Since when is hatred and discrimination in the childs interest?
Jessica your post made no mention of wether the charities commision is going to apeal or wether the clause allowing the exemption will be re-considered. I expect better from gay news we want more info not just the press release word for word thats not reporting.
These people are happy to put their bigotry before the welfare of the children. Disgraceful.
I just hope that they take more care of these kids than the RC Church in general has done.
As for the ruling – again, disgraceful.
let’s not get too depressed. The Commission was told to reconsider in the light of certain human rights issues. They may yet still come tot he same conclusions. Meanwhile our enemies, the catholics, will be spending a lot of money on fighting this through the courts, which is a good thing.
The Charity Commission will not yet say what it intends to do. We’ll have that information this afternoon. We were not given any “press release”.
This is extremely disappointing, I hope that common sense will prevail and this adoption aganecy will have to consider gay couples or close down. However, this is not the last catholic adoption agency in the UK to refuse to serve gay couples. St. Margaret’s Children and Family Care Society in Glasgow were given permission by the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) to change their rules so they can legally refuse to serve gay couples, and it was the SNP Scottish Government who advised and helped them to do so. The Scottish Government are happy that St. Margaret’s are allowed to discriminate against gay people and has no plans to change the situation.
“The charity had pleaded with the commission for an exemption from the law, saying it would close rather than place children with gay couples.”
Go ahead. Close. You obviously do not have the best interests of the children in your care at heart if you discriminate on such arbitrary grounds as orientation.
I regret to say that this is just the start of our equality rights being taken away. This is the turning point-when we have to fight so hard to prevent rentrenchment. With a new Conservative government-and losing the support of the judiciary-and encoraged by the Pope`s lobbying-our rights are now in a state of decline. This is just the first of many to be rolled back.
Sir Michael Townley Featherstone Briggs Q.C or Mr Justice Briggs is a Roman Catholic himself.
How can his decision to allow the appeal be anything but biased and based on his religious beliefs and not the law.
I am a bit confused – is adoption in the interest of the child or the adopters? If it’s in the interest of the child then it should favour circumstances the provide the greatest stability for the child. The extensive evidence (I am happy to give research details if you wish) is that married couples stay together longer than cohabiting heterosexual or civil partnership couples. For the homosexual – the second issue is how they propose to give both the male and female aspects necessary for the psychological development of the child – the same issue that is faced by single parents.
And the catholic church which has been shown time and time again to institutionally support peodophiles is an authority on what is best for children… how? I would bet if you asked a cross section of society who they would feel safer leaving their child with a catholic.priest or a gay person their answer would overwhelmingly be the latter.
All evidence show gay couples are as good as straight couples in being parents so why is unfounded bigotry allowed in a court of law. These people should be ashamed of themselves.
I would like to.see a high court challange to the sutibility of Catholics as parents. What person in their right mind would allow their kid to be adopted by someone who visits some one once a week who is protected by the pope to hide any reports of peodophilia. The catholic.church has repeatedly shown their care for.children and the protection of children’s rights is wholey trumped when it comes to the rights of peados.
Notice how the catholic bishop (and I note that this is not a member of the charity’s staff talking, but some busybody from the church who thinks that wearing a silly hat makes him qualified to deal with this matter) is trying to insinuate that gay people are at fault here? It is outrageous that he tries to paint the adoption agency as the victim here, held to ransom by those nasty gays, and reels off a long list of good things the agency has done in the past in order to add weight to his spurious rhetorical claim. It is a 180 degree inversion of the truth.
Because the charity could continue doing these lovely humanitarian things if it wanted to. It could quite easily continue doing them, and comply with the sexual orientation regulations at the same time, even if its staff did think this the lesser of two evils. It is the “charity” itself that is threatening to stop providing its services because it believes that upholding its medieval bigotry is more important than all the welfare of children that the bishop is so keen to emphasise. Better there is no goodness among all mankind than that gay people are considered equal human beings too. The welfare of children is, it seems, a price worth paying to ensure this.
This kind of conditional charity – charity used as blackmail to further an irrational bigoted agenda – is a loathsome aberration of natural human compassion. It shows full well that the church’s motives for being in the world of charity in the first place are self-serving at best, and humanitarian a poor third if at all.
“male and female aspects necessary for the psychological development of the child”? This is just unevidenced pop-psychology rubbish of the basest sort. It doesn’t even mean anything. The gender of parents is entirely irrelevant to the psychological development of a child – there has never been a single study that demonstrates anything other than this. It is a noisome, antiquated and patriarchal assumption that each gender has a unique and inimitable role in child-rearing, or indeed in almost any other field of human endeavour. It is extremely insulting to the millions of very good gay and single parents to suggest otherwise, as well as being scientifically unsustainable. In fact, if the studies show anything, it is that gay people (lesbians at least, there are no conclusive studies on gay male parents) actually make slightly BETTER parents than heterosexual couples.
John, No 10. How can you give statistics on the habits of Civil Partnership couples when the data is only four years old and any research cannot be regarded as empirical given that short time span. There haven’t been that many CPs to make the sort of comparison you are claiming. I’ll ignore the rest of your post because that is patently ridiculous. You forget there are many single fathers and they do just as good a job in bringing up their kids as single mothers or Gay couples do.
IT TAKES A MAN AND A WOMAN TO MAKE A CHILD …SO MOST LIKELY THERE IS A REASON FOR THAT…AND IF THE DATA IS TO YOUNG TO DRAW A CONCLUSION THAN ITS OBVIOUSLY TO YOUNG TO DRAW A CONCLUSION IN FAVOR OF THE OTHER WAY AROUND ALSO …THERE ARE STUDIES THOUGH THAT GIRLS RAISED BY LESBIANS HAVE A 20% HIGHER INCIDENCE IN EXPERIMENTING WITH THE SAME SEX DURING YOUNG ADULTHOOD NO MATTER IF HOMOSEXUAL OR NOT…DUKE UNIVERSITY HAS ONE FOR INSTANCE.I HAVE NOT MET A HOMOSEXUAL YET THAT APPEARS TO BE NORMAL SOORY..LOL
Stephen Kay: there’s nothing in the reports I’ve read that says anything about that.
What I am after from this gay news site is much more than a parroting of the BBC announcement. I am after info on wether there will be an appeal. I am after info such as the fact that the judge is a catholic. This court loss is a major setback and I expect more from our “reporters”.If all we get is an announcement word for word repeated from mainstream media then why bother with pinknews?
I agree with you Roland. The first thing I thought was that the court case will hopefully clean them out of a fair bit of cash – obviously the more the merrier!!!
And John, you might want to check the divorce rates for straight couples and those in civil partnerships. Even adjusting for the fact that civil partnerships have been round less time, the divorce rate is massively higher.
You might like to believe that gay relationships are less stable but the evidence suggests that in actual fact straight couple appear to get married and split up far quicker
I love Sister Mary Clarence.
This must be overturned. The courts’ role is to interpret law, not defy it. If the judgement is allowed to stand then the door is wide open to anyone wishing to discriminate on grounds of ‘conscience.’
And Terry Sanderson does not go far enough. Catholic or other religious agencies should not only be deprived of public money if they discriminate against gays. They should be outlawed, whether they discriminate or not. Religious adoption agencies must inevitably choose adoptive parents on the basis of supernaturalist ideologies unrelated to the empirically understood needs of children. This is intrinsically mischievous. The adoption of children is a matter of such huge public interest that it should be undertaken by democratically accountable statutory agencies only.
LOL, we’d sure like to see your research because at present the rate of dissolution of civil partnerships is around 1%. We’d love to see how that compares to married couples in your “extensive research”.
Shall we also mention the fact that a body of 30 years of research shows that there is no difference in adjustment between children raised by gay or straight parents?
To answer your question, is adoption in the interest of the child or the adopters, the answer, if we only based it on your comment, is it’s in the interest of the bigot who’s got a chip on his shoulder and will stop at nothing to maintain his privileged status.
It seems a lot of links also exist around Magdalen College, Oxford and Catholic Care its diocese and Mr Justice Briggs.
This whole judgement stinks of a corrupt decision I smell a rat!
At least they have only been allowed to appeal against the ruling, and not, as the Pink Paper reported, to ignore it and actually discriminate against gay couples. http://news.pinkpaper.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=2583
Nevertheless, even the news that they are allowed to appeal is worrying.
Looks like the charities commission will now have to pay for the £100,000 court fees this challenge cost.
The Guardian reports:
“Briggs also ordered the Charity Commission to pay Catholic Care’s legal costs, estimated at over £100,000. The law firms involved, solicitors Bircham Dyson Bell and barristers Christopher McCall QC and Matthew Smith, also worked pro-bono for the adoption society, a contribution estimated at £55,000.
If the judge is RC, then surely for justice to be SEEN to be done he ought to have excused himself. We’ve seen how RCC prelates have attempted to strong-arm politicians and ordinary voters, this judge is now open to the accusation that he pandered to his religious masters rather than the law.
This, by the way, is the reason catholic emancipation was so strongly opposed: the idea that the pope and his minions would interfere in politics and the law. The actions of the latest bishop of Rome does little to disprove this view
Now, lets see what our gay friendly David Cameron will do about that after he’s elected. I suspect…NOTHING!
P Gibbs – not quite so happy then based on the information you’re posted.
it’s people like these homophobes who show how much of a lie it is that they claim to care about the kids
iTS SIMPLE IF HOMOSEXUAL WANT KIDS ..MAKE SOME…U KNOW THE OLD FASHION WAY …OOOPS
Abi: do we have any proof that Briggs is a catholic? if so he ought to disqualified himself from sitting. I do know that Magdalen College School is an Anglican not a Catholic foundation.
Well, that’s the first question to ask David Cameron if he comes on here to be quizzed on the Tory attitude to gay rights and equality:
Mr Cameron, will you as a priority enact legislation which exists, or is created by a court decision, which gives a religious organisation a special exemption from equalities legislation ? or will you support the “right” of a church to have an exemption which permits them to discriminate against gay people?
Magdalen College Oxford is a Catholic establishment its alumni are the Catholic establishment! Briggs is among those alumni and a member of the college. Its very unlikely he is not a Roman Catholic himself!
Terry Sanderson told Pink News “This is an alarming decision and the first major setback for the protection of gay people from discrimination by religious groups.”
The faith school sex education amendment a couple of weeks ago was also quite important, but I don’t think the outcome of that vote was reported here on Pink News.
One step forward…how many more back?
Will this now be the start of all the backbreaking hard work, done by the wonderful – often un named and unaccountable – few, falling apart and we all list back to the “good old days” of discrimination, fear, hatred and non-reprisal?
Deo Gratis – I think not.
This is not actually a problem.
Regardless of the Judge allowing the appeal, and even IF the Charity Commission accepts the agency’s arguments (which it actually can’t, under UK law), the agency will still NOT be able to act as an adoption agency, for the very simple reason that they will not fulfill the legal criteria laid down by the local authorities.
The agency itself does not have direct access to any children. If the LAs refuse to use it, there is NOTHING they can do.
So yes, the whole thing is a bit pf a propaganda ploy for them, but as someone said earlier, it’s an expensive one and also a fight that they cannot possibly win.
Let them waste their money. :-)
Of greater concern is that amendments to the Equality Bill, exempting religious fostering and adoption agencies, have been reintroduced for next weeks 3rd Reading in the House of Lords,23 March. One part of the Lords’ proposed exemptions deals with the conflict with core religious teachings.
I have been quite involved in some of the debates about this, both from within the perspective of those Catholic agencies who have never discriminated against same-sex couples, or single lesbian and gay prospective foster-carers or adoptive parents, e.g The Cabrini Children’s Society (Dioceses of Arundel & Brighton, Portsmouth, and Southwark) and Lancaster Diocese’s Caritas Care, as well as at a secular level in lobbying around the SOR’s and the Equality Bill through the Cutting Edge Consortium. I bring to this many years experience of managing Child and Family Social Work at a London Teaching Hospital, including responsibility for and the supervision of permanent substitute family placements, sometimes quite deliberately with single lesbian or gay carers, or couples, determined by the paramount interests of the child, and affirmed by the Family Court system, not least in cases of children who were sexually abused by heterosexual men or emotionally/physically abused by their mothers. Such placements provided the safest possible environment for such children.
In spite of assertions by those legal advisors opposed to the present regulations re adoption agencies, there is nothing in core Catholic doctrine defining that same-sex couples or single lesbian or gay people cannot bring up children. There may be views and opinions against such provision, from various Vatican departments, individual bishops, or Catholic Bishops’ Conferences but these do not constitute ‘doctrine’ per se. Any formal Catholic teachings on sexual orientation are, in fact, officially recognised as 3rd level teachings which require respect from practising Catholics, but against which it is possible to exercise conscientious dissent. There are also, of course, a good number of previously heterosexually married people, men and women, who discover a variation in their sexual orientation and continue to raise their naturally-born children in loving homes and stable same-sex relationships. Within the LGBT Catholic community there are a number of such examples.
The second point in the proposed Lords amendment ‘conflicting with the strongly held religious convictions …’ line is arguable but what about the strongly held religious convictions of LGBT people of faith who might wish, quite naturally, to seek to be assessed as prospective foster-carers or adoptive parents by a faith-based agency in order to foster or adopt a child and to bring that child up as in their own faith, if that is consistent with the child’s? Will this also now exclude single LGBT people of faith from applying to become foster-carers or prospective adopters, as has been past practice, prior to amendments to the Adoption Act in 2002, and the advent of the Civil Partnerships Act? If I and my partner, both committed Catholics had thought about permanent substitute parenting of a child in need it would have been natural for us to seek such assessment from a Catholic agency, in the desire that a Catholic child might then be placed with us. This proposed legislation would prevent that.
This is not about ‘rights to possess children’ as if they were some kind of fashionable appendage, but wishing to do the best, not least for those vulnerable children whose birth homes have not provided them with the quality of care which we all wish to see for such children. Substantial research in the USA, the UK and Europe now shows that children placed in same-sex-households, all other things being equal, are not disadvantaged in their nurturing and development, nor are they ‘persuaded’ into the diverse sexual orientations of their carers. What most of the research shows is that consistent parenting, in a loving stable relationship, regardless of gender, is what contributes to a child’s flourishing. There are some studies which show that children in single-person households might do less well since they do not necessarily or immediately experience the balancing of relationships beyond a one-to-one parenting relationship with their immediate carer. That is, they can get fixed in relating to one parent rather than two, unless there is a nearby extended family environment. There is also only little evidence that children in same-sex households are vulnerable to prejudicial anti-social behaviour and remarks from other children in school or similar environments. Where there is a healthy school setting such issues can be dealt with well by school staff. It has been noted that children in such households often develop a level of sophistication in terms of their personal resources to deal with such ‘attacks’, particularly when they come from a two parent, same-sex household.
It’s also important to note that the child-care agencies themselves do not make such decisions. Adoption Orders or similar are made by the Courts. There are defined professional principles and guidelines for the recruitment and assessment of prospective foster carers or adoptive parents, and subject to successful assessments being concluded, the actual ‘matching of a child with carers is made by a multi-disciplinary, multi-agency adoption and fostering panel, and not simply down to a single agency. There is also the system of independent Guardians-ad-Litem being appointed to oversee the process and to present the child’s views if he or she is unable to express them to a Court, or other similar tribunal. Having exercised this role for a number of years, I know how influential on a Judge and the Court the Guardian’s Report can be.
martin seems to be a gay catholic. There shouldn’t be such groups. Gay catholics are self-hating traitors to the gay cause who ought to be truly ashamed of themselves. they deserve our contempt for failing to understand that they are in an impossible intellectual position.
Abi: Magdelen College Oxford is NOT a Catholic establishment. Indeed it has a proud record of resisting a catholic king (James II) who tried to enforce a catholic leader on it.
Of course this is a bloody disgrace! Let them close down then! If their stupidity is more important than the welfare of children and all of the ´good works´ they do, then so be it.
They can either obey the law, or cut all links with the catholic church… (those well known protectors of children).
I would think at a time when the catholic church is more heavily embroiled in child abuse scandals, reaching right into the vatican, when the vaticans own devil-watcher says that the devil is at work there (no sh-t sherlock!), then the catholics should not be commenting on child welfare and all the ´good´ they do for children?
With a bit of luck, EVERY child who has suffered abuse at the hands of the catholic clergy will not sue the church, bankrupt it, and we can all be done with their sad prehistoric rubbish.
Sorry, meant to say “will NOW sue the church”
Good to see that liberal inclusivity is alive and well in people like Harry – I don’t think so!
martin: you are, to quote an elegant post above, a follower of sad prehistoric rubbish. if you must be a Christian (a dying breed in any event) could you not find a denomination that is actually welcoming of LGBT people? I have no more wish to be inclusive towards the likes of you than I have to be inclusive towards Asian members of the BNP.
Don’t worry though – you deserve contempt and isolation, not discrimination or harassment.
Indeed the judgement is flawed due to Justice Briggs being from Magdalene College which, according to its own website is part of the “oxford movement” which sees Anglicanism as a mere branch of the catholic church (also known as Catholic Revival)(see http://www.magd.ox.ac.uk/chapel-and-choir). This makes this judge less than impartial. As all his other cases mentioned on google involve finance/probate, I wonder how judges are selected to hear cases at all.
Are there any muslim adoption agencies out there – I’d love to know their views on placing children with gay couples and how they are coping.
Upon reflection I’m not sure I object to this ruling – if in return other agencies can refuse to place children with Catholic/Muslim parents then there’s less chance of them growing up with weird stone age attitudes.
PinkNews states in this article: “The charity had pleaded with the commission for an exemption from the law, saying it would close rather than place children with gay couples.”
And which political partly, people, do you think “Catholic Care” is likely to be voting for at the Election?
That’s right. The Tories. You bet.
The pendulum always swings. Let’s delay a swing backwards for as long as we possibly can.
To allow the Tories back in to power will be to allow “Catholic Care” and all such groups of primitive believers in mumbo-jumbo to regain their superiority over us.
Don’t hand them back that superiority!
Do NOT vote Tory!
Little Matthew Sephton from Eccles will be on here telling you all that he won’t allow the Conservatives to turn against us, but little Matthew Sephton will have no voice if the Tories get in and they finally are able to bear their teeth and put queers back where they believe queers should be!
Matt B: I hold no brief for Christians of any nature – in general most of them are our clear enemies – but we do ourselves no favours by getting our facts wrong. If the enemy (i.e. the real RCs including the gay traitors within their ranks) get their hands on these posts they will laugh at us. Magdelen College Oxford (note the spelling) is NOT a Roman Catholic institution. It is as Anglican as they come. the reference tot he Oxford movement and the “catholic tradition” is to the Anglo-Catholic or “High church” grouping within the CofE, from which on the whole we have little to fear. it is nothing to do with the Church of Rome – I agree a truly evil institution – whatsoever.
Such a shame the catholic emancipation act passed! Maybe its time to resurrect it. The best thing Henry the VIII ever did for England was to get rid of the roman cult as the state cult, but then he went and screwed it up even further by replacing it with the C of E. Time to disestablish the latter too. Its irrelevant to modern living and why should our taxes support a cult that the majority in the country don’t even subscribe to? Why should they, unelected clerics get any say in legislation affecting the rights of others? Nail the bastards once and for all, cut off funding them and their schools (both cults combined) and let them earn their keep. Why should they be allowed to sponge off the rest of us? Nothing more than parasites aided and abetted by successive governments every five years.
Let’s look at it this way – Only 4 % of adoptions are handled by Catholics anyway,of which thi sis one, perhaps cutting it dwon to perhaps 1%, given their speciality. If, therefore, this Agency has had success in placing the most vulnerable children, I think we can let then be. WE do not know if the other agencies can do the job, since they have not been doing it, which may leave these children exposed. In any case, their presence will not deprive the Gay comunity, since there is 94% of available children handled by other agencies to choose from, but it would deny the children. On the balance, I would say the children in this particular case desreve an agency to deal with thier cases, if it is only this one that threatens to close unless they have can contunue as they have been doing.
We have no indication of others offering to do the job, which may mhave influenced the decision, as it appears to be thier greatest argument.
Is this some kind of sick joke? Is it fine for Catholic Priests to continue molesting little boys and girls but not to give blessing for a child to have loving parents?? I for one will NEVER have anything to do with this ‘Church’ of Inbred Devils.
IAM CERTAIN NOT ALL PRIEST MOLESTED CHILDREN ..AND THERE GOES TO SHOW THAT YOU CANT LEAVE CHILDREN WITH HOMOSEXUALS CLOSETED OR OTHERWISE ..SEE HOMOSEXUAL PRIESTS …..MUAA
Why is an organisation with a proven track record of child rape even allowed anywhere near children?
all they need to do remove homosexual piests …than there will be no childmolestation ..most where boys and the priest where man ..right HOMOSEXUAL man …lol
“And which political partly, people, do you think “Catholic Care” is likely to be voting for at the Election?”
I think you’ll find that Catholic Care doesn’t get a vote at the next General Election and more than Big Mamma’s Ribs or Kwik Fit.
Sister Mary Clarence,
I know you think that answer to Eddy’s point was big and clever. But it wasn’t.
Whether we agree with the sentiment he was expressing or not, we all know perfectly well what he meant.
If these people want to discriminate and ignore the law’s of the land then let them reap what they sow.
I am sick and tired of every time I read any given newspaper about these bl@@dy christians its always that THEY are victims.
The Jesus message of Love and Peace is entirely lost on them, not surprising given the history of their “church” and their picking and choosing the parts of their book that suit them.
These people are evil, selfish, pig ignorant, brain washed idiots sitting back whilst their own sacred hierarchy escapes natural justice.
Every single issue in the UK regarding my right to exist as a happy gay man is hijacked by religious bottom feeders and Im sick and tired of being denigrated by this vile exquisitely rich bunch of child molesters, even more so by the stupidly crap legal system that allows this to happen.
What would happen if I ask, when interviewing someone for employment if they are religious and I decide not to employ them as I believe they are stupid due to their belief in a two thousand year old book, re/re/re etc translated and re/re/re interpreted by thousands since it was originally written.
Dragged through the Courts no doubt, yet these b@st@rds get away with it.
They really have it summed up.
Do as we say and ignore what we do, or we will ex-communicate you and you will burn in what we have brain washed you what our version of hell is.
Let us do as we please, outwith human law.
Sounds like a protection racket to me.
The mafia have nothing on these swines.
Mind you, given that they came up with the inquisition????
I don’t think the Charity Commission will overturn their previous decision even based on the High Court judgement.
The Charity Commission will be mindful of the law and all the seemingly unending scandals swirling around the catholic church at the moment.
How’s this for total abject hypocrisy!
“The bishop of Leeds, the Rt Rev Arthur Roche, insisted there was no homophobic element to the case and claimed that children would have been “seriously disadvantaged” had Catholic Care not won the appeal.
“Our case has not been brought on an anti-gay agenda of any sort. We respect, and would not want to diminish, the dignity of any person,” he said.”
This is utterly disgusting.
So the Catholic Church is now above the law is it? What’s happened to this country?
We need a secular constitution and a secular legal system and we need it now.
why is anyone surprised. if it weren’t for what the labour gov has done over the last ten years we’d still be considered a mental illness.
human being + catholic religion = retarded slave
This moron smc make a virtue of being obtuse and should be ignored as she has been on other threads. Best way to deal with the infantile postings of smc, angiehr, abi et al is to ignore anything they say,. I have yet to hear a legitimate argument from any of these silly people. I take it smc is a drag queen which just about says it all. She actually believes Alfred the Great was around in the 18th century .. i kid you not.
Sorry folks.. that should have read AngieHR actually believes ALFRED ETC
It’s all very well saying it’s the first question we should ask Dude Dave C but what about what the current lot? I don’t hear Gordy B or Harriet Harm-em saying anything. Equality minister, my a**e!
I agree with Terry Sanderson and the appeal should have failed
these bishops are lying which is a sin as they are only doing this due to their homophobic stupidity
Davd @ 22:29 is right and the law needs to be secular so religions can’t be above the law
Isnt it about time we caught up with science and consigned all this rubbish to the dustbin of history. While this disease seems to be endemic world wide, if we start now perhaps our decendants in a couple of hundred years will be able to look back in amazement at the iodiocy of it all and wonder why so many people IGNORED ALL THE EVIDENCE. Even the good ole USA where one would think their superior education system would have weakened this potentcy of this malady, seems to be still deep in the grip of its tentacles. However, recent revelations about clerical abuse by paedophile priests and nuns is now starting to make people realise the con it all was. People all over the world are starting to find the courage to start talking about the abuse they suffered at the hands of these monsters and their apologist overlords. Till now if one dared say anything against these vile inhuman creeps, you were likely to geta slap round the head from parents for suggesting such a thing and would be publicly ostracised for saying anything so vile about our holy men and women. I am at a loss why people over the hundreds of years didnt say Hold on a minute, why should celibate unmarried men have any say over our children. What do they know of children or indeed married life. they didnt even have an idea of what their own family life was, as they for the most part were handed over to seminaries and nunneries before they had the sense or maturity to know family life. And once there were abused by those tasked with their education, so the whole vile cesspit grew even more horrendous.
This is from http://www.newfamilysocial.co.uk:
“To allow an adoption agency to exclude lesbian and gay prospective adoptive parents as a rule would not be in the best interests of the children needing permanent homes.
Many complex factors are considered in choosing the best adoptive parents for children. Increasingly, many adoption agencies are finding that the most suitable parents available for a specific child are lesbian or gay. This might be for reasons of their openness to adopting older children and to direct contact with the birth family, or their ability to provide therapeutic parenting, to support the child with their sense of difference, or because of their positive motivations in choosing adoption as a first-choice route to parenthood.
Another factor is of course whether the parents are a mum and dad, two dads, two mums or a single adopter. In cases where a child has been traumatised by abuse, two parents of the opposite sex to the abuser may be actively sought as the best option.
Adoption agencies should choose their prospective adopters by considering the interests of the children, first and foremost. Excluding sections of the population from adoption for arbitrary or dogmatic reasons does not allow for this.”
If you decided to be Gay didn’t you also decide not to be parents. I don’t understand? There are thousands of hetrosexual parents who adopt because they cannot have children but yet Gay people want to adopt when they can indeed have children. I for one am glad that some people still see that the term “Gay parents” sounds ridiculous and there are some people who are willing to fight to stop this infestation of political correctness from flooding into every corner of the next generation. Clearly children will be confused if they have two women or two men bringing them up and you gay rights supporters cannot disagree with that. Honestly I couldn’t care less if people want to sleep with people of the same sex but to put children into this set up unwillingly is cruel. Children deserve to have a normal upbringing if evolution wanted same sex parenting Gay people would have been able to have kids. I for one am not catholic however I do belive that the world and its biological structure is created perfectly and should not be alterd just because everyone wants to jump on the Gay band waggon. And as for you sikkos who are talking about priest being paedo’s lets remember that its their homosexual urges that have led them to abuse all those little choir boys. Why do people have Gay rights when people can’t have religious rights? If CATHOLIC churches do not want to compromise their religious beliefs for Gay people I think Gay people should just go to other organisations and stop being so hypocritical.
Michelle ” if you decided to be gay” i take from that statement that you arent gay. Genuine gay people dont wake up one day and think Oh im gonna be gay any more than hetros wake up one day and think will i be gay or straight. I know a lot of so clled lesbians do do that after being married to hetro men and having a brood of kids. some of them dont “become” gay until their 30s and 40s. and often jump back and forward between the two. Are you one of these convenienc e dykes. ANOTHER TORY TROLL PLANT ON A GAY WEBSITE … HOW IRONIC.
PEOPLE YOU YOU MUST READ THIS ARTICLE WHICH WILL SCARE THE SHYT OUT OF YOU
Michelle – People don’t ‘Choose’ to be gay just as people don’t choose to be straight. We are born whatever we are. We certainly didn’t decide to not be parents. The fact remains that there are millions of children in this world crying out for the love of a family. That being from a man & woman, woman & woman or indeed man & man. Many don’t get it and they should. To suggest that a gay/lesbian couple cannot give that love is just insulting. Gay people are NOT second class citizens.
I gather from your thread that you’re not only not gay but clearly don’t know any gay people. You, like others, just read what you see in the media. Since when has the press been known for giving poistive news about anything. It doesn’t sell papers.
If you did know gay people you’d learn that a lot of gay people are happily in committed relationships. It is well documented also that children who grow up with gay parents tend to be more open minded. And don’t believe the myth that children growing up with gay parents will be turned gay. It’s just not true. Most children don’t, however are actually more likely not to discriminate.
You say ‘I couldn’t care less if people want to sleep with people of the same sex but to put children into this set up unwillingly is cruel.’ I don’t see the argument. Yet again like most people with your view you only see gay people by what they do in bed. Yet you yourself would, no doubt, be horrified if people chose to do that to you. Maybe if you got your head out of the gutter and realised there is more to people than just sex you be less discriminating.
I notice you also use the old ‘homos are paedo’s'comment. That’s just sick. Gay people are NOT paedo’s. You brand but you clearly are not educated. Also your kind always convieniently forget the innocent girls who are molested Usually by a family member.
Your point regarding gay rights and religious rights is also flawed. Religion seems to want the right to discriminate against gay people, yet again by what they do in bed, Not on the ability of the person. It Has that right. But why should it. It seems the church wants the right to do it but low and behold should it come back on them.
Gay couples have just as much right to provide a loving enviroment to a child that needs it. Where is it in the childs best interests to have a Religious Adoption Agency that uses hatred and discrimination when it should be focusing on love.
It is religion that stops the human race from progressing. Whatever the beliefs discrimination should play No part in it.
so there are mongoloids born they dont choose to have an extra chromosome …but they are certainly not normal …and therefore dont get to have children..if homosexuals are born that way ..than its a faulty gene …and therefore nature tells them not to reproduce…ie dont be around kids …i havent seen a lesbian or a homosexual that should be considered normal …by a long shot…
Michelle – sexuality isn’t choice., pedos are pedos and not gay etc! gay people do have kids like the many who did before acknowkledging their sexuality
Another thing Michelle – Has it ever occurred to you that evolution may well have created gay/lesbian people to help stop the overcrowding of the planet. Something hetrosexual people can do too well without thinking about the consequences. Just because gay/lesbian people can’t have kids without the help of the opposite sex doesn’t mean they cannot provide for a loving, stable enviroment for a child and its needs.
I bet you would accept the argument that there are far too many children left without parents because of poverty, disease, war, famine (usually in the name of religion) or indeed left alone because the parents just don’t want them.
Are you really suggesting that if a child left alone in this world in misery/poverty and in desperate need of a stable loving enviroment and that came from a gay/lesbian couple that same child should stay in that misery?
As stated before many adoption agencies have difficulties in placing problematic children. They are happy to turn to gay parents to help because of a lot of the usual hetrosexual parents who want the ‘perfect’ child. Should they stop?
If a child has the right to a loving, stable eviroment then surely That is what is in the best interest of the child. And if the situation is good enough for problematic child then that in itself proves that ‘Gay parenting’ does work and thus gay parents equally make excellent parents.
they also fight hetero parents ..for the kids meaning leaving marriages ..and come out after the fact and want the children ….so dont make this look like they only want the poor children no one else wants …homos want it all ….go to hell you demonseeds
Bravo, Squidgy, very well put and makes my attempt forgettable. You are obviously a caring thoughtful gay human being.
Will you not seriously have another think about your choice of political party. Im sure that if you dont like any of the big three that there must be a lot of independants who would appreciate the support of an obviously caring human being like yourself.
Once again Bravo for putting homophobe Michelle in ger bigoted place. I wont be sparring with you in the future.
Michelle, you wrote at #65: “Honestly I couldn’t care less if people want to sleep with people of the same sex but to put children into this set up unwillingly is cruel.”
Michelle, the above statement reveals that you are suffering from unfounded fears. You have a case of homophobia. You need help with it.
You need to ask yourself why you find repugnant the idea of a child looking up with love at two loving guardians. The child doesn’t find it repugnant and neither do the two loving guardians.
You are the one having the adverse reaction. So you are the one who needs to seek help.
The repugnance that overcomes you is called homophobia. (Maybe you have a long journey ahead of you. It is likely you are unable to accept your own perfectly normal urges towards members of your sex. You will have to do a lot of work to learn to accept those urges.)
As for the reason for male religious clergy turning to the sexual abuse of children, you need to apply logic to your thinking, Michelle.
You may be right to say that many of those clergy would have lived as gay men had they not become clergy, but you nor I or anybody on earth can know what might have been.
What we do know is that the Catholic Church inducts men and women into same-sex lifestyles in same-sex communities while at the same time forbidding them any enjoyment of sexual pleasure. As a result of this unnatural contortion and constriction of human psycho-sexuality, we have had religious persons turning to very young persons of the same sex.
Do you now begin to see where the problem lies, Michelle? The problem lies with those ridiculous systems of thought which are called “religions”, all of them based on the primitive fears of ancient peoples.
You need to campaign for their eradication.
So, there you are. All sorted for you. You have a lot to be getting on with now, Michelle, don’t you. You will find that once you start sorting things out and if you develop a good healthy sense of integrity, then you will also begin to see the hypocrisy and rot in other areas as well. You will begin to question the power of the the Establishment, the Monarchy, and so forth. You will even see that it is foolish to keep voting for the Tories.
I just watched The Magdalen Sisters movie on telly and im beside myself with rage. If i met nun right now i would kill her with my bare hands. 30000 women were destroyed by those evil bitches and they were assisted by the police They have to pay and the police have a lot to answer for too. Christians…what ann evil cult of sadists and paedophiles.
Michelle, you silly woman….who is responsible for the babies given up for adoption? Those are all straight people. Who are the unwed mothers? Why, straights of course! Are you aware that paedophiles commit vile acts against the opposite sex? In fact, in America, government statistics there reveal that the majority of paedophile cases involve heterosexuals.
How do you respond to the widow or widower that raising their children without two parents is not normal and is bad for them? I supposed you’d rather have children raised with two abusive heterosexual parents okay, rather than allow them to be raised by a loving, caring same-sex couple? How dare you make assumptions about gay people. You don’t know any to make absurd and offensive statements like that.
Another thing, gay people don’t get to choose their sexual orientation. When did you choose yours? I would imagine you don’t have much of an intellect to figure that one out. Its not a choice, just as eye colour isn’t. However, religion is a choice, learned behaviour that teaches people like you to discriminate. You’re an idiot.
Well said, Robert. I hope “Michelle” returns to read her replies.
“I came across this site looking at an article to do with kele from bloc party, but when i saw an article about the pope i wondered what sort of comments there would be. Im shocked. Ive seen the pope being called evil, a demon, paedophilie, nazi as well as many people wishing someone would kill him on his visit.
For a forum for a group who are trying to fight for ‘equality’, you all, apart from a couple of people, undermine your cause. You are projecting hatred on those who dissaprove of a certain aspect of your way of life, and this is certainly not a solution.
I can tell from the posts that many of you display distrust and angst towards the ‘church’ and religion in general. No doubt because of unjust discrimination and as i said earlier, hate, that you most likely would have experianced. The reason is a lack of understanding from the POV of many but not all religious groups. I, myself am a christian and a homosexual, but not a ‘practicing’ homosexual as i would call it. I am against homosexuality but not against homosexuals because i belive we are all equal. If any of you were to read the bible, which i doubt any of you have seeing as how critical of all religions the general comments are, you would find the same view within. Its surprising how much people focus the institution and figure heads and negate to even concider that its function is to support the belifies of the bible. You could call be ‘brainwashed’ or ‘indoctrinated’, but I would say that I have faith in God and my belifies. I wouldnt want to impose those belifies on any of you, so the next time you use words like ‘indoctrinated’ to describe someone with a different view to you just remember that doing so gives them the right to fire the same accusation back at you. Hatered, anger and violence isnt the solution to your problems. Instead of planning how to make the popes visit to the U.K as unpleasent as possible, which would be less effective than a drop in the ocean, why not try to do something constructive which will actually further your cause?
And by the way the royal family doesnt just sit in buckingham palace all day eating caviar on jewel encrusted gold thrones you know. The two young princes have both served in the army and both work for many charities…. for free! The pope was in the hitler youth army which is the modern day equivalent of scouts and doesnt really make him a nazi. No.28, the pope cant excommunicate hitler because hes dead. Patrick, some guy already said earlier that the crusades were started by the muslims, and besides, events that occured about 600 years ago shouldnt be anything to hold a grudge over. And i think you will find that muslims are a lot less understanding to gays than the pope is. ”
Well well cc “catholic curate” by any chance…..so we are all wrong to be lambasting those whose sole purpose in life is to make life as unpleasant as possible for others and go around dressed in frocks raping little children or at very least ..as in the case of the Vile sean brady being apologist for them and covering up their vile acts by making little children sign confidentiality clauses and then allowing the perpetrators to go on for another 20 years raping and abusing children before he is caught.
I see from your post that you adhere to the teachings of the bible , just about the most evil book ever published. A book that was ccompiled over three to five thousand years by a fearful band of desert tribes who were 100% illiterate and so their paranoid stories were for thousands of years passed dowe orally.
Then along came Emperor Constantine who deceided that, like the Egyptians, he needed a religeon to consolidate his power and picke up on a small sect that had been around for a couple of hundred years or so and made it his Thing if you will.
He invented most of its “miracles”, prayers and so on , like the creed and its founder, a mythical figure called Jesus Christ who supposedly was, like most of the Egyptian Gods before , born of a virgin , who , and i kid you not, remained a virgin after his birth and ran with it and made it into a world religeon by playing on the fears and superstitions of a vastly uneducated people.
Fast forward another thousand years or so and we have another despot , king James who deceided that he would compile his version and so we were saddled with the King james bible, that was to wreak havoc on the rest of the world for another 5/600 years until people started to be educated and think for themselves. Meanwhile the decendants of Constantine went on to found Roman Catholicism and spent the last 1500 years raping and sadistically abusing those they professsed to protect. And all under the protection of their own made up laws …Cannon Law which noone dared to question under pain of Excommunication, which to uneducated people who knew no better, meant damnation in hell (wherever that is ) for eternity.
Its a bit rich of any christian to sit and pass judgment on anyone about violence , when the religeon you profess has just about the most vilont history on this planet, all in the name of a myth propagated by an organisation solely engaged in rape and sadistic abuse of human beings ,but especially children almost from its inception.
you can call that a hate filled rant is you dare , but be prepared to point out where you think it is wrong. That , whether you like it or not, is the factual history of religeon and if your limited education allows, you can research and prove all of the above to be true. By the way i forgot the inquisition, the slaughter of the Native american , the slaughter of almost the entire original inhabitants of the entire American continent in the name of christianity.
I feel neither hatred anger or violence towards anyone caught up in this evil cult,only pity and some alarm that they still cling to such nonsense in the twenty first century when proof of their delusion is staring them and us all in the face.
I dont know whether you are british or not but your lack of knowledge of for instance the windsors would indicate that you are not. Well grab hold of this pet.. the parasites who currently inhabit buck house are just that. They have never until recently paid any taxs on their vast wealth and the taxes they do pay now were negoitaited with a condescending tory government and are way below what ordinary citizens of this country pay.
They claim that there wouldnt be any tourists without them, but Ireland, a much smaller country with a population a tenth in size that of the Uk, has about three times the tourist traffic of the UK and it doesnt have any parasites leeching off the population
It may be that the two youngest members of this clan of parasites are in the army but that is a ploy by which to keep the natives quiet,as was their decision to pay SOME TAXES, so that they will be seen as being somehow patriotic britons and fool everyone.
Contrary to your assertion that the exnazi paedophile protector currently installed in Rome cant excommunicate Hitler, it didnt stop them excommunicating in the past when even dumb animals could be excomunnicsted. He did however re communicate the Holocaust denier bishop and gave him an important job in the cesspool they call the Vatican. I hold no grudge against anyone, but especially the deluded,because i recognise that they are indoctrinated and for the most part do not possess the intellectual faculties to tear themselves away from the irrational fears engenderd by such delusion. As for the crusades you are entirely wrong to say the also deluded Muslims started the crusades,just because they invaded Spain and settled peacefully there until attacked and ejected by a paranoid catholic church as were the Jews, and who wanted an entirely christian europe. Much the same as was seen in recent times when the Christian serbs tried to ethnically cleanse the Baltic of muslims and hitler who tried to rid europe of the Jews. and finally. your assertion that the nation of islam is more homophobic than the pope, well you seem to forget that their faith also springs from that same Abrahamic myth.
so when you take me on be sure you know what you are talking about,cc.
Michelle wrote comment 65
“If you decided to be Gay didn’t you also decide not to be parents. I don’t understand? There are thousands of hetrosexual parents who adopt because they cannot have children but yet Gay people want to adopt when they can indeed have children.”
Michelle you are contradicting your self
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Michelle wrote comment 65
“ I for one am glad that some people still see that the term “Gay parents” sounds ridiculous and there are some people who are willing to fight to stop this infestation of political correctness from flooding into every corner of the next generation.”
Michelle if parenting for you is just a label, then you clear misunderstand what parenting really is. Gay parents are just as able to provide the love care and support that children need for their development, there is nothing politically correct about that.
Michelle wrote comment 65
“Clearly children will be confused if they have two women or two men bringing them up and you gay rights supporters cannot disagree with that. Honestly I couldn’t care less if people want to sleep with people of the same sex but to put children into this set up unwillingly is cruel.”
Longitudinal research studies in the area of developmental psychology have found no adverse effects from gay parenting; moreover, there is some research that points to children favouring slightly better with same sex parents.
Michelle wrote comment 65
“Children deserve to have a normal upbringing if evolution wanted same sex parenting Gay people would have been able to have kids.”
Michelle, so are you saying that heterosexuals who cannot conceive children should be banned from receiving invitro fertilization . . . because this is not normal.
Michelle wrote comment 65
“I for one am not catholic however I do belive that the world and its biological structure is created perfectly and should not be alterd just because everyone wants to jump on the Gay band waggon.”
Michelle . . . once again. So are you saying that heterosexuals who cannot conceive children should be banned from receiving invitro fertilization . . . because this is not normal?
Michelle wrote comment 65
“And as for you sikkos who are talking about priest being paedo’s lets remember that its their homosexual urges that have led them to abuse all those little choir boys.
Michelle . . . with regards paedophilia both male and female heterosexuals also abuse children. In addition, current research points to how the paedophile is not someone outside the family, but someone usually in the family. The myth of the lone paedophile stalking children is largely myth. Moreover, with regards abuse in the Catholic Church, it is interesting how you focus on homosexual paedophilia but neglect heterosexual paedophilia. This is very telling in your part.
Michelle wrote comment 65
Why do people have Gay rights when people can’t have religious rights? If CATHOLIC churches do not want to compromise their religious beliefs for Gay people I think Gay people should just go to other organisations and stop being so hypocritical.
Michelle . . . Religion is not a right; it is a life style choice. Gay people do not choose to be gay
Well done, JohnK. Kisses to you, if you don’t mind, this Sunday morning!
Thanks Eddy . . . Have a great Sunday, especialy now the sunshine is out.
Personally I’d rather children were raised with love, positivity, freedom & tolerance for all diversities by gay parents who actually want them, rather than by the brainwashing, bullying, abuse-ridden, closetted & anally retentive Catholic church.
gay people despite heteros …dont be confused they are just as biased as heteros ….come out your la la land take your own kids and put them in their beds