The following excerpts, edited for clarity, are taken from an April 22 meeting of the House Committee on State Affairs, at which Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, introduced HB 1911, which would ban gay and lesbian foster parents. Rep. Toby Goodman, an Arlington Republican, begins the questioning:
Toby Goodman: Robert, how would they determine the sexual orientation of these individuals?
Robert Talton: Probably the only way is to ask it and put it on a check-off box and see. They make visits anyway now when they do the foster care. Before they allow anybody in there, they do background. … They don’t give them to just anyone.
TG: Does that run afoul of any law or does that present any constitutional issues?
RT: None that I’m aware of.
Rep. Mike Villareal, D-San Antonio: Mr. Talton, why single out homosexuals and bisexuals?
RT: Well, there’s some of us that believe that that’s not the right kind of conduct that a child should have until he reaches the age of 18. Then they can make a decision on whether they accept that lifestyle or not.
MV: You’re talking about the sexual orientation of the parent, not the child. …
RT: Right. Of the foster parent, or the alleged foster parent. … Some of us believe that’s a learned behavior; you’re not born that way. And so if it’s a learned behavior, then if you’re taught that that conduct is OK, then that’s what they’re gonna do. We know that it’s a learned behavior on sex offenders … same thing with this, it’s a learned behavior. Same thing with pedophiles — it’s all a learned behavior.
Groans of disbelief from the audience.
MV: Is that a religious opinion?
RT: No, I think that’s probably the majority of Texans.
Audience laughs; committee Chair Ken Marchant, R-Coppell, scolds the crowd.
MV: I also sit on Human Services [Committee] and our number one priority is placing children with caring, nurturing, loving parents, period. … Are you concerned that we are going to be holding this value of yours above this other priority?
RT: Quite frankly, I don’t look at those that may be homosexuals as parents as such. … We think of a parent — y’all heard DOMA [Defense of Marriage Act] — as a mother and a father and not persons of homosexual conduct. And I would put that value ahead of the value of foster care. Quite frankly, if it was me I would rather [leave] kids in orphanages. … At least they have a chance of learning the proper values, and if that’s not important, than I don’t know what is.
MV: Wouldn’t that deplete the supply of foster homes and cause us to bear the fiscal burden of keeping these children in more expensive children’s shelters?
RT: Well, it may bar those that may teach the homosexual [or] bisexual conduct. … There’s obviously less of them then the unmarried, but … if you teach these things like this, then what is next? … The Lesbian and Gay Rights Lobby says that most of these kids are victims of child abuse, so all you’re doing is continuing the same thing.
MV: If we marginalize homosexual parents in this area of policy, what is the next step?
RT: Well, I don’t look at ’em as parents, number one. Number two, who knows what happens. You and I both see what happens in legislation; it’s give and take according to what session it is, things change.
MV: Are there other states that have this kind of policy?
RT: I haven’t looked. I will tell you what an old deacon at my church used to say: “You know, I’m not really concerned about the other churches; I’m just concerned about our church.”
This article appears in May 2 • 2003.