T. Belman. The petitioners are asking for a reinterpretation of the law in light of the infringement of the right to equality. There is no such thing in law. That’s called legislating from the bench. As such it is not legal.
The Justice and Welfare Ministers submitted a statement that there was no way to allow same-sex couples to adopt.
LGBT rainbow flagiStock
The Supreme Court began hearing this morning (Wednesday) the petition filed against LGBT discrimination in the Adoption Law, which states that only a married man and woman can adopt children.
Supreme Court Vice President Uzi Vogelman stated in the hearing that the court’s position is to allow adoption by same-sex couples through legal interpretation and not to wait until the Knesset changes the law. “An interpretative decision cannot be avoided,” he said.
Attorney Ran Rosenberg presented the Attorney General’s position at the hearing: “We believe there is a linguistic reason to change the definition. The lease states that ‘man and wife together’ are allowed to adopt. LGBT couples should be allowed to adopt on this basis – the emphasis is on the stability of the family unit and not only on its characteristics. This is why the legislator put the word ‘together’ in the language of the law. The petitioners are asking for a reinterpretation of the law in light of the infringement of the right to equality. We believe the adoption law is a principle of the child’s best interests, not the parents, and should allow LGBT couples to adopt.”
Vogelman responded: “We’ve already been in this movie. We’re in the second round after a very long period of time. I assume that your agreement to an interpretive decision stems, among other things, from the fact that the proceedings are ongoing and there is no solution.”
The chairperson of the Association for the LGBT Community, Hila Par, said that “this is a fight for the values of equality against LGBT phobia and ignorance. We are excited that the Supreme Court agreed to discuss and correct the discrimination, and we look forward to a historic verdict that will affect our lives and the rights they are trying to deny us and our families.”
Last week, the Supreme Court received the state’s response to the petition alleging discrimination against LGBT couples in everything related to adoption. Justice Minister Yariv Levin estimates that there is no legislative feasibility on the issue and that Welfare Minister Yaakov Margi opposes changing the legislation.
“The Minister of Justice believes and assesses that under the current circumstances, there is no political feasibility in the near future to promote government legislation on the issue. We will also mention that the Minister of Welfare announced that he opposes amending the law as proposed,” she wrote.
“In these circumstances, and in view of the fact that at present, there is no political possibility to amend the Adoption Law, the position of the Attorney General is the middle ground to regulate the issue in legislation remains the same and that in a principled and sensitive issue of this kind, which entails complex social and value questions, it is appropriate to wait for the legislator to be required to act.”
“In these circumstances, and as the court finds that it is not possible at this time to wait for the legislative process to mature and that the time has come to be required for the interpretive issue at present, then according to the position of the legal advisor to the government, and even though this is a complex process that is not without difficulties, there is a possible legal anchor for an expansive interpretation of Section 3 of the Adoption Law”.
Related articles:
- Canadian Muslims continue campaign against LGBT curriculum
- Kindergarten teachers prevented from opposing LGBT materials
- Muslims protest LGBT movement in Canada
- Kosher baker rejects synagogue’s order for ‘pride’ treats
“This legal anchor could also allow the adoption by spouses of the same sex as a couple, and this follows the interpretation adopted in 2008 that allowed the adoption of spouses of the same sex as individuals, and further to the interpretation given to the section in 2017 as allowing adoption by well-known public figures.”
In Minister Margi’s answer, it was stated that he “opposes any interpretation that allows children to be adopted by same-sex couples for reasons of the child’s welfare.”
Opposition leader Yair Lapid criticized the statement: “A dark and painful statement by Welfare Minister Margi. Good parenting is not related to sexual orientation. Family is family, and love is love.”
Yair Lapid is wrong about “family is family”. It does require opposite- gender parents. There is no such thing as “sexual orientation.” whatever that means. Primates don’t do transgender surgery and that should include humans. One is born either male or female period. In rare cases there are other situations, but they are not, nor should they be, considered the norm.
A “family” is defined as a male and female as a biological pair; not same gender. No right to adoption to fill in the biological fact that it takes a biological pairing of male and female to make a baby with hereditary features from both to continue the family line. Transgenders are totally out of it. So are same sex “couple”. They are destroying Creation and mocking religion. The Bible rightly calls homosexuality “an abomination”. I can’t even conceive of homosexual prayer whether congregational or private. To what or to whom are they praying ? Repentance requires renouncing one’s sins.
Men like Opposition leader Yair Lapid will be remembered as the fathers of the fifth Jewish exile from the land.