At issue in Idaho: should a parent's sexual orientation be a factor in determining child custody rights?

It's been a couple days since my last post with dead week and all. Well, I'm coming back swinging today...or to quote Matt Foley, 'a snortin' and a fussin'."

I was reading the Idaho Statesman this morning, and I read about a case presently before the Idaho Supreme Court. Apparently, a Magistrate Judge in Idaho Falls ruled a couple years ago that a father could be limited custody of his children for being gay, and having a live-in boyfriend.

Just as race, sex, age and religion do not apply and cannot be used for child custody cases, so should sexual orientation. The only barometer that should be used is fitness as a parent and guardian.

I don't know enough about this specific case or the mother and father in it, but I have seen enough reasoning behind the lower court decisions to know fitness as a parent was secondary to gay-bashing in those decisions. The reasoning of the lower court was that the mother "testified that her primary reason for bringing the custody action was because she was concerned how their children were being told of their father's homosexuality and his new relationship." Also, the court-appointed custody evaluator said that "the father's sexual orientation and his live-in partner needed to be addressed." Finally, the Judge said that the father "had not been acting in the best interests of the children by not cooperating with his ex-wife in jointly explaining his lifestyle to them."

Yet the mother, her lawyer, and the Magistrate Judge said the cases and rulings were not based on the father's homosexuality. As I've said many a time...what that f***!

I'm glad to see that several justices picked up on this "inconsistency." The mother's attorney at one point said "This is not a gay rights case, it's a child custody case." The attorney went on to say the crux of the case revolved around issues of trust and how to talk to the children their dad's new lifestyle.

Fortunately, some of the justices questioned that line of reasoning: Justice Wayne Kidwell replied to the lawyer saying, "Counsel before I leave this, you say it's not a gay rights issue, and I can't help but go back to the original petition to modify the decreed divorce. And the only thing I can find in here is several allegations with regard to: the intimate relationship with the person of the same sex, a homosexual relationship and homosexuality...that's all this petition was based upon"

Even if the Idaho Supreme Court rules that the mother should keep sole custody of her children, I hope they will let the people, lawmakers and judges of Idaho know that a parents' sexual orientation is not and should not be a factor in custody disputes, nor as a parents ability to be a good parent.

I will be back later this week with another post on gay/lesbian/bi-sexual/transgender parenting and adoption.