Monday, March 07, 2011

"Court tells christian couple their views on homosexuality are incompatible with fostering children"

This strikes me as being a significant and important court ruling. Does it show that, as Oliver Kamm states linking to the Guardian article below, that religious convictions don't entitle you to exemption under the law or is it unreasonable of the state to demand the couple go against their beliefs whether we agree with them or not?

Here is Andrew Brown in the Guardian.

"The Christian Insitute and similar bodies have mounted a series of court cases over the alleged persecution of Christians in the last five years. Almost all have been based around the claim that Christians are entitled to discriminate against gay people. Each one has ended in defeat. From the cross worn by Nadia Eweida to the attempts to allow religious exemption to the registrants of civil marriage, or the owners of B&Bs, the cases have been pitched as matters of high principle, and the judges have responded with increasing asperity. None, I think, has been so brutal as Lord Justice Munby in his judgment on the case of Owen and Eunice Johns, a couple of Sheffield pentecostalists who were turned down as foster carers because they would not accept homosexuality."

And for an alternative view-point Peter Hitchens on his blog.

No comments: