British adoption adviser and pediatrician Dr. Sheila Matthews thought she was being sooo clever when she refused to recommend children be placed with gay parents, because as we all know children “did best” with The Breeders. So the Northamptonshire County Council’s adoption panel got rid of her — or she resigned from the £72,000; conflicting press reports say different things. What is clear: Now she’s suing for religious discrimination.
Matthews says in a statement: “I understand that legislation permits same-sex couples to adopt and they are positively encouraged to apply. […But] I have professional concerns… of the influences on children growing up in homosexual households and I feel this is not the best possible option for a child. I do not consider myself to be homophobic, however I believe that children do best in families with a father and mother. I believe it could have been possible for the county council to have allowed me to continue working as medical advisor… but also allow me discretely to abstain from voting in less than one in 20 cases.”
Her job, to be clear, was to evaluate the medical health of the couples, according to the Daily Mail, which doesn’t necessarily match with her pediatrics training. Either way, through this medical diagnosis, and the help of the Bible, she determined same-sex couples to be unfit to adopt. She did not, however, advise the panel gay couples should not adopt; rather, she abstained from weighing in on gay applicants. The adoption panel’s problem, then, arose from her unwillingness to set aside her personal views and do her job.
At present, she’s gainfully employed … by another city council. And her trial continues. [Daily Mail; Press Association]
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Cassandra
She failed to do the job she was hired for, her religious beliefs are immaterial to the issue. Tasked with determining if couples are medically fit, she rejected for a non-medical reason, defrauding the government in the process.
peteNsfo
It’s not religious discrimination, it’s poor job performance. I hope she’s made to pay the court costs.
Cam
What a nice out for bigots to be able to blame any prejudices on their religeon.
The KKK Claims that their religeon bacs up their opinions. Female genital mutilation is defended as a religeous practive, as is preventing women from going outside their houses without a male relative.
So, sorry, no excuse, this woman is a bigot, end of story.
scott ny'er
@peteNsfo: As well as I hope she’s discriminated against in the future, to her face, as well as behind her back.
Jack
The law is the law, whether she’s Christian or not. No “special exceptions” can be allowed for Christians – or where do we draw the line? ‘I’m racist and I don’t think white children should be adopted by black couples’?
scott ny'er
I’m going to paraphrase a quote from a poster from the Daily Mail article… “If my religion told me that fat, ugly, bad-dye job, fashion-blind, taste-challenged, doughy, pasty, sad sacks should not be allowed to adopt much less show themselves to the world, I wouldn’t stop you from living your life, or adopting . Learn to be more open-minded. You provide proof that even well educated people can be idiots.”
scott ny'er
^^^^^^^ Oh and it’s nothing personal, that’s what my religion tells me to say about you.
Shake-n-Bake
It’s a wonderful day for American Christians when “religious discrimination” only amounts to having to go by what the law says and not what your opinion is.
In other words: NO. It’s not discrimination.
ChicagoJimmy
Why do these stories always invovle some individual who does some stupid shit who then calmly and unabashedly claims not to be homophobic? I don’t think people are allowed to decide if they are or are not homophobic or racist. It seems ones actions make that determination for the rest of us.
the crustybastard
“They’re discriminating against me for discriminating against others!”
Wow.
Ah well, she certainly puts the sow in “reap what you…”
mcc
Ha! @the crustybastard that was hilarious. now if only queerty writers could be a little more witty too and perhaps pick up an editor who can read.. then i’ll be in heaven
robert in nyc
She works for the NHS, (National Health Service), government funded via the tax payers, so she won’t win her case. The catholic cult in the UK tried to circumvent the adoption laws too but lost, so will she. If she doesn’t like her job, let her go work in the private sector. Most employers in the UK wouldn’t tolerate her kind of behavior anyway. You either do the job you’re paid to do or quit.
Larry
Why is it that seeing this photo suddenly had me thinking, “Computer says no!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WlHVEAEhR4
Larry
Why is it that seeing this photo suddenly had me thinking, “Computer says no!”?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WlHVEAEhR4
GayGOP
This is what bugs me about many of my fellow Christians. Your faith cannot trump your job requirements, and if it does, it is, perhaps, time to seek a new job.
I’m not stupid enough to become an OB/GYN, or a Pharmacist, because I would be bound, in the US, to occasionally administer abortions, or abortive drugs. I could not in good conscience do that, because I believe that all women who have abortions not designed to save their lives should be rounded up and tried for first degree murder. So, since I cannot leave that opinion at home, I simply refuse to take a job, or even consider a job, where I might have to do that. That is what all of these Christians who believe that homosexuals should not be allowed to adopt, or need to be repaired, should be doing.
Chris
This is a regular occurrence in England. This is a stupid case produced by the christian legal centre. Every case, along these lines, is backed by this organisation of extremists who are seeking to overthrow our recent equality legislation.
tallskin2
I can support what Chris says. These death cult fanatics are very, very cross that their privileges in society have been largely and are continuing to be removed, that they say something about morality and ethics and no-one in the UK listens anymore, they just receive a collective yawn from the general population.
So, they attack what they think is a weak spot, the public’s funny bone, namely us gays, and they keep on attacking and going for it, whack, whack, whack. And they do this because it’s new and a new order, I mean the equality legislation, introduced by the last Labour government, because it has not had time to bed down yet.
So far, they’ve lost every battle.
The filthy catholic cult have withdrawn from adoption work because the new law said they have to treat gays equally with straights- and of course they are blaming gays and the new law for this, rather than their absurd views.
ewe
Show her the door. She is incompetent.
Chris
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-11769358
http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/13579
Await the inevitable appeal…
This lot are usually protestants on the evangelical fringes of the Church of England supported by the former archbishop of canterbury.
Lefty
I just read on Fagburn the following quote from David Pannick QC and it says everything that needs to be said on this matter, I think…
http://www.fagburn.com/2010/11/adoption-sheila-take-walk.html
“The case-law shows that the right to manifest religious beliefs is a very weak right. It gives way to conflicting goals or values that society as a whole has decided are of importance and does so because they are (or should be) based on reason or evidence.
“We do not allow people to set fire to an abortion clinic, to carry out genital mutilation of young girls, or to massacre infidels, however sincere the religious beliefs that motivate such action, and however important they may be to the believer. Abraham would be very fortunate today to escape with a bindover for the binding, and attempted murder, of his son Isaac.”
A Catholic adoption agency cannot refuse to consider placing a child with a gay couple if that is in the child’s best interests however much this may offend against religious beliefs. The law does not prevent people from believing that homosexual acts offend against the word of God. But if you offer a service to the public, it must be on terms that do not discriminate against people on grounds that society finds unacceptable.”