Vermont joins Oregon in hating Christians, going after not those wishing to adopt but those who want to give children a foster home while their parents get their acts together (a majority of the cases; I’ll put aside other types of reasons like parental deaths for now).
These states ignore not only the First Amendment, which says that the Government cannot “prohibit the free exercise…” of their own faith’s beliefs, but Vermont is ignoring its own Constitution (emphasis mine):
Article 3. [Freedom in religion; right and duty of religious worship]
That all persons have a natural and unalienable right, to worship Almighty God, according to the dictates of their own consciences and understandings, as in their opinion shall be regulated by the word of God; and that no person ought to, or of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any minister, contrary to the dictates of conscience, nor can any person be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen, on account of religious sentiments, or peculia[r] mode of religious worship; and that no authority can, or ought to be vested in, or assumed by, any power whatever, that shall in any case interfere with, or in any manner control the rights of conscience, in the free exercise of religious worship. Nevertheless, every sect or denomination of christians ought to observe the sabbath or Lord’s day, and keep up some sort of religious worship, which to them shall seem most agreeable to the revealed will of God.
Read that last part again: “that no authority can…interfere with, or in any manner control the rights of conscience in the free exercise of religious worship.” Wouldn’t even casual odds be that SOME politician or a SINGLE bureaucrat in the Vermont Leviathan might have read the above in the last five years and said to themselves, “Perhaps this is a no-no”? Or has our American Experiment gone that moldy to see that Citizens have now been demoted to religious slavery?
And the Left is always talking about the Right turning us into a theocracy – what do they think THIS is? Mandating beliefs certainly seems well on that road, eh? Emphasis mine, reformatted:
Two Vermont Families Barred from Adopting Children Because of Christian Beliefs
The Wuoti and Gantt families both had their foster licenses revoked because they declined to promote the government’s preferred views on gender ideology. More here.
In MY Social Contract / Construct (see what I did there?), it is clear that Abortion and Transgenderism are two denominations of the same religion. One denies the essential spark of Life from an unborn child, and the other makes a mockery of the simple biology of sex (and no, gender is simply another word for sex).
Vermont’s Department of Children and Families are religious bigots. And yes, we all should start calling them that, wherever they are.
Both families had longstanding relationships with the Vermont Department for Children and Families and had adopted children through the foster care system. But the department adopted new policies that forced foster families to affirm the sexual orientation and “gender identity” of any hypothetical child who could be placed in their care. The department even said this affirmation should include taking children to events like pride parades, using pronouns that are inconsistent with a child’s biological sex, and more actions that would violate the Wuotis’ and the Gantts’ Christian faith.
The Wuoti family explained that they would love and accept any child placed in their care, but they could not promote ideas contrary to their faith. Instead of respecting their religious freedom, the department revoked their foster care license in 2022. And in 2024, the Gantt family suffered the same fate. Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a lawsuit in June 2024 to defend the two families’ religious freedom. Wuoti v. Winters case details
The following is a video by ADF when the Wuotis and Gantts were interviewed by Laura Ingraham:
The NH connection?
I have been asking the DCYF employees I’ve been working with about this trashing of religion coming to NH. Thus far, crickets, but these are lower-level folks. While I would have thought that they would have bounced this up higher and I would have gotten a reception from them, that hasn’t happened.
Now, months later and still Foster Parents (#1 was the Grandson, and we adopted him, #2 turned out to be the problem and not her parents, and now we have #3), TMEW and I decided that we wanted to continue helping children. However, if NH decides to emulate Oregon and Vermont (and others like California and New York, I believe).
If NH goes forward with this, we’ll quit. I have also been told that a good plurality of NH’s Foster Parents would quit as well.
So the inquires have been sent. And for the record, NH’s Constitution is similar to Vermont’s (emphasis mine):
[Art.] 4. [Rights of Conscience Unalienable.] Among the natural rights, some are, in their very nature unalienable, because no equivalent can be given or received for them. Of this kind are the Rights of Conscience.
June 2, 1784[Art.] 5. [Religious Freedom Recognized.] Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and reason; and no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession, sentiments, or persuasion; provided he doth not disturb the public peace or disturb others in their religious worship.
June 2, 1784[Art.] 6. [Morality and Piety.] As morality and piety, rightly grounded on high principles, will give the best and greatest security to government, and will lay, in the hearts of men, the strongest obligations to due subjection; and as the knowledge of these is most likely to be propagated through a society, therefore, the several parishes, bodies, corporate, or religious societies shall at all times have the right of electing their own teachers, and of contracting with them for their support or maintenance, or both. But no person shall ever be compelled to pay towards the support of the schools of any sect or denomination. And every person, denomination or sect shall be equally under the protection of the law; and no subordination of any one sect, denomination or persuasion to another shall ever be established.
Including, I presume, a non-God-oriented secular religion.
More coming…
