Catholic Church says No to Gay Adoption (1 Viewer)

[JenFast]

The catholic church has said if the law does not exclude them from the rule of gay couples being able to adopt they will not keep their adoption agencies.

yeah BOLOX.
For me personally i think a child who otherwise have no family as such should be able to be adopted into a loving and safe family weather the parents be same sex or not.
Yes thee will always be complications in a same sex parent family but I dont think the catholic church should be exempt from the law what next will they want to be exempt from?
And its common knowledge that the catholic church have been responsible for certain crimes to children in their care in the past.
What do you think?

 

[JenFast]

Re: Cathlic Church says No to Gay Adoption

apologies for mis-spelling in thread title

 

[classic seanc]

I'm still waiting to hear their opinion on gay abortion.
Can two wrongs make a right?

 

[Goff]

At the risk of sounding a bit Catholic, can we not allow the straight couples who can't have kids though would love to, to adopt first, before letting the prove-a-points adopt?

I apologise in advance, but I know lots of couples who would love to adopt and are waiting a very long time.

And a lot closer to home than you may think, in a lot of cases.

 

[Goff]

And, in fairness to the Catholic Church, they have a stance, they shouldn't be made go against their faith.

The reasoning may be wrong, but that doesn't mean we have to criminalise their beliefs.

 

[billygannon]

What's hypocritical about the Catholic Church's stance in this case is that Catholic Adoption agencies in the UK already allow children to be adopted by single gay people.

 

[snakybus]

The complication arises as a result of public funding for adoption agencies in the UK.

The attitude of secularists is that, if a catholic adoption agency is going to discriminate based on sexual orientation then why should they get funding from the public. More than that, they want the catholic adoption agencies to toe the line regardless of funding, since recent anti-discrimination law in Britain requires this. The catholics are saying can we not just discriminate and let someone else do the gay adoption thing. It's a very interesting real-life clash of church and state.

 

[snakybus]

What's hypocritical about the Catholic Church's stance in this case is that Catholic Adoption agencies in the UK already allow children to be adopted by single gay people.

I wouldn't say it's hypocritical so much as turning a blind eye. But if they're against it, why shouldn't they take a stance?

 

[billygannon]

I wouldn't say it's hypocritical so much as turning a blind eye. But if they're against it, why shouldn't they take a stance?

A "single" gay person is likely to have a partner. And, what the hell, seeing as the Catholic Church doesn't recognise gay marraiges then surely they wouldn't see any difference between an unmarried or a married gay partnership.

So if a gay couple go to adopt through a Catholic adoption agency, they could do if they weren't married, but they couldn't if they were. Despite the fact that the Catholic church wouldn't even recognise their marraige in the first place.
In my book, that's hypocritical.

 

[JenFast]

yeah but they want to be exempt from a law i mean ffs its like some pointless regime to me even if it is a faith and i do respect people for what they believe in but if Hitler had said killing Jews was part of his faith and that it was part of his faith to kill jews there fore he was exempt from the the law that says its wrong to murder people....
ok thats exaggerated but you know what i mean and that goes for any organization/faith...

also respect the comment about regular couples trying to adopt and to be first on the list.
but ]to me anyway] a parent is a parent no matter what.

 

[billygannon]

yeah but they want to be exempt from a law i mean ffs its like some pointless regime to me even if it is a faith and i do respect people for what they believe in but if Hitler had said killing Jews was part of his faith and that it was part of his faith to kill jews there fore he was exempt from the the law that says its wrong to murder people....
ok thats exaggerated but you know what i mean and that goes for any organization/faith...

also respect the comment about regular couples trying to adopt and to be first on the list.
but ]to me anyway] a parent is a parent no matter what.

Looks like Godwin's Law has kicked in quickly in to this thread!

 

[JenFast]

!bing

 

[snakybus]

A "single" gay person is likely to have a partner. And, what the hell, seeing as the Catholic Church doesn't recognise gay marraiges then surely they wouldn't see any difference between an unmarried or a married gay partnership.

So if a gay couple go to adopt through a Catholic adoption agency, they could do if they weren't married, but they couldn't if they were. Despite the fact that the Catholic church wouldn't even recognise their marraige in the first place.
In my book, that's hypocritical.

Ah yeah fair enough but it's more the case that a child might be placed with a single person only in special circumstances - and that person might be gay. And yes, that person might be in a relationship, in which case a non-married gay couple could end up with a child where a married gay couple would have been turned down. But in most cases, they place children with straight couples as opposed to single people. So they're not going out of their way to place children with single gay people. But I do see your point.

I'm interested to know why people (here) think it's better for a child to be placed with a straight couple. I think generally people do think this, whether they're religious or not. Personally I don't think "a parent is a parent no matter what" - that implies that all parents are the same. They're not.

 

[JenFast]

should have phrased it better, definitely each parent is different, but alas a gay parent can do just a good of job raising a child in a safe, happy and loving environment as a straight parent...no?

 

[billygannon]

I think the reason why there is this inclination towards a straight couple being allowed to adopt is that it can be assumed that if they are having difficulty having a child, then therefore they should be entitled to adopt.

However, a lesbian woman is still likely to have the urge to have children. And it could very well be a case that she will have difficultly baring a child as well. So, in this case, she is just as entitled to adopt a child as a straight woman who is having difficultly getting pregnant.

 

[Denny Oubidoux]

should have phrased it better, definitely each parent is different, but alas a gay parent can do just a good of job raising a child in a safe, happy and loving environment as a straight parent...no?

i would think this is true especially when you see some of the creatures that you see dragging little kids around town - no patience or understanding of the kids, cursing and shouting at them and threatening them for nothing at all. shockin.

my only reservation about gay people adopting is that the kids might end up having to deal with the prejudices of other people (at school, or wherever). it'd be a bit unfair to burden small children with the responsibility of eliminating intolerance in the world, although this argument isnt really about gay people at all... i suppose they (children) have to deal with intolerance all the time though - travellers, immigrants, whoever

 

[JenFast]

my only reservation about gay people adopting is that the kids might end up having to deal with the prejudices of other people (at school, or wherever). it'd be a bit unfair to burden small children with the responsibility of eliminating intolerance in the world, although this argument isnt really about gay people at all...

yeah you make a fair point, i would have that theory too considering the abuse children get in school for wearing glasses or being too tall or to short etc....

 

[billygannon]

my only reservation about gay people adopting is that the kids might end up having to deal with the prejudices of other people (at school, or wherever). it'd be a bit unfair to burden small children with the responsibility of eliminating intolerance in the world, although this argument isnt really about gay people at all... i suppose they (children) have to deal with intolerance all the time though - travellers, immigrants, whoever

The same case could be made for kids being brought up by parents who are from any minority - such as disabled parents, or parents from the traveller community.

It doesn't really hold up. There's no reason why a gay couple shouldn't be allowed to adopt. Fair enough... the Catholic Church is against gay marraige, and I don't believe the law should try to amend their beliefs in this regard.
Perhaps it will make the Catholic Church re-think their views on homosexuality over time.

 

[JenFast]

I don't think there is any reason why gay people should not be allowed to adopt either [obviously]
Hopefully the catholic church will not be given into, but I don't think that they will ever consent to homosexuality. I was born catholic and in no way do I believe that Homosexuality is wrong. It just dose'nt bother me at all,nor should it.

 

[billygannon]

I don't think there is any reason why gay people should not be allowed to adopt either [obviously]
Hopefully the catholic church will not be given into, but I don't think that they will ever consent to homosexuality. I was born catholic and in no way do I believe that Homosexuality is wrong. It just dose'nt bother me at all,nor should it.

This is the thing. The Catholic has, albeit slowly in the last 500 years, adapted to different views and beliefs. Celibacy is a case in point. As is adopting a variety of different local stories and legends. The Feast of All Souls just so happens to be after Hallowe'en. Christmas is linked to older European winter festivals.

And there is no reason why it shouldn't, eventually, change its position on homosexuality. Indeed, it's quite likely that many of Jesus' original followers were homosexual.