Liberty Counsel attacking lgbt parenting again but won't comment on Jenkins/Miller case

One would think that the Liberty Counsel's exploitative behavior in the Janet Jenkins/Lisa Miller custody case would induce a degree of shame in the organization. And one would think that this shame would prevent the Liberty Counsel from butting into another case regarding lgbt parenting.

Think again.

In a huge show of audacity, Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver has the unmitigated gall to comment on a recent case in Florida where a judge awarded the custody of a child to a lesbian couple:

According to Mat Staver of Florida-based Liberty Counsel, the action is one of judicial activism; and the role of a judge, he argues, is not that of writing laws but of interpreting them. The attorney makes note of a 1977 Florida law that bans adoption by homosexual men and women.


"This law has a lot of good commonsense reasons [behind it]," he comments. "Not only the fact that children do best when they are raised in a home with a mother and a father, but certainly sociological research bears that out as well."


. . . "This is renegade judicial activism that ought to be stopped because it weakens the judiciary, it weakens the rule of law, and it undermines the trust of the people in justice and in law," contends Staver. "Once that begins to take place, [it] unravels the entire system."

For those of us familiar with religious right terminology and code words, phrases like "renegade judicial activism" means a judge who doesn't prescribe to their narrow-minded and inaccurate view of the law and the concept  of  "family."

And just like I pointed out in an earlier post regarding NOM head Maggie Gallagher, Staver is another religious right talking head who distorts research to claim that heterosexual households are better than same-sex households when it comes to the raising of children.

But Staver's other comments should give everyone pause for alarm:

Staver says the Florida judge decided on her own to grant a same-gender adoption when she wrote an opinion that has no basis in law -- and her ruling, he adds, should not be respected as though it does.

Seems to me that Staver is encouraging folks not to follow the judge's ruling. One has to wonder if  Staver and the Liberty Counsel also advised Miller to ignore the court when it said that she should allow Jenkins visitation with the two's daughter, Isabella.

We don't know because ever since Miller kidnapped Isabella, the Liberty Counsel hasn't commented on its conduct during the case.

But we do know that the Liberty Counsel dragged the case out,  no doubt filling Miller's head with impossible expectations which led her to kidnap Isabella when those expectations didn't come to fruition.
To this day, no one knows where Miller and Isabella are.
It's too bad that the Liberty Counsel doesn't seem to know the location of either its values and integrity.

On second thought, I take that back.

I'm sure the Liberty Counsel's values and integrity are probably in a jar somewhere in the deepest darkest area of the organization's headquarters where they can bother no one, especially Staver and the rest of his Liberty Counsel colleagues.