Activists react as Utah Supreme Court gets involved in same-sex couples’ adoption cases

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

SALT LAKE CITY -- Utah's Supreme Court has put a hold on second-parent adoptions by same sex couples in the state.

A stay was issued Friday night at the request of Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes.

“There should not be any adoptions until the Supreme Court has ruled,” said Gayle Ruzika with Utah Eagle Forum, which is an activist group that advocates for various conservative causes.

Now that Utah’s federal court has granted Reyes a stay, there won’t be. The stay involves same-sex couples who got married in the days following federal judge Robert Shelby’s decision striking down Utah’s ban on such unions. Many of those couples were already raising children adopted by one of the adult partners.

Several district court judges have extended those adoptions to the second member in married same-sex couples.

“District judges were ordered by the state to grant these adoptions to gay couples that were already married, so to take that away is very hurtful and frustrating for families,” said  Deann Armes with the Utah Pride Center, which is a group that advocates for LGBT causes.

Utah’s attorney general has not complied with earlier court orders, instead seeking this stay. He said there's too much confusion as Utah’s law is being tested in federal and state courts.

"The decision was a wise decision, it should have been the same with marriages,” Ruzika said of the stay.

Armes calls the stay an unfortunate setback that causes psychological harm to the couples and their children.

Ruzika said all children deserve to have a mother and a father, and it’s the state’s responsibility to uphold this ideal while Amendment Three remains in effect.

“Two men cannot create a mother and a father no matter how hard they try, two men can’t be a mother and two women can’t be a father,” Ruzika said.

But Armes said that way of thinking is not pro family at all. He said recognizing the unions of same-sex couples helps them and their children.

“To create families, to raise our children and have that be validated by our state and society and to just enjoy and have what every other family has,” Armes said.

The Utah Supreme Court has not yet scheduled a hearing over adoption rights for Utah’s same-sex marriages.

 

18 comments

  • Stuart McDonald

    Mormon mafia mob boss Tommy “The Murderer” Monson, you’re a pathetic weasel and coward, having your amoral, sociopathic thug agents like Gayle Ruzicka, Sean Reyes, the Utah Supreme Court and so many others do your dirty work for you so you can pretend you and your fellow wealth and power worshiping, world-dominationist, white-supremacist racist, misogynist, anti-LGBT defaming and scapegoating, Nazi pseudo-religious mob captain “General Authorities” — with all your hands stained with the blood and destruction of countless innocents — aren’t involved. You and your organization are just a loyal arm of evil. You are not and will never be infallible. You are not and will never be righteous. And you are not and will never be Gods. You have sold your souls for wealth, power and influence — and are now only evil incarnate who have brainwashed countless useful idiots into fatally misidentifying you for being a representative of a truly just and moral God and faithfully living and teaching what Jesus taught.

    • Bob

      Obviousy Stuart is versed in the teachings of Jesus, and obviously from his rant Stuart follows those teachings himself.

      Stuart must be referring to Isaiah 5:20: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil.”

      • Gabrielle

        The perception of what is good, and what is evil… has been perverted by the Theological State of LD$, Inc… aka The State of Utah.

        Just because some ultra-conservative people THINK that 2 dads or 2 moms are evil, doesn’t make it so.

      • Gabrielle

        True, Cartman.

        While I would have chosen my words a bit more wisely, I find it at least ironic that a population (Utah Mormons) who have shown so much hatred and vitriol towards those they deem as “less-than”, cry foul and play the poor-pitiful-me victim card when their hatred is called out.

        Bigotry never was righteousness.

  • Cartman

    The Court has no choice. The adoptions can’t be legally completed at this time. Courts are supposed to follow the law, not create it.

    • Gabrielle

      Not true, Cartman. The USA is a Constitutional Republic… with 3 branches of government created as a check and balance of power.

      One of the main responsibilities of the Judicial Branch, is to assure that no majority take away, usurp, or vote away the rights of any minority.

      Another thing I find ironic about conservatives, is how they complain about “activist judges” only when the judges rule against THEM.

  • Cartman

    Check out Stuart’s Facebook page for a laugh. He hits every, single liberal talking point. Doesn’t miss a single one.

    No wonder he’s seething with hate. Liberals are deeply unhappy people..

    • Bob

      Stuart has some serious mental issues. In short, he’s really messed up and is seeking someone to blame for his screwed up life. I feel sorry for him.

      • Bob

        The hate in the comment above from Stuart McDonald cannot be denied. The obvious question then must be why. His facebook page provides the answer.

  • All or Nothing

    Marriage licenses or marital benefits are not conditioned on heterosexual couples’ ability or desire to have children. No heterosexual couple would be denied the right to marry for failure to demonstrate the intent to procreate. Attempting to restrict civil marriage to couples who intend to have children would demand governmental inquiry into sensitive matters of personal privacy and raise insuperable, or at a minimum very significant, privacy-based constitutional concerns. To claim that civil marriage is somehow tied to a governmental interest in procreation is to “threaten the legitimacy of marriages involving post-menopausal women, infertile individuals, and individuals who choose to refrain from procreating.

  • Bob

    I looked at your Facebook page Stuart and now I understand where your hate is coming from. Looks like you are associated with the Utah AIDS Foundation. I can see why advice from religious leaders on the concepts of moraltiy would tend to irritate you.

      • Bob

        Every child who ever grew up on a farm can tell you what is supposed to go where and why. It is the same reason why plumbers identify threaded pipe and fittings as either having male or female ends. There are inherent differences between men and women mentally, and children do best when they live in home with both their bio-mother and bio-dad.

  • All or Nothing

    All major professional organizations in this country whose focus is the health and well-being of children and families has reviewed the data on outcomes for children raised by ssm couples, including the methods by which the data were collected, and have concluded that these children are not disadvantaged compared to children raised in osm parent households. Organizations expressing support for parenting, adoption, and/or fostering by ss couples couples include (but are not limited to): American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Psychological Association, Child Welfare League of America, National Association of Social Workers, and the Donaldson Adoption Institute. It’s not the gender of the parent that’s the key. It’s the quality of parenting that’s being offered by whoever is there, husband or wife, two women, two men, a single parent, as long as these factors are present: good mental health, good parent-child relationships, what we call an authoritative parenting style, which is warmth, stimulation, structure, and the availability of resources. Then we’re going to have a child who is much more likely to be healthy.

  • All or Nothing

    As Justice Robert Jackson so eloquently stated: “The framers of the Constitution knew, and we should not forget today, that there is no more effective practical guaranty against arbitrary and unreasonable government than to require that the principles of law which officials would impose upon a minority must be imposed generally.Conversely, nothing opens the door to arbitrary action so effectively as toallow those officials to pick and choose only a few to whom they will applylegislation and thus to escape the political retribution that might be visitedupon them if larger numbers were affected. Courts can take no bettermeasure to assure that laws will be just than to require that laws be equaling operation.”

  • Jim

    A correction: Amendment 3 HAS been struck down. It’s just being appealed. In that process the decision is stayed, so noone can act on the fact that Amendment 3 has been struck. But that doesn’t change the fact that Amendment 3 was found to be unconstitutional.

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.