stats for wordpress
 







Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!


Breaking: Utah Supreme Court Halts Adoptions By Same-Sex Couples

by David Badash on May 17, 2014

in Marriage,News

Post image for Breaking: Utah Supreme Court Halts Adoptions By Same-Sex Couples

The Utah state Supreme Court late Friday night issued an emergency stay, halting the adoption of children by legally-married same-sex couples. The ruling comes in response to the state attorney general’s request, and could have placed him in jail had the Court ruled in a different manner.

At issue, requiring the Department of Health to include the names of both adoptive parents on birth certificates.

In December, a federal judge found Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. 1300 couples married before Utah’s attorney general, Sean Reyes (image), could convince the U.S. Supreme Court to stay that ruling. Republican Governor Gary Herbert subsequently decided that even though those marriages are legal, the state would not recognize them. The federal government, under the direction of Eric Holder, is recognizing all 1300 marriages.

“Supporters of same-sex marriage have accused the state of ‘tearing families apart’ for political reasons, but Assistant Attorney General Joni Jones, who oversees the litigation division of the office, said the state is seeking clarity, not discord,” the Salt Lake Tribune reports.

Now, in what some might say is a vengeful act, not only are 1300 same-sex marriages in limbo, so is the status of their children — as a direct result not of the federal judge’s December ruling or of the U.S. Supreme Court’s, but of the governor’s decision to not recognize the legal marriages.

Last month, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments related to December’s ruling striking down the marriage ban. A decision is expected soon, and court watchers believe the original ruling, striking down the ban, will be upheld.

The stay on adoptions presumably will be in effect until the federal court rules on the marriages.

This is a breaking news story — stay tuned for further developments.

Image via Facebook

 

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Friends:

We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!

{ 4 comments }

weshlovrcm May 17, 2014 at 1:30 am

The radical, anti-family, anti-gay activist lobby is evil. Only evil people would rip apart families and tear children from their parents. But we know they don't care about children, because they were ready to throw starving children under the bus when World Vision and its employees used their freedom of speech and religion several weeks ago.

russellsvocation May 17, 2014 at 2:04 am

So…
They scream because gay people can't procreate… ok, sorta' true.
They won't acknowledge that it's the unmarried and sometimes married heterosexuals, the "natural order" couple who are getting together, banging and popping out these kids and then abandoning them.
They would then rather see a child sit in a foster home and have the chances of adoption go down as the child gets older than admit they could get good, loving homes with couples who happen to be gay.
So, to answer the question WWJD… probably none of this krap.

cftxp May 17, 2014 at 2:38 am

Strong family values are not the same as traditional families. In fact, when humans were merely small bands of individuals who would end up procreating, communities were also families and it literally took a village to raise a child. In a sense, polygamists are closer to real ancient traditional family values than those in heterosexual monogamous marriages would be. Strong families are ones where all individuals have a cohesive bond and love each other. A man and a woman don't make a strong family, love makes strong families, regardless of who happens to be in those structures.

SomeCans May 17, 2014 at 5:42 am

Has anyone seen the ruling? The AG's office says it covers them, which would imply the order is retroactive and doesn't just apply to future adoptions. (And even if it is retroactive, the AG was still in contempt by challenging the adoption after it was approved and not before.)

(The Utah Supreme Court web site will be down from 8:00am to 11:00pm today. https://www.utcourts.gov/courts/sup/ )

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: