Kid taken from Foster Parents When parents refuse to discuss same sex relationships

#1
OrangeEmpire

OrangeEmpire

The White Debonair
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
74,988
Likes
59
#1
Foster Parents Have Child Taken Away After Refusing to Discuss Same Sex Relationships With Child

The 11-year-old boy, who has been in their care for two years, will be placed in a council hostel this week and the Mathericks will no longer be given children to look after.

The devastated couple, who have three grown up children of their own, became foster parents in 2001 and have since cared for 28 children at their home in Chard, Somerset.

Earlier this year, Somerset County Council's social services department asked them to sign a contract to implement Labour's new Sexual Orientation Regulations, part of the Equality Act 2006, which make discrimination on the grounds of sexuality illegal.

Officials told the couple that under the regulations they would be required to discuss same-sex relationships with children as young as 11 and tell them that gay partnerships were just as acceptable as heterosexual marriages.

They could also be required to take teenagers to gay association meetings.

When the Mathericks objected, they were told they would be taken off the register of foster parents.

The Mathericks have decided to resign rather than face the humiliation of being expelled.
Click to expand...

I do not particularly agree with the ultimate outcome but I cannot deny the state has the legal authority, and perhaps a philosophical justification, for acting in this manner.

They are "FOSTER PARENTS" and not "parents" in the traditional sense. The state is the "ward" of the children, in other words the state is the "parent" and the foster parents are "babysitters." The state pays the foster parents to care for and provide for their children, like a parent does a babsitter; and like a parent, who can dictate to the babysitter what is or is not to happen to their children, the state can rightfully and legitimately do so with its babysitters (foster parents) in regards to their children (foster children).

Thoughts?
 
#2
#2
If the "state" is the parents, then these kids are already effed.

Completely idiotic. Put the kid in a hostel, taken out of actual real home because the parents wouldn't talk to them about homosexuality.
 
#3
#3
If the world hadn't gone to hell in a handbasket, there'd be no need for "foster" parents.
 
#6
#6
The foster parents look like a same sex couple. :ermm:

matherickSWNS2310_468x448.jpg
 
#7
#7
well, the foster parents are taking care of the kids. They may be the ward of the state, but these people are raising the child. Taking the child away for not condoning homosexuality, that is absurd. Lets put the kid in an unstable environment and let him grow up and most likely become "a ward of the state" again because these people dont agree with gay marriages. I personally do not believe that the state should be able to tell you about this matter. Also if the state gets all up in arms about sex ed in the eighth grade, when talking about safe situations etc, yet the politicians who make the decisions are pushing their agendas and using issues like this to get votes. Who cares its one child right?
 
#8
#8
This is why people think "liberal" is a bad word. If these people are deemed fit to be parents, and are charged with the care of this child by the state, then they should be able to raise the child as they see fit within the law.

Asking anyone to sign something like this is absolutely stupid. As long as they are not preaching hate then what exactly is the issue?
 
#9
#9
emainvol said:
This is why people think "liberal" is a bad word. If these people are deemed fit to be parents, and are charged with the care of this child by the state, then they should be able to raise the child as they see fit within the law.

Asking anyone to sign something like this is absolutely stupid. As long as they are not preaching hate then what exactly is the issue?
Click to expand...

Agree.
 
#10
#10
there are a lot of gay folks that have grown up to be very nice people whose parents (many of them very good parents) didn't support their relationships at first. This is amazingly stupid and shortsighted. It's not as though there are a lot of people willing to take in kids like this.
 
#12
#12
emainvol said:
This is why people think "liberal" is a bad word. If these people are deemed fit to be parents, and are charged with the care of this child by the state, then they should be able to raise the child as they see fit within the law.
Asking anyone to sign something like this is absolutely stupid. As long as they are not preaching hate then what exactly is the issue?
Click to expand...

Practicing true religious freedom. The Bible condemns the act of homosexuality, but it does not teach hate. If anything, it teaches to love them and to care for thier needs. I still cannot teach it to my child as being normality.
 
#13
#13
Themanfromtn said:
Practicing true religious freedom. The Bible condemns the act of homosexuality, but it does not teach hate. If anything, it teaches to love them and to care for thier needs. I still cannot teach it to my child as being normality.
Click to expand...

So you don't teach him to hate but to view them as abnormal? How is that better?
 
#14
#14
utvolpj said:
So you don't teach him to hate but to view them as abnormal? How is that better?
Click to expand...

Cannot speak for the other gentleman. But it would not be better to teach hatred for people that don't follow your personal views on behavior. That being said, I view the behavior as not normal. No hatred for the person.
 
#18
#18
allvol123 said:
Cannot speak for the other gentleman. But it would not be better to teach hatred for people that don't follow your personal views on behavior. That being said, I view the behavior as not normal. No hatred for the person.
Click to expand...

This might win the understatement for the day. The whole situation these people faced is ridiculous.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top