Get a free copy of Parental Rights & Education when you subscribe to our newsletter!
Kansas was the harder lift, as the legislature had to override a gubernatorial veto to ensure that Christians aren’t banned from fostering and adopting children just because they won’t embrace the doctrine and language of radical gender ideology.
[UPDATE] Last Thursday, Kansas and Arkansas both passed new laws designed to protect parents from being blocked from fostering or adopting children or being otherwise discriminated against due to their traditional biblical beliefs on gender and sexuality.
In Kansas, the legislature was forced to override a veto of House Bill 2311 by Gov. Laura Kelly, D, who claimed that the proposal, which had easily passed both chambers, would hurt LGBT children.
The law stops the government from disqualifying applicants or current foster parents due to their beliefs on gender and sexuality but still places children according to the best interest of the child. It does this by preventing social services works from booting current foster parents and adoption applicants from the system just because they will not agree to aid in a hypothetical child’s gender transition or to teach children about LGBT topics, as has happened in other states, including Oregon, Massachusetts, and Vermont.
The House voted to override the veto by a tally of 87-38, while the Senate voted 31-9, each easily surpassing the two-thirds needed to override the veto. The law will take effect as soon as it is published in the Kansas Register.
Meanwhile, in Arkansas, Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, R, signed the “Keep Kids First Act,” which protects the rights of parents in the foster or adoption systems as well as religious foster and adoption agencies, after it easily passed the Arkansas legislature.
This law also protects current foster or adoptive parents, as well as applicants, from discrimination based on their religious or moral beliefs.
More specifically, the government is prohibited from taking discriminatory action against current foster or adoptive parents based on “Sincerely held religious belief, or intent to guide, instruct, or raise a child, based upon or in a manner that is consistent with that person’s sincerely held religious belief; or [r]efusal to accept or support any government policy regarding sexual orientation or gender identity that conflicts with the person’s sincerely held religious beliefs.”
The law also protects applicants, stating, “The state government shall not establish or enforce any per se standard, rule, or policy that precludes consideration of a current or prospective foster or preadoptive parent for any particular placement based in whole or in part on the person’s sincerely held religious beliefs regarding sexual orientation or gender identity.”
The Keep Kids First Act specifies that the law does not preclude the government from taking into consideration a genetic parent’s or the child’s religious or moral beliefs to prioritize placement with a person of similar beliefs.
Also protected under the law are faith-based foster care and adoption agencies. The law bans the government from taking adverse action against a private foster or adoption organization due to the organization’s refusal to place children in a situation that would violate the organization’s religious beliefs, such as placing the child with a same-sex couple. In crafting the bill, the legislature referenced the Supreme Court’s 9-0 decision in the landmark case of Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, in which it ruled that the government could not discriminate against religious foster or adoption agencies due to their religious beliefs.
The new Arkansas law also states that the standard for placements remains “the best interest of the child.”
Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents clients suing other states for religious discrimination in foster care or adoption, celebrated on learning that Gov. Huckabee Sanders had signed the bill into law.
Greg Chafuen, senior counsel for ADF, issued a statement saying,
“Every child deserves a loving home that can provide them stability and opportunities to grow. Yet other states have put politics over people by excluding caring families and faith-based adoption and foster care organizations from helping children find loving homes.
Thankfully, Arkansas has taken the critical step to pass HB 1669, the Keep Kids First Act, which prioritizes the well-being of kids by prohibiting state and local government officials from discriminating against adoption and foster care providers and parents simply because of their religious beliefs and moral convictions.”
{Published on April 10, 2025} Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly, D, has vetoed a bill that would have prohibited the government from enforcing ideological requirements for hopeful adoptive and foster parents.
House Bill 2311 prohibits the Kansas secretary for children and families from implementing policies that would require a potential adoptive or foster parent to “support any governmental policy regarding sexual orientation or gender identity that may conflict with the person’s sincerely held religious beliefs” or banning a person due to their “religious or moral beliefs” about sexual orientation and gender identity and their intent to instruct a child according to those beliefs.
The bill was passed after lawsuits were filed against numerous states that have banned prospective parents from adoption or foster care because they refused to say that they would affirm a child’s gender identity.
For example in Oregon, a suit claims that Jessica Bates, a devout Christian, was given a handout saying that she should “celebrate diversity in all forms,” and “provide access to a variety of books, movies, and materials, including those that positively represent same-gender relationships.”
It also stated that parents should display “hate-free zone’ signs or symbols indicating and[sic] LGBTQ-affirming environment (e.g. pink triangle, rainbow, or ally flag)” in their homes even if the child does not identify as LGBT.
Bates filed suit after Oregon’s Department of Human Services rejected her application because she stated that she would not encourage children in behavior that promotes the belief that children can change their gender.
Likewise, lawsuits allege that Massachusetts and Vermont both booted couples from the foster care system because they would not say that they would affirm a prospective child’s gender transition.
HB 2311 makes the careful distinction that the bill does not “[p]rohibit the secretary from considering the religious or moral beliefs of a child or the child’s biological family or community, including, but not limited to, beliefs regarding sexual orientation and gender identity, in relation to the religious or moral beliefs of a person selected or being considered for placement, custody or appointment, when determining whether an out-of-home or adoptive placement, custody for adoption or appointment of a custodian is in the best interests of the child.”
In other words, the legislation makes clear that the secretary must still to make placements that would best meet the unique needs of the child.
Thus, if the secretary believes it is in the best interest of a gay or transgender child to be placed with a family that has experience with their situation and would be supportive, the secretary has the discretion and the capability to place that child in that home.
The bill doesn’t create a legal right for a religious family to have a child placed in their home. It only says that the government cannot ban them from the system based solely on their religious beliefs on sexuality and gender identity.
HB 2311 also enshrines a private right of action for prospective parents to file suit if the state bars them based on their beliefs.
Despite this, Kelly vetoed the bill, explaining,
“The top priority of the Kansas Department for Children and Families should be adhering to the ‘best interest of the child’ standard. Legislation like this detracts from this standard and stands in the way of best serving those in the child welfare system. Children in need of care already face unique and complex challenges. I will not sign legislation that could further complicate their lives.”
She continued, “I also have concerns that this bill could expose the state to frivolous lawsuits and hinder the agency by taking time and resources away from critical services.”
House Speaker Dan Hawkins and Senate President Ty Masterson responded in a joint statement by saying,
“Our foster care system depends on strong and stable families to care for the children in our system. The last thing any administration should be doing is discriminating against qualified families due to their religious and moral beliefs.”
“It’s perplexing,” they noted, “that the governor would choose to veto legislation that would ensure First Amendment protections extend to foster parents.”
Hawkins and Masterston then stated: “This veto cannot stand.”
The legislature will meet starting on April 10 to vote on overriding Kelly’s veto of this bill and others, and given that the Republicans have a supermajority in both chambers, it is likely they have the 2/3s vote needed to do just that on HB2311.
The governor makes some interesting but contradictory points. For one, Kelly claims that HB 2311 will hinder the “best interest of the child” standard and that it stands in the way of best serving children in the system and will only further complicate their lives.
But somehow she seems to miss HB 2311’s clear statement that the standard for placement remains “the best interest of the child.”
All children are different, and what is best for one child is not necessarily the best thing for another child. Which is why the secretary needs broad discretion to match children with families that align with their unique needs.
All this bill does is prohibit the state from categorically banning whole categories of the Kansas population from being foster or adoptive parents solely because of their religious or moral beliefs on one issue: LGBTQ ideology.
This bill doesn’t stop the secretary from making sure a child and a couple have similar views or that the chosen parents align best with the child’s needs. Rather, it ensures that a child has options for foster or adoptive parents and that those options can’t be limited because someone fails to agree with state-approved ideological beliefs.
Also intriguing is Kelly’s statement that the bill would expose the state to “frivolous” lawsuits and detract from the agency’s mission.
But courts would probably be surprised by this view because violations of constitutional rights, particularly religious and conscience protections, are never considered frivolous.
Perhaps someone should let her know that states like Oregon, Massachusetts, and Vermont, which don’t have a bill like HB2311 in place, are currently being sued for discriminating against foster and adoptive parents based on their religious beliefs. So having a bill in place to make sure that the state doesn’t discriminate based on a person’s religious beliefs will actually ensure that the state doesn’t get sued.
The states that ban parents from the foster care system or from adopting because they don’t share the left’s views on gender are actually the ones harming children.
There are children who would like to be placed with family members, friends from church, or others who share their beliefs, but they can’t because Oregon, Massachusetts, and Vermont currently ban Bible-adhering Christians from fostering or adopting children.
And really, though it may be difficult or uncomfortable at first, one of the best things that could happen to a child who identifies as LGBT would be to be placed with caring, honest adults who refuse to affirm a child’s confusion and instead help that child learn to accept who God made him or her to be. That is what any responsible adult should do — rather than exacerbate a debilitating mental illness and prompt children to undergo life-altering procedures that will leave them permanently scarred.
Let’s hope the legislature will override this veto. If they do, they will not only ensure that children have the most and best possible options for a loving family, but they will also ensure the religious and conscience rights of people who want to help and love those children.
If you like this article and other content that helps you apply a biblical worldview to today’s politics and culture, consider making a donation here.
Notifications
