And of course, the issue here isn't whether or not they should be forced to provide adoption services to GBLT people, because we all know that as a private organization they have the right to discriminate. The issue is whether or not we think their stance is "right". Who cares if it's legal, I think it's awful. Consider all of the innocent children who will suffer because of their stance. I also have to wonder, why do this just because of GBLT people? I assume that there were also policies prohibiting discrimination based on religion, ethnicity, etc. So, I consider the following.
Did they adopt out children to, say, a Jewish couple? Did it not cause them severe ethical dilemnas given that according to the Catholic church the couple is destined for hell due to lack of belief in Christ, and they would most likely pass their "wrong" religion on to the child? It seems to me that, doctrinally, this is no different than adopting out a child to a couple who are gay, and will teach their child that the sin is acceptable. So why is the "gay adoption" issue what is driving this decision? Why not all the other circumstances which would seem to generate similar ethical dilemnas, given their doctrines?