If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I don't think it's apt to compare religious views with racism.
Gay couples can adopt elsewhere. Catholics have their own ethos and I think it's fair that they have the right to keep that ethos.
And gays can also stay in a different hotel if the owner thinks they're sinful and unwelcome then...
And black people can find another pub to drink at and another shop to buy the groceries in if the owners of those places believe they are not worthy of their service, presumably?
A rather poor comparison, really.
A better question would be about not allowing white supremacists adopt children. Which is something that already happens.
Though since you ask, I think this law is a pile of shit, like most anti-discrimination laws. The motive is usually noble but the implementation is awful and clumsy.
You accuse the Catholic Church of being prejudiced, well tbh I think you are prejudiced towards them: Hasn't it ever occured to you that because someone thinks the best way to achieve something is different from the way you would chose to pursue it doesn't mean they have bad intentions?
Of course it's a rather different issue to take somebody's kids away than to change the temporary carers of those children, for obvious reasons.
The ultimate goal of an adopting agency must be to find suitable, loving parents for children as soon as possible. It is NOT the job of an agency to discriminate against some parents because of religious grounds. If the Catholic Church cannot meet this simple requirement then the government should take charge of the adopting agencies and hand them over to professional carers not impaired or prejudiced by any personal beliefs that have precisely fuck all to do with the welfare of the child.
That's a total different argument from being bigoted and prejudiced against others under the excuse of personal beliefs is it not?
Disagree. I think the comparison stands. Are you saying that discrimination against homosexuals for ostensibly religious reasons is ok, but that upfront discrimination of non-white folk isn't? Just because the Catholic Church has bigotry entrenched in its religious doctrine, doesn't make the discrimination any less abhorrent and unacceptable.
Disagree again. One is gay, and the other is a odious cunt. I think you've drawn a weaker comparison that Aladdin did.
Agree.
I don't make excuses for being prejudiced against an organisation which is the dictionary definition of prejudice, just as I don't make excuses for being prejudiced against racists or xenophobes. They are the ones in the wrong. When they clean their act will I cease to be prejudiced against them.
Spoken like a Nazi that is. You are just as prejudiced as they are but they are in the wrong. Instead of admitting you and they are prejudiced you just deny your own and project it on to them. Well done, you have become something you probably don't like.
Have you given up on the premise of right and wrong, or are you just selectively ignoring it for the sake of this arguement?
Aladdin isn't predjudiced against the Catholic Church, because he's done his research and knows that many of their ideas and ideals are first class lunacy; the church on the other hand are prejudiced because they've made the assumption that homosexuals aren't fit to be parents based on a book which is at best, mostly ficticious, and morals that are 2000 years out-of-date.
Just because your definition of "best interests" and theirs differs doesn't mean that yours should be imposed on them.
Erm... there is no law being applied there though which would force the hotel to accept anyone. You would probably find the owners walked away if there was.
Which is kind of the point here.
If you don't think that the Catholic Church's stance on who is "deemed suitable" then why complain when they say that they don't want to be involved anymore - it suggests that they would agree with you.
Oh yeah, fully signed up member of NSDAP our Aladdin. Got a working time machine too.
I have never stood up for the Catholic church until this debate but I still don't think it right that you sit here and judge against them. Yes their book is 2000 years old and is in my opinion a bunch of bollocks. But the counterweight of that is 2000 years of the same stance and tradition on homosexuality. This belief will take generations to change because changing an instilled belief like this is tricky. People do all sorts of unjust things in the name of their beliefs. They kill for them, they die for them etc.
Because of this fact you can't just discriminate against them. To do that makes you just as bad as them. But Aladdin needs to learn that he is discriminatory and prejudiced against the things he mentioned in the above post. And sometimes unjustified, as with Xenophobic people because it is a phobia, an irrational fear and nothing more. They can't change it just like I can't change my phobia of spiders. To discriminate because of that is wrong and no better than what the Nazi's did. This is what I meant. Do you understand now??
Let me get this straight. Are you suggesting that by opposing bigots I am as bad as them?
Well I never...
I'll make sure I do not say a word of disapproval about anyone at all ever again, be bigots, fascists or even racists, for apparently I'd be as intolerant as them for failing to see their point of view.
Godwin's law. You lose.
Even if the Catholic Church thinks the government is wrong in forcing them to ignore their beliefs the bottom line remains that if the Church had the best interests of the children in mind it would never threaten to close down shop.
I personally find it indescribably nauseating that they are using the welfare of children as a bargaining chip. You might as well grab a kid, put a gun to his head and say 'this are my demands'.
The only interests they are serving by these threats are their own. Certainly they're not serving the children's interests...
Let's be honest here. The ONLY reason they don't want gays to adopt children is because they see gays as sinful people. Not because the children are going to be mistreated.
Let's stop beating about the bush about that. We all know where the Church is coming from.
Best interests of the child my hairy arse.
personally I think the Catholic Church is wrong and that a gay couple, whilst certainly not a good option, is better than not being adopted and remaining in care. But there is no reason why if you're gay and want to adopt you have to go to a Catholic adoption service, so let them have their freedom.
To me it suggests that children come second to their nauseating bigotry towards homosexuals.
No, I think I was right. Predjudice is predjudice. You are no more interested, or no less interested, in the welfare of children than they. You just have a different definition of what those interests are.
When you also consider that the vast majority of people here would argue that the "ideal" is that children are house with hetrosexual couples, and the Catholic Church adoption agency only does this and given that they find homes for more children than other agencies then it would suggest that actually their approach offers more to the children.
So what is the Govt using? It isn't the welfare of the kids which is highest priority for them here, it's "equal rights"
Gay people shouldn't have to worry about which adoption agencies approve of homosexuality any more than they should have to worry about which restaurant owner is tolerant of gays.
I never said not to disapprove, did I? No but don't get on your fucking high horse and look down on them when you yourself discriminate against people.
From an even stand point, go all guns blazing at them. Like I give a flying fuck but the second you take the moral high ground is the day you become as bad as them. Which, has happened to be today.
Ideal does not mean essential.
If it did, only millionaire couples would be considered for adoption. For anything less would be not ideal for the child.
Imagine the horror of a child being given to a mix-sex couple. The child is likely to be taunted at school at some point. That is not ideal is it? So let's ban mix-race couples from adopting while we're at it.
And the slippery slops goes on and on and on...
Funnily enough you should wait and see what happens because I get the feeling the government will cave in to the extortion and allow the Church to carry on bigotring.
Though even if it didn't, the government would still be benefiting the children best by simply increasing the chances of them being adopted, rather than allowing some agencies to blank out significant number of potential parents because of their sexual orientation.
In some cases it is right and good to take the moral high ground you know... :rolleyes:
Frankly that's tough - freedom of conscience should trump it. Because in reality there are other places to go and the system is crying out for people to adopt.
As long as the law says gays can adopt I'm happy. No-one has yet given a real decent reason why the Catholic Church should have to. You may think its bigoted and wrong (and I'd agree), but the Catholic Church will still continue in its attitude whether the laws in place or not.
All the law in reality does is put the power of the state above religous freedom. And I'm not sure that's a good thing.
It would be setting a dangerous precedent, not sure it's a good thing at all.
Yes, when you aren't discriminating against people yourself.
Racists= fine, slag them off and take the high ground. I don't think even they give a fuck.
Catholic Church= when you have a go at them on a level with them yes, go for it. More power to you
But like I said before taking the moral high ground when you youself discriminate against people for things, then you become a hypocrite.