On Sept. 7th, US District Judge Mae A. D’Agostino ruled that adoption agencies are no longer required to offer services to same-sex or unmarried couples in the state of New York as it may violate their First Amendment right to freely practice their faith. The ruling follows a federal lawsuit filed by Syracuse-based non-governmental adoption agency, New Hope Family Services, against New York’s Office of Children and Family Services. OCFS ordered New Hope to either close their doors or accept a wider array of applicants as denying services based on a couple’s marital status was in violation of a non-discriminatory law passed in 2014.

This is not only a matter of personal preference in one’s beliefs, but it is a direct attack on a group of people’s constitutional rights. What appears on the surface to be a ruling in favor of religious freedom is actually a decision that directly harms queer communities and violates their Fourteenth Amendment rights. The state set a precedent that will continue to discriminate queer couples and deprive them of equal protection. The 2015 Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges determined that these protections are extended to those in same sex-marriages. However, the September 6th’s ruling blatantly ignores this and claims to be justified by the First Amendment’s right to freedom of religion.

When it comes to understanding the First Amendment and the rights it seeks to protect, it is important to understand that no protection is absolute. A common example includes how a threat and hate speech made against a marginalized group of people is not protected by the amendment’s freedom of speech. Likewise, there should be exceptions to the freedom of religion, such as in cases where another individual’s rights that are traditionally protected by the Fourteenth Amendment are threatened to be stripped away. In the case of this ruling, we have now expanded and created a gray area on how far citizens are allowed to go by simply citing their religious rights. Does this allow for private shop-owners to turn away customers if their homophobic beliefs are based in their religion? How about private landlords or restaurant owners?

By ignoring the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection, not only are the rights of queer individuals being violated, but it paves the way to continue to push for a harmful anti-queer agenda. Around the country various acts of homophobic legislation, such as the Don’t Say Gay bill in Florida, have been passed. With the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the opportunity to reevaluate the constitutional validity of same-sex marriage itself has been presented. The decision made to allow adoption agencies to turn away same-sex couples in New York state is simply not a solo act of discrimination, it’s just one of many homophobic agendas being pushed around the nation. After so much progress, it feels as if the queer community is being dragged backwards through time.

An agenda is being pushed that those in the LGBTQ+ community are to be viewed in a different light than those who are not. The power being granted to individuals and instatutions to turn away specific groups from key parts of society simply because of faith will create a damaging stigma and dangerous political standing against the queer community.

Moving forward, the New Hope Family Services should reconsider their stance on providing services to those in a same-sex marriage, as their actions will bring great harm to a large community of people. The issue won’t end with the LGBTQ+ community, but will make way for further discriminatory actions against other groups. Furthermore, the Syracuse community should continue to show opposition to Judge D’Agostino’s ruling and make it clear that similar future cases should not be handled in such a manner again, especially if the end goal is to create a welcoming environment for everyone.

The decision made to allow adoption agencies to turn away same-sex and unmarried couples goes to show how much work still needs to be done by society in order to truly accept marginalized communities as equals. Not only does it diminish the efforts made by queer activists over the past decades but it goes to show how some view a person’s harmful belief to be more important than a child’s well-being.

Grace “Gray” Reed is a Sophomore magazine, news and digital journalism major. Their column appears bi-weekly. They can be reached at greed04@syr.edu.

Published on September 12, 2022 at 10:53 pm