S T G O
G A Y S I N C E 1 9 9 7
RYM || Political test results

User avatar
Rojava Free State
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18748
Founded: Feb 06, 2018
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Rojava Free State » Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:53 pm

Anything to pander to the evangelicals and distract from his own sinful life.

I swear it is so weird that people hate gays just for being gay.
political compass:

Economic Left/Right: -0.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.38
pro: marijuana, gun rights, private property

anti: fascism, communism, islamism, sexism, pan africanism, La raza, Warren Police Department (and most of the other police departments of metro Detroit except for Auburn Hills. They're aight), gun control, trump, obama, bush, clinton, reagan, carter, chipotle and snotty in crowd teens. Ugh I can't deal with them
Hurdergaryp wrote:Humanity keeps seeing itself as the crown of creation, but to this world we're a crown of thorns at best.


Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/invites/conta ... ent=82zr2h

User avatar
Gig em Aggies
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7291
Founded: Aug 15, 2009
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Gig em Aggies » Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:56 pm

Rojava Free State wrote:Anything to pander to the evangelicals and distract from his own sinful life.

I swear it is so weird that people hate gays just for being gay.

same thing can be said about people hating Jewish people just for being Jewish but there is a big difference between should be allowed and would be allowed
“One of the serious problems of planning against Aggie doctrine is that the Aggies do not read their manuals nor do they feel any obligations to follow their doctrine.”
“The reason that the Aggies does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the Aggies practices chaos on a daily basis.”
“If we don’t know what we are doing, the enemy certainly can’t anticipate our future actions!”

User avatar
Galloism
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65484
Founded: Aug 20, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Postby Galloism » Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:56 pm

I think religious foster agencies (and most religious organizations) should be legally permitted to discriminate in this regard, and we should just as legally yank every taxpayer dollar from it, and post an ad for free dollars to any foster agency willing to not be an asshole and work in the same area.

You’re free to exercise your first amendment rights. But we don’t have support you.

We should be more like Batman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jZ-_f7kj_8

This is the liberal way to approach the issue.
Venicilian: wow. Jesus hung around with everyone. boys, girls, rich, poor(mostly), sick, healthy, etc. in fact, i bet he even went up to gay people and tried to heal them so they would be straight.
The Parkus Empire: Being serious on NSG is like wearing a suit to a nude beach.
New Kereptica: Since power is changed energy over time, an increase in power would mean, in this case, an increase in energy. As energy is equivalent to mass and the density of the government is static, the volume of the government must increase.


User avatar
Deacarsia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 978
Founded: May 12, 2019
Right-wing Utopia

Trump Says Adoption Agencies Should be Allowed to Refuse

Postby Deacarsia » Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:59 pm

I see no problem with this.
Sic enim Deus dilexit mundum, ut Filium suum unigenitum daret: ut omnis qui credit in eum, non pereat, sed habeat vitam æternam.

User avatar
Antibuda
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 197
Founded: Apr 21, 2020
Democratic Socialists

Postby Antibuda » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:00 pm

Galloism wrote:I think religious foster agencies (and most religious organizations) should be legally permitted to discriminate in this regard, and we should just as legally yank every taxpayer dollar from it, and post an ad for free dollars to any foster agency willing to not be an asshole and work in the same area.

You’re free to exercise your first amendment rights. But we don’t have support you.

We should be more like Batman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jZ-_f7kj_8

This is the liberal way to approach the issue.

Yes, that's the smart way to go about it. You don't want to just straight-up close them all, as the Karens will object, but just suck all the life (read: taxpayer money) out of them.
Factbooks coming never!
ns stats are illegal

A 21.6 civilization, according to this index.
Antibuda wrote:Monkey 4114 decided to wear an Ice Age baby costume in February.

Liriena wrote:Make California three times bigger to intimidate its neighbours into submission.

On a potential Trump movie:
Kronica wrote:Annoying Orange: The Movie
Population isn't used.
I mean, how do you think we would cram 200 mil+ people
into an island the size of Puerto Rico?
didn't mean to get daily referendums
idk how we did
deleted pride flag
it was bad
LeftValues: Centrist Marxist

User avatar
Antityranicals
Minister
 
Posts: 2471
Founded: May 18, 2019
Capitalizt

Postby Antityranicals » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:01 pm

This seems obvious to me. Why shouldn't an adoption agency choose whom it allows to adopt? It's not as though adoption is a right...
Compass: Right: 9.94, Libertarian: -5.84
Catholic Libertarian. Gov't has no authority, all authority is from God. God grants us free will, gov't should not infringe upon it. Legislating morality is wrong. Only exception is protecting rights to life, liberty, and property. Abortion is killing an infant, one of the few things gov't should prevent. Pro-Trump, he's been an effective weapon against real enemies of freedom: The Left, but I wish he were more for free trade, more against deficits. Unrestrained capitalism is a great thing; it does wonders for standards of living of everyone, especially the poor.
HS student in the USA. Male. XC runner, 17:30 5k, 4:59 mile. I enjoy singing, sushi, eating large quantities of food, and eating large quantities of sushi.

User avatar
Andsed
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8902
Founded: Aug 24, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Andsed » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:03 pm

Galloism wrote:I think religious foster agencies (and most religious organizations) should be legally permitted to discriminate in this regard, and we should just as legally yank every taxpayer dollar from it, and post an ad for free dollars to any foster agency willing to not be an asshole and work in the same area.

You’re free to exercise your first amendment rights. But we don’t have support you.

We should be more like Batman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jZ-_f7kj_8

This is the liberal way to approach the issue.

That works. You can be homophobic twats but the government is not going to support you.
Hello I am Andsed welcome to my sig.


Amazing Andsed quotes:
Ok lets get back on topic so we don´t get this thread locked thanks to talking about my church windmill dancing.
Andsed is not legally responsible for any injuries that may occur if you take this seriously and somehow get a trebuchet and try to fling yourself into a plane. You fucking dumbass
NationStates going from serious debates about homosexuality to jokes about Jesus a marijuana dealer in the span of one to two posts since November 13 2002.
Sorry my mind is always in the gutter no it lives in gutter my mind is fuckin called pennywise it is in the gutter so much.
How does one outsource racism? Do you like get an Indian guy to call people and call them racial slurs?

LOVEWHOYOUARE~

User avatar
Orostan
Senator
 
Posts: 4341
Founded: May 02, 2016
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Orostan » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:05 pm

Antityranicals wrote:This seems obvious to me. Why shouldn't an adoption agency choose whom it allows to adopt? It's not as though adoption is a right...

>hey guys I’m a libertarian who loves freedom

>no no not that freedom
“It is difficult for me to imagine what “personal liberty” is enjoyed by an unemployed hungry person. True freedom can only be where there is no exploitation and oppression of one person by another; where there is not unemployment, and where a person is not living in fear of losing his job, his home and his bread. Only in such a society personal and any other freedom can exist for real and not on paper.” -J. V. STALIN


Sagarmatha wrote:You have a corporatist brain. "It's more faster so it's better". Profit, profit, profit my dear Neoliberal, never forget why you exist. Profit, profit, profit.


Orostan wrote:you have posted cringe, your workers are going to unionize and kill you.

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58743
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:08 pm

Galloism wrote:I think religious foster agencies (and most religious organizations) should be legally permitted to discriminate in this regard, and we should just as legally yank every taxpayer dollar from it, and post an ad for free dollars to any foster agency willing to not be an asshole and work in the same area.

You’re free to exercise your first amendment rights. But we don’t have support you.

We should be more like Batman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jZ-_f7kj_8

This is the liberal way to approach the issue.

I agree with this.

You have the right to believe and do what you want no matter how stupid it is, however the government and thus the taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for it
Male, Titoist cultural nationalist, lives somewhere in the Deep South, give me any good Irish, Canadian, or Scottish whiskey and I will be your friend for life. I'm GAY!
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies
Click Here for RP Info Embassy Program
Ambassadors to the WA:
Ambassador to the GA Jon Æthr
Ambassador to the SC Eve Šanœ

RIP Dya

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58743
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:09 pm

Orostan wrote:
Antityranicals wrote:This seems obvious to me. Why shouldn't an adoption agency choose whom it allows to adopt? It's not as though adoption is a right...

>hey guys I’m a libertarian who loves freedom

>no no not that freedom

And not that freedom either or that one or that one
Male, Titoist cultural nationalist, lives somewhere in the Deep South, give me any good Irish, Canadian, or Scottish whiskey and I will be your friend for life. I'm GAY!
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies
Click Here for RP Info Embassy Program
Ambassadors to the WA:
Ambassador to the GA Jon Æthr
Ambassador to the SC Eve Šanœ

RIP Dya

User avatar
Snoodum
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 52
Founded: Oct 24, 2015
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Snoodum » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:18 pm

Who are religious foster agencies (or any foster agencies for that matter) to tell certain people they can't adopt? If the person who wants to adopt has a history of being an abuser, or something similar, I can see an argument to not let them adopt but on the grounds of sexuality? Frankly homophobic nonsense. As others have said, cut off all government funding to such places.
Yours, God-Emperor Snudgeskooge,
May we civilise the world with an iron fist.

User avatar
Esternial
P2TM RP Mentor
 
Posts: 52288
Founded: May 09, 2009
Democratic Socialists

Postby Esternial » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:19 pm

If taxpayers pay for a service, shouldn't they be able to use it?

User avatar
Cisairse
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8439
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Cisairse » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:21 pm

Inhumane and cruel.

Let's not forget that evangelicals are the same group of people pushing the "Just put them up for adoption!" narrative as way to try and legitimize the outlawing of abortion. The adoption system is already supremely flooded with children and in dire need of more willing parents; this move will only exacerbate it and increase the severity of the humanitarian crisis happening within the borders of the United States.
Now it's clear as a pillar of smoke
The details of the above post are subject to leftist infighting.

And broken Starbucks glass

Yeah, I support my troops
They wave black flags
They wear black masks

User avatar
Myrensis
Senator
 
Posts: 4684
Founded: Oct 05, 2010
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Myrensis » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:22 pm

But he touched the rainbow flag once!

Antityranicals wrote:This seems obvious to me. Why shouldn't an adoption agency choose whom it allows to adopt? It's not as though adoption is a right...


They can, as soon as they stop taking taxpayer money.

User avatar
Kannap
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58872
Founded: May 07, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby Kannap » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:30 pm

Antityranicals wrote:This seems obvious to me. Why shouldn't an adoption agency choose whom it allows to adopt? It's not as though adoption is a right...


Would you be fine with an adoption agency refusing to let African Americans to adopt? Or refusing to let Chinese Americans adopt?
23 years old, gay male, Presbyterian, North Carolinian. Pumpkin Spice everything.
TET's resident ostrich
Political Party: Not affiliated/Independent
Hawkins/Walker 2020
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
Luna Amore wrote:note to self, insert clever reference to Kannap
T H E M O U N T A I N S A R E C A L L I N G A N D I M U S T G O
G A Y S I N C E 1 9 9 7
RYM || Political test results

User avatar
Cisairse
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8439
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Cisairse » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:32 pm

Kannap wrote:
Antityranicals wrote:This seems obvious to me. Why shouldn't an adoption agency choose whom it allows to adopt? It's not as though adoption is a right...


Would you be fine with an adoption agency refusing to let African Americans to adopt? Or refusing to let Chinese Americans adopt?


Or, more aptly, refusing to let straight Americans adopt.
Now it's clear as a pillar of smoke
The details of the above post are subject to leftist infighting.

And broken Starbucks glass

Yeah, I support my troops
They wave black flags
They wear black masks

User avatar
Kannap
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58872
Founded: May 07, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby Kannap » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:34 pm

Esternial wrote:If taxpayers pay for a service, shouldn't they be able to use it?


I can see where you'd draw that conclusion
Last edited by Kannap on Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
23 years old, gay male, Presbyterian, North Carolinian. Pumpkin Spice everything.
TET's resident ostrich
Political Party: Not affiliated/Independent
Hawkins/Walker 2020
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
Luna Amore wrote:note to self, insert clever reference to Kannap
T H E M O U N T A I N S A R E C A L L I N G A N D I M U S T G O
G A Y S I N C E 1 9 9 7
RYM || Political test results

User avatar
Kannap
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58872
Founded: May 07, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby Kannap » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:35 pm

Cisairse wrote:
Kannap wrote:
Would you be fine with an adoption agency refusing to let African Americans to adopt? Or refusing to let Chinese Americans adopt?


Or, more aptly, refusing to let straight Americans adopt.


That's a silly idea and a horrible argument, as long as straight people make up the majority. I was making comparisons to other minorities because minorities are always the ones who get oppressed.
23 years old, gay male, Presbyterian, North Carolinian. Pumpkin Spice everything.
TET's resident ostrich
Political Party: Not affiliated/Independent
Hawkins/Walker 2020
Luna Amore wrote:Please remember to attend the ritualistic burning of Kannap for heresy
Luna Amore wrote:note to self, insert clever reference to Kannap
T H E M O U N T A I N S A R E C A L L I N G A N D I M U S T G O
G A Y S I N C E 1 9 9 7
RYM || Political test results

User avatar
Lucja
Attaché
 
Posts: 86
Founded: May 27, 2020
Father Knows Best State

Postby Lucja » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:37 pm

Why should religion be able to interfere with children having a stable home?
Cyprian Norwid wrote:Ogromne wojska, bitne generały,
Policje - tajne, widne i dwu-płciowe -
Przeciwko komuż tak się pojednały?
- Przeciwko kilku myślom... co nienowe!

User avatar
Nanatsu no Tsuki
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 192702
Founded: Feb 10, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Nanatsu no Tsuki » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:39 pm

Antibuda wrote:
Galloism wrote:I think religious foster agencies (and most religious organizations) should be legally permitted to discriminate in this regard, and we should just as legally yank every taxpayer dollar from it, and post an ad for free dollars to any foster agency willing to not be an asshole and work in the same area.

You’re free to exercise your first amendment rights. But we don’t have support you.

We should be more like Batman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jZ-_f7kj_8

This is the liberal way to approach the issue.

Yes, that's the smart way to go about it. You don't want to just straight-up close them all, as the Karens will object, but just suck all the life (read: taxpayer money) out of them.


Karens gotta Karen. Idiots the lot of them.

But yes, Gallo is right. They can be assholes, it’s a constitutional right, but we don’t have to support them in their quest to be assholes.
Code name: Ratatouille Strychnine
Also: THERNSY!!
Your story isn't over;֍Help save transgender people's lives֍Help for feral cats
Cat with internet access||Heartless, ''transgendered non-binary kawaii Chan'', & a d*ck.||No TGs
RIP: Dyakovo & Ashmoria

User avatar
Fulgornia
Secretary
 
Posts: 31
Founded: Jun 06, 2020
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Fulgornia » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:39 pm

I think this is an on-point policy for fuhrer Trump. It speaks to his ideology of degrading the common man while convincing the common man is exceptional to the common man. Truly an amazing political move for future despots on how to teach the populace to attack itself from a false belief of supremacy.

User avatar
Loben The 2nd
Senator
 
Posts: 4383
Founded: Apr 29, 2019
Corporate Bordello

Postby Loben The 2nd » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:39 pm

Lucja wrote:Why should religion be able to interfere with children having a stable home?


why are LGBT couples bothering to go through religious ran organizations?
no quarter.
Satisfaction guaranteed.

User avatar
Middle Barael
Attaché
 
Posts: 80
Founded: Apr 24, 2020
Democratic Socialists

Postby Middle Barael » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:42 pm

Antityranicals wrote:This seems obvious to me. Why shouldn't an adoption agency choose whom it allows to adopt? It's not as though adoption is a right...

Because it’s only doing it because they are same-sex couples, which is discrimination. If the family was actually deemed not suitable for raising a child, then you can understand it, but if the only reason is that they are gay, there’s a problem.

I feel like it will be very difficult to force these organizations to allow gay people to adopt, but instead the government should simply refuse to fund them. Our taxpayer money should not be going to a charity that openly discriminates against any legally protected group, including the LGBTQ community. If an adoption service decided that they would not let Jews adopt, the government would defund them and maybe even prosecute, so why would it be any different for the LGBTQ community?
Pro: Environmentalism, fighting climate change, social democracy, police reform, LGBTQ rights, abortions, separation of church and state, democracy, assault weapon ban, proportional representation, multi-party states, Two-State Solution, Israel AND Palestine, pacifism, immigration, Anti-Racism, Jacinda Ardern-type Politics, NHS-type Healthcare, culture, science

Anti: Environmental destruction, fossil fuels, Trump, Laissez-faire economy, communism, far-right, homophobia, “Pro-Life”, dictatorships, one/two-party systems, guns, Netanyahu, Israeli settlements/annexation, Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian terrorists, war, racism, anti-immigration, nationalism, fascism,
A 15.4285714 civilization, according to this form

Political Compass:
Economic: -3.88
Social: -4.46

User avatar
Bienenhalde
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5203
Founded: Mar 11, 2017
Authoritarian Democracy

Postby Bienenhalde » Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:42 pm

I don't agree with the policy of Christian or other religious adoption agencies that refuse to allow same-sex couples to adopt, but if they close, that would mean that fewer adoption agencies would have to handle a larger number of children. Is that really in the children's best interests?
Bienenhalde (mostly) represents my real political views.
https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=75.6&d=68.6&g=38.8&s=45.2
OOC:
[*]Age: 24 [*]Pennsylvania Dutch [*]ELCA Lutheran [*]Male [*]Bisexual - leaning towards gay [*]Independent [*]Sinophile-Japanophile [*]Monarchist [*]Has Asperger's

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Awesomeland012345, Bombadil, Geneviev, Greater Miami Shores, Majestic-12 [Bot], TBNRKnight, The Alma Mater, Tonakistan

Advertisement

Remove ads