Gay thought police strike in Britain

[TitanTiger 20,511]

You. Must. Conform.

Foster child to be taken away because Christian couple refuse to teach him about homosexuality

By JAMES MILLS

Last updated at 07:14am on 24th October 2007

They are devoted foster parents with an unblemished record of caring for almost 30 vulnerable children.

But Vincent and Pauline Matherick will this week have their latest foster son taken away because they have refused to sign new sexual equality regulations.

To do so, they claim, would force them to promote homosexuality and go against their Christian faith.

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.

Mr Matherick, a 65-year-old retired travel agent and a primary school governor, said: "I simply could not agree to do it because it is against my central beliefs.

"We have never discriminated against anybody but I cannot preach the benefits of homosexuality when I believe it is against the word of God."

Mrs Matherick, 61, said they had asked if they could continue looking after their foster son until he is found a permanent home, but officials refused and he will be placed in a council hostel on Friday.

She said: "He was very upset to begin with. We are all very close, but he's a mature young man and he's dealing with it."

The couple, who have six grandchildren and one greatgrandchild, are both ministers at the nonconformist South Chard Christian Church.

When they first started fostering they took in young single mothers and their babies.

More recently they have been caring for children of primary school age.

Mr Matherick added: "It's terrible that we've been forced into this corner. It just should not happen.

"There are not enough foster carers around anyway without these rules.

"They were saying that we had to be prepared to talk about sexuality with 11-year-olds, which I don't think is appropriate anyway, but not only that, to be prepared to explain how gay people date.

"They said we would even have to take a teenager to gay association meetings.

"How can I do that when it's totally against what I believe?"

Religious campaigners say the couple are the latest victims of an equality drive which puts gay rights above religious beliefs.

Christian, Jewish and Muslim leaders have complained that the rules force them to overturn long-held beliefs.

The Mathericks are planning to fight their case in the courts with the backing of the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship.

The same organisation is backing Christian magistrate Andrew McClintock who resigned from the family courts in a row over gay adoption.

He says he was forced to resign because he was not allowed to opt out of cases where he might have to send a child to live with gay parents.

The Mathericks' case comes at a time when there is a chronic shortage of foster parents, who work on a voluntary basis.

An extra 8,000 are needed to plug the gaps in the service.

Researchers have found that continually moving children from home to home can have a devastating impact on their education and general welfare.

But a report last year revealed that the shortage of carers meant that some children in care are being forced to move up to three times a year.

David Taylor, Somerset County Council's corporate director for children and young people, said: "No decision has been made about the deregistration of Mr and Mrs Matherick.

"The council is committed to promoting the interests of children and young people and welcomes foster carers from all backgrounds and faiths."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770

So, you have a massive shortage of available foster parents, studies show that moving kids around a lot in the foster care system has a devastating impact on the child, and you have a couple with a proven track record of compassion and self-sacrificial caregiving to single mothers and kids, particularly older children that are harder to place. But because you want them to market how wonderful and normal homosexuality is to young children and they refuse to do it, you're going to remove a child who is happy and funnel him back through the system?

Such a thing couldn't happen here...could it?

[Tigermike 3,055]

Such a thing couldn't happen here...could it?

It already has happened here.

For two decades, Catholic Charities has occupied a small but crucial niche in the state's sprawling social safety net: helping to find homes for the most troubled foster children, including those with HIV and AIDS, mental and emotional problems, and histories of abuse.

The Boston agency's decision yesterday to abandon that service will eliminate that critical link between thousands of foster children and the families looking to adopt them. Adoption specialists say the risks for children are real: Foster children could face longer waits in an already backlogged system, and specialists say other agencies will have to scramble to pick up the Catholic Charities' caseload. Whether they can replace its network of seasoned, caring social workers is another question.

link

As I said in another thread there is a hierarchy to the libs agenda groups and child welfare is trumped by the gay rights agenda every time.

[tiger88 934]

Unbelievable. That's all I can say.

[Captain Liger 0]

Unbelievable. That's all I can say.

Disgusting and reprehensible are what came to my mind.

This country will be there soon enough. We're nothing more than western Europe but behind by about 100 to 200 years, culturally speaking. Just wait.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

When people use the term "gay agenda", it's not just scary talk. We're not saying the gay guy three cubicles down from us at work or the two lesbians who've been living together for five years have some decoder ring and checklist and secret Masonic lodge-style meetings every week.

But when you see the state enforcing what amounts to brainwashing of young children, and they are willing to put the child at risk to make sure it happens by forcing foster parents (of which there's already a shortage) to either preach their gospel or lose their right to be a foster parent, the scales begin to fall from your eyes. It is clear that a sizable and influencial segment, along with their sycophants in academia, politics and the media are indeed pushing some kind of an agenda. Absolutely nothing matters to these folks more than inculcating wholesale acceptance of homosexuality into the next generation. It's sickening.

When religious people pull stunts like this, they're called a cult. What do you call it's irreligious counterpart?

[WinCrimson 61]

Think of the wonders common sense would do for this situation. Instead of economics or military strategy, we're talking about what looks to be a simple, black and white problem. Foster parents, particularly when there are so few, should not have a checklist of mandatory discussions. The idea of the government regulating discussion within the walls of our homes, on any issue, is beyond frightening.

I'm about as pro-gay as you can get. I'm completely for same-sex marriage and adoption rights. Yet, instances like this make me scratch my head. Not on my views on said issues, but on the idea of who's in charge within the gay community.

I'm completely straight and have never had any attraction to men, so maybe there's something I'm missing simply because I don't identify with gays. I doubt it, though. This just makes no sense.