Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

(AP: MA. Lt.Gov.) Healey breaks with Romney on gay adoption exemption

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
TaleWgnDg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 06:56 PM
Original message
(AP: MA. Lt.Gov.) Healey breaks with Romney on gay adoption exemption
.

(MA Lt. Governor Kerry) Healey breaks with (MA Governor) Romney on gay adoption exemption


by Jay Lindsay, AP Writer | Boston Globe, Thursday, March 2, 2006

BOSTON (AP) -- In another break with her boss, Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey (Republican) said Thursday (March 2, 2006,) she wouldn't support any (Massachusetts) legislation to exempt Catholic social services agencies from a law requiring them to consider gays as adoptive parents.

The state's four Catholic bishops (in Massachusetts) said this week that the (Massachusetts) law threatens the church's religious freedom by forcing it to do something it considers immoral.

But Healey, a Republican candidate for governor, said the Catholic church should abide by the state's anti-discrimination laws, like any other institution.

She said she wouldn't lobby for an exemption for the church or support any legislation that provides it.

"I believe that any institution that wants to provide services that are regulated by the state has to abide by the laws of this state, and our anti-discrimination laws are some of the most important," Healey said.

Her comments came a day after Gov. Mitt Romney met with Boston Archbishop Sean O'Malley and said religious institutions should be able to help people without being forced to violate their faith.

. . . more at . . . http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/03/02/healey_breaks_with_romney_on_gay_adoption_exemption?mode=PF



See also: (DU thread) http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=158x7867
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BlueManDude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. What's Reilly's position? Probably some middle ground waffle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TaleWgnDg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Attorney General Tom Reilly must uphold Massachusetts
.
Attorney General Tom Reilly must uphold Massachusetts law. PERIOD. That is, as Attorney General, he does.

Separate from his legal duties as Attorney General, however, what is his political position as a potential governor of Massachusetts regarding gay adoptions?

I assume it be to favor gay adoptions. Why do I say this? Because Tom Reilly is not anti-gay marriage. He's said so. So, to be consistent, if one is okay w/ gay marriage, then one should be okay for gay adoption. Again, why? Because legal marriage of gays also includes the legal ability to have or not to have children. Children and marriage are inclusive, that is, the choice is solely the choice of married parents to have or not to have children.

Thus, Tom Reilly should be for gay adoption. Simple really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueManDude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Either way, he needs to give a straight answer
I like the guy but he needs to speak succinctly and clearly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. Healey has her sweaty finger in the air, and has checked the wind!
When churches get involved in social services, there is profit there at SOME level. If it ain't a cash cow via direct reimbursements from the state, it is a vehicle to earn converts so the cash goes in the basket down the line.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TaleWgnDg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. As an attorney who has "worked with" Catholic Charities in
Edited on Thu Mar-02-06 07:36 PM by TaleWgnDg
.
As an attorney who has "worked with" Catholic Charities in adoption issues, particularly children w/ "special needs" (disabled kids), I can wholeheartedly say that Catholic Charities does an excellent job in this area. Catholic Charities (in Massachusetts) does a fantastic job of assisting Massachusetts place these disabled kids in both foster homes and in adoptive homes. These social services are desperately needed in Massachusetts.

With ONE HUGE caveat: religious discrimination should stay the hell out of adoption issues (it's against Massachusetts law to discriminate against gays in adoption).

Therefore, if Catholic Charities, unfortunately, wants to assert its religious tenets into adoption policies and practices in Massachusetts, then Catholic Charities (in Massachusetts) should remove itself from adoption entirely. There's no wiggle room here. There's no governor's executive order that can bypass the Massachusetts anti-discriminatory laws. And, if the state legislature attempts to enact a law to include a religious exemption, our highest court in Massachusetts would strike it down as being against the Massachusetts constitution (as it did in the similar gay marriage issue). Of course, if Catholic Charities appealed such rulings to the federal courts, I wonder what the present U.S. Supreme Court would rule w/ its precedent-setting 5 SCOTUS Roman Catholic majority. This would be a similar issue as is gay marriage, for both include the legal ability to parent children.

As for Kerry Healey, I admire her stance. Republican or not. Uuuummmm, no, I am not some so-called "Freeper" . . . do a google on me. LOL
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I don't doubt your credentials
...but my point remains, if Healey could get traction taking the other view, she would.

Mitt is so friken unpopular, she only does herself good by distancing herself from him.

And while CC may do good, they also do good by their arrangement with the state, I am sure. If this were a net loss situation for them, where they gained neither cash nor influence, they would have gotten out of the business eons ago, especially when they were trying to pay off all those righteously angry abuse victims and scrambling to find the cash for the payoffs. Far easier to dump unprofitable enterprises than close churches/sell real estate, and piss off the faithful who put their hard earned nickles in the box every week...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TaleWgnDg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Yes, which is another reason why Atty General Reilly pushed
.

Yes, which is another reason why Atty General Reilly pushed for open accounting books on the Roman Catholic Church, particularly where plaintiffs attorneys in the child sexual abuse cases were crying foul as to the Church's accounting and its attempts not to divulge. It stinks to high heaven (pardon the pun). All that being said, you know well that the state legislature did a turn-around when most religious institutions in Massachusetts gathered together to lobby against such a law.

Healey's wise to make political hay out of this gay discrimination. When the welcome mat of stupidity and ignorance is rolled out . . . here, by the Catholic Church and Romney-pushing-to-appease-rightwingers-as-a-presidential-candidate. Well? Why not make hay out of it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Would the 5 Catholic judges have to recuse themselves
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TaleWgnDg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-03-06 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. No. Not unless that justice could determine that s/he
Edited on Fri Mar-03-06 01:12 AM by TaleWgnDg
No. Not unless, broadly speaking, that U.S. Supreme Court justice could determine that s/he had conflict(s) of interest or an appearance of conflict(s) that would render his/her decision to be biased, prejudicial, or otherwise derive an unfair judicial review/outcome of the issues of the litigating parties. (See, for example, 28 U.S. 455 . . . and . . . http://www.uscourts.gov/guide/vol2/ch1.html . . . but see footnote 3)

    (footnote #) 3. This Code governs the conduct of United States Circuit Judges, District Judges, Court of International Trade Judges, Court of Federal Claims Judges, Bankruptcy Judges, and Magistrate Judges. In addition, certain provisions of this Code apply to special masters and commissioners as indicated in the "Compliance" section."
    http://www.uscourts.gov/guide/vol2/ch1.html

However, that being said whether statutory federal law or judicial ethical code, the determining factor of these decisions rests with each U.S. Supreme Court justice. There is no higher determination as an overview:

    (Former Chief Justice) Rehnquist offered no conclusions about the issue, but said Scalia alone had the power to recuse himself, at his discretion. "It has long been settled that each justice must decide such a question for himself," he said, although he added that justices often consult among themselves when such issues are raised.

All of which gives rise to questions as to:

(1.) why Justice Scalia's son as an attorney for the same law firm that represented Bush while before the SCOTUS in Bush v. Gore but Scalia didn't recuse himself. That same Scalia kid -- Eugene Scalia -- became head attorney for the Department of Labor under George Walker Bush. Did Justice Scalia have an interest in the outcome of Bush v. Gore?
(2.) Justice Thomas' wife worked for the Heritage Foundation that had interests in Bush v. Gore but Thomas didn't recuse himself. Did Justice Thomas have an interest in the outcome of Bush v. Gore?
(3.) Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, whose lawyer son worked for the law firm representing Microsoft against private antitrust lawsuits, participated in a key U.S. Supreme Court vote in a Microsoft antitrust case. Rehnquist explained in a separate U.S. Supreme Court "note" writing that he had reviewed the law and concluded there was no conflict of interest. Did Justice Rehnquist have an interest in the outcome of that Microsoft case? Was there an appearance of impropriety?
(4.) And, most of America knows of Justice Scalia's duck hunting trip with Vice President Dick Cheney and Cheney's son in which he shared both airplane facilities as well as housing accommodations but Scalia didn't recuse himself. Did Justice Scalia have an interest in the outcome of that Cheney case? Was he influenced by the gratuities from Cheney and company? Was there an appearance of impropriety?

Justice Breyer, on the other hand, is well-known to recuse himself as are Justices Ginsburg and Stephens.

BTW, of the five Roman Catholic Church majority members of this present (Roberts Court) U.S. Supreme Court bench, four of whom are known to be (rightwing) ultra-conservatives: Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justice Samuel Alito. The remaining fifth justice of the majority is Justice Anthony Kennedy, a moderate-to-conservative but he can swing ultra-conservative at times too. Again, will these justices recuse themselves if they have a conflict of interest? Or will they, too, oft-handedly openly say from the SCOTUS bench during oral arguments:

    "I bet that 90% of the American people believe in the 10 Commandments and 85% don't know what they all are; they (the 10 Commandments) are a symbol that this government derives its authority from God and that seems to me entirely appropriate." - Justice Antonin Scalia, March 2, 2005, speaking from the bench of the U.S. Supreme Court during oral arguments demonstrating his inability to Separate Church and State from his own religious beliefs.
    .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. You want state money
you follow state laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TaleWgnDg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
9. Here's more on Healey's political game playing . . . in a GOP minefield
.

Healey embraces former governors - in private - for her own campaign


By Glen Johnson, AP Political Writer | Boston Globe, Thursday, March 2, 2006

BOSTON - As she runs for governor, Kerry Healey is embracing the state's recent tradition of electing Republican chief executives as a check on the overwhelmingly Democratic state Legislature. Just not too tightly.

On Thursday, the lieutenant governor scheduled a major fundraiser at a Boston hotel. The prime draw? The Republicans who have held the governor's office in succession since 1991, from William F. Weld to Paul Cellucci to Jane Swift to Mitt Romney.

Yet amid Weld's current campaign for governor in New York, tensions between Swift and Romney after he bumped her out of the 2002 gubernatorial race, as well as a recent fissure between Healey and her boss as he has espoused increasingly conservative political positions, the lieutenant governor's political staff refused to allow any group picture or reporters to observe the event.

. . . snip . . .

"There's certainly been a lot more troublesome photos in the history of politics, but certainly it would make it easier for Democrats to say, 'Look at this lineup; it's time to make a clean change,'" said Dwight Robson, who managed the 2002 gubernatorial campaign of Democrat Shannon O'Brien.

Healey and her staff said keeping the event private was standard operating procedure, although political fundraisers are often open for remarks. That was the case in Washington on Monday, when Romney hosted President Bush at a gala for the Republican Governors Association.

. . . snip . . .

Healey's campaign manager, Tim O'Brien, denied any suggestion she was embarrassed to be seen with her predecessors.

. . . snip . . .

"The best thing for her is to be 'independent Kerry Healey,' 'a different kind of Republican' who's her own person and would do her own thing," . . .(said Dwight Robson, who managed the 2002 gubernatorial campaign of Democrat Shannon O'Brien.)

. . . more at . . . http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/03/02/healey_embraces_former_governors___in_private___for_her_own_campaign?mode=PF


.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 07:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC