Court backs decision to bar Christian foster couple

[hymie]

Should Christians be stopped from fostering because of their faith/belief?

LINK

No, but homophobes should.

Wasnt it because of their views on homosexuality?

yes, not because they are Christian but because of their homophobia

HTH OP

''they said they could not tell a child a homosexual lifestyle was acceptable.'' from the link

what grandhighpoohba said

This is nothing to do with their religion and everything to do with their homophobia

It is not because they are Christians. It is because they are homophobic.
You can be a Christian and not be homophobic!

Imagine if they had said "they could not tell a female child that an educated career lifestyle was acceptable" and that they would teach children that women should be subservient to men, withdraw them from eduction ASAP and get them married and breeding young.

Would that be OK?

Or would you say "they can't be allowed to adopt with that attitude"?

This isn't about Christianity or even actually homosexuality, it's about whether bigotry should be accepted under the guise of faith.

There was probably more to it than just the homophobia take. So what if they fostered two decades ago, they're assessed for their suitability now.

I read sections of the judgement in this article in the Guardian, thought the judge put it very well.

Also, what Badgerspaws said.
Sadly there are still people out there who call themselves Christians who throw their own children out of the home for being homosexual.

They did not say that they would tell a child the homosexuality was a bad thing, just they would not tell them it was a good thing.

Is that not a roundabout way of saying the same thing?

Would anyone pro-actively say that a homosexual lifestyle was good? That would be tantamount to actually promoting it.

Many religions believe that Homosexuality is a sin, would that mean that a religious person should be barred from giving a child a home?

I'm trying to imagine a conversation where a child approaches their parents to tell them that they may be gay, that a birth parent is gay or that a school friend may be gay. The child is looking for support, comfort, acceptance, reassurance and to be gently helped through a potentially troubling time.

What exactly would this couple be able to offer the child?

You don't have to say that it's "good" or "bad". You just need to be accepting that it is and is as valid as any other type of relationship. Presumably this couple couldn't be trusted to be neutral and non-judgemental.

My main concern is what other stipulations do Social services have on adoptions, the wider picture?

No wonder so many kids are left in social care if the hoops that people have to jump through are too varied.

The powers that be may be looking for "The perfect" couple before they let a child go.

Misleading title and insulting to the vast majority of christians who are not homophobic.

No problem with the ruling at all.

If a child was talking to me about someone being gay, then I'd have no hesitation in letting them know that a homosexual lifestyle was as good as a heterosexual one. I don't think this couple would feel able to say that.

I'd imagine that social services take the same line as doctors "First do no harm" - if they think a foster family are likely to be harmful to a child because of their attitudes, then the child will be worse off there than in care. That's not lokking for perfection.

I dont think that you have to be 'perfect' to be able to tell a child that it is acceptable to be homosexual.

Both homosexual and heterosexual relationships are equally valid. It isnt about promoting one over the other.

When my children (age 14 and 10) have had questions about homosexuality I have gotten our gay friends to talk to them,

Christians shouldn't be stopped from fostering. I'm one myself and I am wonderful. Bigots should be stopped from fostering. LAC are amongst the most vunerable people in society and as such need to be protected as much as is reasonable possible from the view that anything fundemental to a persons makeup, be it their gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation is wrong or bad or inferior. Children don't profit from being told that they are superior to others because they are white/male/straight or that they are inferior because they are black/female/gay (for example).

They wouldn't PROMOTE it as a valid choice.

It wasn't as if they preached hate.

Social services have gone PC mad on this...

I wouldn't have liked to have been adopted by a gay couple, children shouldn't have to deal with that stigma either should they?

But it happens.

Is the definition and teaching of being White/Male/Straight in a proud sense more destructive as the Black/Female/gay mantra?

So, when a foster child comes to them and says "I think I'm gay", how do they respond if they are not able to talk about it as a valid way to be? (BTW I don't like your term of "valid choice", as I think sexual orientation is a fundamental, not a choice). That is where they are potentially harming a child, rejecting them, when they have maybe already gone through a lot of stuff in their life.

A gay couple who are not "heterophobic" wouldn't be heaping that kind of rejection on a child.