Utah's (And The Mormon's) Immoral Adoption Law

Imagine my surprise that one of the most immoral and anti-family laws I have ever seen is on the books in the supposedly family-friendly state of Utah. And then to find out that the supposedly family-friendly Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is complicit in what amounts to kidnapping.

Utah allows families to be anonymously ripped apart taking babies away from a parent who wants them.

The law allows mothers to place their children up for adoption without the consent or knowledge of the father. In some cases, the father desperately wants the child but he has no say and no path to gain custody of the child.

Foxnews reports on some horror stories that have led a dozen men, fathers, to sue the state over this immoral law.

"Well, I thought I was going to have a son," Nikolas Thurnwald recalled. He said he was thrilled by the idea of being a father while he and his live-in girlfriend, in 2004, waited for their child to be born. "We were together all the way up until the last couple of days before the birth."

Then Thurnwald called his girlfriend, "to see if she maybe wanted to go to the movies, and her co-worker answered the phone at the department store that she was working at and basically let me know that she was in the hospital having our baby."

Thurnwald immediately called the hospital. "They patched me through to her ... and I asked her if she was giving our son up for adoption. And she said, 'Kinda.' I said ‘there is no kinda, what are you doing? Why are you doing this?’ And she says, 'Look I gotta go.' I dropped to my knees, dropped my phone that I was holding and just started crying. A grown man on a construction site crying his eyes out."

He immediately drove to the hospital where he was told his girlfriend was not a patient. He explained that he had just spoken to her on the phone, "and they said, 'Sir, you need to leave before we call the police'."

After 10 years and more than $30,000 in legal fees, Thurnwald lost his bid to gain custody.

Ten years and $30k the man fought for his child. The article details stories equally horrific.

This is where we are right now. Men have absolutely no say over the fate of their children. They can be killed in utero without their consent and now can be given away even if the father desperately wants the child. How can the state justify such an immoral law in which the natural rights of the father are treated as non-existent?

As if that wasn't bad enough, it seems that the Church of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) is not only complicit in the immoral practice, but might even be encouraging it.

Bolden lost his son even though he told LDS Family Services he wanted custody. He believes the adoption agency coached his girlfriend. "I believe they told her the things she needed to do to make it happen as far as not accepting money from me, keeping me away from the birth and not giving me pictures, all that other stuff. Just keeping me in the dark about what was going on."

In response to questions on the matter, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said:

"The desire of the Church is for children to be raised in an environment that is best for their physical and spiritual growth. LDS Family Services has, for many years, helped with placing children in homes where a mother and father teach and live the gospel of Jesus Christ. Utah's laws regarding adoption are made and upheld by the state's governing bodies."

In other words, the LDS are perfectly ok with a reprehensible and immoral practice because the state currently says its ok and if we get a few extra Mormons out of the deal, so much the better.

So a little math.

Why would a supposedly family-friendly state, a state heavily influenced by the LDS, adopt such a reprehensible policy that benefits nobody but the LDS?

Ah. I see.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the State of Utah ought to be ashamed of themselves and this law immediately reversed. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should immediately reject participation of any adoptions without the consent of the father. There is a higher law.