In a different twist on the debate about homosexuality, a Colorado woman who broke off a lesbian relationship after converting to Christianity is fighting a judge’s order barring her from teaching her adopted daughter that homosexuality is wrong.
The case involves Cheryl Clark and her former partner, Elsey McLeod. The couple split after Clark converted to Christianity in 2000. Clark had adopted a daughter during the course of her relationship with McLeod, but McLeod never adopted the child and had no legal ties to her.
In April, however, Denver District Judge John Coughlin gave the women shared custody and equal parenting time, saying that McLeod should be considered a psychological parent, according to The Washington Times. On matters of religion, the judge deferred to Clark, giving her sole responsibility for the child’s religious upbringing.
The sole responsibility, however, came with a caveat. The judge ordered Clark to make sure that there is nothing in the religious upbringing or teaching that the minor child is exposed to that can be considered homophobic.
The order against homophobic teaching sprang from a complaint from McLeod about publications in the foyer of Clark’s church. The church displays an assortment of pamphlets, including some published by Promise Keepers and Focus on the Family.
The judge ordered Clark against homophobic teaching after McLeod testified that the religious materials at Clark’s church were somehow inappropriate, according to court documents.
Appealing the order
Clark balked at the order, and has appealed it to the Colorado Court of Appeals, challenging not only the prohibition on teachings against homosexuality, but also McLeod’s legal status as a parent.
James Rouse, Clark’s attorney, argues that Clark can teach her daughter the tenets of Christianity without teaching her to hate. Religious conservatives are not typically homophobic in their behavior, even if they view homosexual activity as morally wrong. Rouse wrote in a brief.
While Clark has no intentions of exposing her child to anything inappropriate, the order itself is a breath-takingly broad restriction on the fundamental rights of Clark and her daughter, he said.
Rouse said the judge’s order violates Clarke’s First Amendment rights to free speech and religion as well as her Fourteenth Amendment rights to direct the religious upbringing of her child.
The state cannot get into the business of approving which churches Clark may attend with her daughter, what theology or doctrine Clark [and her daughter] may study or believe, nor can it create a state-approved list of which churches are homophobic and which are not, nor can the state even prohibit churches from teachings which the state considers homophobic, the appeal said.
Christian groups are closely following the case which has broad implications for how much control the courts can exert over the education and upbringing of children.
(EP)
Share with others: