Homosexual couples deserve respect as members of the community; however, this is not to say they are somehow more important than other members of the community. The Supreme Court of the United States heard Boy Scouts of America v. Dale 530 U.S. 640 (2000), which faced essentially the same issue as we are facing here. The Justices asked: "Does the application of New Jersey's public accommodations law violate the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right of expressive association to bar homosexuals from serving as troop leaders?" (BSA v. Dale). In that case, the Supreme Court held that such a regulation does indeed violate the First Amendment right of expressive association. We would be foolish to go down this road, when we can expect the same result. 

      Furthermore, homosexual couples have legitimate outlets to resolve their desire to adopt without violating private adoption agencies' religious character and birth mother desires. The religious character aspect was handled by BSA v. Dale (2000) - no need to cover it again in this paragraph. However, the pregnant women also freely enter into contracts with these private organizations specifically to guarantee their children's upbringing in a manner consistent with their own religious beliefs. Any attempt to regulate against private organizations then also violates the birth mother's First Amendment rights. Again, the result is predictable and unnecessary. Please do not harm Virginia, our private adoption agencies, and our birth mothers by altering the existing policy