Religious right selfishly turns boy into pawn in gay-adoption battle

[trumad]

On the left is the picture that the Florida Family Policy Council of Orlando, used to illustrate the gay couple that was awarded custody of a relative. It appeared under the headline: "FL judge violates law, places child in homosexual adoption" (on the right) is the actual couple. (February 3, 2010)

The judge's ruling said exactly what most people would want to hear in an adoption case.

It said that the 1-year-old boy who had been living with his foster parents was "happy and thriving" — and that a permanent adoption made perfect sense.

It should be a simple story with a happy ending.

Except it is not.

That judge's ruling — which focused solely on the child's well-being — enraged some on the religious right.

Why? Because the little boy's adoptive parents are gay.

<snip>
And to make their point about just how frightening this ruling was, the Policy Council included a photograph of the couple — a strange and androgynous-looking duo, one with bleached skin and both with mullet haircuts. The couple look so odd (you literally can't tell whether they are male or female) that one might wonder how any judge could place a young child with such a disturbing-looking duo.

Except the judge didn't.

The abnormal-looking couple that the Policy Council chose to illustrate this story is not the same couple granted the right to adopt the child.

No, the two-woman couple awarded custody of the 1-year-old — South Florida trade-show executive Vanessa Alenier and her partner, Melanie Leon — look more like J.Crew models: all-American with catalogue clothes and smiles.

The picture that the Policy Council chose was a grotesque caricature.

These are the dirty tactics of Christianity's far-right warriors.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/os-scott-maxwell-gay-adoption-020310-20100202,0,1037988.column

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

1. I miss the Top 10 Conservative Idiots. -nt

[midnight]

2. Isn't there a law against falsifying evidence?

[BrklynLiberal]

3. Certainly not the first time that the RWingnut/Fundies have used victims to serve

their own selfish purposes. Terry Schiavo comes to mind immediately. If I gave it another 30 seconds of thought the list would be much longer.

This kind of disgusting crap is SOP for them. There is nothing too low or too horrifying to stop them from trying it.

[alphafemale]

4. I know the Relig right is playing a stero type...but

Are you honestly saying that you are equating character with attractiveness?

Or what is the societal norms of attractiveness?

I really could not make a judgement on looks alone on who would be a better parent.

Yes. The RW'ers are playing a stereotype.

But have you not also taken the bait?

So what if the real couple looked like that?

[Control-Z]

8. I was bothered

by the anger projected in the pic of the fake couple. Had they been warm and smiling I would not be moved to dislike them.

The ignorant bastards tried to cover their bases by appealing to people who are not homophobic yet would pick up on the anger.

[tanyev]

5. First picture is on a list called 15 Horrifying Couples that Shouldn't Procreate

Lots of entries in Google. Bet that's where the Policy Council found it.

[ThomCat]

6. WTF! So only attractive people can adopt?

Even if that was their real picture, what the hell would that have to do with anything?

:wtf:

[pepperbear]

9. remember the intended audience. n/t

[LeftyMom]

10. Seriously.

The thing is, there's a fair amount of literature saying that people with comparatively androgynous presentations are happier and better adjusted than their peer groups who present in a more traditionally gendered manner.

[TexasObserver]

7. Recommend

[JoDog]

11. I hope the real couple

is talking to a lawyer about pressing charges for false evidence or suing the policy council for libel/slander.

[LeftinOH]

12. The photo on the left looks highly suspicious; I'm curious to know its origin-

the two people in that photo look like a deliberate caricature of certain "types" -and, they're not even smiling (WTF?). Either the photo is 1. An outright fake; 2. Based on an original image but altered to look especially "offensive"; or, 3. A genuine image taken from an unrelated source and used here for propaganda purposes.

[Soylent Brice]

13. playing on people's fears and stereotypes goes hand in hand with being

Christianity's far-right warriors.