Comments about ‘Virginia panel backs clause letting agencies deny adoption by gays’

'The Health, Welfare and Institutions Committee voted 14-5 Tuesday to send Del. Todd Gilbert's "conscience clause"...' - article

Conscience clause....

People do a LOT of things, in the name of their 'conscience'.

Like...

denying a child, two parents.

As long as they are truly private and do not receive government funding or operate as government agencies, I see no problem with this legislation.

"We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets" (LDS Church "Proclamation on the Family").

This is true for all people.

It is wise for US law to support and strengthen the traditional, time-honored family of a father and a mother raising children with great effort towards instilling faith in God; faith, love and service towards others; compassion; and all other Godly attributes.

@david

Actually david I would argue it is wise to base decisions on the known facts and the facts do not support your superstitious thinking in this case. We gave been through this argument thousands of times on these threads the research and the known facts just do not support your assertions.

If these adoption agencies receive tax money to operate than they should be required to adopt to gay couples. If they're completely privately financed, then they can deny any couple for any reason.

My thought is that these agencies must get tax money, otherwise there wouldn't be any need for this type of bigoted legislation since private agencies ALREADY pick and choose where they place children.

@David;

Your "Proclamation" is valid ONLY for LDS Members. Nobody else has ANY obligation to accept your church's definitions. Period.