|
I don't really see a problem with their position.
Yes, I disagree with them on whether putting children in the care of gays is a sin but accepting that they do consider it to be so, then if the state says that they must if they want to facilitate any adoptions then the logical decision is to stop doing them at all. That really is the proper decision in almost any situation where you're told "you can only do the right thing if you'll do the wrong thing too."
I'm not sure how I feel about them being held to the rule, though. I guess it would depend on to what degree they are acting as an agent of the state. But it doesn't seem that far away from saying "if you want to perform state recognized weddings then you can't discriminate against performing gay weddings" which recent campaigns have stressed would not be the end result of gay marriage.
|