Last Catholic Adoption Agency in England fights to stay open

[Netty1]

The last remaining Catholic adoption agency in England and Wales has renewed its battle to stay open.

Catholic Care, which serves the dioceses of Leeds, Middlesbrough and Hallam, wants to continue its policy of assessing only married heterosexuals and single people as potential adopters and foster parents.

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2010/10/06/adoption-agency-renews-fight-to-stay-open/

 

[kaid100]

The last remaining Catholic adoption agency in England and Wales has renewed its battle to stay open.

Catholic Care, which serves the dioceses of Leeds, Middlesbrough and Hallam, wants to continue its policy of assessing only married heterosexuals and single people as potential adopters and foster parents.

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2010/10/06/adoption-agency-renews-fight-to-stay-open/

Most gay couples, knowing the Catholic Church’s stance on gay issues, would probably not make this agency their first port of call anyway. Some gays might have tried in the first few months after the legislation to “make a point”.

Instead of placing itself in opposition to the law, why doesn’t the agency take the very few “point-makers” on to their books, if they find that they are legally unsuitable they can legally remove them, and the agency can show (in court if necessary) that any other agency would have done the same thing. Any remaining gays - legally suitable to be parents - could have their bluff called, with the agency saying truthfully they have a child ready to adopt, and are they ready to take them in?
A “point-maker” will then quickly find an excuse to not take the child in since they were only trying to put the agency in an awkward situation, but crucially now doesn’t have anything they can say to a lawyer or the press. The “point-maker” leaves and the agency get to continue its work uninterrupted, with no legal or press trouble.

 

[Dale_M]

A “point-maker” will then quickly find an excuse to not take the child in since they were only trying to put the agency in an awkward situation, but crucially now doesn’t have anything they can say to a lawyer or the press. The “point-maker” leaves and the agency get to continue its work uninterrupted, with no legal or press trouble.

The problem I see with this scenario is that there are acceptable gay or lesbian couples who truly do want to adopt, and who also wouldn’t hesitate to apply to a Catholic agency. It was done here in the US often enough to force changes in either the Catholic adoption agency or its eligibility for government support.

 

[SunnaB16]

If the Hierarchy of England and Wales showed True Faith, and stood united on this sickening issue, it would downface the relevant “Authority”, and call its bluff.
But; then again, if it had stood united against Henry VIII, we wouldn`t have Saint John Fisher, Saint Thomas More and The 40 Martyrs of England and Wales…would we?

 

[comrade1789]

The problem I see with this scenario is that there are acceptable gay or lesbian couples who truly do want to adopt, and who also wouldn’t hesitate to apply to a Catholic agency. It was done here in the US often enough to force changes in either the Catholic adoption agency or its eligibility for government support.

I don’t recall any Catholic agencies changing their policy on this issue. What happens is because of the disgustingly selfish motives of a few radical homosexuals, Catholic agencies are forced OUT of the adoption business. These homosexuals show no concern for children, because they would rather close down Catholic adoption agencies than to allow them to pursuing healthy adoption practices. It’s not just about refusing government support, its that government is being used to forcefully shut down Catholic adoption agencies. Humanity is made up of men and women both. The family unit is the basic structure of a society and to create an atmosphere conducive to raising healthy members of our society, a proper role-model representation of humanity involves a full humanity in the form of a man and women, hence the necessity to adopt only to married couples.

 

[SunnaB16]

…Humanity is made up of men and women both. The family unit is the basic structure of a society and to create an atmosphere conducive to raising healthy members of our society, a proper role-model representation of humanity involves a full humanity in the form of a man and women…

…and inflicting same sex “parents” on defenceless children is child abuse.

At least the children sacrificed to Moloch died/die young (i`m including abortion victims).
What sorts of twisted and tormented lives will these latest victims endure?
The Father of lies has won another battle.

 

[kaid100]

…and inflicting same sex “parents” on defenceless children is child abuse.

No, raping children is child abuse. Placing a child in a house with two people of the same sex, who share a room separate to the child, and care for and love the child is certainly unorthodox from a historical perspective, but it is not comparable to raping a child.

 

[SunnaB16]

No, raping children is child abuse. Placing a child in a house with two people of the same sex, who share a room separate to the child, and care for and love the child is certainly unorthodox from a historical perspective, but it is not comparable to raping a child.

It may or may not be comparable to rape; but it is still a form of child abuse. It`s child abuse extended over a period of time.

As comrade said at Post #5:
“…to create an atmosphere conducive to raising healthy members of our society, a proper role-model representation of humanity involves a full humanity in the form of a man and woman…”
AMEN!
We`re created male and female for a reason!

The destructive consequences suffered by the children may well be worse than rape; considering that their ordeal will last for years.
For a start, the way the so-called “spouses” behave towards each other outside that “room separate from the child” will be painfully obvious.

 

[kaid100]

It may or may not be comparable to rape; but it is still a form of child abuse. It`s child abuse extended over a period of time.

As comrade said at Post #5:
“…to create an atmosphere conducive to raising healthy members of our society, a proper role-model representation of humanity involves a full humanity in the form of a man and woman…”
AMEN!
We`re created male and female for a reason!

The destructive consequences suffered by the children may well be worse than rape; considering that their ordeal will last for years.
For a start, the way the so-called “spouses” behave towards each other outside that “room separate from the child” will be painfully obvious.

Plenty of households do not have the traditional one male, one female. What consequences do you see happening from having same-sex parents? You talk about the way the parents “behave” outside their bedroom. You mean like a peck on the cheek or calling each other “love”? Men and Women do that kind of thing all the time, exactly why would seeing a same-sex couple do that damage a child?

 

[Dale_M]

I don’t recall any Catholic agencies changing their policy on this issue.

I seem to recall that an adoption agency was spun off as a secular organization, but I may be wrong about that. A short Google search didn’t locate it. At any rate, that is what I was referring to, not that a Catholic agency has agreed to allow adoption by homosexual couples.

It may or may not be comparable to rape; but it is still a form of child abuse. It`s child abuse extended over a period of time.

As comrade said at Post #5:
“…to create an atmosphere conducive to raising healthy members of our society, a proper role-model representation of humanity involves a full humanity in the form of a man and woman…”

I think there is benefit from having both male and female adults in a child’s life. But not having that does not amount to child abuse.

 

[Dale_M]

It may or may not be comparable to rape; but it is still a form of child abuse. It`s child abuse extended over a period of time.

As comrade said at Post #5:
“…to create an atmosphere conducive to raising healthy members of our society, a proper role-model representation of humanity involves a full humanity in the form of a man and woman…”

I think there is benefit from having both male and female adults in a child’s life. But not having that does not amount to child abuse.

 

[SunnaB16]

I think there is benefit from having both male and female adults in a child’s life. But not having that does not amount to child abuse.

Forcing a helpless child to be at least an observer to an unnatural (perverted!) sexual relationship is emotional and spiritual child abuse. It can`t be anything else. The reasons for that have already been given; here and elsewhere.

 

[kaid100]

Forcing a helpless child to be at least an observer to an unnatural (perverted!) sexual relationship is emotional and spiritual child abuse. It can`t be anything else. The reasons for that have already been given; here and elsewhere.

First of all, they wouldn’t be witness to a sexual relationship, that would be behind closed doors as with heterosexual parents. You define having same-sex parents as child abuse, but how exactly would it damage the child? All you have is words. You call it perverted or spiritual child abuse, but can you specify how a child with same-sex parents would “end up worse”? A raped child will have trust issues, likelihood of relationship problems and damage to internal organs, amongst other things. What specific ailments will a child with same-sex parents have?

 

[NE_Catholic]

What specific ailments will a child with same-sex parents have?

very tricky question for me. I know plenty of same-sex parents and speak from first hand knowledge, not from “scientific data”. Are the children happy? They appear to be. Are they growing up “normal”? Well, here’s where I can sound “homophobic”. They tend to “shop” for schools/towns that are more condusive to their “lifestyle” (Cambridge, Brookline, etc. in Massachusetts). I know one “couple” in Somerville that were very distressed as their son approached grade school. They moved to Cambridge. So what exactly am I getting at? My observation is that they “cluster” in liberal enclaves and thus are shielded from the mainstream. I’m sure that’s not true for all, but that is my experience.

Specific ailment for a same-sex child IMO is the inabilty to live in main stream America. That is the only thing I see different. I do not know of any grown children of same-sex couples, only kids under 12.

 

[kaid100]

very tricky question for me. I know plenty of same-sex parents and speak from first hand knowledge, not from “scientific data”. Are the children happy? They appear to be. Are they growing up “normal”? Well, here’s where I can sound “homophobic”. They tend to “shop” for schools/towns that are more condusive to their “lifestyle” (Cambridge, Brookline, etc. in Massachusetts). I know one “couple” in Somerville that were very distressed as their son approached grade school. They moved to Cambridge. So what exactly am I getting at? My observation is that they “cluster” in liberal enclaves and thus are shielded from the mainstream. I’m sure that’s not true for all, but that is my experience.

Specific ailment for a same-sex child IMO is the inabilty to live in main stream America. That is the only thing I see different. I do not know of any grown children of same-sex couples, only kids under 12.

You are describing the parents responding to the poor behaviour of others. Some schools don’t want to take on children with same-sex guardians, so they have to look for schools that don’t have a problem with them (are “conducive to their lifestyle”, as you put it). Wouldn’t the answer be to insist that schools don’t use the sexuality of the child’s parents as an entry requirement?

In 1950s America, black people had to “shop” around for schools that would take black children. Was it their own fault they ended up “clustered” together or that of the schools? Was it their own fault they didn’t have the ability to live in main stream America?

 

[exoflare]

Catholic Care, which serves the dioceses of Leeds, Middlesbrough and Hallam, wants to continue its policy of assessing only married heterosexuals and single people as potential adopters and foster parents.

How would this even be a hindrance to gay people that want to adopt? The guidelines I put in bold here don’t exclude them, unless there’s some further detail that’s not mentioned here.

 

[kaid100]

How would this even be a hindrance to gay people that want to adopt? The guidelines I put in bold here don’t exclude them, unless there’s some further detail that’s not mentioned here.

They are not using single to mean “unmarried” here, they are using single to mean “not in a relationship”. By this definition, a couple in a gay relationship are not single or married, therefore they will not consider them for adoptees.

 

[SunnaB16]

First of all, they wouldn’t be witness to a sexual relationship, that would be behind closed doors as with heterosexual parents. You define having same-sex parents as child abuse, but how exactly would it damage the child? All you have is words. You call it perverted or spiritual child abuse, but can you specify how a child with same-sex parents would “end up worse”? A raped child will have trust issues, likelihood of relationship problems and damage to internal organs, amongst other things. ***What ***specific ailments will a child with same-sex parents have?

How many more emotionally twisted people can we cope with? Plus:
Use your imagination!
Read whats already been posted. If that doesnt help; time will show the results; even if it`s in the relatively distant future.

You list your Religion as “None”; so youre totally blind to the spiritual consequences of all of this. No arguments put here could ever convince you; so youll have to find out the hard way. ***All sin has consequences! ***
This corrupt and decadent Western society continues to drown in its own effluent!
And most people think it`s OK!

Skin colour?
Theres a big difference between skin colour, where theres no choice, and this same-sex issue, where there IS choice.

 

[NE_Catholic]

You are describing the parents responding to the poor behaviour of others. Some schools don’t want to take on children with same-sex guardians, so they have to look for schools that don’t have a problem with them (are “conducive to their lifestyle”, as you put it). Wouldn’t the answer be to insist that schools don’t use the sexuality of the child’s parents as an entry requirement?

In 1950s America, black people had to “shop” around for schools that would take black children. Was it their own fault they ended up “clustered” together or that of the schools? Was it their own fault they didn’t have the ability to live in main stream America?

no, I’m describing the same-sex parents. THEY are not comfortable in a main stream setting. THEY need to have carriculums changed to appease their political/cultural needs.

Your 1950’s example is a strawman. Not worthy of an answer.

 

[kaid100]

How many more emotionally twisted people can we cope with? Plus:
Use your imagination!
Read whats already been posted. If that doesnt help; time will show the results; even if it`s in the relatively distant future.

You list your Religion as “None”; so youre totally blind to the spiritual consequences of all of this. No arguments put here could ever convince you; so youll have to find out the hard way. ***All sin has consequences! ***
This corrupt and decadent Western society continues to drown in its own effluent!
And most people think it`s OK!

Skin colour?
Theres a big difference between skin colour, where theres no choice, and this same-sex issue, where there IS choice.

I still haven’t heard a reason to not allow homosexuals to adopt. You are telling me to “Use my imagination” but it is you claiming they are unsuitable, not me; so it’s up to you to put your reasons forward. Words like “effluent”, “corrupt”, “decadent” are very emotive and descriptive, but they do not take the place of describing the reason why it would be harmful for a gay to adopt. I may list my religion as “none”, but I was brought up a Christian so I understand spirituality and its consequences.

You have a choice about your sexuality? Did you choose to be (I presume) straight? Could you choose to stop loving your wife/husband/boyfriend/girlfriend? [delete as applicable] Could you choose to stop being attracted to them? If the answer is “no”, why do you think homosexuals have a choice about it?