Well ... I can't say that the result in this case is at all surprising. What surprises me is that both sides made the wrong arguments.
The argument by the gay men who wanted to adopt should have been that, as long as other single people were allowed to adopt in Florida, and as long as homosexuals were allowed to serve as foster parents, the state had no legitimate reason for barring gay men and lesbians from adoption. Homosexuality is simply irrelevant when comparing single people against each other. The argument that it's "best for children to be reared by a married mother and father" is also irrelevant, since Florida does allow adoption by single adults. Frankly, the only other point they could have reasonably made was that the law was enacted to express bigotry.
The counter-argument by the state is very easy, and entirely dispositive: homosexual behavior is a criminal act in the state of Florida. Known criminals are not allowed to adopt children; therefore, gays and lesbians should not be allowed to adopt. The only reason for Florida not to make that argument is that they might have thought that the laws regarding homosexual behavior would be stricken, but since they weren't directly at issue, the court would have been considerably overstepping its limits to do so. I am surprised that the state brought up "its moral disapproval of homosexuality" at all, as it would pretty much constitute bigotry on its face. (And Florida got a nice little slap from the judge in return: The court cannot accept that moral disapproval of homosexuals or homosexuality serves a legitimate state interest.'') What I don't understand is why the judge didn't give more weight to the fact that not only can single people adopt, but gays can serve as foster parents for an indefinite period; all the burdens of parenthood with no certainty, no knowledge that after a few years, the state won't capriciously come in and remove the child from your home, no certainty for the child.
Frankly, what I seriously fear is that the state will now remove the children or that some conservative ideologues will come forward to adopt them, just to make the point.
Copyright © 2001, Iain Jackson, after-words.org
[Archives: 2001 and after]
Archives before February 5, 2001
Search entries:
12/19/2001: vive la france
12/19/2001: princess, redux
12/19/2001: yemen and rumsfeld
12/18/2001: you're NOT in the army now
12/18/2001: interesting donation
12/18/2001: shame on winn dixie, indeed
12/18/2001: saudi princess
12/17/2001: new resolve
12/17/2001: a victim of the attack ... yeah, right
12/17/2001: polluters ho!