One of the many freedoms we enjoy as Americans is the freedom to worship a religon free from any interference from the government. Religon is such a part of our society that it goes to the core of our being. It is no accident that our founders sought to protect our ability to worship a religon of our choice in the FIRST ammendment to the United States Constitution. Even when people believe in something fiercely and passionately, as the issue of homosexual adoption, it is NOT ok to resort to any means to obtain that end. If the state is allowed to exceed its regulatory power, squelching religous liberty, to gain what it desires, EVERYONE LOSES. Diminishing constitutionally protecting rights is too high a price, even for something people may desire. Once liberty is lost, the government will never give it back. Whether someone is for or against homosexuality is not the issue that is being debated. Whether homosexuality is a choice or a genetic aberration is not the issue. Whether homosexuality is something that should or not be discriminated against is not the issue. THE ISSUE IS: if it is proper for a State to exert its own preference over a religous instiution, telling that religon what beliefs are acceptable and which are not. If someone asnwers yes to this question, they do not understand the concept of religous liberty and what it means to live in a State that has this kind of power. If church ran adoption agencies must make a decision to comply with the State's preference or shut their doors, more liberty is lost, everyone loses.