We're always being told we should respect other people's beliefs, but....

[Hakluyt]

.....what exactly does "respect" mean in this context? I am an atheist, and I am always happy to be challenged on my lack of belief, and am frequently told that I must have no moral compass and that I have to put up and shut up when Christianity imposes itself on me. I have also been told that I must have no sense of wonder- and, on on particularly memorable occasion, that I couldn't possibly have any charitable impulses!

But if I say anything even remotely "challenging" about faith or people of faith,bi am accused of disrespect. So, what exactly does respecting other people's beliefs mean?

"Whilst I accept that Churches currently have an exemption from marrying gay couples,it is you that is saying that exemption is wrong"

I'm not. I don't think a church should have to marry anyone it doesn't want to. I do, however, think that a registrar employed by the state does have to marry anyone the law of the land says they should.

vb - where I live the nearby primaries are either good VA faith schools and not so good VA faith schools... if you don't go to church your kid will get the undersubscribed rather than the oversubscribed one. People only play the game to get into the ones which are good - so of course they will tend to get better. I know a few teachers who've found that they can't even get an interview because they don't have a letter of reference from a vicar/priest. If yours is a VC school then it doesn't have to pay the up to 10% capital costs (which is all VA schools have to chip in, running costs are entirely state funded) and it isn't allowed to discriminate on admissions or hiring. VC schools still presumably retain their 'ethos' - so why do the VA ones insist on retaining discriminatory practices?

vdbfamily come now. Ask yourself how you would feel about a BNP run orphanage that didn't let black people adopt. What would you think about them for attempting it and how would you feel about us if we let them do it?

Or in the other direction if we said it was ok to put up a sign saying 'No Christian Adoptions". You suggested it was going that way, but there's no such law and there never will be. Some extremists from any religion may be unsuitable for adoption, but it has to be about what's best for the child. But if we did pass such a law you'd presumably object.

These children are not the property of the church. The fact that many said they would close rather than give in demonstrated that the welfare of the children wasn't their first concern. The fact that at least one was allowed to remain open and carry on discriminating shows how religion is allowed to trump existed law.

Maybe the solution is to make marriage a civil ceremony generally and then let Christians arrange their own religious service to follow.

Not a bad idea, but in practice it's that now isn't it. but the church wasn't satisfied with keeping gay people from being married in church. They demanded they be prevented from being married at all. I wonder if they know that people get married all over the world and lots of them belong to other religions entirely.

Anyway plenty of reason not to respect beliefs.

What I don't know is whether those Catholic adoption agencies were also refusing to place children with co-habiting couples.If so they were not being anti-gay but were following Biblical teaching. Now as a Christian,I can see that to be raised by a loving couple of any description is going to be better than being in the care system all your life but I still don't think it is right to ask Christians to go against their beliefs. It is not like same sex couples were unable to adopt, same sex couples deliberately went to Catholic agencies to discredit them in some cases. This just makes me sad that potentially less kids find adoptive families as agencies who might have had a certain niche(ie with catholic families) were forced to close.
Whilst I agree that there is unlikely to be legislation against Christians adopting,I have had 2 Christian friends go through the process in recent years and the questions about what they believe have been very specific. Wanting to know how evangelical they were,did they believe in the devil,did they believe homosexuality was wrong? would they force a child to go to church etc. Admittedly it may have been certain social workers with an axe to grind but the thought police really are out there when it comes to adopting and fostering

In 2011 Eunice and Owen Johns were banned by the High Court from fostering anymore children because of their faith-based opposition to homosexuality. The Daily Telegraph reported at the time:

‘The couple said they felt excluded for holding “normal, mainstream, Christian views” and had been willing to “love and accept any child”. “All we were not willing to do was to tell a small child that the practice of homosexuality was a good thing,” the couple said after losing their case at the High Court.During the 1990s, the Pentecostal Christian couple from Derby provided foster care for nearly 20 children.
At a time when the country had a shortage of 10,000 foster families,a couple who had successfully fostered 20 already were banned from doing so. This is the reality for many Christian couples today and it takes out a large caring segment of society from being potential foster carers.

"If so they were not being anti-gay but were following Biblical teaching."

As clear as mud. Abdication of responsibility.

I think authorities are right to be concerned about placing children into religious families.

vdb those questions put to your friends - especially the last two - seem like reasonable ones to safeguard the child if it should happen not to be heterosexual or choose to follow their religion - ensuring that the rights of the child would be respected.

Can you explain why the questions asked of your friends were wrong?

Marriage for me was both a legal contract and a sacrament, and I would have been very happy to deal with separately in order to avoid the whole Marriage as a Christian institution thing.

And homophobes should no more be allowed to foster than racists. Some of them cite their faith as justification too...

but I still don't think it is right to ask Christians to go against their beliefs.

I don't believe that Christians should have the services of the local hospital so I hope you understand that if you are in an accident I won't pick you up in my ambulance. There's nothing to stop you walking to another hospital though.

I don't recall the details about Eunice and Owen Johns, but perhaps the problem was what they would do to the child if it turned out to be gay. Beat it out of it perhaps?

We've had our share of that kind of thing haven't we with the religions that teach some children are witches/devils. You will of course support their right to torture children since it's the same principle. You can't say only Christians are allowed to have beliefs.

Well you can and many Christians do, but you can't without looking pretty bad.

I am not sure why encouraging a child to join in with normal family activities for the family they have joined is a safeguarding issue really. Does an athiest parent regularly offer their child the opportunity to attend church.Obviously you would not drag a 16 year old screaming and kicking to church against their wishes but younger children often say they don't wish to do something and you would still encourage them to do so.
A homophobe is someone who'hates or is afraid of homosexuals' and it is frankly ridiculous to label Christians as such unless they hate or fear homosexuals.
The reason I object to the questions is because the implication is that if you don't give the answer they wish to hear your ability to adopt is jeopardized. Why should that be? There are loving Christian parents who happen to believe that any sex outside marriage is not ideal.They also accept that their kids will grow up with minds of their own and live their lives as they see fit despite what their parents believe. How is that different to any other couple looking to adopt. Maybe they should ask the question'what would you do if your child said they were gay' that I could accept as it is not about the parents belief but about whether they would show love and care to their child in whatever circumstances.

I don't think I've ever been asked to act against my Christian beliefs actually.
Mind you, as I said earlier, I am a bad Christian, so I don't do the homophobic thing, for example.
I used to work with a creationist Physics teacher, who actually had no problems teaching Big Bang etc from a scientific perspective without bringing his personal beliefs into it. I rather admired him. And it made for interesting discussion in the staff room. He could have considered it against his beliefs I suppose, but he did his job, and well.

I don't label Christians as homophobes. Obviously. Just the ones who hate/ fear homosexuality. And I'm saying homosexuality to avoid the "hate the sin, love the sinner" thing.

Thank you Hak.

Another question, under what circumstances do you think it's ok to treat people without consideration and courtesy?

"
Another question, under what circumstances do you think it's ok to treat people without consideration and courtesy?"

Dione- I will answer if only because it might take me one step closer to you explaining your rather odd forensic approach....

I try always to treat people with consideration and courtesy. That is my default position. But I would take the need/desire not to on a case by case basis.

Hak What you have just said reminds me of this Bible verse:

"Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners." (1 Corinthians 15:33 KJV)

BigDorrit, that is why the questions should not be around the beliefs of the prospective parents but based on scenarios,and I guess in best practice they actually are, but some SW seem to see it as their mission to weed out evangelical Christians,which is a shame as they can provide very loving secure home environments.Ask a parent how they would deal with a certain situation and see their response....that to me is fair,apart from anything else,you might just discover that a non Christian couple are very anti-gay and more likely to be 'homophobic' that a Christian couple who should have no 'hatred' or 'fear' of anyone.
I will repeat what I said previously that to label all Christians 'homophobic' because they disagree with sex outside of heterosexual marriage is to say that they hate just about everyone in this world. It really is a nonsense.

I would be amazed to discover a self professed Evangelical Christian who was not against homosexuality, and who did not consider it a sin.

Actually Hak there's now a whole movement within the Evangelical church that fully accepts homosexual relationships and gay identities. I think they are called "accepting evangelicals". I'm not an evangelical myself :-) but much of my family is, and there are quite a variety of shades. As usual, the conservative voices are the loudest.

Yep: www.acceptingevangelicals.org

"but some SW seem to see it as their mission to weed out evangelical Christians"

Do you have any evidence of this?

I am not sure why encouraging a child to join in with normal family activities for the family they have joined is a safeguarding issue really.

Neither would I (for something like normal churchgoing) - but the word you used originally was force. Huge difference. Also there are a few churches which do pose real safeguarding issues, as alluded to - the ones which go in for exorcising children and suchlike. The churches you know, the sort I grew up in are benign but unfortunately there are some very rotten apples.