gay adoption

[jambutty]

In answer to the opening question I have posted my opinion that the Catholic Church should not be allowed to opt out of the current adoption laws.

Originally Posted by jambutty

The law is the law, is the law and should apply to all citizens of the land without fear or favour. FULL STOP!

Where this issue has gone all wrong is allowing homosexual couples to adopt in the first place.

I also offered the opinion that homosexual couples should not be allowed to adopt children and gave my reasons why.

If some people cannot accept that I am just as entitled as they are to have an opinion and they start casting aspersions and indulging in childish name calling because my opinion differs to theirs then they are to be pitied, but not by me. I have nothing but contempt for such individuals.

No words or deeds will ever convince me otherwise that a gay couple COULD groom a young lad to satisfy their disgusting sexual needs and that possibility should be enough not to risk an innocent child’s welfare. Similarly a lesbian couple COULD groom a young girl.

[jambutty]

Accepted!

I have to add some more words because the system told me to.

[chav1]

Originally Posted by jambutty

No words or deeds will ever convince me otherwise that a gay couple COULD groom a young lad to satisfy their disgusting sexual needs and that possibility should be enough not to risk an innocent child’s welfare. Similarly a lesbian couple COULD groom a young girl.

yeah but dosnt teh same aply to straight couples , theres been stories of foster parents abusing kids as well

although i dont find the idea of sex between 2 men at all tastefull i wouldnt say been a homo makes you a peodophile , if a gay couple are together it would suggest comitment to each other especialy with gay marages now and would be quite happy buggering each other just like hetrosexual couples enjoy sex between themselves

as for sex between 2 women i think this should be strongly encouraged

but not the mustache faced dungaree wearing ones

[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

That's why I can't understand why you support homophobia when it comes from the Catholic church.

I don't support homophobia. In fact if the Catholic church was literally homophobic they wouldn't direct gay couples to other agencies.

I eat pork but I fully support the right of Jews and Muslims not to do so.

Part of my own religion is not to drink alcohol - that doesn't stop me going to AccyWeb meetings in pubs where others drink alcohol. If, however, it was ever a prerequisite to entry that one had to drink a pint of lager or similar then I would ask to be exempted from that or alternatively I simply wouldn't come.

[Wynonie Harris]

Alright, well, as you said, we're going round in circles and I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

Anyway, I'm tired of being an enlightened liberal now and I want to go back to my old life as a Labour-baiting reactionary. Now, about all these prisoners that have disappeared....

[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

A lesbian Mum kissing her daughter isn't going to kiss the daughter in any different way than a straight Mum does - unless you are implying it will lead to incest.

Originally Posted by jambutty

No but a lesbian woman with an adopted daughter might. Same as a gay man with an adopted son might.

But by the very same token a straight adoptive mother could abuse her adopted son or a straight adoptive father could abuse the adopted daughter. Are you saying that because a child is adopted the parents don't love them as a child but see them as a potential sexual partner? I know adoptive parents and they love their children as children. Potential adoptive parents are vetted by the agencies and as far as the Catholic agency is concerned (and I presume others are the same) the children are checked up on to see if all is well.

Now I know there have been cases of children being abused by foster parents and there was that infamous case of the paedophile ring, but that doesn't mean that all are the same.

Originally Posted by jambutty

Are you aware that one girl in ten is sexually abused by her own father and to a much lesser extent boys are sexually abused by their mother. Not to mention by older siblings and aunts and uncles.

Well there you go. If one girl in ten is sexually abused by her own father maybe the adopted children have a better chance of not being the victims of abuse. Some people who have children by natural means are really not fit to be parents and quite often children who have been abused by their own genetic parents are the ones who end up in care.

Originally Posted by jambutty

I'll grant you that sexual orientation is not contagious in the true sense of the word but it can be learned.

I disagree with that. Many things can be learned but sexual orientation is not a form of behaviour. If it's part of the physical make-up of the person it can no more be learned than double-jointedness or knock knees.

[Bazf]

Just read the thread and was not going to comment but I have just done a lesson on diversity and I was amazed that some of the kids I teach are more open and understanding then some of the adults on here. In the lesson I used the anlogy of a ladder.
Picture a ladder with three rungs on it. Each of these rungs is spaced widely from the next, making it impossible to reach one without first reaching the one directly below it. Rising to the next rung requires a big stretch that would be difficult for someone who is stiff and inflexible, while someone who is limber could more easily make the ascent. The way we each deal with diversity develops in a progression like this ladder.
First rung Recognition. "Racist," "bigot," and "ignorant" are some of the words which are aimed at those who are locked in the stage of recognition. These are people who respond negatively when they come in contact with someone they don't understand or who is different from them. The problem here is a lack of information. This ignorance can cause trouble in two ways.
Second rung Tolerance. Remember that what keeps people locked in the recognition stage is a lack of information. So, in order for one to move on to the second stage, that of tolerance, one must ask questions. As we learn about the unknown, it becomes easier to accept as reality, like adjusting the focus control on a camera. When we make the effort, we can see details that we might otherwise have missed.
Third rung Celebration. Celebrating diversity is the equation for true synergy, whether you happen to be a smooth-talking student leader or a well-organized adviser. By acknowledging that every member of your community, organization, or family has something to contribute, and recognizing that his or her contributions add value to your life, you are moving toward the stage of celebration.

[shillelagh]

No there shouldnt be any exemptions

Yes gay and lesbian people should be able to adopt.

To someone who has been discriminated against - mainly for jobs and been told to my face - why should anyone be discriminated against for anything?

[cashman]

Originally Posted by shillelagh

No there shouldnt be any exemptions

Yes gay and lesbian people should be able to adopt.

To someone who has been discriminated against - mainly for jobs and been told to my face - why should anyone be discriminated against for anything?

now jen what about Conservatives?

[ANNE]

I don't see has it matters weather the couple are gay or straight so long has the child is happy and loved.
They would have to go through the same processes as everybody else and is no body's business but their own.

[shillelagh]

Originally Posted by cashman

now jen what about Conservatives?

To each their own if you want to be blue be blue if you want to be red be red - im not bothered - the tories buy me my tea on election day if i catch the right person!!! lol

[Ianto.W.]

Bazf, I have just read your contribution on diversity, to this very interesting debate I must admit being a bit slow on the uptake I read it several times, likening the spaces of the rungs on the ladder to the diffrering opinions voiced in this debate, made things a lot clearer for me to understand, the final rung summed it up perfectly.

Bazf, Third rung Celebration. Celebrating diversity is the equation for true synergy, whether you happen to be a smooth-talking student leader or a well-organized adviser. By acknowledging that every member of your community, organization, or family has something to contribute, and recognizing that his or her contributions add value to your life, you are moving toward the stage of celebration.

Thank you for that very valuable lesson.

[Billcat]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

So why are people supporting discrimination against Catholicism?

How are they discriminating against Catholicism? I don't see it!

If the Catholic Church chooses to participate in non-religious activities, such as adoption, then they must abide by the legal standard for that activity. They should not be allowed to discriminate.

Personal beliefs are fine, but they should not be allowed to impose on others. Example - we have pharmicists here in the USA who, because of their beliefs on abortion, are refusing to fill presciptions for the morning-after pill. As a result, there are some communities where is is difficult or impossible to obtain this medication. Their refusal to dispense legal medications should result in a warning the first time, and permanant revocation of their license the second time. If they don't want to dispense any and all legally-prescribed medication, then perhaps they should find a different line of work.

[cashman]

good point Billcat but that poses the question which came first the chicken or the egg? i dont know.

[steeljack]

Originally Posted by Billcat

How are they discriminating against Catholicism? I don't see it!

If the Catholic Church chooses to participate in non-religious activities, such as adoption, then they must abide by the legal standard for that activity. They should not be allowed to discriminate.

Personal beliefs are fine, but they should not be allowed to impose on others. Example - we have pharmicists here in the USA who, because of their beliefs on abortion, are refusing to fill presciptions for the morning-after pill. As a result, there are some communities where is is difficult or impossible to obtain this medication. Their refusal to dispense legal medications should result in a warning the first time, and permanant revocation of their license the second time. If they don't want to dispense any and all legally-prescribed medication, then perhaps they should find a different line of work.

sorry Billcat, have to disagree with your logic on this one, are you saying a Pharmacist should be compelled to issue the morning after pill even if he/ she disagrees with it on moral grounds ? then it follows ....a doctor should be compelled to carry out abortions without using his/her own moral conscience, both actions have the same result . I dont really think that the morning-after pill can be described as medication , I've allways thought that medicine was was supposed to heal not kill .