I think your question is a little unreasonable, Philly Steve. There is no doubt that the child has already been taken from one of her parents, and with the consent of the parent. The mother relinquished her custody of the child in December of 2005, according to the article.
That means that it is the father who seeks to take the child away from her foster parents, not some third party or parties seeking to take the child away from father or mother.
So once you get your facts straight, it may not be the opportunity for partisan hackery that you might have envisioned.
I personally don't care who gets tied into how many knots over the political implications of the case. My only concern would be for the welfare of the child, and there are strong arguments for her to stay with the foster parents.
Steve
Give us the wisdom to teach our children to love,
to respect and be kind to one another,
so that we may grow with peace in mind.
(Native American prayer)