All right, let's get this day started right. Or is it wrong? We'll let you decide on that one, readers.

Missouri State University has settled a lawsuit with a student by the name of Emily Brooker. It seems Brooker took issue with an assigment to write letters to her lawmakers advocating gay adoption. A good Christian of the Ted Haggard variety, Brooker couldn't reconcile her academic dreams with her deep-seated belief that homos are rotten child-eating mongrels. Thus, she refused to do the assignment.

365 Gay reports:

Brooker claimed that after she refused to sign the letter because of her religious beliefs she was subjected to a two-and-a-half hour interrogation by faculty members, who allegedly asked her personally invasive questions such as, “Do you think gays and lesbians are sinners?” and “Do you think I am a sinner?”

To which Brooker replied, "You're a hell demon, may you burn for all eternity for even posing such a question!"

Okay, she didn't say that, but she did call her lawyers, who successfully argued that Brooker's first amendment rights had been violated. As a result, MSU's agreed to pay Brooker 9,000 bones and the offending profressor, Frank Kauffman has stepped down as the head of the program.

So, what was the program? Social Work. Nice, huh?

In case you're not up on Missouri law, the state lifted the gay foster parent ban back in July, citing that the law did not specifically disqualify gays from fostering/adopting, thus they had a legal right. Conservative lawmakers vowed to write a bill that will permanently prohibit the homos from adopting or fostering children. Said bill has yet to be written.

As part of the social work program, Brooker's professors urged her to sign the National Association of Social Work's code of ethics, a contract that requires workers to honor LGBT rights. The code reads:

Social workers should not practice, condone, facilitate, or collaborate with any form of discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, political belief, religion, or mental or physical disability.

That sounds pretty fair to us and when we first read this story we got pretty hot under the proverbial collar. The more we think about it, however, the more we wonder if Brooker had a right to protest the assignment.

This brings us back to our follow-up on The Garden Guy, in which we asked "should religion be simply a spiritual practice, or should people attempt to extend their religious beliefs to social - and thus potentially divisive - practices?"

Should social workers - those defenders of civil society, "family values" and America's discarded children and adults - be forced to support cultures/ideals that contradict their religious practices? One reader says, "Religion should not be applied anywhere beyond the self", while another insists, "If your religious values have no social values, then they have no value". Both of which, we think, fall under the category of "notable" (obviously, because we've just noted them).

Loyal readers probably know where we stand on this issue, but why don't you guys duke it our via comments and let us know what you think…

• Missouri Governor says non-discrimination clarification takes "too much time." [University Business]

• 15-year old convicted of Gay Pride attacks. We hate to say it, but good. [365 Gay]

• Wait, you can drink Cocaine? Thanks Red Bull! [Jossip]

• Beckham makes Posh eat like him. We'd rather eat him. [The Daily Mail]

• Polish Prez attempts to clarify gay views. Um…okay. [The Advocate]

• A note to all British gays trying to get married in Hong Kong. "You're in China now, bitch! No marriage for you." [IHT]

• A trannie who served in the Navy during Operation Desert Shield is running for Congress in Missouri as a Republican. Midge Potts is running low on cash, but not on opinions, and we love her. [Columbia Daily Tribune]

• Sen. John McCain is definitely voting against the Federal Marriage Amendment, but supports outlawing samesex marriage in his home state of Arizona. Dammit, he's a federalist not a homo-lover! [Arizona Republic]

• Gays do not have to sit at the back of the bus in D.C., even if the homophobic bus driver tells them to. [Washington Blade]

Since they're pretty much losing the battle against gay marriage, conservatives are now turning their attention toward banning gays& lesbians from adopting children. They're up and running with November ballot inititatives. Someone please save the children from The Gays! But there are already some surprisingly strange laws already on the books across the country. For example, single gays can adopt kids in Mississippi, but queer couple cannot. This is logical. Well, not really.

At least Utah is consistent. All unmarried couples (that includes straights!) are prevented from adopting.

But conservatives are already losing this battle, too. Last week a Missouri judge ruled a lesbian can be a foster mother. It may not be adoption per se, but it's certainly a step in that direction for the state.

Drives to ban gay adoption heat up in 16 states [USA Today]

Missouri judge says lesbian can be foster mom [The Advocate]