And now the Catholic Church says it will close down it's adoption agencies if this law does not exempt them. They may not place many children at first glance, but they do find homes for a high proportion of the 'difficult to place' children that most average couples do not want.
Well in the US, the government isn't supposed to fund Catholic Schools. Under that logic doesn't it stand to reason that the government should not fund Catholic adoption? I'm just asking, not suggesting an answer. It's not necessarily simple. At what point does the State's interest in avoiding discrimination against a "protected class" (whether it be age, perceived disability, sexual orientation, gender, ethnicity...) override a Church's right to adhere to its dogma. My answer actually is that the government shouldn't tell a church what to do. But it CAN tell a church that it can't have it both ways: hiding behind its precepts on the basis of religious freedom, while at the same time expecting government support (usually financing) without having to follow the rules everybody else who gets that support follows. If they're trying to have it both ways then they're not asking for equal protection, they're asking for preferential treatment. I think there's a difference.
What Lil said. And it's also completely ironic, because we all know that all straight adoptive parents are perfect people, while all gay adoptive parents are completely unacceptable because of their sin, right? After all, heterosexuals never sin and always make wonderful parents.