|
Published: November 9, 2009
San Francisco Catholics to Get New Hearing
Ninth Circuit Will Revisit “Hostility to Religion” Case
On Thursday, November 5, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals set aside a June, 2009 ruling that the City and County of San Francisco had not acted unconstitutionally by expressing an official hostility to religion. The ruling had been made by a three-judge panel. A majority of the judges on the Ninth Circuit has decided the case will get a rehearing by the full 11-judge panel.
The set-aside ruling concerned Resolution 168-06, issued in March 2006 by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Resolution 168-06 responded to a statement by William Cardinal Levada that Catholic Charities of San Francisco should not allow adoptive children to be placed in same-sex households. Resolution 168-06 called the Vatican’s statement “hateful” and “discriminatory” and it urged Catholic Charities and local Catholic officials to disregard it.
On Friday, November 6, the San Francisco Chronicle reported: “Robert Muise, lawyer for the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, which requested the rehearing, said he would argue that the city was ‘intervening in church affairs.’" Muise said the supervisors resolution "called on local Catholics to literally defy church teaching, to defy Catholic leaders." Muise is an attorney at the Thomas More Law Center.
The case has its genesis in Catholic Charities of San Francisco’s decision to place adoptive children in homosexual households. Resolution 168-06, sponsored by openly homosexual San Francisco Supervisor Tom Ammiano, was in response to the Vatican’s statement that to allow children to be adopted into households where there was not a mother and a father, and no likelihood of there ever being a mother or father, amounted to “doing violence to the children.” The Vatican’s action was itself in response to Catholic Charities’ practice of placing children into just such households.
The battle resulted in the ill-advised “partnership,“ brokered by openly homosexual Supervisor Bevan Dufty, between Catholic Charities of San Francisco and Family Builders by Adoption. The partnership resulted in Catholic Charities’ funding and staffing Family Builders by Adoption, an organization which is required by contract with the City and County of San Francisco to “increasing the number of children adopted by Lesbian, Gay Bisexual, and Transgender adults." This was referred to by archdiocesan officials as “remote cooperation.”
On August 11, 2009, California Catholic Daily reported that Family Builders by Adoption was advertising for adoptive “fathers” on the leather s/m page of the homosexualist website the Bay Area Reporter and on the “porn” page of the homosexualist website the San Francisco Bay Times. The CCD story caused Trent Rohrer, executive director of San Francisco’s Human Services Agency to direct Family Builders by Adoption to pull the ads. At the time, Mr. Rohrer said “We work in collaboration with Family Builders to recruit adoptive homes for foster youth, However, we were not aware nor would we ever authorize the use of these ads for any type of inappropriate websites and publications. Efforts have been made to contact a representative from Family Builders. We are in the process of resolving this matter and plan to pull the ads immediately.”
When the partnership between Catholic Charities and Family Builders by Adoption was announced, it set off a firestorm of protest among Catholics, although Catholic Chariities’ then-executive director Brian Cahill referred to it as a “great opportunity.” The partnership was dissolved in June, 2009.
Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 8:10 AM By Thomas Edward Miles
Who cares, what a complete WASTE of the COURTS time!
|
Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 8:14 AM By TotaTua
there is hope - the 9th Circuit Court didn't just rubber stamp the SF Resolution! Thanks be to God.
|
Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 9:41 AM By WOODY GUIDRY
EVERYBODY should use "discriminatory" thinking before taking short cuts to make decisions for ANYTHING important.Lack of ordinary discrimination causes children to be herded into households where early death from disease and/or typical SSA separations leave "single parents". Only haters of kids would promote such non-discrimination.
|
Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 12:31 PM By BeauZeau
This whole dismal episode is just another example of the passivity and/or timidity of the Archbishop of San Francisco, George Niederauer. He could have stopped the Cathokic partnership with homosexual adoption in its tracks, but kept quiet, forcing Levada to speak out. Clerics like Niederauer and Mahony by their near silence provide a definite advantage to the pro-gay and pro-abortion politicians. Let us hope the full 9th circuit kicks the butt of the Catholic hating loonies on the SF Board of Supervisers.
|
Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 2:34 PM By Life Lady
Lost in the shuffle of name-calling is the bottom line where what is actually best for children, and not for adults. Somehow people are forgetting that what happens to children stays with them, long after they leave their childhood behind and become adults. We are seeing the result of gender confusion with the onslaught of the hard-core gay propaganda that says you don't need a mother and a father. Where did they come from, those people who are saying that? Surely they were not hatched from a petri dish, at least not yet. There was a mother, and a father, as well meaning as they could be at the time, cooperating with God in the next generation of children. I hope this next generation has a better handle on how to respond to people of the opposite gender.
|
Posted Monday, November 09, 2009 4:52 PM By JLS
One of the rites of passage into bishopness should be manhood.
|
© California Catholic Daily 2009. All Rights Reserved.
|