This never makes any sense to me. Christians prefer orphanages than loving homes for children?
It looks like the link is available under the Most Popular sidebar, rather than on the front page. Perhaps someone dug it out of the archives, passed it around to their community, and once the views got high enough others starting seeing it? Just a guess.
Can we still put a fence around New Jersey?
The case continued into 1971 at the Supreme Court of New Jersey and the judgement overturned.
Did Time make all of their archives available online? Anyway, this has gone from an outrage story to an Internet cautionary tale.
To avoid further confusion to those coming to this thread, perhaps a mod could change the title to “Atheists Denied Right To Adopt Back In 1970 But It’s OK, NJ Supreme Court Overturned The Decision In '71”
Best chuckle of the day anyway. 
Plus the thread has a rare triple-simulpost with a simuledit bonus too!
I thought this was an interesting passage from the decision:
It’s nice to know that even religious groups unanimously defended the couple’s right to adopt.
Sorry, Diogenes, I missed your earlier post with the decision link.
They didn’t like the looks of that slippery slope they saw in the road ahead, I bet.
Maybe somebody actually… thought of the children!
I’m getting too slow in my old age; I was going to ask the same. But be careful, Texan. Glass houses and all that!
I hope that’s not the case. When my wife and I went through DCFS to get our daughter I was more afraid of the religious ones than any others. We met quite a few people in the foster classes who frequently punctuated their sentences with, “Praise Jesus” or “Praise the Lord”. :rolleyes:
I wish you the best of luck and know that you will find the child that needs you just as much as you need them and they will help to complete your family.
BTW, I did a search on this guy’s name, and found a comment today from someone who saw a memorial to him on a Rutgers page, so he appears to be beyond our scorn.
From my Googling, it appears that photopat was not the only person fooled by the date.
Thanks for your support.
SSG Schwartz
My friend was one such. I read the story last night on her blog and didn’t twig to the date then either.
I have to confess, I first saw the story yesterday and noticed the date. I assumed it was one of those computer errors that sometimes occur making it appear files were created 50 or 60 years ago, or 5 years in the future. I meant to look it up but was otherwise occupied and forgot. Then today I just glossed over the date completely. :smack:
Yes. Given how religiously divided America is, religious tolerance ultimately benefits the majority of the religious factions; I’m sure they had visions of Catholic judges forbidding children to Protestants, Baptists to Presbyterians, and so on, down to some judge forbidding adoptions where he is to everyone who isn’t a member of his hundred person church.
That is really awful. We adopted our daughter in Lebanon. In a sense, religion is more important there, since adoption goes through the religious courts (not the secular ones), and only Christian children can be adopted (and theoretically only to Christian families). But the kids are in orphanages, and the nuns we dealt with were realists–they would rather place the kids with a decent non-religious family than leave the kid in the orphanage, where their life prospects were grim. So they were willing to work with us.
Obligatory Onion link:
FBI To Require Background Checks For Child-Care Providers; Child-Havers Unaffected