Michael and Catherine Burke allege that the state’s Department of Children and Families discriminated against them for their Catholic viewpoints.

  • Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    144
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    A social worker’s report attached to the complaint said the couple was asked how they would feel if a child in their care identified as LGBTQ or struggled with their gender identity. Kitty Burke responded by saying “let’s take the T out of it” and called gender-affirming care “chemical castration,” according to the report. She also said, “I’m going to love you the same,” but that the child “would need to live a chaste life.” Both Kitty and Michael Burke expressed hesitation around using a transgender or nonbinary person’s preferred pronouns, the social worker’s report noted.

    Michael Burke told the social worker he’d been to gay weddings and would “likely attend” his child’s wedding if they were LGBTQ, according to the report, and the couple said they wouldn’t kick a child out of their home for being LGBTQ or subject them to conversion therapy.

    Following the interview, the social worker issued an “approval with conditions, specifically around religion and LGBTQIA++ related issues.” Their application was later denied by the department’s Licensing Review Team, the complaint states.

    “If you give me an LGBTQ kid, I’m going to be a horrible parent. Wait, why did you deny my parenting application? This is discrimination!”

    • MagicShel@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know if I need to provide bonifides for being queer positive and not asking in bad faith, but why are there two pluses in that? It just makes me think of C++ and seems… jokey.

      • Sekoia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, that’s why I generally prefer “queer”. Plus, it’s not an acronym, and reclaiming words is always good!

      • Wahots@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Many just say queer. Or LGBT. Companies and news organizations can’t really settle on one thing to call us. Imo, LGBT+ gets the point across without being excessive.

  • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    116
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is why LGBTQ rights is so important. Imagine being a foster kids because of the US failed social safety net, only to be re homed in a religious bigoted house?! That’s what the GOP wants for kids.

    • Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s exactly what happened to me as a kid. As a bonus, these religious nutjobs sexually abused their actual kid, and because I was just a foster kid, I wasn’t believed. Thank god my mom was able to get me out of that hell hole, but the trauma it caused me was so deep I didn’t even recognize how deep it was for almost 20 years.

      • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And now red states made it legal to kidnapping LGBTQ children from loving homes to traditional homes

        • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Wait, they’re allowing kids to be removed from foster/adoptive homes and transferred to a religious home? On what grounds and who’s authority?

        • Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nah don’t be sorry, just be angry at a system that allows such things, and at a religion that shields such people. I came out okay in the end, because I have a family that loves me and helps support me through my traumas, but I don’t know what happened to their kid, or if they were ever stopped. That’s the part that bothers me. Knowing that those sickos could still be out there presenting themselves as righteous Christians while doing such things.

    • diprount_tomato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      91
      ·
      1 year ago

      “This is why protecting traditional families is so important. Imagine being a foster kids because of the US failed social safety net, only to be re homed in a LGBT groomer house?! That’s what the GOP wants for kids.”

      I literally just changed two things and it went 180 degrees on the other extremist side of the spectrum. Do with that info as you wish

      • kescusay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        57
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And with such a simple change, you turned it into a disgusting and bigoted lie, when the person you responded to was completely accurate.

      • czech@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Do with that info as you wish

        You mean put it into proper context, look at the stats, and acknowledge you’re full of shit? Sure thing! But you won’t let facts get in the way of your feelings amirite?

      • foggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh the difference is that religious bigots exist. And in huge, huge numbers.

        “LGBT groomers” are not a thing. It’s a figurative Boogeyman you invented or someone convinced you exists in an attempt to create a dichotomy where one does not exist.

          • Unaware7013@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You can say anything, that doesn’t make it correct. And it’s funny how people call themselves out, because I only call people exhibiting bigotry bigots.

            If you’re being called a bigot, maybe examine your beliefs and actions. After all, if it smells like shit everywhere you go, it’s probably you.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You changed two things and into something imaginary. There is no such thing as an “LGBT groomer house.” You can’t force a child to be gay or trans no matter how much you want to.

        You might as well say “only to be rehomed in a dragon’s den.” It would make about the same amount of sense.

      • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Uhhhh what? One, “traditional families” aren’t anti LGBTQ by default. Second, LGBTQ parents aren’t groomers. (can LGBTQ individuals be terrible humans just like everyone else? Yes!) Third, asking a foster family if they hate LGBTQ people is critical for the safety of foster children because mathematically 10% will be LGBTQ. And since there’s no “Gaydar” to tell you can’t risk putting any child with them!

        You didn’t prove anything except how ignorant you are. Do with that info as you wish

        • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Pendantic though it may be… 30 percent is more accurate for children in foster care to be LGBTQIA+. Many lose their homes of origin and support BECAUSE they are LGBTQIA+ so the instance is way higher.

          Kind of a no brainer to have homo/transphobic foster parents struck from the rolls. It’s enough to be traumatized once by having your authentic self rejected by a supposed safe haven. Twice is unconscionable.

        • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          These boneheads seem to mix up up supportive with grooming. I had a conversation at a bar the other day with some dipshit that said if you support your child coming out as gay or trans, you’re effectively grooming them to be a sexual deviant. They fail to realize that grooming is an active nudge or conditioning in the direction of a desired behavior, whereas being supportive is unconditional love regardless of identity. My buddy’s kid is identifying as a girl atm, and while he and I both think it’s a phase (he’s 15 and just an awkward kid in general), we are supportive of his/her choice.

          On the other hand, there are parents out there that actively nudge their kids into being some brand of queer from a young age (not just in providing an open minded atmosphere, but almost to discerning them gay from a stupid young age) that, to me, begins to cross a line. In my mind, let be kids be kids that become teenagers and then adults, and just support them in their choices while guiding them to be the best person they can be.

  • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Part of being a foster parent is agreeing to respect the child’s situation, religious views, sexual orientation, etc. If I tell the state that I’m not going to take a kid to church if they’re religious, I’m not getting approved. If I tell the state I’m going to teach potentially gay children that being gay is wrong, I’m not getting approved.

  • SquishyPandaDev@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Holy shit. The foster system standing up for kids. Now there’s something that sadly doesn’t happen very often. I hope this couple get what they deserve

  • lem_dart@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The nerve of people to cry they were discriminated against for their views as if their views weren’t the original discriminator… It’s just mind boggling.

  • fear@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    They’re asking the court to get rid of that discriminatory denial so that they will not be barred from fostering or adopting children in the future, in Massachusetts or elsewhere.

    Stop discriminating against our discrimination! Thanks for the good laugh, Michael and Catherine Burke.

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This got me to open the article again and search for what this may reference. I didn’t see anything in particular about him being worse than her. Did I miss it? I admit that I mostly scanned and didn’t read comprehensively because I don’t care about these people and their bullshit views. Fuck anyone who says “Let’s take the T out.”

  • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is why conservatives should not be permitted to be foster parents. Child abuse is a foundational principle of conservatism.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Becket previously represented Sharonell Fulton and Toni Simms-Busch in Fulton v. Philadelphia, a 2021 Supreme Court case that unanimously ruled in favor of a Catholic adoption agency’s right to refuse to place children with LGBTQ couples.

    This highlights the hypocrisy that is endemic in the Catholic church these days. The couple feels they were discriminated against in the approval process due to their anti-Trans views, yet they are using a lawyer who was happy to take the opposite view when a Catholic adoption agency wanted to discriminate against LGBTQ couples.

    Unfortunately, a key difference is that it’s the State doing it in this case, and a private agency before. That may end up being the difference here. It still doesn’t change the fact that the Catholic Church seems much more Interested in politics and litigating than actually helping people.

    • darthfabulous42069@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not hypocrisy, it’s their self-interest. They have a political agenda and are spending their lives doing what they can to enforce it, and that means helping their faction gain a foothold into every aspect of public life, especially raising children which they have said emphatically non-stop is all about forcing younger people who don’t have the ability to reject them logically to adopt their beliefs. They only care about making more Christians and shutting out enemies of what they think constitutes Christianity, especially the LGBTQ+ community.

      They’re being entirely consistent in that light.

      • shastaxc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, it would only be considered hypocritical if they are making the assertion that everyone should be allowed to foster children regardless of their beliefs and whether or not they intend to impose them on the children. But that’s not what they are saying.

  • Wahots@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I agree no child should be placed in a home that would endanger them, but why is this even news? Couple needs to grow a pair and either change their views or just not adopt/foster. Go back to church or golf or whatever. Quit bothering the legal system. Perhaps they could volunteer for an LGBTQ organization and learn why “the T” doesn’t make anyone different or lesser.

    • TheDoctorDonna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There are even dozens of Christian adoption and fostering agencies that will completely ignore any and all criminal histories if you are godly enough. In fact, being as hypocritical as possible seems to be a selling point for these agencies. If you preach God’s love but have smashed a racists face into the concrete and lost your job over it and then shot your dog in the street while your wife defrauds the public and scams vulnerable people to the point of being sued by the state of Texas then you are exactly who they are looking to foster.

      Edit: apologies, my fat fingers bungled it: if you are a racist who smashes black people’s faces into the concrete

  • SolNine@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good, no child should be placed with parents who may discriminate against them for their natural state of being.

  • HellAwaits@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    lol those two shouldn’t be near any kids. They’ll just be control freaks and make their kid exactly what they wanted to avoid.

    Stop trying to control every aspect of children lives, conservatives.