Update on Act 1 in Arkansas

Apparently, the Arkansas ACLU chapter has decided not to follow through with their lawsuit to have Act 1 recinded. Their official response is that as of yet no one has been harmed by the law. In one of the cases they were reviewing, the 39 year old grandmother and her parter petitioned the courts for custody of her baby granddaughter. The granddaughter was in foster care because of a complacent young mother and her abusive boyfriend. The grandmother was awarded temporary custody of the baby. The Arkansas court said that since the grandmother lives in Oklahoma, they could petition the court in Oklahoma for adoption at a later date. Heck of a nice work-around if you ask me.

While I am happy that the baby is now out of the foster care system and with a family member that will love and take care of her, I am still angry about this law. I would like to personally take a copy to Jerry Cox and his Arkansas Family Council and suggest some very unchristian and probably anatomically imposible things they can do with it. The whole thing was a thinly (ceran wrap) veiled attempt to discriminate against homosexual couples. Even though the law does not state anything about homosexuality, it was promoted in all the conservative churches in Northwest Arkansas as a way to "keep homosexuals from adopting."

That puts a kink in mine and my Mrs. plans for our children. If the worst should happen to us, we want two of our friends to have custody of Spud and the future Sprout. We want them raised Episcopalian, and our friends are two of the best candidates right now. Problem is, they're gay and have been together for 13 years, so Act 1 could kick in. Even if it doesn't, my family could sue for custody and might just get it if the act is applied to guardianship. It really chapps my hide that the choice of who raises our kids if the worst should happen is taken away from us in order to keep kids safe from gay cooties.

I think if I hear one more stuffed shirt with a mail order ordination harp about the "gay agenda" I'm going to scream. The "gay agenda" is that they want to be treated like everyone else and not as second class citizens. If anything, I think there is an "anti-gay agenda" that is much more insidious and a lot more dangerous.

Update: Pulled this from a 1-17-09 posting on the Dallas Voice:

The ACLU last week withdrew its request for a temporary restraining order to suspend the law on behalf of a plaintiff who wanted to adopt her granddaughter. The woman, Sheila Cole, 39, of Tulsa, Okla., was granted temporary custody of her granddaughter by a judge this week. Cole lives with her lesbian partner in Tulsa, Okla. In the lawsuit, the families claim that the act’s language was misleading to voters and that it violates their constitutional rights.

In a brief filed with the court, McDaniel argued that adopting or fostering children is not a constitutionally protected right. “No constitutional right is violated by Act 1, if a plaintiff who has no right to adopt or foster chooses to maintain their relationship,” McDaniel’s office said (emphasis mine).

If this isn't the biggest load of horse dung I've seen in a bit, don't know what is. So in the best interest of the child, we have to break up the stable home of a loving couple that would be married if not for that assinine ammendment to the Arkansas constitution. A broken home is in the best interest of a child! Sorry, I have to raise the BS flag here.

Times may be a changin' in most of the country, but here in Arkansas, it's business as usual.