Taxpayer funded adoption agency won't place kids w/Jewish...

Before I comment, what’s the deal with the crossed-out paragraphs? @zima

OK, thanks. I just wanted to make sure there weren’t retractions or unsubstantiated claims or something. Do you want me to delete that post now?

So in that case, it seems completely illegal to me. But I’m just a pinko commie from California. Who doesn’t much understand how things work in the South.

Can they really get away with doing that?

Typical Christ-like behavior, right?

WaPo-I left out a few paragraphs, but these are the important bits. I can’t link the article because my subscriber info is on the link.

“ On Wednesday, the Rutan-Rams, along with six others, sued the Department of Children’s Services and its commissioner, Jennifer Nichols, claiming it violated the couple’s rights to religious freedom and equal protection in the Tennessee Constitution by using state funds to support agencies that discriminate based on religious beliefs.
“It’s infuriating to learn our tax dollars are funding discrimination against us,” Gabriel Rutan-Ram said in a news release from the Tennessee chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “If an agency is getting tax money to provide a service, then everyone should be served — it shouldn’t matter whether you’re Jewish, Catholic or an atheist. We’re all citizens of Tennessee, regardless of our religion.”
The Tennessee Department of Children’s Services and the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is representing Holston, did not immediately respond to The Washington Post’s request for comment late Thursday. Holston is not named as a defendant in the suit.

Brad Williams, the president and chief executive of Holston, said in a statement to The Post that his agency wants to make sure that “vulnerable children” do not “lose access to Christian families.”
“Holston Home places children with families that agree with our statement of faith, and forcing Holston Home to violate our beliefs and place children in homes that do not share our faith is wrong and contrary to a free society,” Williams added.
The lawsuit comes two years after the state’s Republican governor, Bill Lee, signed a bill providing legal protections to taxpayer-funded foster care and adoption agencies that deny services to people based on their sexual orientation or religion. Other states that have passed similar laws include Texas, Alabama, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Virginia, South Dakota and North Dakota.

In November, a lawyer representing the couple sent a letter to the commissioner and general counsel of the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services and to Williams, Holston’s president and chief executive, explaining that the agency violated the Tennessee Constitution and requesting the department sever contracts with Holston. The lawyer never received a response, according to the lawsuit.
A month later, Holston sued the Biden administration, “challenging a federal regulation that prohibits discrimination on the basis of age, disability, sex, race, color, national origin, religion, gender identity, and sexual orientation in programs funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,” the Rutan-Rams’ lawsuit says. In its lawsuit, the agency said that it refuses services to “prospective foster or adoptive parents who do not subscribe to Holston’s understanding of Christianity.”

In their lawsuit, the Rutan-Rams are joined by six other Tennessee taxpayers — four Christian leaders, one psychologist who works with foster parents and children, and the treasurer for the Tennessee chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. All said they disagree with religious discrimination by state-funded agencies.
Their goal in filing the case is so others “do not again suffer the humiliation and loss of opportunity that Holston’s discrimination inflicted on” the Rutan-Rams, court documents say, “and so that their tax payments do not fund similar discrimination against anyone else in the future.”

Because Congress hasn’t done anything about it. I’m not even certain they can because it implicates the First Amendment. As far as I know, equal treatment of prospective parents cannot supersede the free exercise of religion.

But, we'll see what happens with this case. What I've observed with such is it's usually narrowly decided, meaning it's applicable only to that specific case. It was the same with the Philadelphia one--in fact, lucyg was the one who said on that thread it was a narrow decision so its import was extremely limited.

If they were a privately funded organization, they apparently can serve who they please (even though I don’t agree with it - it IS discrimination of a protected class).

I strongly disagree with having taxpayer dollars - including JEWISH taxpayer dollars - going to fund that. I simply don’t understand how potentially Jewish money is good enough for them to take and spend, but that Jewish parents aren’t good enough to adopt children.

It horrifies me that the agency has somehow twisted what Christian values are into supporting keeping a child in foster care rather than allowing a loving couple - who clearly WANT TO GIVE HIM A FAMILY - to adopt him. If Christ were alive and walking the earth, I’m fairly confident that wouldn’t be a stance that he would support - having been raised in a Jewish family himself. I guess that Joseph and Mary - Jews - wouldn’t be allowed to adopt from that agency either, because they wouldn’t be good enough.

As a Jew, I want to take the Old Testament back from Christians. It was ours first - we wrote it, and since many “Christians” don’t understand that and that Judaism is based on it, just give it back to us, stop claiming it as yours, and stop using it.

I’m sick of the anti-Semitism that is growing more and more blatant in the US right now.

Well, don't you all remember that chapter in Matthew where Jesus said "I don't care if a kid has to live in the streets, make sure they don't live with someone of a different religion! That's far and above the most important thing, way more important than making a kid feel safe and loved. Why on EARTH would you think I would support crap like that?"

Religion, the root of all that is evil in the world.

Yikes! Makes me happy that I never read the Bible! 😬

My recollection of the Philadelphia case was part of the decision was based on multiple agencies being available and funded. So to exclude one agencies that is faith based was deemed to be contrary to the first amendment and there was no compelling need for the state to not grant them an exemption. If there are no other agencies available in that area, I would think that the lack of a compelling need portion wouldn't be applicable. But I guess I should go dig out the old case to remind myself.

And as a total aside, considering the state of our foster care system, I am appalled and disgusted that anyone would justify discriminating against parents wanting to adopt for religious reasons - it's disgusting.

What made you conclude I was okay with all this?

You seem to defend them on one level - at least appear to be conflicted. That may be me misinterpreting your words. Would you feel the same way if they discriminated against Black couples?

For me, it is cut & dry in this case. I wonder if it would be more so for you if you were being discriminated against? Maybe not. I’m somewhat sensitive to antisemitism right now and am having a hard time defending allowing them to continue this practice on any level, including that it is better for the children to allow it.

Elaine, not that she needs any explanation from me; she can stick up for herself-but I did not interpret her words that way. My interpretation was that at the present time, there does not seem to be any effective way of fighting these agencies. When given an ultimatum, they fold their tents and leave town. If we ever get a decent SC, maybe something could be done about this reprehensible practice.

You are two of my favorite Peas, and I hope that the above does not offend either of you.