Anti-gay Christians lose right to foster children

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Kilkrazy**

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/antigay-christian-couple-lose-battle-to-become-foster-parents-2228269.html

This has been fairly widely reported. I include the link to The Independent as it is regarded as one of the least biased newspapers.

This is an example of the ongoing collision between modern secular values and some aspects of religious values.

**Frazzled**

I'm sure there's an abundance of foster parents out there, and no kids will miss out at all... Way to go PC...

**Orlanth**

This is quite alarming because holding Christian views is now seen as de facto 'discrimination'.

It appears that moral teaching is now forbidden, I wonder what we have left, just PC dogma?

**Dreadwinter**

Orlanth wrote:This is quite alarming because holding Christian views is now seen as de facto 'discrimination'.

It appears that moral teaching is now forbidden, I wonder what we have left, just PC dogma?

Being anti-gay is a morality?

**Howard A Treesong**

And why should they not be expected to comply with equality legislation. What happens if a child who is gay comes to them. Children need support and fair treatment, not being told that they are wrong in some fashion. There's nothing wrong or illegal about being gay.

Elsewhere I have read that they also said that they go to church on a Sunday and weren't prepared to stay at home with children. That means that whatever the faith of the child's background,. be they a different denomination of christianity, a muslin, jew or even of no religious background, this couple will neither take them to a different religious service on a Sunday or stay at home with them. Seems to me their religious needs are being put before those of the children or potentially being foisted upon them.

The needs of the children come before the 'needs' of the foster parents.

More suspicious is the way they applied to Derby City council, but withdrew their application "believing it "doomed to failure" because of the social worker's attitude to their religious beliefs".

So they didn't wait for an actual decision by the authorities and instead got these "Christian Legal Centre" people involved to take their case to court and spread it around the Newspapers. The Christian Legal Centre are a delightful group that have taken on and blown several cases out of proportion that were of a similar nature, namely cases where christians had denied services to gay people or attempted to inappropriately choosing to lecture people in christian morals instead of doing their job. If you recall the fairly well publicised stories of the policeman who sent colleagues emails denigrating homosexuality or the councillor/therapist who refused to treat homosexuals, that was their handiwork too.

The Christian Legal Centre reacted to today's ruling with dismay and warned "fostering by Christians is now in doubt".

Nope, fostering by people who are prejudiced towards homosexuality is in doubt, please stop trying to distort fact.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orlanth wrote:This is quite alarming because holding Christian views is now seen as de facto 'discrimination'.

It appears that moral teaching is now forbidden, I wonder what we have left, just PC dogma?

Being anti-gay isn't exactly a "christian view" is it? Loads of christians are not anti-gay. It's just some that get a bee in their bonnet about it.

Moral teaching isn't forbidden, it's telling childre that normal, harmless and natural (and perfectly legal) behaviour is 'wrong'. Can you imagine the effect upon a gay child finding themselves being fostered by this couple, being told that their feelings are not acceptable or are somehow wrong or immoral. Children in the care system are likely to be even more in need of support than those in stable families, the last thing they need is someone telling them there are things wrong with them and that their feelings and desires are not right.

**Frazzled**

Howard A Treesong wrote:And why should they not be expected to comply with equality legislation. What happens if a child who is gay comes to them. Children need support and fair treatment, not being told that they are wrong in some fashion. There's nothing wrong or illegal about being gay.

Elsewhere I have read that they also said that they go to church on a Sunday and weren't prepared to stay at home with children. That means that whatever the faith of the child's background,. be they a different denomination of christianity, a muslin, jew or even of no religious background, this couple will neither take them to a different religious service on a Sunday or stay at home with them. Seems to me their religious needs are being put before those of the children or potentially being foisted upon them.

The needs of the children come before the 'needs' of the foster parents.

More suspicious is the way they applied to Derby City council, but withdrew their application "believing it "doomed to failure" because of the social worker's attitude to their religious beliefs".

So they didn't wait for an actual decision by the authorities and instead got these "Christian Legal Centre" people involved to take their case to court and spread it around the Newspapers. The Christian Legal Centre are a delightful group that have taken on and blown several cases out of proportion that were of a similar nature, namely cases where christians had denied services to gay people or attempted to inappropriately choosing to lecture people in christian morals instead of doing their job. If you recall the fairly well publicised stories of the policeman who sent colleagues emails denigrating homosexuality or the councillor/therapist who refused to treat homosexuals, that was their handiwork too.

The Christian Legal Centre reacted to today's ruling with dismay and warned "fostering by Christians is now in doubt".

Nope, fostering by people who are prejudiced towards homosexuality is in doubt, please stop trying to distort fact.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orlanth wrote:This is quite alarming because holding Christian views is now seen as de facto 'discrimination'.

It appears that moral teaching is now forbidden, I wonder what we have left, just PC dogma?

Being anti-gay isn't exactly a "christian view" is it? Loads of christians are not anti-gay. It's just some that get a bee in their bonnet about it.

Moral teaching isn't forbidden, it's telling childre that normal, harmless and natural (and perfectly legal) behaviour is 'wrong'. Can you imagine the effect upon a gay child finding themselves being fostered by this couple, being told that their feelings are not acceptable or are somehow wrong or immoral. Children in the care system are likely to be even more in need of support than those in stable families, the last thing they need is someone telling them there are things wrong with them and that their feelings and desires are not right.

Wow, I guess I think of more pathetic excuses than the argument above but it would take me a good deal of time. At the tend of the day its discrimination against Christians for PC dogma, while there are children who need good homes.

What if this were a couple of a different faith saying the same thing?

**Mr. Burning**

Being a Christian and finding homosexuality wrong is not a problem.

Believing homosexuality is wrong is not a problem.

Having children in your care and having views which may conflict with the emotional and psychological well being of children in your care is a problem.

Though, if you can find me a totally neutral foster family, I will give you all my hard earned cash.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Frazzled wrote:What if this were a couple of a different faith saying the same thing?

TBH they're not being treated this way just because they're Christian, it's "couples of a different faith", as you put it, that are getting away too easily. The solution is absolutely not to stop caring about everyone's equal value.

**frgsinwntr**

Frazzled wrote:

Wow, I guess I think of more pathetic excuses than the argument above but it would take me a good deal of time. At the tend of the day its discrimination against Christians for PC dogma, while there are children who need good homes.

What if this were a couple of a different faith saying the same thing?

Would a home where the child is attacked for who they are all the time be a good home?

You're focused on what you see as your own faith attacked... this is not the case here.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr. Burning wrote:Being a Christian and finding homosexuality wrong is not a problem.

Believing homosexuality is wrong is not a problem.

Having children in your care and having views which may conflict with the emotional and psychological well being of children in your care is a problem.

Though, if you can find me a totally neutral foster family, I will give you all my hard earned cash.

Agreed. But add: Being Homosexual is also not wrong.

**Frazzled**

Why would they be attacked? Thats as nuts as saying a Latino couple couldn't foster African American children, because their culture is different.

Would you allow atheist couples to foster? Its the same issue.

**Ma55ter_fett**

I agree that to raise a foster child you need a much broader and accepting view of humanity than this couple seem to possess.

**frgsinwntr**

Frazzled wrote:Why would they be attacked? Thats as nuts as saying a Latino couple couldn't foster African American children, because their culture is different.

Would you allow atheist couples to foster? Its the same issue.

Ever see Saved? yea those camps where they send gay kids to be "fixed" are real. Can't tell me thats not abuse....

**Orlanth**

Howard A Treesong wrote:

Orlanth wrote:This is quite alarming because holding Christian views is now seen as de facto 'discrimination'.

It appears that moral teaching is now forbidden, I wonder what we have left, just PC dogma?

Being anti-gay isn't exactly a "christian view" is it? Loads of christians are not anti-gay. It's just some that get a bee in their bonnet about it.

Moral teaching isn't forbidden, it's telling childre that normal, harmless and natural (and perfectly legal) behaviour is 'wrong'. Can you imagine the effect upon a gay child finding themselves being fostered by this couple, being told that their feelings are not acceptable or are somehow wrong or immoral. Children in the care system are likely to be even more in need of support than those in stable families, the last thing they need is someone telling them there are things wrong with them and that their feelings and desires are not right.

Here is the rub, the couple were willing to jump through all the hoops except 'tell a small child that homosexuality is good'.
The council wasnt after an agreement not to discriminate against gays, they asked for an endorsement of homosexuality, with the failure to endorse being read as discrimination. This is grossly unfair.

There is a huge danger in this because now to not approve of homosexuality is discrimination or homophobia leading to loss of status, in this case the inability to foster.

**Howard A Treesong**

Frazzled wrote:What if this were a couple of a different faith saying the same thing?

It wouldn't make any difference, they can be a jew, muslim, atheist, doesn't matter all are free to foster and adopt. It's their attitude towards homosexuality which presents the problem not their stated religion.

There's no excuse for their prejudice towards homosexuality, saying "it's my religion" doesn't grant special dispensation either.

**Orlanth**

Mr. Burning wrote:

Though, if you can find me a totally neutral foster family, I will give you all my hard earned cash.

Point, besides how much lying will most foster parents now have to do to claim to be the true neutral. also what about other minorities, that means no Moslem adoption either or Jew. This is a minefield of PC dogma that will cause big problems.
I really do wonder if other groups are treated the same? Because if you think Christianity has problems with homosexuality you should try Islam.

**Howard A Treesong**

Frazzled wrote:Would you allow atheist couples to foster? Its the same issue.

It's not the same issue at all. Would you let a couple of racist or homophobic atheists foster kids? No it makes them unsuitable because they are incapable of showing fair treatment and respect to everyone.

It's the "racist" or "homophobic" part of that above description presents the problem, not the "atheist". Just as in the reported case here. It's not their christianity that is the issue, loads of christians adopt kids, so do atheists and muslims, it's their views on homosexuality.

**Orlanth**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Frazzled wrote:What if this were a couple of a different faith saying the same thing?

There's no excuse for their prejudice towards homosexuality, saying "it's my religion" doesn't grant special dispensation either.

How were they being 'prejudiced'? They refused to endorse, this is different from condemnation with hatred.

**Frazzled**

frgsinwntr wrote:
Frazzled wrote:Why would they be attacked? Thats as nuts as saying a Latino couple couldn't foster African American children, because their culture is different.

Would you allow atheist couples to foster? Its the same issue.

Ever see Saved? yea those camps where they send gay kids to be "fixed" are real. Can't tell me thats not abuse....

Since since you have no proof thats their nefarious plan then we're back to square one. What about the atheist couple would they be permitted to have kids? Again what about the hispanic couple. How can homosexual couples foster heterosexual kids? This concept is stupid.

After checking for criminal history or proclivities, the next step should be:
*Will the couple foster the kids to the best of their ability? Yes, or no. That is should be the test.

**Howard A Treesong**

Orlanth wrote:I really do wonder if other groups are treated the same? Because if you think Christianity has problems with homosexuality you should try Islam.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that muslims are given a free ride on homophobia in the adoption system? What's the defence here, that you suspect muslims might be allowed a free pass, so these christians should definitely get one?

**Orlanth**

Frazzled wrote:
frgsinwntr wrote:
Frazzled wrote:Why would they be attacked? Thats as nuts as saying a Latino couple couldn't foster African American children, because their culture is different.

Would you allow atheist couples to foster? Its the same issue.

Ever see Saved? yea those camps where they send gay kids to be "fixed" are real. Can't tell me thats not abuse....

Since since you have no proof thats their nefarious plan then we're back to square one. What about the atheist couple would they be permitted to have kids? Again what about the hispanic couple. How can homosexual couples foster heterosexual kids? This concept is stupid.

After checking for criminal history or proclivities, the next step should be:
*Will the couple foster the kids to the best of their ability? Yes, or no. That is should be the test.

Agreed, personally I would have found this no less disturbing if the couple were Jewish or Moslem. The assumption that to fail to endorse 'homosexuality' is legally now a form of 'homophobia' is the sort of backward thinking we expect from a cheap junta.

**Howard A Treesong**

Frazzled wrote:Since since you have no proof thats their nefarious plan then we're back to square one. What about the atheist couple would they be permitted to have kids? Again what about the hispanic couple. How can homosexual couples foster heterosexual kids? This concept is stupid.

After checking for criminal history or proclivities, the next step should be:
*Will the couple foster the kids to the best of their ability? Yes, or no. That is should be the test.

On that basis you could have a couple of white supremacists adopting kids as long as they had a clean criminal record. You think that's a good idea? What if they get given a child with mixed ethnicity?

I suppose now I'll have someone desperately trying to describe how thinking a black person is inferior is a totally different case to thinking a homosexual is wrong. Even though both are perfectly natural.

**Strimen**

Perhaps removing relgion would benefit all then. Since they all conflict on what is right and wrong, what is good and evil. Instead work within the laws which are created by the people for the people in a democratic government of elected individuals. Then you wouldn't have to worry about any of this.

**Frazzled**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Frazzled wrote:Since since you have no proof thats their nefarious plan then we're back to square one. What about the atheist couple would they be permitted to have kids? Again what about the hispanic couple. How can homosexual couples foster heterosexual kids? This concept is stupid.

After checking for criminal history or proclivities, the next step should be:
*Will the couple foster the kids to the best of their ability? Yes, or no. That is should be the test.

On that basis you could have a couple of white supremacists adopting kids as long as they had a clean criminal record. You think that's a good idea? What if they get given a child with mixed ethnicity?

I suppose now I'll have someone desperately trying to describe how thinking a black person is inferior is a totally different case to thinking a homosexual is wrong. Even though both are perfectly natural.

Discrimination on the basis of "race" is illegal.

**Orlanth**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
Orlanth wrote:I really do wonder if other groups are treated the same? Because if you think Christianity has problems with homosexuality you should try Islam.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that muslims are given a free ride on homophobia in the adoption system? What's the defence here, that you suspect muslims might be allowed a free pass, so these christians should definitely get one?

I don't think either can be fairly considered 'homophobic' without looking at the individuals concerned, first address this issue. However there is plenty of Islamic adoption in the UK, just as with any other group, and Islam is far more hardcore, yet we I see no record of similar objections by councils over Islamic adoption on those grounds.

**Frazzled**

Strimen wrote:Perhaps removing relgion would benefit all then. Since they all conflict on what is right and wrong, what is good and evil. Instead work within the laws which are created by the people for the people in a democratic government of elected individuals. Then you wouldn't have to worry about any of this.

So people oif faith shouldn't be allowed to foster?

**Corpsesarefun**

As long as a child is cared for and is healthy anyone should be allowed to foster tbh.

**Frazzled**

corpsesarefun wrote:As long as a child is cared for and is healthy anyone should be allowed to foster tbh.

Word.

**Orlanth**

Strimen wrote:Perhaps removing relgion would benefit all then. Since they all conflict on what is right and wrong, what is good and evil. Instead work within the laws which are created by the people for the people in a democratic government of elected individuals. Then you wouldn't have to worry about any of this.

Welcome to Dakkas latest outed atheist extremist. How do you intend to get rid of the relgious then, camps, executions, 'educashun'?

**Ma55ter_fett**

Orlanth wrote:
Strimen wrote:Perhaps removing relgion would benefit all then. Since they all conflict on what is right and wrong, what is good and evil. Instead work within the laws which are created by the people for the people in a democratic government of elected individuals. Then you wouldn't have to worry about any of this.

Welcome to Dakkas latest outed Troll. How do you intend to get rid of the relgious then, camps, executions, 'educashun'?

Fixed, and ask yourself, do you really expect a competent answer to your question?

**Corpsesarefun**

Strimen wrote:Perhaps removing relgion would benefit all then. Since they all conflict on what is right and wrong, what is good and evil. Instead work within the laws which are created by the people for the people in a democratic government of elected individuals. Then you wouldn't have to worry about any of this.

You're right.

Also we should give everyone a frontal lobotomy so that nobody can have any thoughts to prevent conflict.