gay adoption

[Gayle]

This thread has raised an awful lot of issues, some of which contradict others. I’ve given it a lot of thought and slept on it to try and put my views into a reasonable order. Just as an aside Wynonie, this sort of emotive issue is why I wouldn’t make a good MP – too many factors to confuse the issue - in future, I think I’ll stick to potholes on Union Road.

Anyway, to clarify my thoughts – except that now that I’ve written it all out it’s not clarification, it’s a huge amount of contradictions – so apologies before you start reading.

1. my own personal views on discrimination

I do not discriminate against any single person and treat everybody as individuals – some I like and some I don’t like. In an ideal world (which I realise doesn’t exist) there would be no discrimination and therefore no need for discrimination laws. People would take other people for what they are and not judge them on colour, sexual preference or gender.

However, Willow raised an interesting point about BNP – I find everything that group stands for to be abhorrent and would love to stop them from existing. The problem is that if I preach that everyone should be free to think what they want to think then by my own definition I am allowing them that freedom too. So contradiction number one – I hate discrimination in every form, yet I would clearly be happy to discriminate against anyone who discriminates against other people.

2. the real world of discrimination

The real world, as Wynonie points out, contains discrimination all around us based on colour, sexual preference and gender, and other factors. Laws should exist so that people can not discriminate against anyone else based on any of those factors. The laws should exist to provide a level playing field and to allow everyone freedom of choice. The laws should be about ensuring that no one is discriminated against and so inciting racial or sexual orientation hatred should not be allowed. However, there is a fine line between thinking racially or putting up a sign saying ‘no blacks/gays/etc in here’. Going back to human rights issues you can not stop some people from thinking those things. I don’t like people thinking those things but the fact is that some people do. I agree that they should not be allowed to put up signs of that nature. Education and understanding are essential to break down these barriers. So contradiction number two – I do not like the thought that we need discrimination laws and yet I accept that they are necessary.

3. the catholic churches (or any other religion’s) teachings vs government edicts

I have a real problem with the government imposing itself on any religious group, (particularly one which has 1000s of years of teaching under its belt), if you start down that route you have to insist that women are allowed to become priests, gay couples can get married in a church, women should be allowed into the inner rooms in a mosque, etc. In other words you have to completely pick apart the basic cornerstones of each and every faith to a point where there is nothing left except a group of people who get together every Sunday morning for a sing-song.
If you start unpicking the basic teachings then surely you will end up a point where there is nothing left.

At a time when we in the UK are losing our family support systems the church is a much needed place for a lot of people. Other people have argued that the lack of faith in the country is one of the main contributors to the lack of structure that we have so surely we should be bolstering up the faiths and support churches more giving us a sense of belonging and a structure.

Contradiction number three – I agree that there are many instances where the church is outdated but I am just a bit worried about where it will all stop.

So finally, back to the original question on this thread

4. should the catholic church be forced to promote gay adoptions?

Well, gay adoptions are not against the law – the government has already ensured that gay couples can adopt within the law. There are agencies that work with gay couples to allow them to adopt and so if a gay couple wished to adopt they would have many places to which they can turn. The catholic church is not saying that they would stop gay adoptions taking place, they are simply saying that they will not facilitate them. For that reason, and with the caveat that they don’t actively oppose gay adoption, then I see no reason to change their stance. By imposing laws ‘forcing’ people to go against their beliefs you give rise to the whole homophobic and racist groups out there. It fuels their arguments that the country is being diluted and that it will no longer be their own. This in turn allows groups like BNP to stand up and gain support.

So, final contradiction, although less so, I personally do not like discrimination however I do feel that the catholic church should be allowed to maintain their beliefs on this issue.


Finally, Wynonie, you asked if I feel that homophobia is different to racism. Well, no I think that both are the same and equally repulsive. I accept that I made a mistake with an earlier phrase that said race discrimination and gay discrimination are different – they aren’t, they’re both exactly the same and equally wrong. However, what I meant to say is that being gay is slightly (and note slightly) different to being born with a brown skin – I’m not saying it’s a lifestyle choice because it isn’t, I realise that ‘gayness’ can not be taught. However, there are a number of gay people who are still ‘in the closet’ for want of a better phrase – they themselves are hiding their ‘gayness’ – yet being born of asian or black parents is not something that you can hide. What I’m saying is that it is not me who is defining that there is a difference, it is gay people themselves who choose to not come out. If more people were more open about it perhaps there would not be the same stigmas attached to it in the first place.


So, two sides of A4 later and all I really know is that this issue is massive, the people who took the decisions to introduce the law probably didn’t go into it lightly and that I could not have done it myself.

[Gayle]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Incidentally, Gayle, I've just been rereading some of the posts in this thread and I noticed this which presumably refers to the fashion show you organised as part of your "do" at tht town hall. I assume that the muslim women wouldn't work with Garinda because he was bloke. Can I just ask, if you were organising a similar event with white women and they refused to work with a girl because she was Asian, would you still go ahead because "the needs of many outweighs the needs of one".

Different circumstances on different days require different decisions. There were a lot of factors involved and I made the right decision on that day.

[Wynonie Harris]

Crikey, Gayle, I don't really know what to say after that little lot! I keep starting to write "you've said you believe xxxxxxxxxxx but you're condoning xxxxxxxxxxxx" then I stop because I notice you've admitted the contradictions yourself!

All I can say is that your following statement is at the heart of my argument:

Originally Posted by Gayle

So, final contradiction, although less so, I personally do not like discrimination however I do feel that the catholic church should be allowed to maintain their beliefs on this issue.

As some bloke said on TV this morning, "let's not disguise prejudice as principles." The fact is, the Catholic church is prejudiced against gays and to call it a "belief" is to bestow upon it a dignity it doesn't deserve. It is just as illogical and immoral as the KKK's belief that the black race is inferior. To allow an organisation (even one with thousands of years of tradition) to indulge in its prejudices by opting out of an anti-discrimination law would be wrong and would give the wrong signal to others. However, we're going round in circles so I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Right, I'm now going to quietly remove my woolly liberal hat and retire to the pub!

[Gayle]

Perhaps we should look at it another way though

Are they discriminating or are they choosing to not discriminate? By politely pointing someone down the road to the adoption agency that will help them are they actually discriminating or are they opting out of the argument?

If they were holding up placards saying 'ban gay adoptions' then yes, that is discrimination but they're not doing - in fact, they were actually helping gay couples by pointing them in the right direction. But now they are no longer able to sit on the fence, which is effectively where they were, and either have to fight against the law or accept it lying down - either way, no one looks good.

[Ianto.W.]

Just got the ok to get blasted, so i'm off to the WM Club, to see if there are any good topics down there, Gayle if I see you I'll buy you one for writers cramp, you sure must have it

Wyninie Harris, Right, I'm now going to quietly remove my woolly liberal hat and retire to the pub!

[Billcat]

Originally Posted by Gayle

No, I'm well aware of the story. I am totally for human rights and every single person is equal in my mind - I wouldn't refuse you b&b - but surely if we're talking human rights then every person also has the right to deal with whoever they want.

That is exactly the argument used for denying African-Amaericans housing, lodgings, hospital care and food in restaurants, prior to civil rights legislation The individual still has the right to choose with whom they will associate, but if they choose to make their living from the public, they must conform with the law. If discimination becomes allowable in one place, where do you stop?

[Billcat]

Originally Posted by yerself

If as chav1 says 'homosexuality is genetic' then slinky's statement is wrong. If nature, and not the individual, has chosen homosexuality nature has denied the individual the means of creating a child by natural means. Therefore, a homosexual does not have the right to be a parent.

Nonsense!

If you follow that argument to it's illogical conclusion, then women who cannot conceive should also not have the right to adopt. Or my cousin, who lost the ability due to ovarian cysts.

[Wynonie Harris]

Originally Posted by Gayle

Perhaps we should look at it another way though

Are they discriminating or are they choosing to not discriminate? By politely pointing someone down the road to the adoption agency that will help them are they actually discriminating or are they opting out of the argument?

Right, so if you applied for a job and they said "you're just right for the job but we don't employ women in senior positions, however there's a company down the road that does, try there." would you be happy, Gayle?

I'll tell you something, if I went into a pub with Mrs H and they said, however politely, "we don't serve coloureds here, but there's a pub down the road that does." I would not be a happy Wynonie!

[Wynonie Harris]

Originally Posted by Billcat

If discimination becomes allowable in one place, where do you stop?

Exactly! Hit the nail right on the head!

[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

So, Willow, you also would want to repeal the existing discrimination laws so that people are free to refuse service, accommodation or jobs to others purely on the basis of race, gender or sexual orientation? Don't you think it would be major step backwards? How would you feel if you applied for a vacancy and they told you, "Sorry, you're well-qualified to do the job, but we don't want a woman." Would you walk away, contented, thinking, "Well, at least I know where I stand."

Please don't put words into my mouth.

Actually jobs are often refused to people on the basis of them being the wrong colour. If a firm has to fill a certain quota of employees from ethnic minorities then a perfectly well qualified person of a paler complexion may well be refused the job. Personally I believe we should have total equality for all and that the best qualified person should be the one for the job regardless of race creed colour or quotas. Discriminating in favour of one group causes discrimination against another. In some positions where it is felt that there are not enough women then a perfectly qualified man could be turned down in favour of a less qualified woman. I also believe that this is wrong.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

And if you'd want to refuse the right of the BNP to hold a conference, why do you defend the anti-gay beliefs of the Catholic church? Surely, both are based on irrational prejudice, or do you, as Gayle appears to, think that homophobia somehow isn't quite as bad as racism?

You see the Catholic church's beliefs as irrational prejudice. I see them as a specific part of their doctrine which they should not be forced to compromise. In a day and age when we permit sikhs to opt out of wearing crash helmets because they wear turbans which are a part of their beliefs why can we make exceptions for them and yet insist that we cannot make exceptions for others? As several of us have already said, the Catholic church does not seek to prevent adoption by gay couples, only to request that they be allowed to pass them on to other agencies.

As for the BNP - do you really think I would be wrong for not wanting to have their racist and homophobic attitude on my premises? I find them utterly repulsive and would rather go to jail than to be seen supporting them.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Originally Posted by Billcat
If discimination becomes allowable in one place, where do you stop?




Exactly! Hit the nail right on the head!

So why are people supporting discrimination against Catholicism?




How far would you suggest the state intereferes in religion? Should there be laws insisting that Catholics permit women to hold the priesthood? After all, it's denying them an equal opportunity and discriminating isn't it?

[shakermaker]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

As for the BNP - do you really think I would be wrong for not wanting to have their racist and homophobic attitude on my premises? I find them utterly repulsive and would rather go to jail than to be seen supporting them.

But Willow, you're discriminating against their core beliefs, what would you do? Show them the conference centre down the road instead?

Religion/beliefs/principles whatever you want to call them should never enter into the law if true equality is to be gained. They are but mere irrational opinions, never working for the majority - and since we are a utilitarian nation these opinions can not enter into the laws we live by.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Yes I would suggest that they go elsewhere and hold their meeting somewhere where the owner doesn't disagree with their 'core beliefs'

On the one hand you object to what you perceive to be homophobia on the part of the Catholic church and yet you would support a gathering of an organistion which is categorically homophobic? The BPN with it's totally anti-gay militant attitude is more of a problem AFAICS than the RC adoption agency which merely wishes to pass on the gay applicants to someone else, not to ban them from adopting.

[WillowTheWhisp]

We are going round and round in circles here. If the government does the same then all that will happen is that the Catholic adoption societies will cease to exist. I can't see them wanting to compromise their beliefs

[Wynonie Harris]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

Discriminating in favour of one group causes discrimination against another. In some positions where it is felt that there are not enough women then a perfectly qualified man could be turned down in favour of a less qualified woman. I also believe that this is wrong.

So do I. That's why I said in an earlier post that I've no time for positive discrimination and all that PC malarky.

Originally Posted by WillowTheWisp

As for the BNP - do you really think I would be wrong for not wanting to have their racist and homophobic attitude on my premises? I find them utterly repulsive and would rather go to jail than to be seen supporting them.

No, I think you're quite right. That's why I can't understand why you support homophobia when it comes from the Catholic church.