Virginia's House committee on Health, Welfare and Institutions passed today SB 349, a "Conscience Clause" bill that would allow private adoption agencies to refuse to participate in any adoption or foster child placement if doing so would violate their religious beliefs. This would prevent, for example, the state from forcing Christian agencies to place children with homosexual couples.

The bill, which passed the full Senate on Feb. 9, should go for a full House vote within days. It's sponsored by Jeffrey McWaters, Republican from the 8th district.

Del. Todd Gilbert, sponsor of HB 189, a companion bill to SB 349, said that the bill does not affect who can adopt children in Virginia. "All it intends to do is codify and clarify the existing status quo," Gilbert said.

The Virginia Board of Social Services decided in December to adopt regulations that allow agencies to make decisions based on their religious foundations. Gilbert said it's important to convert those regulations into state law.

This bill "would protect this regulation from being easily changed in the future," said Victoria Cobb, President of the Family Foundation of Virginia. She explained that future governors can change regulations but changing laws, which requires the approval of the General Assembly, is much more difficult.

"This bill allows these important agencies to continue doing the vital work they've been doing for decades," Cobb said. "This simply protects those agencies that do the bulk of the child placement work."

In Virginia 5,000 children are in the foster care system and 1,300 are awaiting adoption. For over 80 years, private agencies like Catholic Charities have partnered with the state, offering substantial adoption services to its citizens.

Sponsor Sen. Jeffrey McWaters said that "these religious organizations have been in business for a long time- we want them to stay in business." Prospective homosexual parents can still adopt through other agencies.

Democratic senator Adam Ebbin, sponsor of a bill that would prohibit the state from partnering with discriminating agencies, argues that, since adoptions facilitated by private agencies are court-certified, they are a public function, so "the state should not be providing a license to discriminate."

"It's critically important to understand the difference between private and state," Cobb said. "Partnering doesn't make it a public entity."

"No one is going to operate [in a manner] inconsistent with what they strongly believe," she continued. "If people have to check their faith at the door, we have a significant problem."

Jeff Caruso, President of the Virginia Catholic Conference says, "faith-based agencies should have the right to practice what they profess."

Virginia has 120 local departments of social services, which administer adoption and foster care services. There are 77 state-licensed private child placement agencies that local departments can contract with to provide those services.

"A gay individual can adopt; this bill doesn't restrict adoption laws," Cobb said. "Who adopts is the same, just where they go is what's different."

Cobb explains how important it is to understand that this is not about adult rights to adopt, but that it's the states job to decide what is best for the child.

Neil McNulty of the Catholic Charities of Eastern Virginia says, "protecting the rights of private adoption agencies to act in accordance with their beliefs and core values, a fundamental right, is paramount."

Agencies like Catholic Charities and Bethany partner with the state and are willing to carry much of the burden. "We should be grateful for agencies and not restrict them," Cobb said.

According to the Virginia Catholic Conference, the state has reduced its foster care caseload from 7,557 (in Dec. of 2007) to 4,718 (in July of 2011). The state has also decreased the number of children in group home placements from 1,922 (Dec. of 2007) to 702 (July of 2011). Faith-based agencies played a vital role in these decreases.

"They were doing it before the state even entered into the picture," Cobb said. "We hope people understand that this good work will stop if SB 569 is passed in law. The Catholic charities will close."

McNulty suspects that homosexual couples may soon sue to force agencies to accept them as clients. "I see the trend toward such litigation in the future," McNulty said, "which is why laws must remain strong in protecting the traditional family unit."

"Religious freedom is a fundamental right," McNulty added. "Any law which infringes upon that right is unconstitutional."

SB 349 would also prohibit the Department of Social Services from denying or revoking an agency's license solely because it refused to place a child based on sexual orientation. It also would shield agencies from legal actions stemming from such decisions.

Supporters of SB 349 contend that strengthening protections for religious freedom in Virginia is important given recent Obama administration policy decisions. A notable example is the furor this month over the administration's decision that religious institutions short should be required to include in employee health insurance policies all FDA-approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and related education and counseling.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is calling the contraception mandate an "unprecedented" attack on religious freedom. Many bishops are publicly declaring that they "cannot" and "will not" comply with "this unjust law."

As Cleveland Bishop Richard Lennon explained, "Unless this rule is overturned, Catholics will be compelled either to violate our consciences or to drop health care coverage for our employees."

"In my opinion, the true underlying issue is the goal of eroding the traditional family unit by groups which oppose the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman," said McNulty.

Cobb said. "We want Virginia to still be a place the Founding Fathers intended it to be, where people can hold to a faith and still interact in public square."