A test case starting today involves a couple who say they have been barred from fostering because they refuse to give up their religious belief that homosexuality is unacceptable.
Owen and Eunice Johns refuse to compromise their Pentecostal beliefs
Supporters hope their legal challenge will set a precedent for the rights of Christians to foster or adopt children without compromising their faith.
But senior bishops fear that if the ruling goes against them, it could have devastating consequences for those with religious beliefs.
Most of you will know by now that I don't hold a candle for any religion. However, this couple seem at first view to be God fearing couple, who just happen to believe as many people do that Homosexuality is not a normal state of affairs in the natural world. I don't think that in a foster situation that parents should unduly influence a child to follow any religion in particular, but if the child has already been taught religious beliefs and wants to continue, I for one would rather see a stable couple fostering or adopting children, rather than a same sex couple. I would hope though, that if a child they foster feels they have a tendency towards Homosexuality, they would be able to handle it sympathetically. If however they found a child trying on his foster mother's knickers, some mild chastisement, may be in order! There must be Pentecostal, Protestant, Catholic and Muslim children out there looking for a stable upbringing, so I wish the Johns every success in their appeal, a situation that should not have arisen in the first place in a stable, sensible democracy, which we are just beginning to get back to after the Marxist madness of the last 13 years.
5 comments:
How can you expect to promote homosexuality when you've got people like Owen and Eunice Johns there to throw a spanner in the works?
This is the way it is, no matter what people may think, it's not up to the them. Your controllers, the state want you to think and behave as they want, not how you want and this is the important factor here - control.
This is why I despise socialism, because socialism is and always has been about control. It pisses on any form of individual liberty whatsoever and does not see people as individual entities able to make their own decisions but as a homogeneous blob, that needs decisions to be made for them - state control = bad - any form of control = bad.
And lastly fuck democracy DL for the simple reason that 50.5% beats 49.5% and this does not prove overwhelming majority control but will give it. If 50.5% of the population decide to vote for Sharia then everyone's fucked.
Remove all forms of democracy and allow full blown liberty within society - no political parties, no centralised government, minimal laws (murder, rape, theft) and allow people their natural born freedoms to live. Democracy is the reason we're in this mess!
Harbingers, what you describe might be an ideal utopia, but it's not going to happen. What we have to do is make the best of the shite we've got at the moment. Some aspects of Sharia seem to be OK, although to be fair, I haven't looked into it as much as you have.
Those BellendCaledonia socialist wankers are attacking me on twatter because Newsnet Scotland published one of my articles in their E-paper! Pricks.
LOL, remember bad publicity is still publicity! It'll get a few readers to your blog I suspect!
Harbingers, you mean I sent a few to theirs!
Banned, that is what they are working towards. Are you a Paedo-want a young child to abuse? Get one here and this week only we have a special offer, two for the price of one!
Post a Comment