I’ve been boiling over this one all day, ever since a friend forwarded me an email alert about Texas House Bill 194, which is currently assigned to the Juvenile Justice & Family Issues Committee.  This steaming pile of excrement was filed by Pasadena-area (a suburb of Houston) Republican Representative Robert Talton.

Let us examine HB194 (text current as of today, use link for updates):

By:  Talton                H.B. No. 194

            A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

                        AN ACT

relating to disqualifying certain persons from serving as foster parents. 

    BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

    SECTION 1.  Subchapter B, Chapter 264, Family Code, is
amended by adding Section 264.1062 to read as follows:

    Sec. 264.1062.  FOSTER PARENT DISQUALIFICATION.  (a)  The department shall inquire of an applicant who is applying to serve as a foster parent or of a foster parent whose performance is being evaluated whether the applicant or foster parent is homosexual or bisexual.

    (b)  If the answer to the inquiry required by Subsection (a)
is affirmative, the department is prohibited from:

        (1)  allowing the applicant to serve as a foster parent; or

        (2)  placing a child or allowing a child to remain in foster care with the foster parent whose performance is being evaluated.

    (c)  Notwithstanding a negative answer to the inquiry required by Subsection (a), if the department determines after a reasonable investigation that an applicant who is applying to serve as a foster parent or a foster parent whose performance is being evaluated is homosexual or bisexual, the department is prohibited from:

        (1)  allowing the applicant to serve as a foster parent; or

        (2)  placing a child or allowing a child to remain in foster care with the foster parent whose performance is being evaluated.

    SECTION 2.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2003.             

Short, direct, and to the point.  At least Rep. Talton is up-front about his bigotry.  And yes, that’s exactly what it is.  If we were to take this bill and substitute Black or Hispanic or Jewish for “homosexual or bisexual” would it still be acceptable?  Hell, NO!  This is the same kind of overworn, rehashed crap about homosexuals and pedophilia that these nutbags have been peddling for years.

This is not an issue about so-called “special rights” either (damn I hate that phrase).  I do not claim that adoption of foster children is a right.  I’m approaching this issue from that of state-sponsored discrimination against a segment of society.  If Rep. Talton were running a private adoption service and had this policy, I would think him a damn bloody fool for doing it, and I would complain about it, but I would recognize his right to do so.  However, government must deal with all citizens equally.  Such discrimination by government is simply not acceptable nor is it compatible with a supposedly free society.  If we allow the government to discriminate in this fashion, where does it end?  Where do we draw the line?  What group is next? 

You may be saying to yourself that this doesn’t affect me.  Why should I care?  Or you may even be mightily pissed off at me for protesting this if you agree with Rep. Talton.  But if we allow government to usurp the power to make these kinds of decisions there will eventually come a time when your own ox is gored.  What if there comes a day when Christians are a minority and are falsely associated with some socially taboo crime, like child molestation?  Who will stand up for you when someone proposes a bill that prevents Christians from adopting foster children?  Those who support this bill definitely won’t have a leg to stand on at that point and those who currently face discrimination certainly won’t be interested in defending the new minority.

Now, allow me to fire a salvo directly into the heart of the Republican party.  This is exactly the kind of crap that makes me nervous about Republicans.  Just when I think you’ve overcome your old bad habits, something like this pops up again.  If you’re really interested in projecting the image of being “compassionate conservatives”, you’ll excise this cancer from your midst.  I’ve voted for some of you, but it’s been grudging at best.  If this kind of nonsense continues I will vote exclusively Libertarian or I won’t vote at all.  And don’t bother to bleat that this will effectively give a vote to the Democrats.  As I’ve said before, Republicans are not entitled to my vote.

I’m really pissed off about this one.  My gay and lesbian friends are human beings, not some kind of disease that is to be feared and shunned.  I may not be able to convince other citizens of that, and they’re entitled to their opinions (no matter how wrong).  I will fight to the death for their right to speak their minds.  But I will also fight them to the death over any attempt to implement the ideas that they are espousing.

Note:  The issue of fitness of homosexuals and bisexuals as parents cannot be addressed at the group level.  Fitness can only be determined for individuals, which is why foster parents are interviewed and investigated to determine their fitness.  I will not entertain arguments about pedophilia or child molestation.  As far as I am concerned that is uninformed prejudice of the worst sort and not worthy of being addressed.  Am I stifling dissent?  Guilty as charged.  But then this is my forum.  If you disagree, you’re welcome to do so on your own site.

Penultimate Note: I suppose some people think that this is about the children, but the above bill carries the implication that current foster parents who are homosexual or bisexual will have their children removed.  How does it help the children to rip them away from their current parents after all they’ve been through?

Final Note: I don’t support legislation that singles out any one group for any particular reason and I strongly believe in the right of free association.  So I happen to oppose this bill, no matter how fraught with good intentions it may be.

Update:  Fixed some typos above.

Update 2:  I should clarify that my thoughts on the equivalence of race and sexual orientation are based on the idea that a person’s sexual orientation is not a choice.  I realize that in some cases people do choose a sexual orientation for various reasons.  However, that does not make the case that all homosexuals do so.  It has been my general experience that it is not a choice.  Purposefully treating a segment of the population differently because of an inherent characteristic is discimination.