Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Court rules that religious charities are free to ban gay couples from adopting in Australia

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Again we have the privileging of religion above everyone Else’s rights.

    It’s been said again and again on the forums on here and I wont labour the point but this would be unthinkable to stop disabled or black or people from other religious denominations from adopting.

    Children in the care of such agencies lose out too because there are many that need a good home and stability.. Yet, religious dogma is being put before the welfare of children just to appease the religious who like discriminating against homosexuals and other groups.

  2. Harry Small 28 Dec 2010, 12:31am

    This is a good example of why Australia’s apparent reputation for liberalism and gay friendliness is simply undeserved. Religion seems to have a strange hold on the place and it is of course, compared with us in the UK, absolutely crawling with catholics.

  3. Consideration for the child should always come first and foremost not consideration for anti-gay religious dogma as has happened here.

  4. How depressing – it also seems from the papers that the courts think that parliament should look at the loopholes in the act but the politicians don’t seem to be interested in doing anything….

    relgious exemptions are out of control everywhere…..Harry – I’m Australian, it is normaly quite liberal and gay friendly that’s why I don’t understand things like this ……

  5. Harry Small , you are spot on! As an Aussie, I am appalled at how conservative my country is! Yes, sadly, our main 2 old political parties, The Australian Labor Party and the Liberal Party are crawling with Catholics! They trash our Federal and state parliaments with their presence and obstructions.
    Australia will still have Elizabeth 2 as Head of State when you Brits have got rid of the Royal Family! The Windsors will probably move here!

  6. should be the other way round……people who want to indoctrinate kids should not be allowed to adopt.

  7. Strange how people who can’t or won’t bring up their own children are given a final right to decide how “best” to bring up the kids. Says a lot for their parenting skills when the only thing they can think of is: “No Bloody Queers!”

  8. Brenton, the British house of lords (non elected and can never be de-elected until they pass out) are made up temporal AND spirtual lords (Bishops) and they still have old herditary lords and the head of it all (the Queen) happens to be the head of the C of E which isn’t particularly liberal or gay freindly….. At least we have an elected upper and lower houses in Australia, we have the chance in every election to make a difference (that’s why the Greens are making a difference here and yet the lib dems in the UK coalition govt are still up against the House of Lords !)……if the UK can get reasonably good anti-discrimination laws in place then Australia should be able to as well eventually but don’t forget the UK too has get out clauses for relgious freedom…..!

    It’s a bad day but don’t knock our country mate!

  9. Jock S. Trap 28 Dec 2010, 7:20am

    Ironic that they feel bringing up children in an enviroment of hate and bigotry is not only acceptable but in the best interest of the child.

    Hypocrites!

  10. I love how the UK gays who have never visited the country bash us for being homophobic and anti gay..

    Almost on a daily basis pinknews has a story about a bashing, an MP making offensive comments and discrimination cases all based in the UK.

    This hardly makes the UK a bastion of homophobia just as it does not make Australia with just one court case.

  11. Interesting that they want the right to discriminate in adoption services but are more than happy with using us as foster parents..

    Such hypocracy is hilarious but we are dealing with a church organisation.

  12. - yes and if you’re rich enough then you can by-pass the adoption agencies completely and get a surrogate mother to produce a baby – as Sir Elton has done…

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12084650 – Sir Elton John becomes father via surrogate

    are we or aren’t we ok to have children , the rules should apply to everyone !

  13. Steve@GayWebHosting 28 Dec 2010, 8:46am

    @John. Completely different subject really. Having a child via a surrogate is nothing to do with adoption or fostering. It means that the child is yours genetically and you are the biological parent.

    Just as it is wrong to brand a whole country homophobic or ´backward´ just on one piece of legislation, there really is too much influence in politics by churches. Let the sky-pixie believers think whatever they like, But lets separate church and states forever.

  14. I completely believe that gay couples should have the right to adopt, but I can’t help but feel that if I had a child up for adoption I would want to veto very religious couples from doing so.

  15. Do these charities receive any state funding?

    If so then a case needs to be taken to stop all state funding.

  16. “Religion seems to have a strange hold on the place and it is of course, compared with us in the UK, absolutely crawling with catholics.”

    But Spain, Portugal, Argentine, Belgium and Mexico have even more catholics than Australia. Can you explain then how these 5 countries have full legal equality?

  17. SHAME, SHAME, SHAME.

    Australia is NOT the Shangri-La that most Brits think it is.

    It is a land of sun, sand, sea, and many EMPTY IGNORANT BIGOTED heads.

    That’s why I fled the bloody place!

  18. Disappointing . . . but with the rise of the “Mrs Hanson” Types in Australia, is there any real difference between this ultra right wing resurgence; and the regressive politics of the religious fundamentalists.

  19. JackAlison 28 Dec 2010, 3:29pm

    Australia is one of the most racist countries on earth. Every UN inspector that visits the plight of blacks here says so! It is one of the last ‘liberal democracies?!’ with no federal bill or charter of rights. It has no federal govt. protection for sexual orientation in its anti-discrimination law. The ‘best part’ is it will not allow gay men and women to marry overseas because it refuses to issues certificates on non-impediment. It is NOT a ‘laid back’ happy-go-lucky-live-and-let-live society. Really, when u go there and hear the general populace talk about refugees, blacks, gays or any minority u realise it is worse than the American deep south. An appalling place for civil rights!

  20. John in Calif. 28 Dec 2010, 5:35pm

    While peers and bishops in the United Kingdom are appointed rather than elected, they have been functionally subordinate to the Commons since the passage of the Parliament Act 1911. If there’s a dispute, the more representative Commons will overrule the Lords and get their way eventually.

    In Australia and the United States, however, the Senate is coequal to the House of Representatives in nearly all matters. They are allowed to block supply. They can pretty much do whatever they want. And the fact that senators are “elected” is somewhat of a misnomer. Senators serve the interests of geographical entities rather than actual people. In a Senate, states with 500,000 residents have exactly the same amount of representation as one with 8 million residents.

    There’s nothing inherently more legitimate about that. In fact, the sheer amount of power an individual senator wields compared to a lord suggests that the British model is slightly more “democratic.” Albeit in an oddly anachronistic sort of way.

  21. limp wristed 28 Dec 2010, 8:24pm

    The most racist group in Australia is probably the blacks , with an all blacks in their eyes not welcome. Strangely enough the only real racism I encountered was by the English who had emigrated there. Again , catholics are the most gay friendly of major religous groups , in attitudes of their members. Seems to me the anti catholic sentiment is probably cloaked anti irish racism , and of course the protestant churches of the US are so progressive. Dont talk drivel about a country you have no understanding of.

  22. Free to discriminate against a gay minority…how marvellous for religious bigots!!!
    Will there be an appeal against this ruling?

  23. For Shame!

  24. This was the appeal I think, it’s taken 7 yrs to get to this, I think the charity was appealing an earlier case that went against them…I’m not sure?

    Some pretty naff comments about Aus here, we lost the adoption case wheras the UK won it but that doesn’t mean we are much more homophobic than the UK. We’re just come out of the Howards yrs, you’ve just had 13 yrs of labour with a strong EU influence behind you. We both have somekind of CPs and we both have anti-discrimaintion laws, we’re both fighting homophobic bullying at shcools and we’re both fighting for marriage equality (although I think we’ll have it before you ????). From this case it seems that our anti-discrimination laws aren’t as good as yours and not that our country is totally anti-gay!. Aus is not generally a bad place for gays!!

    John in Calif – it’s not very common for the house of lords to be overruled. I don’t think they can vote down a budget but they can certainly vote down any improvements to gay rights. To overrule the house of lords too often would question whether they are the right thing and so it rarely happens… The official relgion in the UK is the C of E I think and they form part of the house of lords (no other relgion is represented), the head of govt is the Queen who is also head of the C of E… You may think they have no power but to get the queen who is also the head of the church to sign a bill such as marriage equality would be very symbolic as it would mean that she has head of the c of E and the commonwealth has oked gay marrige ….that’s a tough one to get across and so the house of lords, bishops and the queen are very, very relevant and have huge power.

    Australia on the other hand has none of this, we have no official relgion and relgion , catholicsm or any other, is NOT part of our govt…

  25. To Limp wristed
    ‘The most racist group in Australia is probably the blacks , with an all blacks in their eyes not welcome…’
    Were u high or drunk when u wrote this? or both? Mayb u should pull ur head outta ur racist aussi arse. In 2007 there was and still is ‘the intervention’ where police and military were called in to bring ‘law and order’ to the’ savage blacks’ and the racial discrimination act was suspended so the govt could do so. This is NOT the only example of a country that has little or no respect for minority rights.Wake up and smell the coffee!!!

  26. If this landmark stands, does that mean if a religion wants to discriminate against an ethnic group, it’ll be OK to do so?

  27. I agree with most of these comments. But Australia has been going down this fundamentalist path for years because of our alliance with America. Australia has been and will always be a “PUPPET of AMERICA”. Oprah’s visit here proved that. We have become too Americanised. America is riddled with Fundamentalists and extremist religious nuts.

  28. I just read the string of comments re: Religious Charities can discriminate against Gay couples in child adoptions. Echos the very same problems we have here in America, even here in California, supposedly one of THE most liberal states in the Union. The unfortunate thing is RELIGION always seems to have an overriding trump on just about everything until someone FINALLY can bring up a challenge to the finding, in our case being Proposition 8 and marriage equality. Until court cases are filed, judged and re-judged up the entire ladder, we still get religion impeding our rights. We are now into our THIRD judgment, two ALREADY deeming religious hate legislation UNCONSTITUTIONAL and we go back for a FINAL ruling possibly in our Supreme court. Until religion is thoroughly extricated from governmental functions, we will ALL have these problems. We even have a “liberal” Presideint (Obama) “evolving” his personal feelings on Gay marriage. This from a “liberal” mind you! I sympathise with you all on the frustrations of RELIGION mucking up equal rights for GLBT.

  29. radical53 – sorry but we are pretty closely linked to the UK as well – look at the ABC , it’s mostly English TV and we have tons of BBC coverage on news items…. our culture is based on British culture not American.. American culture is all around the world not just Australia…

    Just look at the recent pinknews items on Stephen Green and the BBC and his org Chritian Voice – we’ll soon have this news item over here!.

    I agre with the above comment as long as relegion is part of the govt then it’s an uphill struggle …

    Quote from Stephen Green on his British Christian Voice website

    “…Even though our Queen was anointed to reign under the authority of God in the Name of Jesus Christ and given the Holy Bible as “the rule for the whole life and government of Christian princes,” her ministers pass laws in opposition to the will of God. They bear a huge responsibility for the way Britain has fallen into sin and misery. ….”

    Queen , head of govt , head of C of E – dangerous mix!!!!

  30. Firstly we should stick by our Aussie gay friends and support them , any law in any counrty against gay rights. IS agianst us all , where ever we live!

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

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all