Reader comments · Catholic adoption agency barred from refusing gay couples · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Catholic adoption agency barred from refusing gay couples

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Well don’t they just make absolute fools of themselves, publicly asking for exemption from equality laws and the legal right to be prejudiced towards gay couples. I wonder if they even stop and think for a minute about the cold and calculated hate that comes out of their mouths. There is no justification at all for the church, or its affiliates, to demand an exemption allowing them to treat us like third class citizens.

    They now plan to appeal again. Why? The rule is still going to be the same; it won’t change.

    This agency shouldn’t be allowed to decide who has the children anymore with views like that anyway. Take their rights away as they wish to take ours. Move the children in their care to other less bigoted adoption agencies.

  2. Why do they keep referring to damaged children, don’t they know 15,000 people – fifteen thousand, mind – successfully applied to the redress board set up in the Republic of Ireland to compensate children systematically raped, tortured, and abused by the catholic church.

  3. A bit rich of them to talk of damaged children given the catholic church’s terrible record in child abuse and their total denial of responsibility for this since.

    In this case, the needs of the children must come first. Clearly this has happened. It is no good for children to be brought up in the households of people who will tell them, from a very early age, that LGBT are somehow “wrong”. Instilling prejudice and bigotry in children is child abuse.

    In the end it is the children whose situation will now improve. If the catholic adoption agency shuts down, then it the children will be place in homes of people who are more likely to instil values of acceptance of all. So I strongly feel the right decision was made in the interests of not putting up with bigotry in this case, but more importantly, the interests of the children have been kept as THE most important factor.

    I believe there were some adoption agencies who tried to discriminate on racial grounds in years past, but I’d need to research this a bit more to find specific examples.

  4. Bigotted religious people should Never be responsible for any childs welfare, anywhere. They serve no other purpose than to damage children filling them with hatred, lies and discrimination.

    At last a common sense judgement. If the agency has to close so be it. With shameful bigots running it it should Never have been allowed.

    I dare say we’ll get some kind of reaction saying how poorly Catholic Care has been treated. Maybe they’ll All now have to rethink now that it clearly isn’t going to be easy for these religions to openly discriminate.

    May our voice grow louder and once and for all stamp out any religion that sees fit to show such disregard to other human beings, especially children.

  5. Good news. Whatever one’s belief’s, the Law applies to everyone.

    Agencies placing children for adoption should have open minds so that they can choose the BEST home for a child – not one that suits their own personal prejudices.

  6. Just out of interest, I wonder how Catholics would respond if someone set up an agency which specifically wanted to bar Catholics from adoption.

  7. I wondered how Catholics would react if someone set up an agency that barred them from adoption.

  8. Why can’t these God-bothering nutters obey the law as the rest of us have to or just f***off? People demanding to be excused from obeying the law on the grounds of unprovable supernatural belief are getting really annoying. And people who claim to be fit to find homes for children on the basis of pre-scientific fairy stories and not empirical evidence are just plain frightening.

  9. gay couples are harmed by any discrimination
    religions shouldn’t be above the law

  10. I’ve just really had about enough of religion thinking it can piss all over gay men and women and equality rights in general.
    They talk about damaged children yet they don’t even seem to acknowledge the problem with their priests sexually abusing raping thousands of them.
    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – religion should be disbanded in this country, we have no need for it anymore and faith instead should be placed in society.
    In a 100 years, we’d all be happier.

  11. Religious groups always seem to think that their beliefs should grant them special exemption from the law of the land. But convictions, no matter how strongly held, can scarcely justify being above the law. We wouldn’t permit the sacrifice of the first-born if a parent’s religion enjoined this. “Religious reasons” (contradiction in terms!) don’t entitle anyone to special treatment. We must get away from the idea that parents own their children, or that parentless children can be owned by religious organisations who can then assign them to the care of others in accordance with their *own* religious convictions. For this reason, the ruling by the Charity Commission was the only sane one, and is to be welcomed.

  12. Felix Garnet-Simister. 19 Aug 2010, 2:54pm

    Good. We’re not living in awe of the Church any more. If they refuse to comply with 21st century laws against bigotry then they must take the rap for it.

  13. George Broadhead, PTT 19 Aug 2010, 3:01pm

    This is very good news indicating, as it does, that the Charity Commission is gay-friendly and not kowtowing to religionists.

  14. I agree with above- the Catholic church has damaged too many children already. Whereas gay adopters are more likely to take on children with problems and yield excellent outcomes. If they were genuine about wanting to do their jobs they would be severing links with the Catholic church and building links with the LGBT community.

  15. Hurrah! BTW Jessica – the regulations were passed in 2007, not 2005…

  16. The court made the right decision by refusing to permit an exception to the law for this Catholic adoption agency.

    One law for all!

  17. Politicians enact laws to ensure our equal adoption rights.
    Politicians prefer children to be parented by married couples.
    Does this mean politicians will now support equality in marriage?

  18. So it’s only that catholic adoption agency in Glasgow that’s still legally allowed to refuse gay couples thanks to the help given to them by the SNP Scottish Government.

  19. Tim Hopkins 20 Aug 2010, 7:37am

    St Margaret’s Catholic adoption agency in Glasgow are not legally allowed to refuse same-sex couples. The same equality and human rights laws apply to them as apply in England. Those laws are not devolved to Scotland, so are not in the power of the Scottish Govt. St Margaret’s are breaking the law.

    Although Leeds Catholic Care could still appeal, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Scottish Govt were simply wrong in advising St Margaret’s that they could legally continue to discriminate (as we and many others said all along). That bad advice is likely to come back and bite St Margaret’s on the bum if they carry on discriminating.

    St Margaret’s best bet would be to accept that the law has now been clarified, and to stop breaking it before they are challenged with legal action.

  20. watch the movie Patrik 1.5 (
    a gay swedish couple wanting to adopt – instead of a 1.5 yr old they got a 15 yr old….
    Everyone lives happily ever after – but it’s pretty funny/tragic/poignant until then…

  21. Kate Walker 27 Jan 2011, 10:35am

    It’s so sad – anybody (gay or straight) can make a baby but people want to refuse gay couples from adopting? Refuse alcoholics, druggies, violent offenders but if a stable couple (again gay or straight) wishes to adopt a child, why ever NOT??? Effing mad.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.