Faith-Based Adoption Agencies Under Attack
On any given day, there are more than 400,000 children in foster care in the United States. Despite the efforts by child welfare services across the country to prevent the removal of children from their parents, the number of kids in foster care continues to rise. In fact, the current demand for foster parents is at an all time high, and because of a variety of factors like parental opioid addiction, it is likely that the demand will continue to grow.
Due to the rising need for foster parents, some might be surprised to learn that, last November, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia to determine whether the city of Philadelphia can legally prevent Catholic Social Services from participating in the foster care system because they refuse to certify unmarried or same-sex couples for foster placement. The Family Foundation actually submitted an Amicus Brief to the Court on behalf of faith-based agencies.
The road to the high court began two years ago when the city of Philadelphia threatened to shut down two taxpayer funded foster care agencies, Bethany Christian Services (BCS) and Catholic Social Services (CSS), because of their policies of not licensing same-sex couples to be foster parents. The city maintained that these agencies were discriminating and threatened to shut them down unless they agreed to align their policies with the city’s anti-discrimination laws. In the end, BCS agreed to change their policies while CSS proposed referring any same-sex married couples interested in fostering to one of 29 other agencies that work with the city. Unfortunately, Philadelphia wasn’t satisfied with CSS’s proposal – even though no same-sex couple had EVER approached CSS – and the city terminated their contract. Sadly, since that time, dozens of CSS foster families have been denied the ability to foster children through the agency they know and trust.
Alleging religious discrimination, several foster mothers and CSS sued the city of Philadelphia and asked the court to order the city to renew its contract. CSS argued that its right to free exercise of religion and free speech entitle the agency to decline requests to place children with same-sex couples. CSS lost at the federal district and appellate levels, but the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
Throughout this ordeal, CSS has maintained that the city has infringed the religious freedom of the agency while also placing in jeopardy hundreds of children in need of good and loving homes – an important point that should be emphasized since, prior to ending their contract with CSS, the city of Philadelphia had repeatedly recognized the severe shortage of foster families and even put out a call for an additional 300 foster families just a couple days before they stopped allowing children to be placed with families who work with CSS.
Another critical detail to keep in mind is that the city didn’t object to the quality of services provided by CSS – in fact, the city used the phrase “point of light” to describe CSS in relation to the other foster care agencies in Philadelphia. Furthermore, CSS had served Philadelphia for over 100 years and not one same-sex couple had ever requested foster care certification from CSS, a fact that didn’t go unnoticed by Left-leaning Justice Stephen Breyer who said during the oral argument, “What’s actually bothering me quite a lot about this case is I think that no family has ever been turned down by this agency. Indeed, none has ever applied, no gay family, no gay couple.”
So, what was the real impetus behind the city of Philadelphia shutting out the Catholic agency? Well, Justice Alito aptly supplied that answer when he declared, “It’s the fact the City can’t stand the message that Catholic Social Services and the Archdiocese are sending by continuing to adhere to the old fashion view about marriage.”
Sharonell Fulton and Toni Simms-Busch, the foster mothers petitioning the Supreme Court, are foster care heroes. Both have been called to help at-risk kids break the cycle of foster care. They have repeatedly made the choice to work with Catholic Social Services because they want the support of an agency that shares their faith and values, and there are thousands of foster parents across this great nation who feel the same way.
For almost two centuries, CSS has served all children in need regardless of race, religion, or sexual traits, or any other characteristics. Their ministry has been vital to so many kids, given that foster children who never find permanent families are more likely to drop out of school and end up in poverty and addiction. The bottom line is this -- CSS has a proven record of helping children in these communities, so why would anyone think it would be a good idea to shut them down?
While it can be difficult to balance certain public policy interests with constitutional rights, it can and must be done. CSS understands this and even offered to compromise with Philadelphia by referring to another agency any same sex-couple who came to them. But, the City wasn’t interested in finding a workable solution for both sides. Instead, they gave CSS one option – surrender your religious beliefs and principles or give up your agency. Personally, I would be very disappointed in, and skeptical of any religious organization that would be willing to compromise their core values – so I applaud CSS for standing their ground.
It's important to note that these are not the only examples of faith-based adoption agencies that are targeted for their beliefs. In fact, last year, Virginia’s legislature introduced a bill that would repeal conscience protections for religious adoption agencies and effectively shut those agencies down. The goal of this bill was to prohibit the Commonwealth from contracting with or providing funds to “any child-placing agency that, in making decisions regarding the placement of a child, discriminates against the child or otherwise eligible prospective foster or adoptive parents on the basis of,” among other protected classes, “sexual orientation, gender identity, or marital status.” Additionally, this legislation would remove conscience provisions that protect religious adoption and foster care agencies from being denied licensing, contracts, or grants when they refuse to place children in certain households due to “religious or moral convictions or policies.”
In short, this bill opposed religious diversity by targeting faith-based, non-profit organizations and shutting them down simply for placing children in homes with a mom and a dad. Since Rep. Mark Levine, the patron of the bill, knew only of the impact this legislation would have on Catholic Charities even though it would adversely affect other organizations, this clearly demonstrates that Christian ministries were the sole targets of this legislation. As of this week, Del. Levine has reintroduced the same bill (HB 1932) for the 2021 session.
Virginia is ranked 49th in the country for children aging out of the foster care system without being adopted, so one would think the goal of the legislature would be to help get children adopted into good families instead of passing legislation that prevents this from happening. There are approximately 5,000 foster children in Virginia, more than 900 of whom are currently ready for adoption. Because many of the adoption and foster care providers in Virginia are from religious communities, if this bill becomes law, the number of adoption and foster care providers in the Commonwealth will be significantly reduced. It is a sad state of affairs when religious adoption and foster care agencies are not free to follow the convictions of their faith while working to serve vulnerable children.
Virginia has always been a place of religious diversity, and we must recommit ourselves to preserving and protecting the principles of religious liberty and conscience protection, which Thomas Jefferson, author of The Declaration of Independence and the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom, believed were vital for a functioning republic.
Our nation has experienced some highly contentious disagreements over the tension between religious freedom and other rights that are guaranteed under the Constitution, and based on this legislation, it is abundantly clear that Virginians are involved in one of those disputes at this time. Resolving these disputes is the responsibility of the courts, but it is our responsibility as citizens to practice religious tolerance and love of our fellow man in our everyday lives. As Abraham Lincoln noted, the United States is mankind’s last best hope on earth. And religious freedom is the indispensable pillar of that hope.