Foster child to be taken away because Christian couple refuse to teach him about homosexuality

reply to post by apc

BY APC "It's unfortunate that people keep turning to the Government to decide how to educate children about sex."

Are you sure its not the Government who are going ahead with their own legislation,rather than the people "turning to the gov?"

Thats what it feels like anyhow.

I tend to agree. I should have clarified that statement is a generalization to bring public school sexual education under the same issue as government mandating sexual education for foster children.

Point being, it's not any of the Government's business.

reply to post by Silcone Synapse


Well.... I didn't mean right now. I meant exactly what you said. Eventually they'll learn about it whether or not it comes from the parents. My parents never talked to me about it.

At the same time though if this couple's religion is getting in the way of their childhood then maybe it's for the better?

Though it does seem to portray the government as being against Christianity. And again at the same time I feel like some people take their religion overboard. I wouldn't want children being brainwashed into being preachers and basing every life decision off of their strictly ruled religion.

All IMO.

Originally posted by bodrul
reply to post by timeless test

 

So in words you would rather have kids living in care centers,
then with people who refuse to teach homosexuality?

Since the only people that will suffer is the kids as they lose out on a home because of a stupid law.

This whole deal I think is stupid. And for once Bodrul and I actually see eye to eye...lol. (Shocker huh?)

Their not abusing the kids so why take them out? It makes no sense at all.
There are kids who needs a good homes and they pull out a child who isn't facing any harm and they pull them out because of a stupid law? What in the world is wrong with people nowadays- have they lost their minds?

reply to post by Leyla


OK, I fully understand your standpoint on this and it may well be unreasonable that this particular couple are being highlighted simply because they are amongst the first to be affected by this law against discrimination. However, the law is not something which can be put aside just because someone who wishes to discriminate against homosexuals is, in all other respects, a thoroughly nice person; after all there's hardly an armed robber in history who wasn't kind to his mother and no one is suggesting that they should be forgiven for their nastier habits as a result.

The options here were really very limited. The adoption agencies of the Roman Catholic Church have already been forced to cease their activities here because they would not place a child with a homosexual couple and so there was really very little other way in which this situation could end up. The local authority will have asked their foster carers to sign up to new codes of practice to recognise the change in the law, (in order to protect themselves from potential presecution), and they have refused so it's case closed.

It seems very sad but I really believe that's just something that is being overblown at the moment partly because there are those who wish to make political capital out of the situation but also because this is a new cultural law which will take some time to be fully accepted.

As I said much earlier in the thread, if the fosterers had refused to educate the child about the equal rights of different races or sexes there would be no fuss being made whatsoever about the fact that they are not fit to foster children and the law in the UK now treats discrimination against homosexuals in exactly the same way.

Whether it should or not is an altogether different question.




[edit on 30-10-2007 by timeless test]

I'll tell you what I think.

The Child Protection System in which I worked blatantly discriminated against Christians and their values.

These agencies don't give a flying cow chip about kids.

They would rather place kids in a shelter, where their lives will forever change because of the influences they will encounter there, than to place kids in a Christian home.

If you think Child Protective Services is about protecting kids, think again.

To Child Protective Services, a child is just a source state funds and federal matching funds and has no value beyond the bureaucracies these funds support.

And that's the truth.

Regardless of how well meaning this couple is, they are better off out of the system.

I commend them for placing their values over those of the agency and its secular "progressive" agenda.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I commend them for placing their values over those of the agency and its secular "progressive" agenda.

Indeed, we should all have the faith in our own beliefs and values to place them at the very heart of what we do.

If it is appropriate and possible then we should also shout those values from the roof tops to make others aware of them.

...but it's absolutely no damned use believing that holding your Christian values dear should exempt you from the law no matter how sweet and charming an old couple you may look. Let's stop sugar coating the issue and face facts; these two want to bring up other peoples children believing that homosexuality is an abomination before God and that people who practice such beliefs are to be abhorred. If these two lovable people were Muslims rather than Christians and were determined to bring up a foster child believing that adulterers should be stoned to death the majority of Daily Mail readers would be demanding their deportation and preferably public hanging.

What makes Christians believe they are above the law?

[edit on 30-10-2007 by timeless test]

Originally posted by timeless test

...but it's absolutely no damned use believing that holding your Christian values dear should exempt you from the law no matter how sweet and charming an old couple you may look.

What makes Christians believe they are above the law?

Who said that?


[edit on 2007/10/30 by GradyPhilpott]

I have been watching this thread for a while now, and I didn’t think that I would respond, but I want to just share a personal view of the situation.


I was a foster parent from 1977-1978. We fostered only infants due to the number of bedrooms we had. We thought that we could make a difference in the lives of at least a couple of children. We were in Texas, and it was a long time ago, but as far as I can tell, things haven’t gotten any better, and perhaps they have worse than they were back then.

Our first was a 6 week old little girl that had been abandoned. They delivered her to me absolutely filthy, with lice to boot. After burning all the clothing she came with, delousing her, and bathing her we had a wonderful six weeks loving her, and considered adoption. As it seems to almost always be the case, the government came in, took her from us, and returned her to her mother, to continue the life she had had prior. Heart breaking for me and my family.

Next, they gave us a three month old little boy. He was clean, and no lice. He had been in the hospital for three weeks with a fractured skull and broken bones, and multiple bruises and abrasions. We had a heck of a time with this little guy. He was very fretful and cried everyday starting promptly at 5:00 PM. You guessed it, the same father that had physically abused him, had also gotten him addicted to some sort of drug to calm him when the father got home. He “couldn’t stand the kid crying all the time”.

In this case, the baby never should have been placed with us, because we were not educated at all about drug addicted cases. After 10 days of not being able to sooth this helpless infant, they came and got him, apologizing like mad for the error, and the problems it had caused US! Not a hint of remorse for the trauma that had been caused the innocent child. We learned later, that the baby was returned to the mother, and the father was awaiting trial for child abuse. (I have always wondered where mom was when all that abuse took place. But the agency felt fit to return him to the mother. Ya right!)

And our third little one was a nine month old girl. She was a case of neglect in the hygiene area, and had a horrible case of impetigo. She was covered with sores and the majority were severely infected. She came to us with medication and was clean. The first night, she woke up and of course I got up with her, I changed her diaper and saw a huge swelling across her little belly. I rocked and comforted her, and in about 1 ½ hours that swelling was gone, but her leg was then swollen. I had no idea of what was going on, or what could be wrong with her, but I immediately took her to the hospital. It was a severe reaction to the penicillin shot they had given her just prior to bringing her to us. She remained in the hospital for the next 10 days, until the penicillin had passed through her system. She was then released to her mother.

The point is if the government can’t address the emotional and physical needs of these children by sending them back to the problems they came from, why would they care what religious values are taught at the caregivers’ homes. There are far bigger problems to address here than the homosexual agenda.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Who said that?

Grady,

The attitude that Christian beliefs should exempt you from, or allow you to opt out of the law is the essence of the complaint from the two fosterers concerned and whole thrust of the Daily Mail article which this thread reported.

For instance:

But Vincent and Pauline Matherick will this week have their latest foster son taken away because they have refused to sign new sexual equality regulations... ... To do so, they claim, would force them to promote homosexuality and go against their Christian faith

Mr Matherick added: "It's terrible that we've been forced into this corner. It just should not happen.

The Mathericks are planning to fight their case in the courts with the backing of the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship
The same organisation is backing Christian magistrate Andrew McClintock who resigned from the family courts in a row over gay adoption
He says he was forced to resign because he was not allowed to opt out of cases where he might have to send a child to live with gay parents.

all the above from - Daily Mail

In addition we have the adoption agencies of the Roman Catholic church.

Catholic adoption agencies will defy new anti-discrimination laws, the Church warned last night, as the row over allowing gay couples to adopt threatened to divide religion and politics. The argument was sparked by new equality laws being brought in by Westminster which would make it illegal to discriminate against anyone on the grounds of sexuality. This would include a Catholic adoption agency turning down a gay couple for adoption and has led to outcry among religious groups.

The Scotsman


That's who said it.



[edit on 31-10-2007 by timeless test]

reply to post by timeless test



They have the right to challenge the law, it appears, and they are abiding by the law in the mean time, even though they don't like it.

I will go further by saying that this is just another example of how the well-being of children in state's custody is sacrificed on the alter of political correctness.


[edit on 2007/10/31 by GradyPhilpott]

reply to post by GradyPhilpott


They certainly have the right to challenge the law - despite the fact that the intent of the law is clear and they have no desire to comply with it.

With regard to the well being of children, do you not think that would be well served by not being brought up by individuals or organisations who would encourage them to discriminate arbitrarily against certain social groups in our community?

I haven't read all of the posts.....
but it seems that everyone is focusing on the poor parents, and how their rights are being denied them....

What about the children? They have a good lawsuit!! Good foster parents are hard to find, and they've lucked out and found them a couple!!
So, the gov't decides that they will uproot them again, away from what they are now calling home.....because the parents are refusing to teach them something they don't really care about anyway??

God, I don't know how it works in Europe, but here in the states, every foster child is given a law guardian to look out for their interest...these foster parents should be contacting the children's law guardian! What is going on is a shame!