comsc US Politics | AMERICAblog News: Bush's "Snowflake" adoption program discriminates on basis of religion, sexual orientation
Join Email List | About us | AMERICAblog Gay
Elections | Economic Crisis | Jobs | TSA | Limbaugh | Fun Stuff

Bush's "Snowflake" adoption program discriminates on basis of religion, sexual orientation

| Reddit | Tumblr | Digg | FARK

I'm sorry, but how is it legal that this adoption program discriminates on the basis of religion? (Read the excerpt from the NYT article below.)

It's disgusting that they allow anti-gay discrimination too, of course, but religious discrimination is in the civil rights act. And this is not a church, it's an adoption agency. So how do they permit discrimination? Do they permit discrimination based on race too? You know, in case I don't want any of those dark folks adopting my sperm child. And would a court of law be forced to endorse religious or race based discrimination if the adoption agency refused to follow through on the donors racist or bigoted views?

Couples adopting or donating Snowflakes embryos are mostly Christian, and most embryo donors are white, Ms. Maze said. Some families are Roman Catholic, even though the church has historically opposed in vitro fertilization.

Couples must agree to adoption-like procedures: receiving families are screened and must undergo counseling, and Snowflakes allows donating and receiving families to designate criteria for each other, meet and maintain contact after birth. Adopting couples must agree not to abort any embryos.

Those conditions were fine with Bob and Angie Deacon of Virginia Beach, Va., who donated their 13 embryos after having twins and being discouraged from another pregnancy by a doctor. "With another program, to be honest with you, they could have been adopted by lesbian parents, and I'm totally against that," said Mr. Deacon, 35.

It took two and a half years to bring themselves to fill out the papers. On their forms, they said the adopting family must be conservative Christians and, ideally, include a stay-at-home mother.
Law or no law, these people were at the White House. AT THE WHITE HOUSE, at the invitation of the president. The president wanted this to be THE MODEL for the country - religious-based (and who knows, race-based?) discrimination as the model for the entire country.

So again, I ask the question - do they permit discrimination based on race? Against Latinos? Blacks? Irish? Muslims?

PS And how did the NYT totally miss this incredible aspect of their own story? Did NO editor read this and go "holy shit"? No follow up with the Snowflake folks about the legality of doing this, the morality of doing this, and whether they permit discrimination in other categories?

blog comments powered by Disqus