Christian Adopt Shun?

Christian Adopt Shun?

The Left has a funny way of celebrating Mother's Day. First, the President issues a bizarre tweet reminding moms that his gift is free birth control -- presumably so they never have to become mothers again. Then, of course, there was Secretary Arne Duncan's announcement that the Department of Education would stop acknowledging moms' existence altogether. Starting in 2014, the DOE is replacing "mother" and "father" with "Parent 1" and "Parent 2" on its student aid forms in an effort to be more politically correct (and anatomically incorrect).

Now, some in Congress want to get in on the act with a bill that would intentionally deprive children of a mother. Under this legislation, the government would punish any adoption agency that gives priority to married, heterosexual couples. The bill, co-sponsored by Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), would cut off the federal funding of any agency -- including faith-based charities -- that seek the safest and most nurturing home for kids. If it passes, the official policy of the U.S. government would be to penalize organizations who take the well-being of children into account in adoption placement.

This is how backwards we've become as a society! As we've seen in the Boy Scouts membership debate, America's focus is no longer the well-being of children but on the "well-being" of a small but politically powerful minority. There's an abundance of social science data supporting the common-sense belief that children do best when raised by a married mother and father. Because of that, there's every rational basis for agencies to prefer such households over those headed by same-sex couples in adoption.

In the largest peer-review study ever done on same-sex parenting, Dr. Mark Regnerus found that the emotional, financial, academic, and physical outcomes of kids raised in homosexual homes rated "suboptimal" or "negative" in almost every category. "There's nothing worse than being brought up by two gay dads," said homosexual actor Rupert Everett. And Dr. Regnerus proves it. In outcome after outcome, he shows the serious risks to being raised in a homosexual home -- not the least of which are poverty, depression, and abuse.

Why would anyone -- including Congress -- knowingly put children at a disadvantage? Or worse, put the agencies that care about the social science out of business? Under this bill, faith-based adoption agencies would be forced to compromise their beliefs (sound familiar?) or lose their government contracts. Believe it or not, one of the biggest engines for adoption in America are private, social service agencies like Catholic Charities, who refuse to place kids with homosexual parents because it violates the teaching of scripture. In places like Illinois, Washington, D.C. and Massachusetts, where similar proposals have passed, Catholic Charities opted to close their doors rather than compromise the Bible's teachings. If H.R. 1681 became law, faith-based groups would be driven out of the adoption business all across America -- leaving children and prospective parents with even fewer options for building families.

Adoption is not -- and should never be -- about adults. This is about giving children the best chance to succeed in life. If homosexual activists truly cared about kids, they'd stop using them as leverage to force society -- through the government -- to embrace their lifestyle. It's time we shifted away from bills like "Every Child Deserves a Family" to Every Child Deserves a Mom and a Dad. You can help. Contact your representative and ask him or her to oppose H.R. 1681!

Congress: Going on Offense at Defense

The media may be dismissive of the Pentagon's faith flap, but Congress is not. In the handful of days since the Defense Department reversed its policy on proselytization, even House leaders are unclear about the DOD's position. In two strongly-worded letters to Secretary Chuck Hagel, dozens of Congressmen are demanding answers about the nature of the Pentagon's relationship with Mikey Weinstein. Citing Weinstein's "inflammatory statements" about Christians, Rep. John Fleming (R-La.) and 58 of his colleagues "question the Pentagon's judgment and reasoning in accepting a meeting from someone with a history of such statements and sentiments like Mr. Weinstein. We would respectfully request clarification on the nature of the meeting and detailed information regarding: [the meeting(s)' participants, goals, plans for future collaboration]." Among other things, House leaders also want to know if the Pentagon was aware of Weinstein's hateful comments before scheduling the meeting.

A second inquiry, led by Reps. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) and Steve Scalise (R-La.) hopes to get to the bottom of the administration's anti-Christian ties. "...[T]he military is developing a culture that is hostile to religion," they write on behalf of 54 bipartisan signatories. "We request the names of all organizations you are consulting in drafting regulations to comply with the [National Defense Authorization Act] and the date by which you expect to have the regulations [upholding] conscience protections, as called for under the law, finalized and implemented." If the Obama administration thought it could issue a press release and make this controversy disappear, they were wrong. Only Congress can protect our troops' rights -- and from the sound of this investigation, they're off to a great start!

The Taxman Cometh -- for Conservatives!

When the book finally closes on the Obama presidency, it could easily go down as the most corrupt administration in American history. Last week, as the White House was bleeding credibility in the Benghazi scandal, another breach of trust came to light -- this time here at home. In a stunning admission, the IRS apologized Friday for "inappropriately targeting conservative political groups in the 2012 election." At the behest of Congress, government investigators dug deeper into the IRS's tax-exempt application process and found that the agency was intentionally singling out conservative groups for harassment.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), one of many leaders outraged by the report, confirmed on "Fox News Sunday" that the IRS had agents "who were engaged in the intimidation of political groups" -- in particular, tea party, patriot, and other conservative groups. "I don't care if you're a conservative, a liberal, a Democrat, or a Republican, this should send a chill up your spine. It needs to have a full investigation." Imagine if this had been a Republican administration targeting people's taxes for their ideology! The media would have been all over it. Instead, news that the government is using the IRS as a weapon to bludgeon conservatives is barely a blip on the networks' screen.

Maybe reporters are too preoccupied with the administration's other cover-ups to give this report the attention it deserves. But even without the media's help, this story is starting to unravel for the White House. Questions about the origins of the target list abound -- as well as what actions have been taken to remove these individuals from power. It will take a committed group of members, through a series of congressional hearings, to peel back the layers of deceit. And unfortunately, in this new era of corruption, who knows what else they'll find?

** Before the jury arrived at a verdict on Kermit Gosnell, I had the chance to talk about the case with Fox's Shannon Bream. If you missed the interview, click below to watch.

Tony Perkins on Fox News

Tony Perkins' Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.

Previous Washington Update Articles »