Brickbat: Ideological Impurity

Michael and Catherine Burke have filed a lawsuit against officials in the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF) and other state agencies after their application to become foster parents was denied because of their Catholic faith. According to a social worker's report, the two were asked how they would feel if a child in their care was LGBT. The two responded that they would still love the child, wouldn't kick the child out, and wouldn't subject the child to conversion therapy. But both opposed sex change treatments for those under 18 and expressed a reluctance to use pronouns that don't reflect someone's biological sex, and Catherine said it would be important for the child to remain chaste. The social worker recommended approval of their application with conditions for LGBT and religious issues, but DCF's Licensing Review Team rejected the application.

Comments

[Adans smith]

Damn Papist and their 'white privilege'.

[Olivahunter]

I'm making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning 16,000 US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website... http://www.Payathome7.com

[Cyto]

We discussed this in the commentariate when it came out.

Whatever happened to the Reason budget for original reporting? This seems to be an issue that would be well served by a true libertarian perspective. The ideology formerly known as Political Correctness has grown and morphed over the decades to the point where our government sees the minuscule possibility that a child being placed for adoption might turn out to be transgender and request “gender affirming medical care” at age 9 is the priority, with a family that will support and encourage a transition to the child’s gender of choice being critical to a placement.

There is a lot of meat on this bone for a reporter. Of course, there is the main story – the family looking to adopt, the child, the social worker and the board…. all of those angles provide avenues to explore issues of rights, social responsibility, the role of government, religious tolerance…. there is a lot of meat on that bone.

But beyond that, there is a history of a movement – of several movements. There is an ideology of moving language to accomplish political goals – in this case we have pronouns, “tolerance”, “gender affirming” … a whole raft of words that have been introduced or altered to move us from a world where placing adoptive children with a gay couple was avante guarde to a world where it is important to place children with a couple who will have enthusiasm for preventing the child from undergoing puberty, surgically removing their gonads and altering their genitalia and socially presenting the child as representing the opposite gender.

That is a pretty colossal change for – how long has that been? Less than a decade? Certainly there is a story to be told there. Who pushed for this? Who funded it? How did it pervade a society that clearly had no notion that such a thing was even an issue?

Certainly the ability to change an entire culture at such a fundamental level is an important issue to explore for a political ideology and movement that is grounded in the individual, individual freedom and limited involvement of the government in daily life.

[Quo Usque Tandem]

You ask excellent and very pertinent questions; of course just “asking” is to be met with vociferous condemnation (quite handily I might add). We have certainly progressed from the incremental boiling frog model to a much more accelerated control of language and expression. And many institutions including government, education, media, and even mainstream churches are on board. One hell of a coup, is it not?

And I perceive this has largely been promulgated by a relatively small but influential number of persons who have gotten themselves into positions of influence, particularly in academia (our long standing petri dish of “new ideas” and “progress” and the media.

It wouldn’t be happening if they weren’t colluding. Unfortunately a significant proportion of our citizenry are motivated by desiring to feel smart and “on board” with the bien pensant du jour. And they vote accordingly or many outrageous politicians would not be in office.

All that matters here (IMAO) is whether enough of us will sufficiently push back before we completely lose control of what we have left of our lives.

[Davedave]

You are free to believe in whatever insane cult you like, but if you not only do so, but openly state that you will abuse children because that's what your cult tells you to do, don't be surprised that you (obviously) aren't allowed to adopt or foster.

You could think about what kind of evil god you are 'serving' by acting in that way, though.

I note that there is no mainstream Christian sect that actually says this family's claimed beliefs match what they think god requires of them. In fact they say the family are committing a mortal sin. That's because it isn't really about the religion, it's just an excuse to grandstand and hate.

[Dude 2]

Are you OK? If you know you aren't or if you aren't sure, help is available. In fact, it's available in Catholic and other Christian churches and agencies.

[Don't look at me!]

Fav Dave shows his ignorance once again.

[R Mac]

What abuse are you referring to?

[Idaho Bob]

That’s because it isn’t really about the religion, it’s just an excuse to grandstand and hate.

You are referring to the prefects representing the State of Massachusetts?

[defaultdotxbe]

So you call them insane cultists, but then criticize them for them not doing every little thing you think their cult is telling them to do? Perhaps it isn't as much of a "cult" as you would like to believe.

[See Double You]

These are Catholics, not insane leftists.

[mad.casual]

Did a higher power command you to be this demonstratively retarded or did you choose to do so on your own?

[Quo Usque Tandem]

I suspect it is a lifetime achievement. You’d have to be tremendously motivated to become that much of a clueless prick.

[Quo Usque Tandem]

Define “abuse children “ for us.

[MWAocdoc]

Although this was a brief summary, the difference between adoption and foster care is significant. Foster care, although it may turn into a long-term relationship, is not adoption. The children are only under the protection of the foster parents for as long as they need a guardian to see to their basic needs. Adoption is permanent - the child becomes your own child just like your own biological child. There have been many atrocious cases of foster homes neglecting or even abusing foster children, apparently just to get hold of the money the state provides for their support, so most of us would want enough supervision by outsiders to prevent that. Of course the state has a pretty bad track record in the supervision area too. I guess nothing's perfect but nothing in the article suggests that the rejection of these foster parents by the state was appropriate, or that the questions asked about gender medical treatments made any sense from an "abuse or neglect" point of view.

[Quo Usque Tandem]

It doesn’t make sense; this is about ideology.

[Religion and Politics, my life]

So now you are in charge of the defnitions that underpin your morality !!!
This is a short book written for people with your problem

Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power
by Josef Pieper
4.9 out of 5 stars 123 ratings

[Fist of Etiquette]

Has the pendulum swung far enough? I don't think so. To adopt in Massachusetts you should not only be an ally but one potential adoptive parent must not be cis, and the other(s) must go through certification training.

[Cyto]

Holy crap! Fist with multiple sentences and multiple lines? The power of the derp is so great that the pithiest writer on the internet couldn't contain himself to 15 words.

[Cyto]

Also interesting - the use of the stock photo family instead of the actual pasty and chubby family.

[n00bdragon]

Yeah, that was super weird and awkward.

[Religion and Politics, my life]

also interesting...why you fell that you had to resort to that.

[Jerryskids]

Why don't the parents just identify as Muslim?

[Quo Usque Tandem]

Or any protected class, as defined by the cult of intersectionality.

[R Mac]

The State is now forcing trans ideology on people.

[Idaho Bob]

Now? Been going on for a while in many jurisdictions.

[Jerry B.]

Only the State's schools are permitted to indoctrinate your children.

[Minadin]

But I have heard it asserted over and over by the same person here, that sex changes for people under 18 don't happen and never would.

[Medulla Oblongata]

https://americanmind.org/salvo/thats-not-happening-and-its-good-that-it-is/

The Law of Merited Impossibility

The coinage is Rod Dreher’s and goes back to the early debates on homosexual marriage. As Dreher formulates it, the Law of Merited Impossibility holds: “That will never happen, and when it does, boy will you [homophobes, transphobes, racists, sexists, whatever] deserve it.”

This Law is used, first, to disarm resistance to the latest leftist enthusiasm. Whatever the innovation is, it will have no adverse consequences. None! Puberty blockers and disfiguring surgeries have no downsides whatsoever. How dare you suggest they might!

Its second purpose is to dismiss out of hand “slippery slope” arguments—despite, or because of, the fact that every single such argument over the last twenty years at least has proved true. Worried that allowing people to “self-identify” as whatever sex they want will lead to pervy 50-year-old men exposing themselves to’ tween girls? Insist, loudly and indignantly, that that will NEVER happen and anyone who suggests it might is an alarmist bigot with a heart full of hate.

The third purpose is to enforce the new caste system. Those who get to impose fresh irrational indignities on the rest of us are the upper caste. Those who object, or even have reservations, are lower. The latter are not allowed to harbor, much less express, any doubts. Whatever humiliation the upper caste has planned for us, we deserve and must meekly accept. Hence when said pervy 50-year-old actually does start waving around “her” equipment in the girls’ locker room, if any parent dares object, let ’em have it with both barrels. That thing that ten seconds ago you said would “never” happen? Now it’s righteous punishment for the retrograde.

The Law of Merited Impossibility has done wonders for the Left in helping to ram through a wide variety of radical societal changes and cow into silence all opposition. It’s currently busy destroying girls’ and women’s sports, an outcome that we were assured would “never” happen. Though one wonders what the ladies did do to deserve it.

The Law is a bit passé, though, because our rulers rarely any longer feel the need to reassure normie Americans that everything will turn out OK, that the things we most fear won’t happen. Mostly, the holders of the Megaphone just skip to the second half, the angry insistence that we deserve it.

[Medulla Oblongata]

The Law of Salutary Contradiction

Which brings us to the Law of Salutary Contradiction, whose formulation is: “That’s not happening and it’s good that it is.” While the Law of Merited Impossibility applies to the future, this one is about the present. It’s what the ruling class immediately switches to after what they insisted would “never” happen is happening before everyone’s eyes.

Is the NSA spying on Tucker Carlson? That’s an insane conspiracy theory … which is also warranted by Tucker’s treasonous contacts with Russian officials as he seeks an interview with Putin.

Is the Biden Administration inviting in illegal immigrants, then putting them on military planes and shipping them to the heartland? Absolutely not … and these future Nobel Prize winners deserve their shot at the American Dream.

Once you learn to recognize this pattern, you see it everywhere. It is the cornerstone of ruling class rhetoric in the current year.

[Medulla Oblongata]

In their eyes, we deserve nothing. We have no reasonable wants nor any just complaints. Our only role is to accept getting nothing and learning to like it.

Our masters bleat about “democracy” but have redefined the word to mean “getting exactly what we”—i.e., they—“want.” Any ostensibly “democratic” outcome that might result in us getting what we want is ipso facto illegitimate. Border wall? Fascist! Immigration enforcement? Racist and fascist! Law and order? Double racist and fascist! Better trade deals? Economically illiterate! An end to endless wars? Catastrophic! And also, somehow, “anti-Semitic.” Penis-free girls’ bathrooms? Transphobic!

No matter is too small, too local, too private, or too inconsequential to escape their gaze and slip their punishment. Bake the cake, bigot.

Mostly what they bleat, though, is anti-American, anti-white, anti-conservative, anti-Christian, anti-rural, anti-Southern, anti-Red-state, anti-redneck, anti-working-class hate. Every media organ and cultural citadel blares this message loudly and incessantly.

The purpose is hard to figure. On one hand, it’s demoralizing, which certainly serves ruling class ends, and it fires up their coalition. On the other hand, if you’re trying to boil a frog, it’s best not to tell him the plan, as he might try to jump out of the pot.

[mad.casual]

Mostly what they bleat, though, is anti-American, anti-white, anti-conservative, anti-Christian, anti-rural, anti-Southern, anti-Red-state, anti-redneck, anti-working-class hate. Every media organ and cultural citadel blares this message loudly and incessantly.

Slight disagreement, per your own precepts; What they bleat is anti-individual, anti-liberty, anti-human, anti-cultural, anti-belief, anti-community, anti-rational hatred that they cache as anti-American, anti-white, anti-conservative, anti-Christian, anti-rural, anti-Southern, anti-Red-state, anti-redneck, anti-working-class hate in order to sell it to useful idiots around the globe of any race, class, sex, or religion.

[Medulla Oblongata]

Just to clarify, those were all quotes from the linked article, not my own words. I didn't make the last two clearly quotes.

[Quo Usque Tandem]

Good points, explains a lot thank you.

Unfortunately it is beyond the attention span of too many citizens to comprehend. If only Oliver Anthony could manage to put this to music a resonator guitar!

[Ty Gold]

There's a corollary with affirmative action. Administrators, faculty and students will fight to the death to defend affirmative action - some traveling hundreds of miles to protest in front of the Supreme Court building.

But if you ask an individual student if they are an affirmative action admit, they will get righteously indignant, accuse you of committing a microaggression and label you a racist. And if the student complains to the administration, the same administrators who enacted the affirmative action scheme will pillory you for inquiring about it.

So people are "for" affirmative action" but no one wants to admit to being having been admitted via affirmative action.

[Religion and Politics, my life]

As I have always thought...You would be an arch-supporter of Slavery during the 1860's

You can't say 'X is wrong" and then exocriate holders of X for using the right/wrong vocabulary

[Dillinger]

what if the child is struck by lightning?
what if the child is hit by a bus?
what if the child is seriously injured playing polo?

[Quo Usque Tandem]

I can just hear this in a committee meeting.

No going outside, no crossing the street, no physical games.

And then progress to triggering. It’s existing in a world of what possibly could be.

[Religion and Politics, my life]

There is more hope for a fool than for them. 13 A sluggard says, “There's a lion in the road, a fierce lion roaming the streets!” 14 As a door turns on its hinges, so a sluggard turns on his bed. 15 A sluggard buries his hand in the dish; he is too lazy to bring it back to his mouth.