Re: gay adoption
 

Re: gay adoption
 

Happily this has been resolved, and the Catholic Church now has until the end of 2008 to decide what they want to do.

Discrimination of any kind is unacceptable in a modern, secular country.

As stated earlier, if all faith group's prejudices and beliefs were to be exempt from the law of the land, there would be chaos.

"Islamists deny human rights to gays. An attempt by the United Nations to include gay people in anti-discrimination measures is being derailed by a coalition of Islamic countries. UN sources said that Pakistan, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Malaysia were doing everything in their power to stop the resolution. They hope to delay the vote long enough to kill it off entirely. Secretary of the Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association in Britain, George Broadhead, commented that all Muslim countries outlawed homosexuality, and the penalties for those convicted ranged from prison, flogging, execution by a variety of perverted methods – such as throwing the victim off a cliff or pushing a stone wall on to them. "The record of these countries on human rights in general is bad enough, but when it comes to gay human rights, they are disgusting""
NSS Newsline 2003 Apr 25

Re: gay adoption
 

Let's hope this never becomes a muslim country. :(

Re: gay adoption
 

The heir to the throne already wants to be defender of 'faiths', rather than just faith, meaning the Church of England.

Re: gay adoption
 

Re: gay adoption
 

I too would defend anyone's rights to their own religious beliefs, but if they happened to endager the freedoms of others, and by that I just don't mean homosexuals, then I would fight it every step of the way from happening in this country.

Re: gay adoption
 

that is completely NUTS it mirrors the BNP. no wonder some folks are prejudice.

Re: gay adoption
 

Strangely enough David Cameron today compared some Muslim groups, which included the Muslim Council of Britain, a body which has advised the current government's policies, to extreme right wing groups such as the BNP, and their mirrored intolerances.

http://www.itn.co.uk/news/index_299f...4ff107a9d.html

Re: gay adoption
 

It will be intersting to see if Tony and Cheri get the Papel/Papal knighthoods they have been groveling for

Re: gay adoption
 

jeez cashy thinkin like a bloody tory.:eek:

Re: gay adoption
 

strange one that! there were stories about 30-40 years ago about the conservatives secretly funding the BNP,has the leopard changed its spots?

Re: gay adoption
 

i fear i may have joined this conversation a little late as it seems to have evolved rather rapidly, however here's my twopenneth for what it's worth.
for one i have no problem with gay couples adopting children i believe same sex partnerships can provide just as loving a home to a child as any however i do see one small problem. And that is the general wellbeing of the child among his/her peers. As we well know children can be cruel and heartless creatures (not all mind you) and at the first sign of another child being "different" are quick to jump on this and could leave the said child wide open to abuse and bullying.and although the adopted child may grow to be more tolerant of such things as gay relationships in some cases it may swing the other way(no pun intended) and leave the child with quite severe issues.

and point number 2. imho it would be impossible to even consider exemption of any kind for any organisation from these new laws as to even consider it is to leave the door wide open for anybody and his dog to say i'm exempt from being prejudiced and i can do/say what i like (well if it's good enough for them why not everyone else). how can you possibly build a society on a system of one rule for one and another for everyone else(hmmmm sounds familiar).

Re: gay adoption
 

Re: gay adoption
 

The basic difference is that marriages can have a religious component, which is in addition to the civil component set up under law. Adoptions don't. If memory serves, the Catholic Church regards marriage as a sacrament. Adoption is not a sacrament. While religions may have adoption agencies, they do not have legal or religious jurisdiction over the adoption. It's a comparison of apples and oranges.

Marriages can happen in a church. Adoptions cannot (at least, not in the USA - I'm assuming that the UK is the same?).

Re: gay adoption
 

Why is it that some people, in fact, many people cannot just accept that everyone can have an opinion about something that may be different to theirs in whole or in part and then set out and attack a differing opinion?

After all it does state at the head of each thread: “common sense in here please. Decent serious discussions to be enjoyed by everyone!”

This thread is a typical example. Mancie opened the thread with a simple question. Should the Catholic Church be exempt from the proposed adoption laws? Although his way of phrasing the question was different.

I made my views quite clear but views are not much use unless they are qualified with reasons, so I also gave my reasons. That is called HAVING AN OPINION. So did other contributors.

And what happens next? Arguments about who is right and who is wrong that degenerated into name calling in an attempt to belittle what was an honest opinion by someone and in one case casting disgusting allegations.

If nothing else the thread gets dragged off topic and no moderator steps in to bring it back on topic.

Is it too much to ask that everyone respects the OPINION of another and they just present their own OPINION without all the nastiness that happens? Thus anyone reading the whole thread can make a balanced judgement on the issue and decide for themselves if they need to change their opinion or not.

I guess maybe it is!