adoption application with child's toy
Should being critical of transgender policies prohibit parents from adoption and fostering?

Should prospective foster parents be denied over their religious beliefs about gender identity? That’s the question at the center of debate after several Christian parents in Vermont had their foster applications denied due to their views on transgender issues. 

Numerous parents reportedly refused to say they would support a foster child's gender identity if it differed from their sex assigned at birth, arguing that doing so would violate Biblical teachings and their Christian faith.  

Now some of those foster parents are filing suit, claiming the state has trampled on their first amendment rights by denying them the opportunity to foster based on their religious beliefs. 

Foster Application Denied

One such couple is Melinda Antonucci and Casey Mathieu, who say that the state of Vermont pulled their foster license after Antonucci posted a “parental rights petition” on social media in February.

According to Antonucci’s lawyers, “the petition called on the school district to recognize parents’ constitutional right to raise their children and to inform parents prior to assisting their child’s social transition to a new gender identity at school.”

A representative of the Vermont Department for Children and Families (DCF) contacted the couple, questioning them on whether they supported everything in the petition. The DCF worker reportedly asked her if she would call a transgender child by their preferred pronouns, whether she would teach her five-year-old biological son to use gender-affirming language, and if she would generally affirm the child’s social and/or medical transition.

After Antonucci informed the worker they would not affirm a transgender foster child’s identity, their foster license was pulled.

Faith or Foster: Pick One

Two other couples, Brian and Kaitlyn Wuoti and Michael and Rebecca Gantt, similarly had their foster licenses pulled by Vermont DCF for their views on transgender identity.

They're taking things a step further, filing a lawsuit against DCF and accusing the agency of violating their religious freedom.

The complaint targets a policy called “Supporting and Affirming LGBTQ Children & Youth,” which guides DCF staff on placing children who identify as LGBTQ+. Foster families are given training materials and taught how to support and affirm LGBTQ+ identity. Since 2018, all prospective foster families are required to understand and abide by the policy’s terms “even if the foster parents hold divergent personal opinions or beliefs.”

Despite allegedly being recognized as “amazing” foster parents by a department worker, The Wuotis and the Gantts both had their licenses pulled after stating that they would not be able to affirm a foster child’s LGBTQ+ identity.

"We were offered to be reeducated and given the choice that they could either revoke our foster license or we could take some education materials, and they could give us up to a year to change our faith,” says Michael Gantt. “And I said, ‘No, we are not going to change our faith in the next year; absolutely not.’”

The couple is being represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a Christian legal activism group. In a statement, the group said: "Vermont is placing radical gender ideology over children's needs AND the Constitution."

Ideology or Responsible Policy?

It’s unclear where, if anywhere, these lawsuits will go. The state of Vermont says foster parents must affirm LGBTQ+ youth, but the prospective foster parents are holding firm to their faith convictions.

The conflict also comes at a time when foster parents are in high demand. Late last year, Vermont foster officials said they were in “desperate need for emergency foster homes."

But critics are now questioning how desperate they really are. If the situation was so dire, why block Christian families from fostering? they ask.

The Wuotis and Gantts say the state is implementing an “ideological position at the expense of children.” As their legal filing claims, “Vermont would prefer children have no home than to place them with families of faith with these views.”

The obvious mission of a foster agency should be to match children to homes where they will be a good fit.

But this legal action raises some key questions. For example, is it responsible for the state to place an LGBTQ+ child in a home where they don't feel welcome? What if there are no other options available – does that change the equation?

Some would answer unequivocally: No. LGBTQ+ children, particularly trans children, are at elevated risk of anxiety, depression, and even suicide. Placing them with parents who refuse to accept or affirm their identities poses a grave risk to their safety, LGBTQ+ rights advocates say. 

And more fundamentally: did the state violate foster parents' rights by denying them licenses based on their religious beliefs? Or do foster children have a right not to be sent to homes where their identity won't be welcome?


  1. Echo's Avatar Echo

    Good of Vermont. Putting the child's needs above the self centered parents. Thank you

    1. Daniel Gray's Avatar Daniel Gray

      And this is so illegal that its not funny. Care to guess whats going to happen if they decide to sue? Vermont is going to get a very nasty wake up call.

      1. Rev Samantha Counihan's Avatar Rev Samantha Counihan

        trans isnt a choice, transphobia is a choice, im glad Vermont is protecting kids from "foster parents" that will risk their lives

        1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

          Samantha, trans is not a choice because it is not a reality. Appearing as the opposite gender is a choice. Kids are not born trans, but they can be talked into believing they are by unscrupulous adults who should know better. It would be better for such adults to have a millstone tied around their neck and be thrown into the water than to so harm a child.

          1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

            I'll make sure to tell this to all of my transgender friends. I'm sure it will knock some sense into them. "Sorry I know this is how you've always felt but you're wrong" should go over really well.

      2. Dr. Zerpersande, NSC's Avatar Dr. Zerpersande, NSC

        Yeah, but SCOTUS says it’s legal.

  1. Douglas Robert Spindler's Avatar Douglas Robert Spindler

    It's Christians and news headlines like this one which gives all Christians and the Christian religion a bad name. Sad Christians can't be loving and accepting of all of God's children. Why do they have such hatred?

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      Douglas, it is not hatred to affirm the sex and associated gender of a child. It is not hatred to deny wrong ideologies that say a biological male can be a woman. It's simply stating reality. Accepting reality is not hateful.

      1. Stephanie A Willey's Avatar Stephanie A Willey

        Russel, with all due respect, I recommend a study of the real medical science that clearly recognizes the reality of gender identity variations in humans and throughout the animal kingdom.

        1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

          Stephanie, your suggestion sounds wonderful. I have looked into this and all of the actual science says there are only two sexes and two genders associated with them. However, if you know of a sound science based research on this then please do tell me where I can find it. You used the term 'gender identity variations' with which I was unfamiliar and asked Google AI for a definition. It said, "Gender identity variations, or gender variance, is a broad term that includes specific terms like transsexual, butch, femme, queen, sissy, tomboy, femboy, travesti, or hijra. The term transgender has a narrower meaning and different connotations, usually referring to an identification that differs from the gender assigned at birth." It seems the term you used is not the same as the condition of gender dysphoria which uses the term transgender. We're all aware of variance of gender expression within a given gender. It's existed forever. It is this new theory of transgenderism which is at issue in the above article and for which there is no scientific proof. None. If one is born male, that person will never be female and vise versa. It an impossibility. One might have more male characteristics or be rather effeminate but those are variations within the male gender and does not de facto make or prove that one is the opposite gender. Your position also has one more hurdle. Queer theory posits that one is either male or female based on his or her actions. It says a person can be a man on Monday and a woman on Wednesday based on how they feel and act. This is the basis for transgenderism which says a man is a woman of he feels and acts like a woman. Gender is far more inherent and enduring than that. Transgenderism is more analogous to make believe and fantasy than truth and science. But prove me wrong. I'm more than happy to look at your evidence or examine you well founded claims. To start, I recommend that you study the case of the Reimer twins and the horrible lies told by Dr. Money in his determination to prove transgenderism. He failed. And he did despicable things to his two, young patients. Foucault was another advocate of these theories and he too was a pedophile. Both men have been disgraced, but it is such as these who were the founders of gender studies and transgender theory. The others you will find were feminists who wanted to be perceived as equal to men by queering the difference between male and female. Their desire for quality is understandable, their methods are not. I look forward to your findings. Why all of the above? To show that transgenderism is based on bad sociological theories with no science whatsoever as your response indicated.

          1. Ari Joseph Bertine's Avatar Ari Joseph Bertine

            I'm surprised to read your suggestion to study the Reimer case, and then to read your comments on it. Money was a dangerous quack that was trying to prove that sexual orientation and gender were trained rather than inherent, and his abominable treatment of the Reimer children was an attempt to prove it. He believed that people could be prevented from being transgender by eliminating gender stereotypes--in other words, he thought that accepting variances in behavior for different genders would eliminate the need for gender transition. Trans people recognize him as both a monster and a massive detriment to gender identity studies. His work was not in support of the trans community, nor is it regarded at all valid by them despite the fact that his hideous and tragic experiment proved the point that one cannot be influenced to identify as another gender regardless of what is attempted to enforce it.

            Gender identity studies and treatments were well explored, documented, and being successfully implemented before WWII by the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft founded by Magnus Hirschfeld in 1919. The institute and all of its research library and archives were destroyed by the Nazis in 1933. Dr. Hirschfeld's practice and theory closely resembled that of the American Psychological Association now.

            Someone has misinformed you about the relationship between "queer theory" and the actual basis for transgender treatment and support. While variances such as those you are discussing with Stephanie are understood to be a normal part of gender expression across the spectrum, being transgender is much more narrowly and precisely defined in regard to gender transition. There is no weight given to behavior or transient feelings in the determination of whether someone is transgender. Identification is not a mood, an aesthetic, or a preference, but rather the internal perception of gender without regard for any of those factors.

            Money and Foucault were not the founders of transgender theory or gender studies, just two perverts who became famous for the abuse they committed under that banner. Hirschfeld was a genuine founder of these studies and a more apt subject for referral.

            1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

              Ari, I recommended studying the case of the Reimer twins because it shows just how wrong are the theories which say that gender is a social construct and can be changed simply by performative acts which Dr. Money championed. We are agreed that he was a monster. And that is one of the reasons to know about it and to learn from it as a warning against such theories. Another advocate of this theory of gender is Judith Butler. According to an article written by Purdue, "Indeed, Butler goes far as to argue that gender, as an objective natural thing, does not exist: "Gender reality is performative which means, quite simply, that it is real only to the extent that it is performed" ("Performative" 278)." Source:,(%22Performative%22%20278).

              This understanding of Butler's ideas of gender as performative acts is also attested to by Wikipedia, "Gender performativity is a term first used by the feminist philosopher Judith Butler in their 1990 book Gender Trouble. They argue that being born male or female does not determine behavior. Instead, people learn to behave in particular ways to fit into society. The idea of gender is an act, or performance." Source:,is%20an%20act%2C%20or%20performance.

              So your understanding is at odds with many of the acknowledged experts in this field.

              Per Wikipedia, "The Institut für Sexualwissenschaft was an early private sexology research institute in Germany from 1919 to 1933." So it was not a scientific organization and did not conduct scientific research. While it's studies are interesting, they are more in line with sociology and perhaps psychology than to that of a hard science. Their work might be helpful to psychologists today who are counseling persons experiencing gender dysphoria.

              Hirsch practiced sexology. He was an advocate for homosexual and transexual rights. But not a basic researcher. Some of his fellows at the institute left because of his insistence that homosexuals were by nature effeminate. One such person, Benedict Friedlaender, started their own organization called, the Bund für männliche Kultur or 'Union for Male Culture (source is also Wikipedia.

              The reason for all of this is to understand that Hirsch and his institute started with an agenda and their interests and activities were conducted in the interests of and service to that agenda.

              I do find your argument that transgenderism is inherent and enduring to be much more tenable than the positions held by Butler, Foucault, and some ministers here on the ULC blog. And the case of the Reimer twins does seem to prove that gender is inherent and enduring. I still hold that one's gender is the same as one's sex and therefore transgenderism is nothing more than a person sincerely wishing to be the opposite gender and thus the proper subject of psychology. I also respect that you don't agree that it can change with the wind. One day I might learn that my position is wrong. But so far I haven't seen or read any credible evidence to that effect.

              Great conversations! And I do want to read more about both of the institutes which were briefly referenced.

              1. Ari Joseph Bertine's Avatar Ari Joseph Bertine

                I'd like to offer to discuss the topic at length sometime, to exchange viewpoints and information. It is evident that you put much thought into your determination of situations, and we very likely have quite different resources available to us. If you would like to do that sometime, you are welcome to contact me via Messenger.

              2. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

                Ari, thank you for the kind offer. I no longer use FB or X or any of the other social platforms. This is the only site I still use to talk with others as I do believe in the Monastery's mission and enjoy our fellow ministers thoughts on current religious topics.

                You have also put good, thoughtful effort into your comments which is very much appreciated. I enjoy reading them and reflecting on them.

      2. Dr. Zerpersande, NSC's Avatar Dr. Zerpersande, NSC

        Actually there is research that shows that biologically males that are trans are physiologically different.

        Myself, I don’t care. I’ve always accepted gays. The trans thing was a different matter until I heard what the Harvard(??) researcher had determined. And regardless, it’s a matter of ‘Not my circus, not my monkeys.’

        As for xtians getting the stinky end of the stick on this, I think teaching a child to believe in the Jewish Zombie is a form of child abuse, so anything that limits its spread gets my vote.

    2. ServantOfJudgement's Avatar ServantOfJudgement

      God's children are not all children. A child of God believes the Bible is his word whether you like what you read or not.

      There is a litmus test in God's word to determine if you're a child of God. You cant just say it and it becomes true. That's the woke nonsense of identity declaration.

      The hate occured by the government. The potential parents were judged negatively without a cause. The hate comes from the left, the woke and the antichrists, there are many. The LGBTQIA+++ is the largest exclusive hate machine mankind has ever assembled.

      1. Rev. BH's Avatar Rev. BH

        SoJ, You hate the left, the woke, the LGBTQIA+, yet you talk of God and the Bible. Which god and what bible supports such hatred?

      2. Rev. Dr. Father JJ's Avatar Rev. Dr. Father JJ

        kkkristofascism homophobia to say the least. you're religion does not allow you to judge others. start with judging your own sanctimoniousness and work to become a good person instead of someone who spits hate and judgement while wearing a cloak of self-righteousness

  1. Laura McAllister's Avatar Laura McAllister

    I would have to ask why would you want a transgender child. if you had negative views about them. Is it that you want to try and fix them because that’s God‘s job and obviously he’s OK with it. I don’t agree with the Bible says a child regardless if you had your own children you can’t say OK I want mines to be blonde hair blue eyes, what God gives you. so if you had negative thoughts about these children then I wouldn’t give it to you either. I listen to some of your remarks and comments about things. A lot of them. Remind me these people are Christian. These people don’t know what religion is nobody has the right to talk about anybody , I was up that way you don’t talk about people you never know what’s gonna happen in your home. I stated many times my daughter is gay. I couldn’t be more proud of her. She runs her own division in a hospital and she’s been in the medical field since she was 19 if you truly love your children , you accept them for who they are again if you had negative views, I will give you a license either .

    1. James Mounts's Avatar James Mounts

      *Laura McAllister I would have to say I doubt they wanted a transgender child, but, now that the credentials were pulled, they can't help ANY child; even mentally healthy ones; even Christian ones. In the name of those children desperately needing fostering and whose chances have now been diminished, I would have to say GOOD JOB, KAREN.

      1. Rev. Klaire ThD, MA's Avatar Rev. Klaire ThD, MA

        Karen Mounts, what an uninformed, uneducated and shallow comment. The reason their credentials were pulled was because they cannot help any children with views like that. No child, foster or actual can be allowed to grow up in a household with such hateful views and rhetoric being spewed. To allow a child to be raised in a household like that is child abuse and the state agency cannot allow that.

        1. James Mounts's Avatar James Mounts

          Maybe I read a different article, but I got the idea the credentials were not pulled because of hateful rhetoric, but because of refusal to make an affirmation. That is forced speech. That is unconstitutional.

          1. Rev. Klaire ThD, MA's Avatar Rev. Klaire ThD, MA

            James Mounts, that is a distinction without a difference. And no, that's not forced speech when they originally agreed to conditions of licensing that they likely did not read. So, no, not unconstitutional either.

            When an agency like this establishes rules (safety of the children placed in foster care, empirically defined) that have, over time, survived legal scrutiny, deciding after the fact that you don't like those rules doesn't carry much weight.

            1. James Mounts's Avatar James Mounts

              I do believe you may be jumping the gun. The jury is still out on the validity of humoring teens with behavioral problems. In fact, the pendulum of medical and psychological research is swinging in the opposite direction. So, basing such an important decision on a fad is irresponsible.

      2. Scott Smith's Avatar Scott Smith

        @James: "even mentally healthy ones" really?

        Are you saying that LGBTQ+ people are mentally unhealthy?

        They ARE mentally healthy, unless you persecute them, bully them, abuse them, or do not raise them with a sense of self-worth.

        Who are you to judge?

        1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

          Scott, his point was that these foster parents would not be able to help ANY child. But if you must jump on the term mentally healthy, then they are now unable to help mentally healthy children. That is a factual statement. Since YOU are questioning if gender dysphoria is considered by the healthcare industry as a mental condition, I asked Google AI which said, "The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5), defines gender dysphoria as a condition that involves a strong desire to change one's sexual characteristics due to a conflict between one's gender identity and expressed or experienced gender. It also includes a strong belief that one has the typical feelings and reactions of a gender other than their assigned gender. For the diagnosis to be valid, it must also be associated with clinically significant distress or impairment." So, one suffering from gender dysphoria (transgenderism) is experiencing significant distress or impairment. Sounds like a healthcare issue which not every person is equipped to handle. So the State should consider better placement of these persons and not remove the licenses of foster parents who do well with children not suffering from this diagnosis.

      3. James Riggle-Johnson's Avatar James Riggle-Johnson

        Stop indoctrinating children with your religious ideology. Freedom of religion means to worship how you want to. Not make everyone else worship the way you want them to.

      4. Elizabeth Jane Erbe Wilcox's Avatar Elizabeth Jane Erbe Wilcox

        James, Am I reading your comments correctly? You state they can’t help ANY child; “even mentally healthy ones; even Christian ones.” To me you are saying that transgender human beings are not “mentally healthy.” Really? And you imply that only “christian ones” are “mentally healthy.”

        So all other human beings in any world religion other than your specific “christian” belief are not “mentally healthy?”

        That seems quite hateful to me. There is an old saying “What Would Jesus Do?”

        Odd. The Christian God I followed while growing up was all about loving one another. Perhaps you were brought up with a different god.

        1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

          Elizabeth, that's not what James said. Those are the words you are trying to put into his mouth. He simply stated that now they will be unable to help ANY child.

          1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

            She's literally quoting James showing that is exactly what he said.

            1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

              Michael, I'm referring to where Elizabeth goes on to write, "To me you are saying that transgender human beings are not “mentally healthy.” Really? And you imply that only “christian ones” are “mentally healthy.”. James didn't say any of that.

      5. Rev. Klaire ThD, MA's Avatar Rev. Klaire ThD, MA

        Comment removed by user.

    2. Matthew Mastrogiovanni's Avatar Matthew Mastrogiovanni

      They wanted this child, in order to "fix" them.

      1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

        Matthew, first there was no child involved only a new policy. Second, you ascribe a motivation to people you don't even know. That's prejudicsm.

        1. Harvey Darwin Myers II's Avatar Harvey Darwin Myers II

          I think that applies to all of the people that accused them of being hateful and not knowing them as well.

          If you want to protect the children, any child that believes they are trans can go to home that will gender affirm. Other children that do not claim to be trans can go to a home that doesn't affirm. More homes for children in need, isn't that what we should all want?

          The problem is that if you don't support any ideology from the left you are considered hateful. My uncle was a gay man. I believe the Bible. The Bible says, 'We are all sinners." and "The wages of sin is death" and "Love they neighbor". The only why that makes sense to me is to love the sinner and hate the sin. To me since lying and homosexuality are sins according to the Bible I must hate them equally, however, I should love the person committing those sins also. I also loved my uncle and his partner tremendously.

          By stating, I disagree or believe something is bad, isn't hateful. Anymore that your belief that I should agree with you, is hateful. Hateful behavior isn't simply disagreement. Let's stop this nonsense and maybe some fruitful conversations can be had.

        2. Dr. Zerpersande, NSC's Avatar Dr. Zerpersande, NSC

          Yeah, but they’re religiously delusional. If I put a child up for adoption I would refuse all religious folk. Child abuse. So 10-yard penalty for excessive stupidity.

  1. Michael Holland's Avatar Michael Holland

    Good, foster parents need to be open minded to the child's physical, mental and spiritual needs! They are not there to judge, condemn and indoctrinate ! Not all diamonds are cut the same, every eye will not see the beauty of the next, accept, tolerate and most of all love

  1. Colleen McAllister's Avatar Colleen McAllister

    In fostering, or adopting, the child's needs must come first. If a family is not willing to support any child in any circumstance then that family should not be allowed to foster. Any true Christian family would understand that and be willing to support the child. This has nothing to do with faith. This is pure bigotry.

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      Colleen, that begs the question of which is best for the child, to go along with either a childish imagination which changes daily or to tell the truth and say something like, 'no sweety your a boy not a dog or a cat or a girl but a wonderful little boy with a wonderful imagination!' The answer to what is actually in the best interests of the child is the point to be proven before the State makes these types of demands. It hasn't proven anything. It simply accepts bad gender ideology uncritically.

  1. Donald J Rothschild Jr's Avatar Donald J Rothschild Jr

    These are the same people who have denied gay couples the right to foster and adopt children claiming the gay couples would force their lifestyles on the children, which is BS. Talk about a double standard.

    It is time to follow the law, not some religious text written a few thousand of years ago whose sole purpose was controlling the people.

  1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

    This article hit home for me as I was a foster child for many years. The article stated that they were good foster parents and the state would not have to place trans kids in their care. Also, the state requires that they teach their own biological son to accept trans ideology. Therefore, the State of Vermont is wrong to pull the couple's licenses to be foster parents. I also noticed that there was no mention of what the biological parents of the child wanted for their child. This sounds like another case where a state's woke social services department is dictating its agenda over what's best for the child and in the true interests of the state. The solution is to continue with the couple's licenses and simply place trans kids elsewhere. This allows the 99.9% of kids who are not trans to be given a good home. The policy of pulling their licenses is unfairly discriminatory. With all that said, all states should rethink the foster care system as it is rife with sexual abuse people like farmers who want foster kids to work their farms so they don't have to hire help for money and they get paid for the kids to boot. I think single sex group homes might be a better option. It's very difficult for a child to have to learn a new set of rules every time they are moved to a new foster home and might have to attend a new school too. Group homes might provide longer term care with very similar rules as established by the state. But if the state is going to use the foster care system, then it should not discriminate against Christian foster parents who live by their faith and teach the same to their biological children.

    1. James Riggle-Johnson's Avatar James Riggle-Johnson

      Russell, what happens when that young child grows up and discovers that they’re gay, bi, lesbian, or trans? Would it be okay to torture the child with religious indoctrination that makes them feel desperate and hate themselves? A foster parent needs to be open to what a child becomes, not only be the good Christians, they insist on. At least LGBTQ people are born that way. Religion is taught. Talk about indoctrination.

      1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

        James, you seem to think the worst of these foster parents. I saw nothing in the article that said they were indoctrinating any child. They simply would not agree to use the wrong gender for the child's sex. Using words like torture is too severe. Many of us grew up in Christian homes and here we are gay and wonderful. Simply because they're Christians doesn't mean they would harm any child for being LGB. In fact, I suspect that most Christians today are very affirming of LGB kids. And foster kids have other resources in school, online, community centers, and caseworkers. Based on the article, this is not an LGB issue, only a trans. The state is wrong when it requires foster parents to abide by a pledge on trans issues which affect less than 1% of any potential placement. It also oversteps when it requires foster parents to teach bad trans ideology to their own biological child. It's very Orwellian. It's wrong.

  1. Charles Lee's Avatar Charles Lee

    I do not think it is right to deny people based on their viewpoints. If they are not open to transgender then give them a gender specific child. I think each side of this issue are wrong for trying to impose their stances on others.

    1. John's Avatar John

      Sounds simple enough but what happens if a child as he/she goes through adolescents begins to question his or her sexual identity. Is the issue allowed to be explored and even supported by the parents or is the whole notion crushed by the parents because it goes against their Christian beliefs? Children from day one are dynamic, exploring, and yes even evolving human beings. As a parent we can't just cherry pick and say we'll take the child who down the road will have no transgender issues.

    2. Rev. Klaire ThD, MA's Avatar Rev. Klaire ThD, MA

      Charles Lee, this seems like a pretty shallow comment. The reason their credentials were pulled was because they cannot help any children with views like that. To allow a child to be raised in a household like that is child abuse and the state agency cannot allow that.

    3. John's Avatar John

      Comment removed by user.

  1. Tareq Asfour's Avatar Tareq Asfour

    Good, I am in full support for this. A child should be loved, respected and accepted regardless.

  1. Rev. Mike Eggleston's Avatar Rev. Mike Eggleston

    They're not being discriminated against because of their religious beliefs, they're simply being denied the opportunity to abuse a LBGTQ+ child.

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      Mike, there is no evidence presented in the article that they ever did or would abuse a child. Using a child's biology gender is not abuse. In fact, the article said that they were very good foster parents. There is no reason to use the term abuse.

      1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

        Gaslighting a child who knows they are transgender or queer into believing that being trans or queer is a sin that will doom them to hell is abuse, plain and simple.

        1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

          Michael, no where in the article did it say that any child had been told they were called a sinner for any reason whatsoever or that they were going to hell. It was an ideological issue about addressing a child by its correct biological sex and, hence, correct gender. Claiming to be trans is properly a term under the umbrella term queer so there was no need to repeat it twice; however, the term gay or lesbian should not be included within the current usage of the term queer and could be separately stated. And no, no gay or lesbian child should be mistreated or shamed for his or her sexuality.

  1. James Riggle-Johnson's Avatar James Riggle-Johnson

    Religious indoctrination is dangerous. At least LGBTQ people are born that way. Religion is taught. Why would the state want to give a child to parents that might abuse them. If the child turns out to be L,G,B, or T, then the foster parents should at least be open to discussing the issue.

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      James, I've seen you post numerous times that religious indoctrination is dangerous. That's simply not true. Also using the term 'indoctrination' has a.negatibe connotation today that it didn't have originally. Teaching religious values is good. Indoctrinating child in bad trans ideologies is bad. Very bad.

      1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

        Why is religious indoctrination good? Christianity teaches people to hate those who do not believe what they do. It teaches you to fear God worship him or else be sent to Hell. What is good about being taught to believe that fairy tales are truth? "Trans ideologies" are backed up by research and study of transgender persons. Religion is just blind faith in something for which you have no proof.

        1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

          Michael, Christianity does not teach its followers to hate, it teaches them to love. It teaches fear of God in the sense of a proper reverence to God as creator and sustainer. Hell is a more problematic term especially as envisioned during the Middle Ages, but is also understood as a state of being with no connection felt to God or his divine love. Such beliefs are not fairytales. Though no one is required to believe any of them.

          Trans ideologies are not backed by actual, rigorous scientific research. It is supported by poorly done pseudoscience written by deluded sociologists who are determined to propagate their theories as science. They are not.

          Finally, religion is not just blind faith. If one is sincere in their quest for religious truth, then they will prove to themselves the claims made by their chosen faith. As the Christian religion has said for a long time, one does not believe because one sees, one sees because one believes.

  1. Marilyn's Avatar Marilyn

    This breaks my heart on so many levels. Qualified and loving foster parents are excluded because the latest "fad" of inclusion isn't in their belief system. Before you go off, I don't care who you love or what you call yourself.However, there are precious children languishing in the foster system and become damaged Adults who reck havoc for everyone they encounter. Foster care should not have an agenda but apparently it does. How sad for the precious children.

  1. Gary Leu's Avatar Gary Leu

    Trans kids should never have to be in a place where they are not accepted for who they are. While society cannot control if a parent is accepting of thier naturally born offspring, we can certainly make sure it happens in public institutions. Foster children are already vulnerable enough, they do not need self-righteous judegment foster parents regardless of the source of their bias.

    Recently one of my favorite podcasts examined what the current scientific data has to say about trans kids' healthcare:

  1. Cindi's Avatar Cindi

    Why even foster children if you aren't going to 'help' them? That doesn't mean you should ENABLE them to hurt themselves by loading their bodies with all kinds of hormones, cut on them, or add a body part! The Bible states there are TWO genders! Male & Female. NOT 57 or whatever number is currently made up! Christ Jesus said he came not to change the law, but to fulfill it! It's one thing to be gay or change the color of your hair. To change your body? I doubt that would be God's plan. But, you are correct in stating parents who have negative views about transgender children, than don't foster them! Maybe I am biased about transgender, but I am open as far as gay people. I know many gay people (some are family members) who agree they don't want to change their gender just because of that!

    1. Elizabeth Jane Erbe Wilcox's Avatar Elizabeth Jane Erbe Wilcox

      Cindi, I would love for you to meet my transgender child. They are 29 years old and came out only 2 years ago. Imagine knowing your sex and gender were not in synch for so very long.

      How amusing that you’re ok with people being gay but not with them being transgender. I seem to recall something along the lines of “Judge not least you be judged.” Hmmmm…

    2. Rev. Klaire ThD, MA's Avatar Rev. Klaire ThD, MA

      That is a really uneducated and shallow comment. It seems you really need to start over and get a decent education. Firstly, the bible, a work of fiction written by man to control man, is NOT a book of science. There is so many great clinical studies out there that can help you learn more about this topic. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like you would have the educational background to understand them. Start over. Your views are hurting real people with real lives and real hopes and futures.

    3. Michael Holland's Avatar Michael Holland

      You're basing your comment on a book of fiction ! You are aware the Bible was written some 2000 years after Christ's existence, supposedly!!! Please never foster! Please look up the word foster AND acceptance!

      1. Rev. Michael Gerraghty II's Avatar Rev. Michael Gerraghty II

        About 100 actually.

      2. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

        Michael, as a former foster child I much preferred a sincere and loving Christian family to a nonreligious family that just kept me around for the money and didn't care about me at all. We can all use additional education in this area and not indoctrination.

      3. Thomas P. Davis's Avatar Thomas P. Davis

        The Old Testament was written and quoted by the apostles and Jesus. It is the New Testament that was written after Jesus.

  1. Rev. MichaelRS's Avatar Rev. MichaelRS

    Does Vermont allow LGBT...XYZ2+2=5 people to become foster parents?

    If so it is only fair that they be screened for beliefs that are counter to conservative Christian values and have their license pulled if they have any.

    1. Rev. Klaire ThD, MA's Avatar Rev. Klaire ThD, MA

      Michael, state agencies don't operate under a system of 'belief', they function on empirical data. Belief, as you probably know, requires NO facts, data or proof. So, NO, as far as empirical data goes, your 'conservative christian values' carry no weight where valid data is required.

      1. Rev. MichaelRS's Avatar Rev. MichaelRS

        Well, that's a nice vague statement.

        Precisely what data is it that would call for that couple's future license/certification as foster parents to be denied?

        Particularly since they apparently received high marks from the state as foster parents...until they let their Christian values be known.

      2. Daniel Gray's Avatar Daniel Gray

        Sorry but they DO. All you have to do is look and you will see that lbgtq people have no problem in adopting, its clear in the state records. So unless you know what you are talking about maybe its better for you to keep shut?

        1. Rev. MichaelRS's Avatar Rev. MichaelRS

          What are YOU talking about Daniel?

          I don't think they screen potential foster parents who are LGB...XYZ for anti-christian sentiments

          1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

            People are born queer and cannot change their sexuality. No one is born Christian; they're only converted to it by brainwashing. They don't have to screen for anti-Christian sentiments because there's no need while anti-LGBTQ sentiments would be incredibly detrimental to a queer foster child.

            1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

              Michael, if by queer you mean the older term for being homosexual or gay then, yes, we are born either gay or straight. However, since the advent of Queer theory, that term is now used differently. It now means to disrupt a space from it's gender normativity in order to take over the space. It is also used by persons claiming a nonbinary or other identity status. With that understanding of the term, no one is born queer. This is one of the language problems specifically intended by Queer theory so that terms are no longer clear and precise but are instead conflated and confused or as they would say the terms have been queered.

    2. James Riggle-Johnson's Avatar James Riggle-Johnson

      LGBTQ people are born that way. Religion is taught. Stop religious indoctrination. Religious freedom is being able to worship the way you choose. It’s not about forcing that religion on others.

      1. Rev. MichaelRS's Avatar Rev. MichaelRS

        Clearly activist in the alphabet Community are trying to desensitize and indoctrinate children into their way of life.

        Have you not seen the lascivious drag entertainers at birthday parties where little children are encouraged to run up and put dollar bills in the waste band of the dancer"s underwear. And don't even get me started on drag queen story time.

        1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

          If you're more worried about drag queens reading to children than you are about the epidemic of religious leaders molesting children that's occurred for decades, please take a look in the mirror. Drag queens aren't sexually assaulting children, so-called Christians are.

          The LGBTQ community isn't trying to indoctrinate anyone. They're trying to undo the indoctrination that has caused our society to demonize that community.

          1. Rev. MichaelRS's Avatar Rev. MichaelRS

            Two things can be true at the same time. So yes, I can dislike faith leaders molesting children as much as I just like children being sexualized in other ways.

            The difference being is that everybody agrees that Faith leaders should not be physically molesting children. It's whether it is right or wrong to molest their minds that is the area of contention.

            1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

              Michael, I clearly understand that I am quoting only a part of a longer statement, but I think that in this case it is fair to do so. You wrote, "I just like children being sexualized in other ways." What does that mean? Under what circumstances is sexualizing children good?.

              1. Rev. MichaelRS's Avatar Rev. MichaelRS

                What that means is my talks-text heard DISLIKE as JUST LIKE and that I did not proofread my comment well enough before tapping submit.

                That is what that means.

                And for those I need to spell the correction out, my position is; I can dislike faith leaders molesting children while at the same time DISLIKE children being sexualized by others in other ways.

  1. Mountainsage's Avatar Mountainsage

    Not all foster parents and kids are a fit and for various reasons, not just LGBTQ+ reasons. These good people should not be singled out because of their religion and religious preferences. I thought we have religious freedom in this country. What’s happening to them sounds like the political indoctrination of Stalin. Be careful of sliding down this slippery slope.

    1. Rev. Klaire ThD, MA's Avatar Rev. Klaire ThD, MA

      Mountainsage, religious "preferences" are one thing. Views that equate to child abuse is another. Wisdom is in knowing the difference.

  1. Matthew Mastrogiovanni's Avatar Matthew Mastrogiovanni

    A foster child needs endless love and acceptance, not judgment

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      No one was judging any child according to the article. It was an ideological issue.

  1. Brien's Avatar Brien

    So, the zealots wish to cherry pick children to foster. Once again, Christian hatred on display. I guess Christians are proud of their hateful views, it does not seem like any of them take stands against them. If you cannot overcome your toxic views, then please don't foster a child. Just my opinion.

  1. Rev. Rory's Avatar Rev. Rory

    It is not a right to be a foster parent.

    Children should be placed in accepting homes.

    The people in this story are not the parents.

    People don't "turn" gay, just as they don't "turn" left handed (another thing that is determined by biology that some religious groups see as evil.)

    How every single teacher, librarian, health department worker, counselor and scientist suddenly work in coordination n some wild global conspiracy is mind bending. When someone (especially those that benefit financially) tell you that everything is a conspiracy to, for example, make all children LGBTQ+, I recommend having respect for YOURSELF and question if the agenda is self serving for the conspiracy spreaders.

    Love who you are and love your God. Have respect for yourself. Stop using the legal system to punish "the other." It's ugly and it never ends well.

    Be well.

  1. ServantOfJudgement's Avatar ServantOfJudgement

    It's exciting to see the world move against Christians like this. It validates what was said would happen in the Bible 2k years ago by a person the world says didn't exist. Good becomes evil and evil becomes good. Killing babies is good. Preventing baby killing is evil. Men hiding as women is good, men being men is evil. Lol, the woke feminist is the funniest person alive right now. On and on and on.

    God doesn't exist yet all of his prophecies are being fulfilled live right in front of us. It's important for Satan that all children are raised his way or no way at all. It must happen this way.

    The antichrists must go mad in their wisdom. And so they are.

    1. Rev. Dr. Father JJ's Avatar Rev. Dr. Father JJ

      Persecution complex much LackOfJudgement? This is the thing, as soon as one can a kkkristofascist will claim persecution but that's not the case. It's because you kkkristofascists demand that the world turn you way, to the exclusion of all other religions. The only reason your kind will tolerate jews is because according your to babble you have to side with them to fulfill some prophecy,

      And let's not forget that as far as anyone can tell, your jebus actually was the antichrist, the god you believe in is actually satan and you are doing satan's work. The funny thing about that is that you can't prove me wrong. Satan created the bible as a way for simple minded people to get in line and do his bidding. Who you call satan is actually the true god and from whom you will be excluded for eternity

      1. ServantOfJudgement's Avatar ServantOfJudgement


        For an inclusive loving crowd, you all seem to spit venom quite a bit. You probe a christians armor with every insult conceivable to find a way in. The woke hive mind is extremely predictable. That's a good thing.

        Interesting that you believe we tolerate the Jewish people for prophecies sake. That implies there's no reason at all to tolerate the Jewish people. I don't agree with your or Hitler's assessment of the Israelites. Like any other people on the planet, they're valuable. I pray for their protection. So far, so good.

        You're not the first idiot(biblical idiot, don't take offense) to suggest that Satan wrote the bible and the foul thing we know as Satan is really God. Many idiots believe the Bible was written to control a population yet the first thing dictators do is ban the Bible and kill believers. People who repeat that should have more to think. In fact they should start thinking first thing in the morning. Maybe by evening they'll be thunk and stop saying stupid stuff.

        If God is Satan and Satan is God, does that mean you worship God or Satan? If you don't worship one, you worship the other or is that Satan's rule? I think I've read from you or one of your fellow thought drones say hail Satan, were you worshipping god or Satan? There's a Satanist or two on this blog, are they actually Christians then?

        I'm glad Jesus told us you'd say something foolish like that. When you've got access to supreme logic and wisdom, it's easy to spot silly talk a mile away.

        Seek the truth.

  1. Patricia Ann Gross's Avatar Patricia Ann Gross

    What some are missing is that the licenses were pulled for anti-LGBTQIA+ stances and petitioning against the rights of transpeople. They were not removed because they were Christian. There are plenty of Christian families that would fully support a gay or lesbian child and a child that has gender dysphoria, and these are to be commended. There are also plenty of Christian families that would honor a child's "different" religious views, specifically if they were Jewish or Muslim, so the litmus test of whether they were discriminated for their religious views does not totally track. Some Christians actually follow the example of Christ and welcome those that others choose to hate because they are different, including sex workers, tax collectors, and members of other faith traditions. Putting a child in a family that supports hate against other human beings is not a healthy environment of any child. It teaches them to bully and disparage others. We have more than enough of those already.

    1. Rev. Rory's Avatar Rev. Rory

      I don't know the answer to this issue in one state, but I can say thank you to YOU for providing a home for children for 13 years. You are doing something very good.

  1. Chris's Avatar Chris

    So many foster and adoption agencies refuse to let children in need go to loving homes just because the adults are gay. It goes both ways. Should they have their license revoked? Possibly not. But if they're so indoctrinated by their "sincerely held religious beliefs" they can't even consider letting the child explore who they are or are not, it seems they would simply be groomers for more extremists.

    When you try to force your religion onto everyone then cry foul when someone doesn't follow along, you're a hypocrite. Would you approve a Neo-Nazi fostering a child? Possibly, considering how many Evangelicals tend to side with them. Would you approve a Muslim family fostering a child? How about a pagan family? Probably not, simply based on their religious views.

    We don't need extremists raising more extremists. We need loving families willing to teach love and acceptance instead of hatred and discrimination.

  1. Martin L Stigleman's Avatar Martin L Stigleman

    These are not people being told how to raise THEIR kids. These are professional foster parents...people who are PAID to care for children until they can be adopted by others. No one is asking them to change their faith, their lawsuit is essentially that they be allowed to indoctrinate children to THEIR beliefs! Also, they aren't so much angry that they won't be allowed to foster, so much as the fact that they won't have that paycheck coming in.

    1. James Ameel Saylors's Avatar James Ameel Saylors

      Comment removed by user.

    2. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      Martin, according to the above article, your first statement is wrong. The parents were told that they had to teach trans ideology to their biological child.

  1. James Ameel Saylors's Avatar James Ameel Saylors

    LBGTQ+ is a radical ideology. it is my experience that most gay men or women are not radical and do not support LGBTQ+. I’ve been on this planet for a very long time now, and I have seen that 95% of the people get along no matter what their belief or ethnicity and the loudmouth 5% ruin it for everybody. It’s time they stop getting all the attention and all the mainstream media press. Be kind to people and show them respect. The moment they show you, they don’t deserve your respect, turn and leave them standing where they are. Never talk politics and sex to other peoples children. Never. You do not have that right. In fact, it’s betrayal of the highest order. Leave my family alone. Unless someone is physically/sexually abusive to someone in the family, no one else has any business poking their nose in there, and most of all certainly not any government agency.

  1. Rev Samantha Counihan's Avatar Rev Samantha Counihan

    if a foster parent isnt gonna accept LGBTQ then theyre not fit to be parents, its not against their religion, saying its against their religion is an excuse to be a bigot, the amendment wasnt broken , hate speech isnt free speech, trans isnt a choice, transphobia is a choice

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      Samantha, there was no discussion in the article about gay children, it was only about the foster parents signing an affirmation that they accept and agree with trans ideology and would use a pronoun other than the one correct for the child's sex. That is not hate and it is not bigotry. Neither is it hate speech to use the correct gender which matches one's sex. These parents are not transphobic for using the English language correctly. Trans does not exist. It isn't real. Trans is a social construct by gender and queer theorists which they use to destroy and confuse our language in hopes of them inserting their own terminology with definitions which they have created. That is the battle being fought here not an attack on a child from the foster parents.

  1. Thomas P. Davis's Avatar Thomas P. Davis

    According to what was written before this blog started "The obvious mission of a foster agency should be to match children to homes where they will be a good fit." I would say that is the best approach. I agree with both the statements of Charles Lee and Cindi. Why is the agency denying a functional home to a child in need? Maybe it is MONEY!. My brother-in-law and his wife wanted to adopt a child years ago and were told there was none currently available at the agency. That sounded suspicious so he did a little investigation and found out that there were really 30 children (I believe that is the actual number) at the home. So why tell him there was none? He was also into politics and researched a little more and found out if the number of occupants dropped below a certain level, they were stop receiving certain grants from the government,

    1. Rev. Klaire ThD, MA's Avatar Rev. Klaire ThD, MA

      Thomas, you're really missing the point. The reason their credentials were rescinded was because they cannot help any children with views like that. No child, foster or actual can be allowed to grow up in a household with such hateful views and rhetoric being spewed. To allow a child to be raised in a household like that is child abuse and the state agency cannot allow that. A corollary would be to say "these parents hold nazi views. Do we have a compatible chile to place in foster care with them?" No, that's the same form of child abuse. So, your comment is incredibly misguided and misses the point of the state agency in preventing further abuse.

      1. Thomas P. Davis's Avatar Thomas P. Davis

        I don't believe that I am. The way I read and understood it was the people were required to submit to the agencies rules prior to the retaining or receiving any children in the future. So if as you say they had one of those children, then return them to the agency, no harm done. But preventing a child of the other persuasion from finding a home is criminal on the agencies part.

      2. Mark Gilgen's Avatar Mark Gilgen

        FAR from "nazi" views get real! have you READ the BIBLE its the same views it has so maybe THEY are right.

        1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

          That relies heavily on the belief that the Bible is right. The Bible advocates for slaves to submit to their masters and for women to be subservient to their husbands. I don't think such things are right by any means.

          1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

            Michael, the idea that the Bible is either right or wrong is a mistake. The Bible contains truths, morals, literature, wisdom, guidance, and much more. As far as the slave issue, it was most likely added by the wealthy who owned slaves and were the only ones rich enough to have the letters copied. As to women being subservient to their husbands, this ensured that Christians were in conformity with their environment and the times. Thus eliminating yet another criticism that could be hurled at Christians. The books of the Bible were not written in a vacuum. Should a husband be recognized as the head of the house? Perhaps. Families with such a clear structure seem to do better than those without it. It would be interesting to have a thorough study or studies conducted to see if that idea is factually true.

            1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

              The Bible is a work of fiction written by men. It does not contain anymore truths than Harry Potter.

              1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

                Michael, who's to say that Harry Potter books don't contain morals and truths? I happen to think they do.

  1. Bill Thompson's Avatar Bill Thompson

    A child must be 18 and in some cases 21 to get a tattoo, pierce their bodies or buy alcohol or cigarettes and yet the schools, social services and courts are advocating gender mutilization, random use of restrooms and encouraging vulnerable children to participate without parental consent.

    These kids need parental consent to go on field trips or participate is school activities yet they can show up after school for gender utilization.

    This goes against every single parents rights on earth. Parents must unite and rise up against this misuse of power these agencies absolutely do not possess.

    This isn’t religious; it is barbaric and violates both the children’s and the parents rights!

    On the other hand if a child comes home I encouraged or manipulated and thinks they are gay this child falls under parental jurisdiction not government policy!

    1. James Riggle-Johnson's Avatar James Riggle-Johnson

      Where do you get this kind of stuff, Bill? You cannot mutilate a minor. Minors are not having sex change surgery.

      As for parents’ rights… these are not their children. They are being asked to care for the child who cannot live with their parents for whatever reason. Maybe they’ve been beaten by a parent for being gay and removed. Now you want to put them right back in that situation. Religious ideology is dangerous. Religious indoctrination should be outlawed. Freedom of Religion means you can worship how you choose, not that you can force everyone else to worship as you do.

      1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

        James, you err when you say that children are not having sex change surgery. They are. I've posted elsewhere before the actual numbers from information collected from insurance companies who've paid for the surgeries. I also watched a video presented to Congress of a doctor explaining how he has performed these surgeries on children in Portland, Oregon.

        1. Rev. Mike Eggleston's Avatar Rev. Mike Eggleston

          Post your verifiable evidence to support your claims.

          1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

            MIke, according to the JAMA Network of all GAS conducted 3678 (7.7%) were aged12 to 18 years here's the link for the entire article:

            I found this within seconds just by asking Google. I'm surprised you weren't able to do the same. This information isn't new, back in 2007 ABC news reported, "Jan. 30, 2007 — -- Two years ago, a 12-year-old German boy became perhaps the youngest-ever patient to embark upon a sex change." The above data only goes up to 2019. It has become much easier for kids to get such 'treatment' today. In a few years we'll have additional information. In the meantime, YouTube has a number of detransitioners who share just how young and incapable they were to transition when they were, in their words, pushed to transition by doctors.

            Why didn't you know this was happening?

            1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

              You seem to be leaving out the facts that the vast majority of people who transition, at any age, end up happier and live longer, more fruitful lives than if they had not been allowed to transition.

              That 12-year-old German boy is now known as Kim Petras, an incredibly successful pop artist who's been able to live happily as a woman since their transition.

              1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

                Michael, your statements are not entirely true. But first, I responded to the allegation that children didn't receive GAS and showed that children do indeed receive such surgery. And in your response you have agreed that they do. So between the two of us we have shown that James's statement was wrong.

                As to your belief that persons who have undergone GAS are happier and well adjusted that is still a question. To wit from PubMed, "Gender-affirming treatment remains a topic of controversy, with many calling for greater access to gender-affirming treatments to foster psychological well-being for transgender, nonbinary, and intersex individuals [1-6]. There is accumulating literature that suggests transgender individuals suffer worse mental health outcomes than their cisgender peers; of particular concern is increased suicidality [4,7-13]." The source is

                The same article cautions the reader as follows, "Of the 23 studies that met the inclusion criteria, the majority indicated a reduction in suicidality following gender-affirming treatment; however, the literature to date suffers from a lack of methodological rigor that increases the risk of type I error." A lack of methodological rigor in the literature on the outcomes of GAS was also cited in the Cass Report which said such studies were 'thin', that is lacked real data from a robust population.

                There is a growing amount of literature that shows the opposite of what you claim. Even PubMed is cautious in its writing.

            2. James Riggle-Johnson's Avatar James Riggle-Johnson

              Russel, yes, some kids have had breast surgery, but that is no different than when little girls have breast augmentation. There is also sexual reassignment on infants when they’re born with more than one set of sexual organs. It’s the parents that decides what happens there. There are not millions of kids signing up for sex change procedures every year. Even adults have to live as the other gender for years before surgery become the only solution left to them. You don’t just walk into a doctors office and say I want to be a woman, and your surgery is scheduled for next month.

              With my own experience being gay, I’ve had people tell me I suffer from mental illness, or that I’m a sinner and refuse to accept it. I’m tired of people trying to force something on someone else when they have no idea what’s going on. People are not trying to change the gender of children. When a child feels like they are not the sex they were born as, there is a complex series of things that child has to go through before having the chop.

    2. Elizabeth Jane Erbe Wilcox's Avatar Elizabeth Jane Erbe Wilcox

      It’s curious that you are so intimately interested in a child’s genitalia. Why is that? Why are the genitals of my children any of your business? Sounds like you love the idea of big government invading your child’s underwear to be sure they have the proper penis or vagina. Very curious.

    3. Matthew Mastrogiovanni's Avatar Matthew Mastrogiovanni

      How about the child's rights?

      1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

        The child has a right to be told the truth that they are either a little boy or girl based on their biological sex. They have the right to be cared for and educated so that they can become productive members of society. They have a need for love, understanding, and compassion. They have a need for guidance and tolerance. But they are still children not adults and cannot make such important decisions for themselves. Let their imaginations run wild during the day, but at the end of the day bring them gently back down to earth reminding them playing Superman is fun, but now it's time for bed.

  1. Matthew Mastrogiovanni's Avatar Matthew Mastrogiovanni

    Score 1 point against the Patriarchy

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      Matthew, there was nothing in the article relating to patriarchy. Besides, that is an old idea that died with actual patriarchy long ago. There is no patriarchy today. None.

      1. Rev. BH's Avatar Rev. BH

        Patriarchy: "a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it." R.A.K, Wrong again.

        1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

          BH, actually a patriarchy is defined by online dictionary of Oxford Languages as, "a system of society or government in which the father or eldest male is head of the family and descent is traced through the male line." Which we in the US do not have.

          As to the alternate and quite new definition which you quote, women are not excluded from holding power in countries that are part of Western civilization. We have females as members of the House of Representatives, governors, Senators, mayors, CEOs, and the list goes on. In fact National Party leader LePen might just win the national election against Macron. England had a female Monarch for many, many decades and had at least two female Prime Ministers. So your definition does not apply here BH, but it might well apply to Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, Afghanistan, or Iran. Those countries you seem to omit in your analyses while you castigate ours. So, as I said patriarchy died with the patriarchs. Your definition is not applicable to us or the whole of Western civilization. Times have changed.

          1. Rev. BH's Avatar Rev. BH

            Indeed, you have selected one of several definitions, as have I. Very few words have one pat, absolute definition. Usually several. The one I quoted is legitimate, and I have no doubt many women here (who are not politicians such as your examples) find it sadly applicable to their lives. Times have changed, misogynists haven't.

            1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

              BH, as my above comments demonstrate, the idea of patriarchy as you use it does not exist in the West. There is no system in the West that gives men power over women. Everyone has equal civil rights and responsibilities except for men who are still subject to the draft. Not being drafted is a privilege afforded to women, and it is wrong because it fails to treat both sexes equally. So, women have greater privilege in America than men.

              Even if an American man is a misogynist, he has no power to enforce his beliefs or opinions. Just as an American woman who is an andrist, has no power to enforce her beliefs or opinions. Both sexes have equal power with slightly more women in America than men which gives them a bit more political clout.

  1. Dominique D Sweat's Avatar Dominique D Sweat

    this is not okay we need to fight back for our laws

  1. Daniel Gray's Avatar Daniel Gray

    Isnt it just so special of some of the people leaving messages here, they first demand that all the pro life people start adopting, and when they actually do what is demanded of them, then they get refused and the same people who started making the demands are now attacking the people who tried to do what they wanted int the first place.

    1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

      Foster care is not adoption, for the record.

      1. Brien's Avatar Brien

        Michael, First, thank you for your statement. I have been waiting for this point to be brought up. I would like to expand on it a little. Foster care is not adoption. Foster care requires a state registration and license. Foster care households get money from the state per child fostered. The states set the requirements and the federal government may also allocate money to the state to help the system. It is very simple. If you can't or won't follow the rules set up by the state, then you cannot get a license to foster. Any other arguments about this are mute and a waste of time. If you want the system to change, vote or get involved at the government level. 🤔

  1. Steven Ferrell's Avatar Steven Ferrell

    That state is discriminating based on their own discrimination of people who don’t believe the liberal agenda and will not conform to their agenda.

  1. Gabrielle Radford's Avatar Gabrielle Radford

    I have been a foster parent for 13 years. To be a successful foster parent I have had to learn to pivot quickly. I have had several children say they are transgender and then after you start affirming them, their position changes back to the birth sex. In care it’s something they have some control over and they have no other control in their life. I’m not saying you have to give up your values but you cannot force your values onto the child. What if this family had been given a child that was an atheist or Muslim or Buddhist? Would they affirm those choices?
    I have had successful long term placements of teen girls, and I truly believe it’s because I hope for a few things in my home, you are safe and chose safe actions, you go to school, and you come home. There are other things but those are the biggest. Let’s say they are the only home that is open but they have a transgender child that needs care??? It doesn’t matter that their home is open because they can’t place that child in that home. All the state is asking them to do is affirm the child’s choice, to call them by their chosen pronouns. They aren’t asking them to give up their faith. They are just asking them to be affirming.

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      Gabrielle, thank you for being a foster parent, and it seems you're one of the good ones. As a foster child, the foster mother I cherished the most was loving and kind. She was also a Christian who lived her beliefs. Our birth mother said we were Seventh Day Adventists and so she sent us to that church on Saturdays. I think it was obvious to her before anyone else that I was gay. She didn't treat me differently from any of the other kids, and that was back in the 60's. But I believe she would have refused to call me a girl, and I believe she would have been right. To think that the state might have revoked her license for refusing to misgender a boy as a girl would have been a travesty. A child will live just fine with foster parents using the gender associated with their sex and doing so is in conformity with the recommendations in the Cass Report. As you yourself said, one day he was a girl and a little later he was back to being a boy. That is why children need consistent reinforcement of the identity that matches their sex. This is especially important for boys as their masculinity is under constant assessment by themselves and attacked by others. Girls never have to prove their girls, but boys must prove they're boys well into early manhood at which time they become certain in their manhood and no longer question it or listen to critics. There's an interesting book on Amazon called The Idiots Guide to Raising Boys. It has some good thoughts and ideas.

  1. Father Flanagan's Avatar Father Flanagan

    These are not “views” this is REALITY, there is No Such Thing As Transgender. Anyone who thinks otherwise is part of the problem and guilty promoting harm upon children, as this sick fraud is sterilizing and mutilating children with these supposed “affirming” criminals cheering it on! Not to mention over 50% or more of children who are duped into having these procedures commit suicide by their early 20’s or transition to what extent they can and become activists against this sickness!

    1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

      These are not "views" this is REALITY, there is No Such Thing As God. Anyone who thinks otherwise is part of the problem and guilty of promoting harm upon children, as sick priests molest children and teach them to believe in things that don't exist while their parents give money to the church and tell their kids this is God's will.

      I'd love to see your sources for the 50% or more of children who have gender affirming care commit suicide by their early 20's. Every study I have ever read says the exact opposite; gender affirming care drastically lowers the rate of suicide in transgender persons.

      1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

        Michael, yes, God does exist. Your failure to perceive his divine presence or believe the numerous accounts written by others of their experiences of God going back thousands of years not withstanding.

        1. Michael Hunt's Avatar Michael Hunt

          Prove that God exists then. Just because one perceives there to be a divine presence does not mean it actually is. There are numerous accounts throughout history of the existence of Bigfoot and yetis and tales of dragons and unicorns, but that doesn't make any of them real.

          One cannot fail to perceive something that is not there. Never in my life have I experienced anything that would suggest a deity exists. Could there be? Possibly. There could also be yetis in the Himalayas. Until there is concrete proof of something, I will be rightly skeptical of it's existence.

  1. Kathryn Darcy Smith's Avatar Kathryn Darcy Smith

    Good for the parents! This trans crap is out of hand! (and I AM trans!)

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      God bless you, Kathryn. You are very brave. The left castigates someone like you more than anyone for stating any opinion that disagrees with the herd.

  1. Lisbeth Kieran Bushey's Avatar Lisbeth Kieran Bushey

    Children in crisis deserve safe homes - physically and mentally. If a prospective foster parent can’t provide that, then they shouldn’t be allowed to foster. That’s why these people had their licenses pulled - they strongly stated that they would refuse to provide a safe environment for children. The basis for their refusal to provide a safe environment may have been in their religious beliefs, but that doesn’t change the fact that they refused to provide a safe environment for children.

  1. Evone Payton Banks (Minister non denominational)'s Avatar Evone Payton Banks (Minister non denominational)

    Firstly, of course the state violations goes against freedom of religion and has openly denied the right to choose based on non discriminatory acts. There's no representative of any background that wouldn't say this is a clear violation of human rights and constitutional rights and laws that protect.

    Secondly, I think if the child feels there needs mentally and emotionally will not be met; then it shouldn't be a choice of a non accepting family. Children thrive in an environment where love and emotional, and mental needs are met as well as the physical. With depression and suicidal rates going up based on the stereotype of two genders, then it it is only fair to say no child will be psychologically safe in an environment that doesn't accept them, therefore should not be even selected to be sent to a non accepting family.

    Lastly, this isn't just an LGBTQ+ problem or issue. These decisions effect all in the long-term. With less marginal families being accepting and foster care rates also being a rising topic. We must also consider "no child left behind". The less accepting families the rate of homelessness amongst children of these specific groups will also rise and unfortunately so will the toll of depression based deaths. The last time I checked "behold I say love everyone" was a commandment as well. If we start basing personal views with religion. What messages have we already sent to children just finding out who they are?... To deny a family the right to love a child no matter what is a crime of personal in faith. It is sad that the world has come to the decision of thou shout only love straight male or female. I never read that before. It breaks my heart that personal views are overriding what is ethically and morally right. The right to live as one chooses and be loved regardless of the outward appearance.


    The applicants should not have had thier license pulled. They have the right to believe what they want to beleive. The state does not have the right to tell you what you should and can believe. Is homosexuality wrong? Yes. Why? Why is the penis and Vagina here, what is it's purpose? To reproduce. Is it the fault of the individual being affected by it? No. Why? because it's not their fault, so called church, teachers and knowers of the BIBLE have failed society. They didn't, and still don't understand, that the devil can hear your thoughts, and your childrens thoughts, and are messing their thoughts up because, the children are at the beginning of learning(starting to learn about this thing we call life). Is homosexuality a spiritual issue? Yes. Does that mean it's a form of spiritual warfare? Yes, you just need to know how to defeat it because our lord does say it's an abomination because it's against OUR CREATORS LAW, and not what he planned for us. YAHWEH IS GREAT!

    1. Russel A. Kester's Avatar Russel A. Kester

      The issue here was not homosexuality, it was about trans ideology. Being homosexual is not a sin and your theology is simply wrong. Sex is not just about procreation. That was the Catholic church's original stance but even it changed its thinking to include the idea that sex is about the feelings of love and caring for the good of another that can be expressed between two persons. According to your theology a married couple who are unable to have children should never have sex. Once a theology admits sex is about intimacy between two persons, then any two persons are capable of those feelings and expressions. It's about the love being expressed not the sexual act; hence, the organs involved don't matter.

  1. David Buck's Avatar David Buck

    They should not have had their credentials pulled. I hope they win their court case. These were good foster parents. Surely the state can simply put children with foster parents appropriate to the situation. That is to say, in the event a chid who requires care identifies as LBGTQ+ etc., that child goes with family A who agree with the state's ideology, and not with family B who are religious and do not. I am sure that there are enough children not identifying as LGBTQ+ who require foster care to make it worthwhile keeping these foster parents on the roster. One size does not fit all.

  1. David Wolf's Avatar David Wolf

    Both sides ae correct. Too many kids need a home. Certainly, these devout people could be paired with children in need of a loving home where gend er identity is not an issue. This is also a call to all people in support of LGBTQ++, Will you open your homes and hearts to foster a child in need of your understanding?


  1. James L. Giberson's Avatar James L. Giberson

    Crystal clear case of 1st amendment violation. The law applies both ways. Liberals AND conservatives are equally protected.

    1. Reverend Thom's Avatar Reverend Thom

      I hope the Vermont LGBQ etc. Nazis get sued into oblivion. No belief, no religion, no opinion needs to use the government to overcome another. This is an atttack on religious freedom.

    2. Reverend Thom's Avatar Reverend Thom

      AGREE, another lefty attack on the constitution. If you are religious, believe in a God Almighty, you are not compatible with communism, marxism or a global central government. That type of government makes itself your god.

  1. Ari Joseph Bertine's Avatar Ari Joseph Bertine

    This is a sticky wicket legally, and there are several factors to consider.

    Currently, there are many religions that mandate refusal of necessary medical services, including to children in one's care. And yet, people belonging to these religions are allowed to foster children, as a categorical rule. This is by law and not by policy of individual foster services, who may institute their own screening policies. So we start with the base assumption that belonging to a religion that prohibits medical care does not rule out being a foster parent.

    If foster parents whose religion prohibits medical care actually get into a situation where the child's life is in danger, the state usually steps in to save the child's life. This would be likely to spawn a lawsuit from the foster parents, as it frequently does with non-foster parents that the state has bypassed to intervene for a child's life. So there is also an assumption that foster parents can believe whatever they want, and in all but a few states, their religious prohibition on medical care will be overridden in the case of risk to the child's life.

    Since this was a state-run foster agency, their policies are based upon state laws and anticipation of legal conflicts. Vermont is not one of the states that has exemptions on their books for religious medical neglect. Some states actually do; West Virginia, for example, will allow parents to medically neglect their children if it is their religious preference. So the foster agency must operate in such a way that adheres to state child advocacy laws.

    Having established this, a closer look at Vermont legislation reveals that it does indeed have a blanket protection for parents against being convicted of child abuse based upon harm occurring from religious-based medical neglect. In the definitions chapter in statutes on reporting child abuse, the following is stated: "(6) “Harm” can occur by:

    (A) Physical injury or emotional maltreatment.

    (B) Failure to supply the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or health care. As used in this subchapter, “adequate health care” includes any medical or nonmedical remedial health care permitted or authorized under State law. Notwithstanding that a child might be found to be without proper parental care under chapters 51 and 53 of this title, a parent or other person responsible for a child’s care legitimately practicing his or her religious beliefs who thereby does not provide specified medical treatment for a child shall not be considered neglectful for that reason alone."

    So it looks like there is some wiggle room for the legal allowance of religious-based medical neglect, which would also cover the withholding of treatment for gender dysphoria. This puts the burden on the state to loosen their vetting policies to allow foster parents to declare an intent to withhold medical treatment for a child based upon religious beliefs.

    After researching the issue, it looks like these couples do indeed have the legal right to abuse foster children as their religion mandates. This will make it difficult but not impossible for those children that survive the neglect to sue for damages later. I predict that the state will have to back down and allow potentially abusive foster parents to continue to foster, as there is no legal precedent to protect any children from the withholding of any medical treatment, including emergency life-saving measures such as medications or blood transfusions.

  1. Genevieve Friday Ard's Avatar Genevieve Friday Ard

    Its actions like these I find disheartening, and they anger me. Three aspects: Legal, Medical and Religious are intertwined. Legal, our Constitution is quite clear and when it states 'Life, Liberty and Happiness' it did not originally speak to Religious beliefs that is where the Bill of Rights come in. Yes, the Bill of Rights shows difference and respect but it does not subvert, condone nor overrule the fundamental Right to 'Life, Liberty and Happiness'. So by the Constitution their stance is wrong. Medical, well I'm a Clinical Mental Health Counselor and I have dealt with families with Transgender individuals, children, parents and sometimes both. When you look at the biological and mental sciences along with evolutionary trends this makes sense in so many regards. Historically Intersex and Transgender people have been here since mankind started walking. They have a very willful purposeful ignorance that makes me question their desire to harm a child. Religious, Matthew recorded Jesus's own words in 19:12 and I know the word 'eunuch' replaced another word because the word it replaced, in 1st century Azkinazi held a far more complex meaning reflecting what we consider Intersex and Transgender today. It made me think 'why' Jesus would make that comment. I ask 'why' a lot... and, well, I can see Matthew asking why Thomas was among them. Thomas 'the beardless one', who could not grow a beard at all. Not due to youth, but simply because Thomas as an adult could not grow a beard due to biology. 1st Century Middle East, Intersex people existed and some were revered and some were revile just like today. Also, just like today typically little can be done medically to do much more than make the person comfortable. Same for Transgender people, just enough medical care to make them able to live their lives.

  1. Walter J. Holbrook's Avatar Walter J. Holbrook

    Okay my brothers and sisters. 1. This is an abomination in the bible. There are some who just out right say it is a sin. (See Revelations). 2.This is a big issue for separation of church and state. (Too many blurred lines within the interpretation of wording). "Jesus said love one another as I have loved thee." There was no conditions, just love. We must stop setting terms on what life is. Just teach the word.

  1. Angela Dawn Barton-Goggin's Avatar Angela Dawn Barton-Goggin

    Not ALL children are transgender and not ALL foster parents are of the belief that birth gender is permanent. Why not dive deeper and place children in the best place for them as individuals?

  1. Dominique D Sweat's Avatar Dominique D Sweat

    Time for us as Minsiters, pastors, bishop to say no to the Sepreme Court

Leave a Comment

When leaving your comment, please:

  • Be respectful and constructive
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Avoid profanity, insults, and derogatory comments

To view the full code of conduct governing these comment sections, please visit this page.

Not ordained yet? Hit the button below to get started. Once ordained, log in to your account to leave a comment!
Don't have an account yet? Create Account