Christian couple told they can't adopt due to their views on homosexuality.

[Jaysyn]

The government has no business in beliefs, period.

If it was the case that government had an obligation to prevent bigotry or racism through it's official channels then you would see no .co.uk or .us domains being issued to known racists or homophobes and they would be removed when discovered.

1.) They do when the beliefs can have an adverse effect on a ward of the state. Also, ICANN is a private company for that very reason.

And why should their own children be an exception? What is it about a child coming into a family after birth that makes them need these double standards?

2.) A natural child isn't a ward of the state. Two different things legally.

I don't care about the established law, I asked for the principles

3.) I've given you both objective & subjective principles. Please quit trying to move the goalposts on me.

Never said it did give them automatic access to a privilege, and that wasn't my point about religious beliefs either - My point was that if you are going to 'protect' children from being placed with families who display anti-homosexual beliefs then why not those who display anit-religious beliefs?

4.) I'm not sure what you are getting at, I've never said anything about anti-religious beliefs. We are talking about protected classes here. You are putting words in my mouth that have little to do with the matter at hand.

So why aren't you against religious or sexual bigotry too? You've said that this shouldn't apply to people with anit-religious/atheist attitudes, would you say that a family who's only bigotry is an extreme dislike of Islam should prevent them too from adopting?

5.) I am against bigotry period, not sure why you would think otherwise. I've never said anything should or shouldn't apply to people with anti-religious / atheist attitudes. I mentioned they were both protected classes in the workplace. Please stop attributing things to me that I didn't say.

Oh, and a family refusing to promote pro-gay attitudes makes them "brainwashers"? Are you personally for preventing any religious beliefs form being taught on the account of it being "brainwashing"? By what standards do you determine that these things are brainwashing and is there a difference between "brainwashing" and a family passing on beliefs that they sincerely believe are correct and good for the child? Is a family who sincerely beliefs in creationism and wants to teach that position to there children "brainwashing" them?

6.) Protected classes. Not sure why you can't understand that. If for some reason you don't think that children are very, very malleable when they are young then you are sorely mistaken.

I agree that it's the most important concern, I disagree that these attitudes have a significant impact on the child's welbeing. Being raised homophobic and having a perfectly normal physical and mental state are by no means mutually exclusive.

7.) You are saying it's ok to promote racist & homophobic values to a child, I will never agree with you on that point. I will further never agree that the state shouldn't do what is legally in their power to do to prevent that from happening when it is in their ward's best interest. The well being of the ward trumps any privilege that you seem to think the couple in question has.

A few generations ago most people were homophobic and/or racist, their children turned out better than that generation, so the case of a child being raised in a homophobic family causing them mental harm is unjustified.

7a.) Appeal to history.

It would require that an Atheist family who adopts/fosters a child who has been raised in a religious home to continue to take that child to church. An atheist who refuses to take a child to church would be refused the privilege of adopting.

8.) Yes, that is correct other than we are not talking about adoption, but foster care.

They wouldn't take the child to a mosque when they were at church - Neither would I.

9.) Then you wouldn't be allowed to foster a child either. Don't feel bad, neither would I. Not having free time to care for a child & not making certain things available to a foster child are pretty big issues. I don't expect you to see that since you are way too hung up on the other side of this issue (The "rights" of the foster couple).

As for the feminists who do hate men, they should be refused adoption by your standards, no?

10.) I don't think I'd place a child with them either, if I was the adoption agent or the judge.