April 9 update: The bill, HB 7111, passed the House on a 75 to 38 vote.
The Florida House of Representatives on Wednesday advanced a controversial bill that would allow private adoption agencies to refuse to place children with same-sex couples.
Dubbed the “conscience protection” bill, the House measure (HB 7111) by Rep. Jason Brodeur, R-Sanford, is poised for approval as soon as Thursday.
It would allow private adoption agencies whose “written religious or moral convictions” do not permit children in their care to be adopted by gays or lesbians to refuse to make such placements. The agencies would not face the possibility of losing their licenses or state funding.
But across the Capitol, the Senate refused to keep on the books a decades-old state law that banned gay adoptions. The issue arose in debate about a bill (HB 7013) that would provide adoption subsidies to state workers.
The House, in passing the adoption-subsidies bill last month, moved to repeal the prohibition on gay adoptions — a law that was struck down by an appeals court five years ago and has not been in effect. But Sen. Kelli Stargel, R-Lakeland, proposed an amendment Wednesday that would have kept the prohibition in law. Like with the “conscience protection” issue, she pointed to concerns about the effect on faith-based adoption agencies if the law is repealed.
“I strongly believe that our faith-based organizations provide a lot of our adoptions, and I think that they should have the religious freedom not to have to put a child in the home of a family that they may not believe holds their religious guidelines,” Stargel said earlier Wednesday.
But Sen. Don Gaetz, a Niceville Republican and the sponsor of the adoption-subsidies bill in the Senate, led the opposition to Stargel’s amendment, which failed in a voice vote. He warned that Stargel’s amendment could jeopardize the entire adoption-subsidies bill.
“It’s not only an unfriendly amendment, it is a killer amendment,” Gaetz said.
The bill, in part, would offer $10,000 payments to state employees who adopt special-needs children from the foster-care system and $5,000 payments to state employees who adopt other foster children.
Gaetz said that of the 852 children awaiting adoption in the state foster-care system, the overwhelming majority are special-needs children. “All are very hard to place,” he said. “And that’s what this bill is for.”
The House passed the adoption-subsidies bill March 11 but set off a firestorm by including the repeal of the law that banned same-sex couples from adopting in the past.
Florida banned gay adoption until 2010, when an appeals court ruled that the ban was unconstitutional. Since then, the state hasn’t challenged such adoptions, but the ban has remained in statute.
“That carries the force of law,” Gaetz said of the court ruling. “Since that decision came out, no advocacy group on either side of the law has suggested that it was wrong or should be challenged. …That ship has sailed.”
He also contended that the Department of Children and Families “under oath has said they placed children with same-sex couples and there are no negative consequences of that.”
But Stargel said she could not “in good conscience” support gay adoption as part of state law.
“I don’t believe it’s a done deal,” she said. “It’s possible the Supreme Court would render a different decision.”
In the House, a three-hour debate over Brodeur’s “conscience-protection” bill showed the strength of the backlash against last month’s vote.
House Democrats tried a series of amendments that would have sought to prevent private adoption agencies from discriminating based on race, religion, national origin, gender identity and military and marital status — but they were all outvoted, largely along party lines.
In a number of those instances, Brodeur proposed the same substitute amendment, which would insert language in the bill stating, “An act by a private child-placing agency under this subsection does not constitute discrimination.”
“If you vote in support of this substitute amendment, you are voting to allow discrimination against the LGBT community in an adoption action. That’s what you’re voting for,” Rep. David Richardson, the Miami Beach Democrat and the House’s only openly gay representative, said in one of several attempts to defeat Brodeur’s measure and others like it.
Every one of the substitute amendments passed.
“This is a shield, not a sword,” Brodeur said of his bill. “A shield to protect our religious liberties.”
He pointed to Catholic Charities of Boston and San Francisco, which stopped providing adoption services in 2006 rather than comply with state anti-discrimination laws.
“We’ve seen in other states those agencies absolutely shut down,” Brodeur said.
The Florida Democratic Party and the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida oppose the conscience-protection measure, while the Florida Family Policy Council and the Liberty Counsel support it.
“When kids are placed in the care of the state because of abuse or neglect, they must have their foster or adoptive family chosen based on their needs, not the religious or moral beliefs of agencies the state hires to care for them,” the ACLU’s Michelle Richardson said in a statement. “In supporting this bill, members are plugging their ears and ignoring both the warnings of child welfare advocates in Florida and the national outcry that has arisen around recent bills in other states that similarly would give license to use religion to discriminate.”
Asked if he’d sign or veto the measure should it reach his desk, Gov. Rick Scott did not answer directly.
“We have a great state,” he said. “We’re one of the best melting pots in the world.” Scott noted that 250,000 languages are spoken in Florida, more than 100 million tourists are expected this year and 250,000 people moved here last year. “This is a state that people want to move to — we’re doing the right thing,” he said.
–Margie Menzel, News Service of Florida
keeping it real says
Kids shouldn’t grow up in odd households…
I am a Christian, and many of my fellow Christians with “written religious or moral convictions” are on marriage # 3, and are the same folks that only sit in the front row of the church. Children need Love and Protection and as long as a couple (any type of couple) can provide that they are O.K. with me.
ted bundy says
gays should not be allowed to adopt, EVER…
Nalla C. says
We’re all entitled to our opinions. Saying “gays should not be allowed to adopt, EVER” is a pretty broad opinion, though, and as a standalone with no reasoning behind it, appears to be quite inappropriate.
Life is hard enough in a conventional adoption household. Don’t push a lifestyle on kids. If they want to get married, sure. Have a kid of their own if they get married.
ACLU Supporter says
Oh you think life is sunshine and roses growing up in foster and group homes because there is a shortage of so-called “suitable” people willing to adopt?
Would you seriously rather that a child grows up with no permanent home than with two loving Dads? Get your priorities in order.
Groot, I keep hearing straight people refer to a so-called “gay lifestyle.” What are you talking about?
Being attracted to the same sex instead of the opposite sex qualifies as its own “lifestyle” about as much as being attracted to brunettes instead of blondes.
I’m a gay guy. You know what my gay “lifestyle” is like? I get up in the morning, go to work, come home, eat dinner and read a book. Maybe I’ll go out for beer with a few friends, and on the weekends I’ll take my boat out and go fishing — all things that straight people do too, unless pastimes like reading, fishing and drinking beer went queer when I wasn’t looking. And if I ever settle down and get hitched with another guy, you know what we’ll probably do? Get up in the morning, go to work, come home, eat dinner, read a book, have the occasional drink with friends and take the boat out fishing on the weekends.
What exactly is it about that “lifestyle” that you think is so harmful that children are better off in group homes or foster care than exposed to it?
Diana L says
Discrimatory, so Unconstitutional, give it up, already. You are on the wrong side. These legislators are an embarrassment to this State.
Sherry E says
Right on Diana and Yankee expat!
The same people that often cry foul at government overreach seem to have no problem with implementing discriminatory laws that try to control who should love who, what people do in their bedrooms, which bathrooms they use, which birth control pills they take. . . and on and on! What a bunch of hypocrites!
Nancy N says
C’mon, Sherry, do we really have to go over this again? Let’s review one more time the GOP rules of life….
* When a government you like makes rules about your sex life, that is “instilling values”.
* When a government you don’t like makes rules about your sex life, that is “government overreach”.
Let’s try to keep that straight from now on, ok?
Nalla C. says
I’m not keeping it straight on their behalf though your point is absolutely spot-on. Such obnoxious hypocrisy needs to be pointed out every time it rears its ugly head in our community, and in the kind of detail you provided.
These bigots are disgusting and depraved and I am damned tired of them getting their granny panties in a twist all because Teh Gay is ICKY to them.
And somehow I can hear Jesus saying you people have me and this all wrong. I told you to love one another. Yes everyone of you even the ones that are sinners and the ones that like to scream hypocrite because that’s what they shouted at me too. Didn’t His crucifixion for all mean anything to anyone?
Sherry E says
LOL! Thanks so much for keeping me straight on the GOP rules, Nancy!
The Republican rules are just so honest, consistent, logical, reasonable, non-discriminatory and embrace all humanity with great love. . . NOT!