Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
litmus tests

Denying Foster Kids To Anti-Gays Parents: A Bad Choice?

This week England’s High Court upheld a Derby City Council decision to deny a Pentecostal couple’s right to foster kids. The reason? The older couple refused to tell their prospective kids that homosexuality is OK. And while Stonewall UK’s chief executive says he’s delighted at the high court’s decision, it’s not a complete win for the hundreds of thousands of international orphans currently in need of foster care.

According to 62-year-old Mrs. Eunice Johns, the Derby council asked her “Do you know you would have to tell [children] that it’s OK to be homosexual?” She responded, “I couldn’t do that because my Christian beliefs won’t let me. Morally, I couldn’t do that. Spiritually I couldn’t do that.” And since the state certifies couples to become foster parents, certifying Eunice and Owen Johns would have been a tacit endorsement of their anti-gay views.

But the queer response I’ve heard so far on this issue falls on one side, either celebrating that Christian couples are now being denied the right to care for children as gay couples have been denied for year or asking questions like “What if they got a gay kid?” and “Would you put a black kid with white supremacist parents?” Yes, its abhorrent to think of white supremacists and bible thumpers molding a new generation of gay-bashers and suicidal queers, but it also presumes that denouncing homosexuality will be high on a foster parents’ to-do list when dealing with kids damaged by sexual abuse, neglect, legal troubles, drug addiction, and mental and physical illnesses.

Eunice and Owen Johns find homosexuality immoral, but they aren’t the Phelps family. They’re an elderly couple who cared for about 15 foster kids through the 90s. And while Pentecostal Christianity may evoke all sorts of crazy fundamentalist beliefs like speaking in tongues, faith healing, and handling snakes, they also instill tenants of parental respect, hard work, and perseverance.

I’m not arguing that Pentecostals aren’t crazy: my own Pentecostal mom taught me never to trust white people, that demons come through the television to give you murderous thoughts, and that the government puts all our social security numbers in a giant computer called “The Beast” which will one day bring about the rise of the anti-Christ. And while that’s insane, she also gave me the love and support to gain an education and eventually realize on my own that she was bat-shit crazy. Yes it took lots of therapy, self-help books, and anti-depressants to pull through, but here I am writing for Queerty—see? Dreams really DO come true.

In a perfect world, all foster children would get raised by Claire Huxtable and Ward Cleaver, free from any prejudice. And while I’m against putting kids in unhealthy homes, if the alternative is leaving them to rot in a orphanage or a state run house, I’m not so convinced that refusing anti-gay people who make otherwise good parents is the ideal solution to the continuing needs of these abandoned kids.
 

By:           Daniel Villarreal
On:           Feb 28, 2011
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , ,
  • 64 Comments
    • Kev C
      Kev C

      A child should not be subjected to fear or hatred because of who they are. And doing so is harmful and doesn’t qualify as good parenting or responsible social work. No government agency should be inflicting harm upon children regardless of logistics or convenience.

      Feb 28, 2011 at 7:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lucas
      Lucas

      Presumably there’s a shortage of foster parents, which means we might have to take those that we don’t like. The solution is for more gay-friendly people to volunteer as foster parents.

      Feb 28, 2011 at 7:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dave
      Dave

      I think this old couple should be aloud to be foster parents.I don’t know about England but I grew up in the system here in the states and I tell you that a child is better off in a home then in the system.

      Feb 28, 2011 at 7:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David
      David

      Freep this Daily Mail poll, so go ahead and demolish it. Click on “Should Christian couple against homosexuality be allowed to foster?” link on this webpage to take the poll.
      http://bit.ly/eV82Ed

      Feb 28, 2011 at 7:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kev C
      Kev C

      @Dave: I was a foster child too and I would have prefered being raised in a group home rather than with foster families. Every foster family I met was:

      Strict and punishing.
      Used foster children as free labor.
      Used fostering for additional income.
      Treated the foster child as second class, inferior to natural offspring.

      Feb 28, 2011 at 8:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DJ
      DJ

      I don’t really think that’s fair. I don’t like the fact that they have the chance to brainwash kids but it’s also not fair that they don’t get the chance to help a child in need if they want to. Maybe there should be some kind of screening process where a gay child shouldn’t be placed with an anti foster parent. But even if they aren’t, can’t they just call the foster agency and get them to switch or something?

      Feb 28, 2011 at 8:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      To allow these people to be foster parents would be tantamount to declaring their anti gay views are valid and ok. What if a gay kid wound up with them? Nothing doing. They might be nice people, but that one thing is enough to where they don’t need to have parental influence of any kind over these kids.

      Feb 28, 2011 at 9:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      I think the author got it in one. Unless there was a history of bad foster parenting by this couple, and it appears there was not,then what use is there to have a one question litmus test deny an otherwise capable couple of being foster parents?

      Feb 28, 2011 at 9:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TheRealAdam
      TheRealAdam

      @DR: I agree. Absent of a history of anti-gay abuse, they should be allowed to adopt. If they are denied kids and deemed unfit because of their anti-gay views, then that would mean every parent who may hold anti-gay prejudice is an unfit parent.

      I don’t believe that to be true in the slightest. It’s unreasonable. Just because someone is a racist doesn’t automatically make them a bad parent. Same thing with homophobic/anti-gay individuals who are parents.

      Feb 28, 2011 at 10:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      As a product of the foster care system, I think there’s no easy answer, as long there is a shortage of foster parents just about in every area of the US. Am not sure about the UK.

      Ideally the match between a candidate family and child is based on which family will best deal with that child’s needs, BUT usually it boils down to who’s got space.
      Many foster kids do get physically abused and those families need to be weeded out. The religious indoctrination is also common, but hard to avoid because many foster parents actually consider fostering as part of their religious calling.

      I can’t speak for all people who’ve been through the system, but I do think most would prefer to be with a stable family/single person than in a group home or other “warehouse” kind of setting.

      And I agree that it would be great if more gay-friendly people would foster and adopt. Gay men and lesbians still encounter homophobia / discrimination from many agencies and although that’s changing I still hear about it frequently.

      Feb 28, 2011 at 11:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • McMike
      McMike

      As someone has already pointed out, would you let a black child be raised by racist?

      Too many gay children end up killing themselves after being rejected by their parents.

      Feb 28, 2011 at 11:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt
      Hyhybt

      I didn’t know snake-handling was a common Pentecostal practice…

      Mar 1, 2011 at 12:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Reggina Ebonee
      Reggina Ebonee

      @McMike: Well, there’s Maine’s new Republican governor who did just that.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 1:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lily White
      Lily White

      But what I want to know is when they started letting coloreds keep foster children? Everybody knows how sex-hungry colored men are.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 1:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris

      These are stooges of the Christian legal institute the same organisation which brings every case of this type. This is nothing to do with them wanting to be foster parents. They are on the radio now demanding their rights as christians.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 2:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @Chris: Thanks for the info–“Christian Legal Institute” was the group defending the B&B owners who denied two gay men from staying at their place–well covered on this site.

      I can’t find much else about them on the internet. Do they perhaps have a web presence under a different name?

      Mar 1, 2011 at 4:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kev C
      Kev C

      @Jeffree: It’s just The Christian Institute

      http://www.christian.org.uk

      Mar 1, 2011 at 4:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @Kev C: Thanks, mate. I appreciate that info.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 5:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Miss Understood
      Miss Understood

      When Queerty runs an opinion piece like this I think the writers name should be more prominent to differentiate it from a news item. It should also link to other pieces by the same writer. Readers like to know more about who is writing opinions.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 7:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pat Duffy
      Pat Duffy

      I luv the idea that it’s better to let folks Indoctrinate their foster kids in Hating GLBT folk(and making the GLBT kids they Mentally Abuse suffer) than making Haters Ineligible.
      ‘Course, they Hate GLBT folk. It’s not like they Hated REAL PEOPLE like those of a different Religion or Ethnicity…

      Mar 1, 2011 at 7:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      All this story tells me is that either they have raised 15 kids who are now homophobic, or they have raised several homophobic kids and tortoured a few kids who were closeted and having to suffer with them as parents.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 7:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daniel
      Daniel

      @Miss Understood: You can check out all my past Queerty pieces at http://www.queerty.com/tag/daniel-villarreal. Enjoy.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 7:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Shannon1981
      Shannon1981

      And the more comments I read the more I think these people are unfit. And seriously, there are people on this board who think homophobic parents are fit parents? What about members of the KKK? Would David Duke make a good foster dad? Same thing, except these old people know how to be old and cute and win your hearts, when theirs is made of ice as far as you are concerned, because they hate the very core of what you are, and they will make sure any gay kid who crosses their paths knows it. They’ll turn the straight kids they raise into homophobes and torture the gay ones. Unacceptable.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 7:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @Pat Duffy: So what do you suggest? That abandoned children stay in orphanages, get taken care of by imperfect people or that you’re willing to provide foster care to LGB kids?

      Be honest. If you’re willing& able.I can prôvide you with three foster kids with severe disâbilities by March 19. They will stay w/ you for a minimum of 6 months.

      Speak up, put up, or shùt up. Take your pick.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 7:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      This is typical British nanny statism, no more justifiable than the prior position by the British government that gay people aren’t fit to be foster parents. This is inevitably where big government and social engineering leads.

      Of course, there is one good thing that could come out of it — religious conservatives could learn that the same government that denies marriage and adoption rights to gay people can do the same to them.

      In that regard, both gay people and religious conservatives are (unlikely) political allies — the only way those unusual groups can exist is if they’re in a truly free society where government force isn’t used to make them conform to the “expectations of the majority.”

      I hope the religious conservatives learn this lesson and take it to heart — embracing a freedom agenda for themselves AND others who are different from them. Otherwise, this is just the beginning.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 8:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scott ny'er
      scott ny'er

      here’s an interesting thought. Would you want to foster a very Christian fundamentalist type of kid? Reversing the roles. And I’m not sure I could.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 8:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      @Cam: Proof or stop assuming. It’s obnoxious.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 9:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      That idiotic couple needs to enter a deprogramming center. They have been brainwashed over their lifetime and are damaging to children as well as offensive and insulting. They can do that or get back inside their ugly church and stay there not bothering the rest of us outside its walls.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 9:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      Society must be protected from people like that.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 9:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ousslander
      ousslander

      They have said that homosexuality is immoral, where have they said they hate gay people. I find certain things about people somewhat odious but I don’t hate the person.

      They should be allowed to foster.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 11:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nik
      Nik

      I heard Eunice Johns being interviewed on BBC Radio 4 this morning. A little evasive about what she actually believed until finally admitted that while she loved homosexuals she loathed the act. Something like the Catholic attitude of love the sinner, hate the sin. So. You have a kid who thinks he – or she – is gay. ‘I love you,” says foster-mommy, ‘but what you want is disgusting.’ Implied ‘if you loved me you wouldn’t feel that way. If you want me to go on loving you, you wouldn’t feel that way. And as for your relationship with God who really, really loves you. . .’
      Let’s substitute the word Jewish for gay. ‘You might have been born Jewish, darling, but that doesn’t mean you have to be one because actually, it’s wrong’.
      Don’t anyone dare feel sorry for them. It’s the Pentecostals stirring up hate and murder in Uganda.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 12:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nathan
      Nathan

      Religious people in general shouldn’t be allowed to foster, or really have custody of any child. Indoctrination and brainwashing is not the price of having a family. Forcing a kid to go to church is morally repugnant.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 12:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @ousslander: bullshit. do you support foster parents telling children heterosexuality is immoral? These idiots are ignorant and deserve a taste of their own medicine. What’s next with you? Saying it’s ok for oppressed people of color to tell children being caucasian is immoral? You are not being open minded like you think. You are being an idiot and you need to be confronted just like this stupid couple of brainless trash. How about if we all apply to foster children and tell them being jewish is immoral? Is that cool with you. It’s bad enough that biological children of jackasses are chained to their tormentors so stop supporting the state do it too. You got some nerve implying that there is some sort of difference between immoral and wrong that a small child is going to be able to defend themselves against.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 12:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lefty
      Lefty

      @ewe: Well said.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 12:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TheRealAdam
      TheRealAdam

      @ewe: The problem is that it is simply impossible to somehow remove all prejudicial feelings from people, and anti-gay sentiments are no exception. People are going to have their views whether you like it or not, but that simply doesn’t make them unfit parents to the child unless there is some sort of active abuse involved.

      In such an instance as this, for the sake of the sheer quantity of children needing a home, and because of the impossibility of giving every one of them an accepting, pro-gay home, they should be allowed to adopt, without question. Once these kids are of age, they can make their own decisions about the rest of their lives, like most children from disapproving households do.

      In your fanaticism, you are being impractical and unreasonable.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 1:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      @DR: said..

      “@Cam: Proof or stop assuming. It’s obnoxious.”
      _________________________

      Your response is idiotic. To remind you , I said, that these people have either raised 15 straight children in an environment where they were taught that gays are bad, or they raised a certain amount of straight people in that environment and a certain amount of terrified closeted gay kids who were taught that they were bad.

      Don’t even try to pretend that this isn’t the case, present to me all the images of the happy kids that came out of Pentacostal homes with parents who thought gays were evil.

      If these folks thought that hetrosexuality was evil there wouldn’t even be a discussion going on, some people seem to have bought too far into the victim status.

      It is THEIR private belief, however, when the GOVT. is giving them a child, the govt. absolutly has a say.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 2:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      @Cam:

      No, your assumptions are idiotic. Until you get depos from all fifteen kids they fostered, you’re simply making assumptions.

      Proof or it didn’t happen, end of discussion.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 2:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • moldobo
      moldobo

      Just another sad example of black homophobia

      Mar 1, 2011 at 5:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • StevenW
      StevenW

      I wonder just how much this couple *really* wanted to adopt. Eunice and Owen Johns are 62 and 65 and last adopted 20 odd years ago – they would have found it very hard to adopt at over 60 no matter their religious views.

      I would not put it past the more intolerant christian groups to be using them as stooges, just to have yet another go at the Equality Act.

      Mar 1, 2011 at 5:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ousslander
      ousslander

      No I don’t have a problem if some raises their kid thinking homosexuality is immoral. Did they say the person or the act is immoral? In most churches having sex without marriage is a sin and immoral. So should children be taken out of other foster homes where they teach premarital sex is wrong?

      The child has to defend himself from what? Is he being physically or mental abused? If he were gay then you have a point. Most people grow up with parents who teach them things they later disagree with as adults and are perfectly fine.

      Should a rabid aetheist be able to foster, if they think people who believe in a god are abhorrent and idiots who should be looked done upon?

      Mar 1, 2011 at 5:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @ousslander: Yes, because they are.

      Mar 2, 2011 at 1:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ben pin wang
      ben pin wang

      @Kev C:
      Thank you for telling us the truth. I always am suspicious of those who want to foster a child to “collect money from the government” than adopt a child and pay for all the expenses a child needs. I am glad the government agents are careful because those poor children do depend on their wisdom and clear minds.
      We all know what the difference is when people do things for money instead of doing things for love. Hope you find love and kindness regardless of people’s age. Married and religious adults are not always better.

      Mar 2, 2011 at 1:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • m3e8n1s0a
      m3e8n1s0a

      Thank you DR for answering Ousslander’s question:

      “Should a rabid aetheist be able to foster, if they think people who believe in a god are abhorrent and idiots who should be looked done upon?”

      You are more of a bigot than Eunice and Owen Johns are, and far less suitable to raise children. Clearly, atheists like yourself should be barred from fostering children as much as Eunice and Owen Johns should be barred, and for the very same reason.

      Mar 2, 2011 at 2:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @StevenW: There’s a difference between being foster parents and adoptive parents. The foster “situation” is usually temporary, in cases while waiting for legal decisions on custody for the bio-parents, actual adoption by another family, or other disposition like being transferred to a relative’s home.

      Adoption is basically “forever”, and may happen after a “triál” period to assure a good match. [UK process may be different, btw]

      Foster parents may decide to adopt a foster kid, but that doesn’t happen all that often.

      Mar 2, 2011 at 3:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tarxien
      tarxien

      I sometimes have to assess people as to whether they are suitable foster parents. It’s clear that some the main motive is financial. I suspect there is more to this story than just perceived homophobia.

      Mar 2, 2011 at 5:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tallskin2
      tallskin2

      I gotta larf at the sky pixie believers posting on here! Idiots

      a gay christian is a turkey voting for an early christmas

      Outside of the mad world of sky pixie belief how does sexual behaviour relate to “immorality”? As an atheist immorality to me means thieving, killing, murdering, hurting other people, launching crusader wars etc. Where I or anyone else puts their organs of regeneration cannot be immoral, if it’s consensual. It is simply absurd and makes no sense outside of the babbling nonsense that is religion.

      And let us take this couple of bigots. They claim they are entitled to be bigoted because their invisible friend told them to be. Quite frankly that is AN INDICATION OF MADNESS. Not only should they not be adopting but they should not be out on the streets: they should be in a psychiatric ward, in straightjackets. They should definitely NOT be allowed within two miles of a child.

      [img]http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSeWBGoa7U1sweO08sHiDK1QJ2nHWSpl22JKgyYBZZo8y08IhSP6A&t=1[/img]

      Mar 2, 2011 at 7:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      @DR: said..


      No, your assumptions are idiotic. Until you get depos from all fifteen kids they fostered, you’re simply making assumptions.

      Proof or it didn’t happen, end of discussion.
      __________________________

      Yes, because THATS the way you weed out abuse, you wait until you ignore all the signs and wait until you have a dead child before you say that those people are unfit.

      Sorry, the law in Britain says, no anti-gay discrimination…these children are wards of the govt. and covered by those govt. policies and laws. These people have stated that abiding by that law is not within their belief structure. Guess what, you don’t get a kid. If they want a kid and to not have to abide by the govt. policies then they are perfectly free to go and adopt one privately.

      Mar 2, 2011 at 7:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jack
      Jack

      Actually, the court didn’t uphold the verdict of the council, and didn’t rule that the couple were unfit foster parents because of their views.
      The court merely suggested that it was appropriate for the council to take into consideration how a couple’s beliefs would affect their behaviour towards a child in their care.
      Naturally, this was stirred up by those in the media with an anti-gay, pro “Christian” agenda to add more fuel to their batshit crazy supporters’ paranoia that the mad, bad, European-human-rights-leftist-atheists are mercilessly persecuting good, honest, god fearing bigots. Yawn, same old, same old.
      It’s a shame more of the queer media hasn’t picked up on this angle of the story, instead of wading into the tabloid press’s fabricated “debate” on a ruling that never even happened.
      Don’t let them frame the debate people. Kill ‘em with facts.

      Mar 2, 2011 at 9:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      @m3e8n1s0a:

      That wasn’t me, sadly Queerty has no way of protecting handles. Someone trying to start trouble borrowed my handle to make that post. If you read my posts here on religion, you’d find I have never made such a comment about Christians since I am one. The post has been flagged, but I suspect that this site won’t bother addressing the issue as it happens quite frequently.

      @Cam: You are making the standard anti-Christian comments with no proof to back it up, and now treading out the “dead gay child” meme to appeal to emotion. Talk about grasping at straws.

      It’s a shame the UK doesn’t have the legal intelligence to balance everyone’s interests and would deny this family the right to foster children, as they have successfully done in the past. The decision is one of legal laziness based on some social worker’s *single* question.

      Mar 2, 2011 at 11:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Neal Hicks
      Neal Hicks

      I think there’s a difference between anti-gay discrimination and disapproving of homosexuality.

      I won’t pretend to know or understand this British certification of foster parents. Can it really require foster parents to inform kids that gay is ok? Require them to be advocates? Or just not to put hatred or abuse on the kids. These, to me, are two different things. It’s kind of a thought police issue…I don’t necessarily care if person X thinks homosexuality is a wholesome way to live, as long as they aren’t actively thwarting me. My landlord can hate gays all he wants until he kicks me out of my apartment over it, then we might have a lawsuit. (random hypothetical, my landlord is nice and I don’t know his views.) Similarly, a person who doesn’t feel comfortable with gays, could still be a caring person who can provide a good situation for a foster kid. Gay pro or anti need not come up. If the child did ask about it, the person could just say, that’s a private and personal matter, I don’t want to talk about it. Are British foster parents expected to be positive advocates for being gay? Or just not to be jerks about it?

      I mean, this is kind of “sins of commission” vs “sins of omission” sort of stuff, always confusing.

      Mar 2, 2011 at 1:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Soupy
      Soupy

      I would have to ask some follow up questions. Like if a child said that he wanted to talk about homosexuality would the foster parents be willing to guide him to a guidance counsellor or professional? Do they force their foster children to go to church or preach to them? What if you substituted the word jew and they said that jews weren’t right with their god?

      Mar 2, 2011 at 1:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @TheRealAdam: my fanaticism? You are traumatized and you do not even know it. Just because some gay children grow up in hostile unaccepting unloving households and are able to overcome it when they are adults does not give you the right to say that the state should promote being antigay as ok when you know damn well in that thick pathetic offensive skull of yours that the state would not legislate parents being anti straight. And therein lies your stupidity as usual. Trying to be a conservative with your live and let live attitude as long as it punishes those who are homoesexual again? So Ms.Intelligencia, tell us all (mostly gay) on this blog why you think you can come here and push your prejudice for right wing evangelicals as if squatting and taking an open dump on the a floorthat you don’t polish? Go back to the 1950s where you can relish in your persoanal “problem”.

      Mar 4, 2011 at 10:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TheRealAdam
      TheRealAdam

      @ewe: Yes, Ewe, your fanaticism. Your over-zealous nature is getting the best of you yet again. They have tablets for that.

      And if you were ever so insightful in your judgment of me as you are in your commentary, dear, you’d understand that the only thing I advocate is a reasonable home for the gay kiddies, given the extremes of children without homes. By reasonable, I certainly don’t mean “perfect,” plastered with rainbows, PFLAG meetings every evening, and condom dispense machines in the bathroom, as your deluded ramblings would have me believe you’d expect.

      I don’t want anyone punished. However, I do not want them to go around believing that they can rid every single person in the world of their prejudicial views. Maybe on whatever planet you live on, medicated or not, that is a possibility, but I’d prefer to look at the larger picture instead of wasting energy on one specific couple fostering children that does not appear to have any correlation with anti-gay abuse except for a few narrow-minded but hardly malicious pronouncements. People are built differently, and they believe different things. Face that fact, and also the fact that I’m gay, since you appear to have me confused with one of the breeder enemies you’ve invented in that contraption of unoiled parts you no doubt generously refer to as a brain.

      When you wake up from this dream of yours, slap yourself a few times. On me.

      Mar 4, 2011 at 9:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sage Cat
      Sage Cat

      Gay friendly people are usually younger in age, unfortunately. It would be difficult to find more gay friendly people to adopt.

      Also people will always lie about their beliefs. There are many racist, sexist and hateful people who can easily hide their beliefs during screening processes. I think that a person who adopts children should sign a pledge to be anti-discriminatory, but outside of this- I don’t see what we can do.

      One of my parents dislikes homosexuality, but this person is not cruel, hateful or incompetent. I am proud to have had a kind, loving and successful parental figure(the other who accepts homosexuality is great too). Face the facts; people who are decent people are often homophobic. Good parents often have their biases. One day homophobia will become as uncommon as racism… however, isn’t racism still an issue in society? Hatred will always exist, all that we can do is attempt to find loving foster parents. Adamantly anti-gay foster parents should be excluded- just as many forceful political extremists. The problem is people are often bad, not just homophobic. A kind, loving and supportive foster family is what children definitely be taken!

      Mar 5, 2011 at 10:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @TheRealAdam: no adam. I just tell shitheads like you that you need to grow up and that is the truth. You have very little life experience. That is not an insult. What i am saying is thay you have yet to or have failed to immerse yourself in the lives of other people outside your insulated life. You most certainly did not advocate a safe home environment for (how did you say it DEAR) “gay kiddies”. Go back and read your words. You are a delusional hypocrite in your immaturity and la la la la la attitude. What you don’t understand is that many people did not have the same type of unconditional support you obviously did. That unfortunately did not make you any smarter though. Secondly, you don’t get to fucking decide how gay parents choose to be honest about themselves with their children even though you obviously think that gay parents should censor who they are with your bullshit about PFLAG discussions in the home. Darlin, you are not as global as you would like to think you are. Right wing evangelical fundamentalists or any born again creepy flipped out fucks are definitely open for target. They are promoting hate and intolerance and want to start with the very young. Grow the fuck up. I don’t stinking like your pollyanna outlook that fosters homophobia and free reign for bigots to continue oppressing people like me you little fuck. Lastly, i don’t use terms such as breeder, if you ever fucking read what i wrote you would know that. Open up a book if you can’t get out of the priviledged suburb you are from and obviously never left. You must be extremely blessed to be so damn ignorant.

      Mar 5, 2011 at 11:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TheRealAdam
      TheRealAdam

      @ewe: Foolish woman, I had no “unconditional support” or “privileged” (ha!) upbringing. My parents were (and continue to be) just as anti-gay as the next, so you need to check your little assumptions about my “life experience,” which you are not aware of in the slightest bit, my dear.

      The rest of your post only reflects the typical incoherence I’ve come to expect from you.

      Be blessed, and be dismissed.

      Mar 6, 2011 at 1:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris [Different person #1 using similar name]

      Ok for all the people out there who sincerely believe this bigot couple and those like them should foster gay children, pushing mental abuse and psychological trauma on them, please read this by the Family Acceptance Project:

      http://familyproject.sfsu.edu/files/English_Final_Print_Version_Last.pdf

      and the American Academy of Pediatrics

      http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/123/1/346

      There is a direct connection between LGBT suicide and self destructive behavior and non acceptance.

      Mar 6, 2011 at 2:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @tallskin2: Best comment ever! Thank you!

      Mar 6, 2011 at 2:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @ewe: I understand your frustration hun, especially with those out there who cant see the harm that these beliefs but onto children. Just for the record everyone “not agreeing with homosexuality” and hating it are kind of the same thing. However it should be noted that one cannot agree or disagree with homosexuality, it is just there. To say you disagree with homosexuality is akin to saying you disagree with maple trees. It makes no sense, outside the confines of the fundamentalist mind.

      And for those who sincerely think that anti-gay attitudes by caregivers don’t effect the children, please read my above links from the Family Acceptance Project and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

      Any chance of harming innocent kids is a chance to high!

      Mar 6, 2011 at 3:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt
      Hyhybt

      @Chris: Oh, go ahead and disagree with maple trees. They’re capable of putting up better arguments than FRC :)

      Mar 6, 2011 at 6:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @Chris: i have no idea why you would be addressing me with your post Chris.

      Mar 7, 2011 at 12:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @TheRealAdam: well looky looky, she’s got a problem with people who use the word “breeder” as she calls out “foolish woman” as another accusation. The only incoherence being addressed is your statement that children should grow up in anti gay homes and when they are of age they can get over it. Of course you don’t care to ever address that stupidity just ladedadeda on and on you go with more dingy uninformed idiotic jargon. Laughing in response to what one says is one step closer to admitting that they are right about an observation Townie. Get the fuck away from me. You can meet that couple in some evangelical church and share your stories with each other.

      Mar 7, 2011 at 12:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rich Friday
      Rich Friday

      Dearest beloved servant of God,
      I send lovely Christian greetings to you in the name the name of our lord Jesus Christ.

      We are a registered Christian ministry, and because of the ADF insurgency that hit kasese district western Uganda in 1996 displaced most of the people almost half of the population of kasese and many people lost their lives hence leading to high rates of orphans and street children and high dependence ransios.

      As a result of the instability people were affected with diseases such as HIV/AIDs Malaria Cough etc, all resulting from high conjunction, high death rates, among families and high displacements of people especially children under 18 years of age who went as orphans and street children.

      As Christians, because of this worse situation we decided to come up with a Christian ministry which HOPE FOR VULNERABLE CHILDREN MINISTRY as a way of restoring these vulnerable children in order for them to grow well and have a better future. HOPE FOR VULNERABLE CHILDREN MINISTRY currently operates under the following programs:-
      (i) Care for orphans and street children and their guardians, widows.
      (ii) Training and education.
      (iii) Communal working class and spiritual development skills in the community.

      HOPE FOR VULNERABLE CHILDREN MINISTRY works in partnership with well wisher Christians, well wisher churches and well wisher Christian Organizations for assistance in the smooth running of their activities of this ministry from the time we started up to date and we hope if we are together, we shall build this ministry as well as the kingdom of God .

      Therefore we feel to request you kindly to send us the information about your organization activities (Guideline) for us to be in touch with you, and we shall be grateful to hear a positive response from you soon.

      our ministry though we operate, it is on a low scale depending of our vision and this is brought about due to financial crisis and since the ADF war attack the rate of orphans and street children has been increasing not only in kasese as a district but the whole of Uganda as a nation, the soldiers that flooded in kasese during this ADF war spread these diseases especially HIV/AIDs that is still claiming peoples lives and especially people who lefts their lands (Bakonzo) from mount Rwenzori to occupy the low lands in town are the most affected and have never gone back, hence high stands of living in kasese town and in the villages, high mortality rates and birth rates.

      through the activities of HOPE FOR VULNERABLE CHILDREN MINISTRY are funded, we have a vision that by 2015 the situation in kasese and the whole Uganda at large, of street children and orphans and the dependence ration will have traduced leading to the development of kasese as a district and the entire community of Uganda as a Nation.

      We shall be grateful if our request is put under your consideration.
      I remain yours faithfully
      Apostle Rich Friday
      Director/Founder
      HOPE FOR VULNERABLE CHILDREN MINISTRY.
      TEL: +256772965381

      May 4, 2011 at 8:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Judaas
      Judaas

      @Chris:
      That cuts both ways. The gay lobby have hoodwinked the world at large into believing that you’re born gay or you’re not. So like eye colour, there’s no way anyone or anything can influence if I or my son is going to be gay. LIE. The facts tell a very different story, full of over-protective mothers, absent or abusive fathers or people who were raised in weird and at the very least ‘non-conducive’ circumstances. Some other people’s ‘gayness’ just appears to come out of the blue. Still others decide they’re ‘artistic’ and ‘passionate’ adolescent and impose their search for significance on the world in the form of coming out as a ‘shock tactic’ – to get others to notice them, to be taken seriously. In short, it is a form of rebellion. IF there are genuine cases of genetically gay people out there I reckon these imposters must be to them must be one of the worst forms of life, as their pretence invalidates the reality of the genuine experience. SO Chris, if a gay child CAN be unduly influenced/victimised by a couple of Bible-beating parents, so too can a child be unduly and unfairly influenced by a gay couple who have either fostered or adopted a child. THAT is why some Christians are concerned about the way the gay lobby agenda is moving on to children. It is little more than political recruitment under the guise of caring in many cases. Unfortunately, I would have to concede the model which some non-gay people have demonstrated in their own fostering example is little short of exploitation, and in some cases they have called themselves Christians. Clearly they had no credible belief in divine retribution.

      Sep 20, 2011 at 7:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     


    POPULAR ON QUEERTY


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.