National Geographic

"The so-called Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act has already done more harm to religious freedom than good. The Roman Catholic diocese in Rockford has announced that it will close its doors on the church's adoption program before subjecting children to placement in homosexual homes. Like it did in Massachusetts and Washington, D.C., the Catholic Church refused to violate its convictions. Unfortunately, it's only a matter of time before other dioceses follow suit. For the church, this is an act of self-defense. Without a religious exemption, the law makes programs like this one vulnerable to lawsuits or state budget cuts. Much to the frustration of the bill's own sponsor, the state refused to carve out special protections for the religious organizations like this one. And now the state's neediest children will be paying for it." - Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.

Catholic Charities of Rockford, Illinois announced yesterday that they will suspend all foster care and adoption services rather than comply with the state's new civil unions law.

Officials cited a lack of clarity in the Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Unions Act, which does not specify whether religious child welfare agencies must place children with couples in civil unions. Without a specific provision protecting religious agencies, church officials said, the agency can't risk losing state contracts or facing lawsuits if it turns away gay couples or others in civil unions. State funds make up about half of Catholic Charities of Rockford's $7.5 million operating budget.

"While we understand leaving this work will be very painful for our client families, employees, volunteers, donors and prayerful supporters, we can no longer contract with the state of Illinois whose laws would force us to participate in activity offensive to the moral teachings of the church — teachings which compel us to do this work in the first place," said Frank Vonch, director of social services for the Diocese of Rockford, which includes Kane and McHenry counties.

Catholic adoption agencies in other Illinois cities say they have not yet decided whether to stay open.

"In Great Britain, Christians are now effectively second-class citizens, judged 'unfit' to care for foster children. If they are unfit to foster children, logically they are also unfit to adopt, and possibly as one British lawyer suggested to the press, unfit to parent their own children, too. Could it happen over here? Yes. We see the first steps of the muscular liberalism process at work already in the state of Illinois, in its probe of evangelical, Lutheran and Catholic foster-care agencies for discrimination against gay couples in foster care.

"For the ACLU and the gay rights community, suddenly the right to live as we choose isn't good enough. Any foster-care agency that does not place children with gay couples now must be discriminated against by the government in the name of anti-discrimination. The ACLU claims that legally requiring foster-care agencies to be inclusive would expand resources to help 16,000 kids currently in the Illinois foster-care system. This is just Orwellian doubletalk. The new 'inclusive' policy would exclude three religious foster-care agencies from recruiting parents. This cannot possibly expand resources available to needy kids." - NOM founder Maggie Gallagher, writing for Yahoo! News.

In a case that has already seen heavy coverage in the American right-wing press, a British high court has backed a local city council decision to ban foster parents who vow to condemn homosexuality to their children. The case involves Eunice and Owen Johns, who say their right to be foster parents is being denied because of their religious views.

Lord Justice Munby and Mr Justice Beatson ruled that laws protecting people from discrimination because of their sexual orientation "should take precedence" over the right not to be discriminated against on religious grounds. The Johns are considering an appeal. Derby City Council said previously its first duty was to the children in its care, some of whom were very vulnerable. Speaking outside the court in London, Mrs Johns said: "All we wanted was to offer a loving home to a child in need. We have a good track record as foster parents. "We have been excluded because we have moral opinions based on our faith and we feel sidelined because we are Christians with normal, mainstream, Christian views on sexual ethics. We are prepared to love and accept any child. All we were not willing to do was to tell a small child that the practice of homosexuality was a good thing."

You can bet that this case will somehow be injected into the DOMA battle.