QueenB4Liberty
03-01-2011, 06:02 PM
The High Court had been asked to rule on whether the traditional views of Christian couple Owen and Eunice Johns should be a bar to them becoming foster carers.
Their legal bid came after Derby City Council halted their application process when the couple admitted they would not be able to condone the homosexual lifestyle to a child in their care because of their beliefs on marriage as a union between a man and woman.
Although the High Court did not go as far as to ban all orthodox Christians from becoming foster carers, its ruling yesterday stated that laws protecting the rights of homosexuals should take precedence over laws protecting religious beliefs.
It is now unlikely that the Johns, who have fostered 15 children previously, will be approved as foster carers unless Derby City Council changes its position.
The Christian Institute expressed particular concern over the High Court’s conclusion that “the attitudes of potential carers to sexuality are relevant when considering an application for approval”.
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/court.ruling.on.christian.foster.parents.is.concer ning/27597.htm
Crazy! I don't have a problem with homosexuality, but this is ridiculous and is very bad precedent.
Their legal bid came after Derby City Council halted their application process when the couple admitted they would not be able to condone the homosexual lifestyle to a child in their care because of their beliefs on marriage as a union between a man and woman.
Although the High Court did not go as far as to ban all orthodox Christians from becoming foster carers, its ruling yesterday stated that laws protecting the rights of homosexuals should take precedence over laws protecting religious beliefs.
It is now unlikely that the Johns, who have fostered 15 children previously, will be approved as foster carers unless Derby City Council changes its position.
The Christian Institute expressed particular concern over the High Court’s conclusion that “the attitudes of potential carers to sexuality are relevant when considering an application for approval”.
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/court.ruling.on.christian.foster.parents.is.concer ning/27597.htm
Crazy! I don't have a problem with homosexuality, but this is ridiculous and is very bad precedent.