Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Businessmen, lawyers and Church in challenge to gay adoption

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 02 February 2009
By SHÂN ROSS
A CONSORTIUM of businessmen and professionals is believed to be funding a legal challenge to prevent a young brother and sister being adopted by two gay men, it emerged yesterday.
The consortium, which reportedly also includes lawyers, approached the Catholic Church in Scotland last week. The deal is being facilitated by the church, which is fundamentally opposed to gay adoption.

The Scotsman yesterday contacted sever
al high-profile Scottish businessmen on the issue. Sir Tom Farmer, the philanthropist, denied any involvement. A spokesman for Stagecoach chief Brian Souter would only say that he was aware of the issue. Mr Souter pledged £1 million to fight plans to repeal controversial legislation which prohibited the promotion of homosexuality in schools in 2000.

A leading Edinburgh law firm has been instructed to work on behalf of the children's grandparents, who were told they were too old, at 46 and 59, to care for the youngsters.

With financial support and the backing of the Catholic Church, the family is hoping that lawyers can get a judicial review of Edinburgh city council's decision to remove the four-year-old girl and her five-year-old brother from their family.

Last week, it emerged that the children had been cared for by their grandparents to prevent them being taken into care, after their mother became involved with an abusive partner who introduced her to heroin.

Social workers raised concerns about the grandparents' ability to care for the children – citing their ages and ill health. The grandmother has diabetes and her husband has angina.

The grandparents, who cannot be named, said they had fought for two years to care for their grandchildren and only agreed to adoption after facing massive legal bills.

On hearing that their legal costs were being taken care of, the grandmother said: "I can't believe anyone would do that for us. We are so grateful."

Her husband added: "We never wanted to let (the children] go and, if we had known it would come to this, we would have fought it to our last breath.

"We can now see it was the wrong thing to do. We were bullied and manipulated.

"Now, because of the generosity of a stranger, we might have a chance to put things right – not only for our family but for others who are put in this position."

A spokesman for the Catholic Church said: "As well as the moral issue there is also a legal question, which needs to be explored. Lawyers will be taking this forward with the family.

"Allowing two men to adopt children against the wishes of their grandparents who want to care for them is positively wicked. It is not surprising this case has caused outrage."

A spokesman for the council said the authority had not yet received a written complaint from the grandparents. He added: "If we do receive a complaint from the family concerned then we will investigate that."




Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 02 February 2009 1:10 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Gay and Lesbian issues
 
1

Fifi la Bonbon,

02/02/2009 00:27:16
Why is it significant that a biznissmin is giving some money to this? It seems to me that biznissmins are the fount of all our woes, and should be suppressed and not given publicity.

Stupid word anyway, "biznissmin."
2

Tracker,

02/02/2009 00:43:01
I see two issues here:

1. The sexuality of the adoptive parents, and;
2. the handling of the case by the Council.

I have no objection on principle to the adoption of children by gay couples. I am aware of no evidence that suggests that adoptive gay parents cannot rear children effectively in a loving environment.

If the Catholic Church objects to same-sex couples, why does it not object to same-sex clergy?
3

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 02/02/2009 00:47:53
#2 The real issue is why have they been taken from their grandparents.
4

gordon'sboomhasbust,

glasgow 02/02/2009 00:53:08
I wouldn't take the catholic church too seriously. They believe in miracles and virgin births and folk walking on water. Give them a wide berth.
5

,

02/02/2009 00:54:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Rosie,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 01:03:50
No. 2 is correct... the real issue is why have they been taken from their grandparents...... if at 46 and 59 they are considered too old to bring up children.... this is ageist!
7

DouglasT,

kirkintilloch 02/02/2009 01:19:37
This is all about some little people being granted more power than they are capable of exercising. I hope Edinburgh voters take note of the council members who ultimately are responsible for this nonsensical decision.
8

Canada,

Canada 02/02/2009 01:36:23
Why is the Church of Scotland so silent on this perverse situation? What would John Knox say? Is the Church of Scotland mow so irrelevant it cannot raise its head above the furor and demand Christian values. The bible, all world religions say homosexuality is wrong. C of S stand up, be counted, be true to your roots in Christ. Stop being so gutless.
9

S'me,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 01:45:48
We're turning into a right wing bible bashing nation.. very American... Most of the posters on here make me ashamed to be Scottish.
10

Tim Hopkins,

Equality Network 02/02/2009 01:55:48
#2 and #6 are correct - the issue that would be tested in court here is surely whether the council were right not to leave the children with their grandparents. The grandparents have the right to challenge that decision in court.

How sad, yet predictable, that some senior Catholic leaders have chosen to use the case to promote their usual anti-gay prejudice.

There is no way a court in Scotland is going to overturn the general rule that same-sex couples can be considered as an adoptive family. That's been established since a Court of Session ruling in 1995 (the case of T Petitioner), and re-confirmed by the later adoption legislation.
11

,

02/02/2009 02:00:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

,

02/02/2009 02:02:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
13

2Right,

On Location 02/02/2009 03:07:12
Would it not be great if some of the Lawyers fought for some of the Miscarriages we hear so much of today with as much Gustu.

Seen a case today were the Lawyer refused to hand over documents claiming they belonged to the employers of the accused because they had paid for his defence.

See here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/26453069@N02/3239164924/sizes/l/

But even with the backing of this Lawyer this man has never seen the documents collected for his trial:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/26453069@N02/3239166698/sizes/l/

Justice in this country is a joke



14

Justin Time,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 03:10:48
#12. Sad, strange little man.

This is another classic piece of gutter journalism from The Scotsman. The heading is complete and utter garbage. The Catholic Church and business leaders are NOT going to challenge gay adoption in this case. Only someone that is completely stupid, or trying to stir up homophobic feelings would suggest such a thing.

The body of the article shows that they are going to pay the legal costs of an elderly couple trying to secure the right to look after their grandchildren. Whilst there personal insecurities and deep homophobic feelings might be motivating the individuals concerned to suddenly become so generous, they are NOT going to court to challenge gay adoption. The case will be about the grandparents being the most suitable guardians for the children.

The social workers have determined that the grandparents are not suitable guardians for the kids. This decision will have been taken well before the prospective Adoptive parents were found. Presumably there are compelling reasons for the grandparents to be overlooked (beyond age and their own child having gone down a abhorrent path).

I am all for the grandparents being given every chance to show that they are fit and proper people to look after these kids. But we just have to walk around any of Scotland's town centres to know that a blood line does not make you a fit person to raise kids. If the grandparents are alleging that they have been the victims of maladministration from the Social Work department then there are avenues for them to go down.

I fear that what we have here are a bunch of self-righteous, arrogant buffoons from the Church and business community who are putting their own insecurities and intolerance before what is best for the children, grandparents and society. If that is the case then hopefully karma will take care of them.

At the end of the day, these kids will be quickly forgotten about by all of those 'do-gooders' whose only concern is
15

Justin Time,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 03:13:52
Continued from post 14 - they cut me off in my prime :-(

At the end of the day, these kids will be quickly forgotten about by all of those 'do-gooders' whose only concern is forcing their religious dogma onto those of us who want no part of it.
16

DannyG,

02/02/2009 03:46:37
#14... Sorry but since when was 46 and 59 considered elderly...
17

Norrie G,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 04:43:33
#14 Calling people homophobic because of their opinion is very primitive and unconvincing.

You should also try to learn what exactly a judicial review means.
18

FerryPort,

firmly on the happy fence 02/02/2009 04:52:33
Whit a load of hot blassphylemic stench
Oh, and the devil will be among us

Not enough kissing goin on
Hail to the kiss
19

SteveMD2,

USA 02/02/2009 05:54:48
Ah yes, as usual, the Catholic church is at it again.

The people who gave the world 1000 years of the dark ages, and the murder of 50 million Muslims in the name of God, during the "crusades". The church poisoned Muslim society, and they haven't forgotten their Holocaust. Real creators of 9/11- the church.

The same people who for 1500 years gave us the hatred of the Jews. Which hitler, a catholic, used as a hate lever to gain total control of Germany and 50 million more died.

And now they have someone else to hate - the gays.

Why - because they simply foam at the mouth for power, they are master psychologists with their fantasies, and their promises of hell if you don[t do, and life everlasting if you do do as they say.

It took wars and wars, head choppings etc to partially break the back of the church's destruction of much of humanity in western europe, when it teamed up with corrupt kings for a feast of death and destruction for centuries.

It is time for all good people to stand side by side with our gay people, all made "im His Image". We must cut off the money and support of this ancient institution, whose buildings should be museums to one of mankind's worst adventures - conservative religions, whose only real goal is power of the mind, and money.
20

Old Siggy,

Dunbar 02/02/2009 07:10:38
If a 46 year old woman is "too old" to care for children, why are women in their 50s and 60s given IVF treatment? Personally, I couldn't care less who is funding this court challenge, the yoke of political correctness that is strangling this country must be removed at all costs.
21

john z,

edinburgh 02/02/2009 07:29:05
I'm sure there were very good reasons for the grandparents not being allowed to keep the children. That decision in itself would have been made, before any potential adopters were looked at.

As it stands, knowing very well how some religious fascists like the Catholic church in Scotland feel about gay adoption, I am very confident that the gay couple (it isn't clear if they are male or female) will have been very very thoroughly assessed.

This raising of this issue is nothing but blatant homophobia by the catholic church, who really should be ashamed of themselves. But perhaps we should not be so surprised by this, the current pope was an active member of the Hitler youth league (twice), and the Roman Catholic church in Italy (Rome) actively colluded with the fascist dictatorship of Mussolini.

In the past, and when I was growing up, christians were the kind of people who cared for others, helping the homeless and the persecuted of this world. Now, however, the christian Taliban HAVE BECOME the persecutors.

As regards the infantile comments of number 3, gay parents are no more likely to let their kids watch them 'at it' than 'straight parents.

Sometimes, the religious bigots of Scotland makes us all feel like we are back in Nazi Germany - and it's not a good feeling.
22

caithness,

02/02/2009 07:31:38
All this speculation is daft. However the social work department should be more open as to why it went down this route. I would guess this gay couple lead a successful life. Looking at some of the neds around, they're hardly an advert for being raised by natural parents.
23

Phillip,

02/02/2009 07:41:13
This whole story is so wrong on so many levels. First, there is no reason why a gay couple cannot provide a loving, caring home for a child. Second, there is ABSOLUTELY no reason why a 46 year old and a 59 year old cannot raise children either! Using modern science, couples that old are even having biological children at that age.

If there needs to be an investigation, it should be of the idiots in the Council who decided that people in the prime of their lives (the grandparents) aren't capable of raising children.
24

,

02/02/2009 07:44:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
25

cabrach loon,

inverness 02/02/2009 07:51:00
I am shocked to see the politically correct state of the majority of the bloggers here. They prefer the unnatural state to the natural.
The frightening thing is that morality generally goes full circle and who knows in 10 years time homosexuality mayt well be banned and PC outlawed.
Personally I look forward to that day yet I consider myself open minded on such matters. What is done in private is obne thing but please do not ram it down my throat and tell me that what is not normal is right ad coirrect. The wheel has turned far enough and a return to human values is overdue.
Time was that human beings were considered to be a higher life form than the lower animals but these days watching TV etc. there seems doubt about it and where it is all leading to. We support an increasing number of parasites until the tax burden may well be too great. Communism will soon clean that up though so take a good look at what went on in the USSR in the past! It may well become the future though I really hope not but POC may push things that way with politicians pursuing their own agendas rather than thiose of the voters!
Let logic rule rather than hypocritical PC.!
26

oder,

Scotland 02/02/2009 07:51:58
whats important here is not what the council wants or gays, it whats best for the child or children?
is placing child in the middle a gay relationship good for the child or not! can it be considered a normal situation from the child's perspective?its not a question if gay people make good or bad parents,is it the right thing to do? surely family have a legitimate claim before none family? this appears to be yet another move in the destruction of traditional family life by the minority groups and the PC brigade.
27

Spanish Scot,

Las Galletas 02/02/2009 08:05:06
Isn't the simplest answer to end this matter for the gentlemen in question to withdraw their application to adopt the children.
28

Xena - Warrior Princess,

02/02/2009 08:18:02
The issue I have with this case is the way Social Services appear to have bullied the grandparents, threatened that they would not see the children ever again if they continued to oppose them, they also tried to use the press to support their case as in they said that if this went public they would have to stop the adoption.
29

paulr,

edinburgh 02/02/2009 08:36:19
It is typical of the hypocrisy of the catholic church, cover up all the child abuse carried out by their paedophiles, i mean priests then object to 2 gay men adopting children.
30

Angoos,

Baku, Azerbaijan 02/02/2009 08:45:34
At a cursory glance this matter appears to be a case of Edinburgh Social Work Department bullying the Grandparents into believing they weren't capable of taking care of their Grandchildren due to their health, which doesn't surprise me at all.

The real surprise to me is that there doesn't appear to be any other couples in the area looking to adopt.
Surely two children of that age, who are USED to seeing a "normal" partnership between a man and a woman (Boyfriend/Girlfriend, Mother/Father, Grandmother/Grandfather), would be better being placed with a male/female couple looking to adopt rather than a gay couple ?

Stinks to me of Edinburgh Social Work Department trying to gain "PC Brownie Points" by letting these kids be adopted by a gay couple instead of a hetorosexual couple !!
31

Autism Rights,

Ayrshire 02/02/2009 09:15:13
What ought to concern people and politicians is the apparent blackmail that Social Services have used to obtain consent from the grandparents for this proposed adoption. This chimes with many, many other instances of forced adoption, some of which has involved children with disabilities. When the government guidelines for Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy overlap with the international clinical criteria for Autistic Spectrum Disorder, and when the committee ostensibly set up to investigate whether or not there was any basis at all to MSBP was then subverted to one which drew up the government guidelines, much more should be made of this in the Scottish media. Camilla Cavendish of the Times wrote a whole series of articles on the use of the family courts in England and Wales to tear children away from their families in complete secrecy, without any possibility of oversight by the media. The possibility of reporting by the media would, at least, have enabled the whole shameful practice to have been exposed much earlier.

We know that Munchausen's continues to be used as the basis for forced adoptions. It has now metamorphosed into Factitious and Induced Illness (FII) and Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD). Almost a mirror image of Calder Hall /Windscale / Sellafield.
32

MGJ,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 09:19:56
#33 The issue is not whether the grandparents can look after them now, but whether they can in 14 years time (the younger child is 2 IIRC). By that time, the grandfather will be 73, and he is ill with angina now.

Those with little knowledge of the process seem to be mixing up the two things. The first relates to why they were freed to be adopted; there were no fit kinship carers and longer term fostering with the grandparents seems not be an option, implying that the mother is unlikely to ever be an option for rehabilitation.

So that is why they are freed; then it becomes a different part of the Children and Families Department (there has been no such thing as a Social Work Department in Edinburgh for a number of years - wouldn't expect an Edinburgh paper to know that though) who look for adoptive carers form a list of those registered; the couple who happen to be gay are the most suitable on the criteria used.

What seems to then have happened is that the grandparents have threatened to disrupt that placement, so have been told that until they promise not to, they won't have contact. It is not their right to choose who their grandchildren are placed with.
33

MGJ,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 09:22:33
#34, the grandparents don't have to consent or not to adoption since at no point has it been suggested that they have been to court to gain parental rights under a Section 11 order. Presumably the children were placed with their grandparents on a voluntary basis or through a condition of residence on a supervision requiremnt made by a children's hearing.
34

P Rayner.,

Latin America . 02/02/2009 09:25:03
This case is one further example of the malaise affecting the western world . As I see it there are two issues here of prime importance . One is that if the parents are unfit to care for the children it should be almost impossible for the state to prevent grandparents assuming care . The second is , to permit those who indulge in unatural acts to adopt children is in its self a greater perversion . But be warned , the western worlds liberal governance , in these times of economic woe , is begining to crumble . Should worse occur it´s quite probable there will be a massive revolt from the angered majority who do not share such easy going views . Don´t think communist Russia or Nazi Germany are historical blips . They are , in my view , quite probably the coming times .
35

Autism Rights,

Ayrshire 02/02/2009 09:27:58
We don't know how many families have been affected by what seems to be deliberate government policy of the ultimate threat to be used against any loving parent. The only category that gives us a clue as to how many have potentially been affected that is currently used by the Children's Reporters is `emotional abuse`. A government Review of the use of the Munchausen't `diagnosis`, that was forced out of them by the Sally Clark and Angela Cannings cases, has been a mere whitewash. If you read this article, you can see how all-encompassing the MSBP `diagnosis` is, and why it is of such benefit to a state intent on control of `troublesome` elements:-

http://www.theoneclickgroup.co.uk/news.php?start=2540&end=2560&view=yes&id=3176#newspost

http://www.spectator.co.uk/print/the-magazine/cartoons/30630/what-killed-sally-clarks-child.thtml

http://www.theoneclickgroup.co.uk/documents/ME-CFS_pol/Consensus Report - Family Law Reform.pdf
36

Captainofedinburgh,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 09:31:01
Has this country just regressed back into the dark ages? Welcome to 21st century Scotland : A shelter for bigots, homophobes and religious zealots. The adoptive parents' sexuality should at no point come into this. It's their ability to provide a good home for the children. Who cares what they get up to in the bedroom? And to the person commenting about the children watching the parents "get it on", why on earth would the children be watching that?! Do kids with heterosexual parents stand watching them have sex? What a pile of utter nonsense.
37

Canada,

Canada 02/02/2009 09:31:28
Those who condemn the church for certain wrongs have no idea of history. Of course there were dark times. But the church gave birth to our civilization. Hospitals, poor relief, universities, moral teaching, all the work of the church till secularism took over. Criticize if you must, but know the reality of the church's influence and for good or ill, how it restrained the beast within. Yes the bible and all major religions condemn homosexuality, much to the dismay of the modern pc, massed gay lobby, with their perverted arguments about discrimination, justice and equality. What God has ordained let no man put asunder.
38

P Rayner.,

Latin America . 02/02/2009 09:44:10
MGJ. Whether or not hitherto the grandparents have satisfied legal requirements , which may now in anycase be rectified , should not be precedent of their suitability to adopt . If at this moment of time no compelling reason exists for refusal its obvious that blood relatives are the natural choice for adoption . Who can say what might be the case in ten or fifteen years in so far as the natural mother and grandparents are concerned ? It appears to me the motivation for preventing the grandparents from adopting is an enthusiasm for homosexuality .
39

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 09:45:52
8...John Knox would have a lot to say...the man was a blowhard full of his own self importance...how dare you ask what a lunatic preacher who stated that women were the gateway to the devil would have to say about this when it is obvious...get a grip of yourself..give yourself a good bliddy shake...

Religion is the root of all evil...take your bible and your christian values and you know what you can do with them...and as for your laughable comment at 40...the church did more than "Restrain the beast within"...it oppressed and dominated people's lives with its influence and dictatorship...of course the bible and all major religions condemn homosexuality...they are built upon ancient fairy tales written by who knows (in reality) watered down over the years to become more palatable etc etc...and the issue of sexuality was always something that human beings were to be ashamed of..what religion(apart from pagans and wiccans) asks that we be proud to be sexual beings?

The Church has carried out acts of goodness but so what?..it has carried out acts of badness too..."No idea of history"...truly...you are astonishing in your blinkered position...

I fear for a world that still has individuals like you roaming it...because there are still the gullible that will swallow your moralistic poison...
40

bill-alba,

fife 02/02/2009 09:50:10
#40 repeating nonsense doesnt make it true...there is no massed gay lobby, the church hasnt advanced civilization if anything the opposite is true.(the sun revolves around the earth).whether a fairy story condemns homosexuality is irrelevant and nothing to do with modern pc its more to do with antiquated stoneage believe system. The congregation attending churches should give you some indication of what people believe or dont believe.
41

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 09:54:54
There aint half some zoomers come out the woodwork to comment on this subject...strewth I hope they aint parents...
42

Brian the Barbarian.,

middle east, lebanon 02/02/2009 09:59:51

One solution which may be agreeable to all parties is for me to buy the children for my own purposes and take them to live with me in a strange and distant land.
43

A.A.,

Dalkeith 02/02/2009 10:03:43
#2 I agree.
The issue is not that it is a gay adoptive couple, but that these children already have loving grandparents who are more than willing to look after them.
Not all children have happy home lives where there is a mother and father. Some women should never have children.
44

mike3,

02/02/2009 10:04:12
I think, as a priority, that both male and female caring role models should be involved in the day to day upbringing of children.
45

P Rayner.,

Latin America . 02/02/2009 10:06:20
AA .I suspect the issue is in fact homosexual adoption .
46

eric,

02/02/2009 10:09:43
The rc church jump on any oppertunity to divert attention away from the churches abuse of children itself.and in no position to dish out morals.
47

mike3,

02/02/2009 10:11:22
#53 "role models" social interaction, way of behaving, discipline, caring etc.
48

P Rayner.,

Latin America . 02/02/2009 10:11:54
For myself I have no interest in organised religion . My thinking is that such are just further examples of power of the few over the many . Rather than messengers of Gods will I rather see ¨the Church ¨as perveyors of darkness . Clearly though there is a universal force that I could define and do , as God . But I speak for myself .
49

W Smith,

Middle East 02/02/2009 10:12:42
I take it those for the gays adopting were themselves brought up by hetrosexual parents.

SELFISH GITS.

This is what I expect from naive idealists who don't necessary want to practice what they preach.
50

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 10:14:27
it is clear in this case and many others that left wing chic over rules commen sense.

The law requires that where possible children should be placed in care of relatives it is clear that the social workers in this case are acting on there own biased ageist veiws.

Is the social work department of Edinburgh council stateing that anyone who is over 40 and has a medical condition are poor parents?
51

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 10:16:57
tommytommy this is about the care of two young children not an opportunity to display Knuckle draging bigotry
52

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 10:17:33

I'm surprised that anyone thinks the Council Social Work Department might have got this wrong.

Council Social Work Departments never get anything wrong.

Just ask the good people of Pontefract.



53

dallan,

Aberdeen 02/02/2009 10:21:40
However PC the do gooders wish us to be things take time and the majority are not ready to accept progression at the rate that's being forced upon us.
Is gay adoption the right way to go - who knows but the jury looks to be still making it's mind up.....
54

MGJ,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 10:23:34
#59, it is not about the parenting skills of the grandparents, it is sadly, a reflection of the strong probability that at least one of them will die or be severely incapacitated by currently known illnesses well before the two children are able to look after themselves. Placing these children with their grandparents sets them up for either a further disruptive move or makes them young carers.

55

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 10:24:44

Was the legislation allowing adoption by homosexual couples driven by the needs of children or by the demands of homosexuals?
56

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 10:30:04
MGJ on that basis parents who have been diagnosed with a seriouse illness and is over 40 can expect a knock on the door from social services.

This is madness
57

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 10:30:25
65...I think you'll find it was both...children needing adoptive parents having as many opportunities as possible and gay and lesbian couples having the right to adopt...
58

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 10:39:11
69 you contradict yourself. the involvement of the catholic church in this case is incidental.

The fact that the social workers have to justify there actions is crucial
59

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 02/02/2009 10:40:46
Tommy: "The bigotry is the opinions being voiced by the Catholic Church and its members."

It never seems to be far away, does it?
60

Cockney Ranger,

Grays 02/02/2009 10:44:30
The social workers involved in this case should not hide behind council red tape and explain fully their reasons for the decision in what appears to be strongarm tactics in taking grandchildren away from loving granparents. Just over thirty years ago my brother and his wife were killed in a car crash leaving my nephew of eleven months, my parents who were then both 55 years of age saw no other option than to be legal guardians of their grandson, thank God these monsters of Edinburgh social sevices were not around. Are we not told that bulling in any way shape or form will not be tolerated by these same kind of people !!!!!!!.
61

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 10:45:19
tommytommy, The bigotry is the opinions being voiced by the Catholic Church and its members.?

All catholics are bigots?
62

im brian and so is my wife,

edinburgh 02/02/2009 10:46:21
its alright to protest as its your democaratic right
anti gays are put down as bullies
but where is the public outcry about the bullying going on in the muirhouse social work
http://piltonsucks.com/?s=bullying
gay people will have a loud voice no matter what,so are the same shouters going to condemn bullying in the workplace as those bullyed are also the same people who are trying to adopt
63

,

02/02/2009 10:46:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
64

Strict Ivan Jellicoe,

Renfrew 02/02/2009 10:46:54
QUESTION - What's the differece between Al Queida, Edinburgh Social Work Department, and anonymous athiests posting on 'The Scotsman'?
ANSWER - You can negotiate with Al Queida
65

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 10:47:35
72 spot on the logic offerd by the social workers in this case does not stand up to much scrutiny
66

Miss H,

02/02/2009 10:50:30
Maybe not a bad thing if it will allow the facts to come out. And I think they should and I would hope that the Scotsman publishes all of the facts in as prominent a position as they have given to these stories - even if those facts do not sit comfortably with the editorial slant it has taken.
67

Curious Yellow,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 10:51:43
Nothing particularly against adoption by a homosexual couple, but I acn't for the life of me see how that would be preferable to the two children in question being raised by their grandparents. To suggest they are too old is complete rubbish - nowadays, older parents are become more and more the norm. The whole process would require to go before the court, and the court will, as a matter of course, apppiont an independenet reporter to represent the interests of the children. In all likeliehood, this would result in the adoption not being granted, but the whole issue of the Social Work Department's handling of the situation needs to be investigated - and, if necessary, disciplinary action must follow.
68

Miss H,

02/02/2009 10:51:45
74 If the case comes to court surely those assessments can be published and reported on?

That is probably what is needed here.
69

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 10:54:05
tommytommy a sherif being present while a book is sigend by two bulied grandparents is hardly legal scrutiny.

yet again whats the reason for bringingg a churchs minimal involvement in this up continously?
70

Miss H,

02/02/2009 10:56:53
80 yes it is complete rubbish to suggest that grandparents are too old and it is no barrier to children being placed with them. The majority of kinship carers are grandparents. Edinburgh Council like all Scottish councils has signed up to the concordat on kinship care. Social workers will always place children with family members where that is possible. They will have carried out an assessment of the grandparents and a decision reached on the basis of that. They cannot publish that assessment now as it would be illegal but if the case goes to court presumably it will become possible for the Scotsman to report on the detailed reasons why that decision was taken and we will all be able to judge for ourselves.

71

gordon'sboomhasbust,

glasgow 02/02/2009 10:58:32
#77 Strict
Why would you want to negotiate with an atheist ?
Can't we just respect each others views and move on ?
I believe humans evolved over 3 billion years and you think it took six days. ( one day for women - via a mans rib )
I don't believe in the supernatural and you do.
Can't see any room for negotiating. Better to live and let live.
72

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 11:01:38
Miss H yes i agree but i must say one of the thing's that concerned's me and rang alarm bells is the reported phone call to the grandparents after the story broke in the press.

if that is an example of how social workers have conducted themselves in this case then scrutiny is indeed needed
73

Strict Ivan Jellicoe,

Renfrew 02/02/2009 11:03:01
#74 Tommytommy
1. “The social workers assessments and the assessments of the many professional people involved in an adoption case are closely scrutinised by an independent panel and by courts of law. . . . . .
2. The interests of children are the only criteria used in the decision making process.”

WHO ARE YOU KIDDING?

WRONG ON BOTH COUNTS
1. You tell that to the Orkney children taken away in the dawn raids in 1990.
Social workers didn’t read their own procedures, didn’t follow their own procedures, and some of them didn’t even know that they had procedures. Some of them turned up on the dawn raids without even an ID card to introduce themselves to the parents. The belief was ‘This is Orkney and everybody knows.’ The social workers chopped and changed the rules to suit themselves, as they went along. One family were Quakers and were discriminated against because they were Christians. The Orkney children were abuses ; they were put to children’s homes in Renfrewshire and Ayrshire and surrounded by delinquent kids who taught them street life that up until then they had not been exposed to. The social workers abused the Orkney Children, and they got off scott free.
2. IN REAL LIFE This should read “The interests of the SOCIAL WORKERS are the only criteria used in the decision making process.” Do you think that they would carry out that job for nothing? The social workers ONLY motives are their ego trip and their wage packet. Social workers are untouchable and cannot be removed from their posts. Jobs for life. Children have been used as social experiments in every society – especially our – since time began. Don’t be so naïve ; life is cheap, children are expendable and children’s interests are well down the list of priorities.
The true people who care are the families and the true Christian charities.
74

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 11:05:27

#81 Miss H

You obviously haven't a clue how the system operates if you think that's the case.
75

Strict Ivan Jellicoe,

Renfrew 02/02/2009 11:05:45
# 77 gordon'sboomhasbust
I’m grateful to Gordon who has made his point graciously. Thank-you.
76

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 11:08:24

#84 gordon'sboomhasbust

As you are obviously an expert on evolutionary theory could you explain how homosexuality is explained in terms of the theory. What evolutionary purpose does it serve?
77

Greens,

02/02/2009 11:09:18
Not just this case but ALL homosexual adoption should be scrapped. It is wrong for children to be the pawns in the liberal dogma game.
78

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 11:10:29

Hey, tommy tommy tommy tommy tommy, what happened for the social workers in the Pontefract case to get it so wrong?
79

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 11:14:00
tommytommy, it matters little if it was the catholic church, muslim's or quakers that put the grandparents in touch with those who are willing to help what matter is that the grandparents have their wishes listend to
80

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 11:14:13

The legislation was introduced because of a vociferous campaign by homosexuals wishing to assert their rights to be treated equally to heterosexuals.

It was not introduced because of pressure by children who need adopting. They don't have a voice and they don't have votes.
81

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 11:15:09
81 the reports will never be published it's a breach of the data protection act.

I welcome this judicial review, and I hope the businesspeople engage the finest and most expensive legal brains in Scotland - indeed the world. I hope that no stone is unturned in a full and lengthy exploration of all aspects of this case.

In short, I hope they lose vast amounts of money on this case, it will serve them right for being anti-homosexual bigots.
82

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 11:17:01
#95 Observer

It has nothing to do with the Data Protection Act.
83

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 11:20:13
95 and the care of the children, and the wishes and feelings of the grandparents who succesfully cared for the children need to take a back seat in the name of gay rights?
84

,

02/02/2009 11:20:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
85

Cauchy Riemann,

Wales 02/02/2009 11:27:38
The welfare of the children should be put first - and this isn't what the council are doing here.

(No surprise there - councils have a history of following their own narrow dogma rather than actually considering the welfare of children first).
86

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 11:32:55
#98 Colin R

Caskie was as gay as a cricket.
87

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 11:33:16
76...And so are heteros mate dont kid yourself...the mother has a fair old chance of having hep C thanks to being a heroin addict...
88

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 11:36:18
this should not and can not turn into a compitition between the grandparents and the gay couple as to who can provide a better life.

if the grandparents are willing to look after the children and are able (it was the grandparents who looked after the children prior to this episode) then there should be no debate.

we can not have afluent or politicaly correct potential adopters enter into some sort of competition with family carers
89

Zippy,

Aberdeen 02/02/2009 11:42:46
I've got a few issues here.....

1 - Quite rightly any decision should be based on what is best for a child, and at a first look at this article you can quickly jump to the defense of the grandparents regardless of the sexuality of any prospective adoptative parents. However I imagine thorough checks have taken place over the suitability of either option. We shouldnt forget the fact that the grandparents had themselves produced a child who has become a heroin addict and is now unfit to look after their children. Those who are quick to judge others should bare in mind the complexity of the issues involved jumping to their 'moral' highground.

2 - It may come as a shock to some that the sexuality of a parent or guardian has little influence on the formation of a child. Millions of gay people were in fact born into the world by straight parents. No one chooses how they will become, babys are not tagged at the maternity ward on their sexuality.

3 - How many of those who are so critical of others lives actually offered their homes and lives to care for a child whether foster or adopt? Should we not encourage those who are willing to offer a safe and loving home to a child to come forward. Or should we continue condem children to a life time of childrens homes where a significant percentage of those children who have never had a home will become homeless, involved in crime, uneducated and unemployed. A loving safe home is what is important here. There is a shortage of suitable parents to adopt, should we make the situation worse by condemnation from a vocal group of society based on religious beliefs and very little fact?

90

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 11:48:16
zippy i personaly dont think the sexuality is the core issue here allthough that is what has gained the attention of many.

But if you want to bring it up the succes rate and subsequent problems children adopted by gay parents have dosent make me optimistic
91

gordon'sboomhasbust,

glasgow 02/02/2009 11:50:10
#90 Stan
Homosexuality may be a response to overcrowding in a species. It's also seen in other animals apart from humans.
It would give offspring more support during their younger years aswell. Lots of gay anties and uncles to look after them so to speak.
92

Green,

02/02/2009 11:52:26
Farmer? Does he still have any money?
93

Thistledhu,

02/02/2009 11:56:03
Farmer? Does he still have any money?

I dont know but i doubt he will be selling the big issue any time soon
94

WSS,

02/02/2009 11:57:03
In any decision making process, the best interests of the children must be uppermost in the minds of the decisionmakers. Forget PC, get it right for the children.
95

Green,

02/02/2009 11:57:30
NorrieG quote

Calling people homophobic because of their opinion is very primitive and unconvincing.???

What else are we to judge them by? The colour of their cars? Their star sign?
96

Green,

02/02/2009 12:01:26
Canada,

Criticize if you must, but know the reality of the church's influence and for good or ill, how it restrained the beast within. Yes the bible and all major religions condemn homosexuality, much to the dismay of the modern pc, massed gay lobby, with their perverted arguments about discrimination, justice and equality. What God has ordained let no man put asunder.

Nobody takes any notice of this stuff in Canada anymore so he has to come here!
97

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 12:26:45

#105 gordon'sboomhasbust

Gibberish.

But thanks for trying.
98

gordon'sboomhasbust,

glasgow 02/02/2009 12:37:04
#111 Stan

Cheers. No probs.
99

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 12:51:05
I have no problem with the granparents, they may have a good case.

I do have a problem with Catholic Church inspired bigotry. How are we meant to oppose sectarian bigotry from the likes of the Orange Order - who probably agree with the CC on this - who beleive the Pope is the 'antichrist', then the CC itelf is so open with its faith-inspired bigotry against others?

Why not raise money for the victims of Christian/ Catholic child abuse?

What about the hetero parents who abuse kids? Go to any school/ street corner and see kids of parents who were/are unable to look after themselves, never mind bring life into the world.
100

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 13:06:02
#113 Calum Crubag

Just to get this clear, in your opinion is anyone who believes that it's better for adopted children to be raised by a heterosexual couple than a homosexual couple de facto bigoted and homophobic?
101

Scottish 'N British,

02/02/2009 13:25:03
"Allowing two men to adopt children against the wishes of their grandparents who want to care for them is positively wicked. It is not surprising this case has caused outrage."

Can't say fairer than that.

102

,

02/02/2009 13:36:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
103

Sumlogic,

Religion 02/02/2009 13:37:20
Good old religion raises its ugly, apocryphal head (and money, don’t see them spending much of the churches vast fortune on issues like poverty or starvation) again this time helped along likely by some brainwashed or generally narrow-minded money men....(any women involved in financing this case?)

Anyway I have a problem with all religion generally but its good to see that the Catholic Church is still standing up for their outdated and in some cases dangerous (against condoms) delusional beliefs!

I doubt the church would be involved if it were a so-called hetro couple, even ones who abuse their kids through neglect and physical punishment!

Will the human race ever break the chains of religious slavery and take a step out of the dark ages! Who knows!


104

Miss H,

02/02/2009 13:44:50
87 Well maybe you can enlighten me.

If they take the council to court I don’t see how the proceedings can be kept secret. And that must be what they are talking about as legal fees would not be incurred in any other scenario.
105

Miss H,

02/02/2009 13:47:09
102 No it wasn't - the previous story said that children have been in foster care for the past 2 years.
106

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 13:50:08
#118 Miss H

Any details concerning the children, or that would allow them to be identified, will be kept confidential.

That applies to all court cases involving children, not just this one.
107

Had_Enough!,

02/02/2009 14:01:27
The real story here is not gay adoption (and no i'm not gay) but the fact that social workers think that anyone in any kind of ill health can't look after kids. Better get ready for the floodgates...how many people are of ill health and bringing up children? Just get ALL of them at the same time to write to their MP and demand they take their kids.

Definition

Organized work intended to advance the social conditions of a community, and especially of the disadvantaged, by providing psychological counseling, guidance, and assistance, especially in the form of social services.

Social workers raised concerns about the grandparents' ability to care for the children – citing their ages and ill health. The grandmother has diabetes and her husband has angina.

The grandparents, who cannot be named, said they had fought for two years to care for their grandchildren and only agreed to adoption after facing massive legal bills.
108

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 14:02:45
#120 tommytommytommytommytommy

What do you think of the recommendations of the professionals involved in the Pontefract case?

Were they correct or not?
109

gaychristian,

Scotland 02/02/2009 14:13:08
I don't have an issue with same sex couples adopting. I do have a problem with children being taken from their families though! As someone who is both gay and an Evangelical Christian I don't think we should automatically say gay or lesbian couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt, but where there are family members who are willing to take the children - let them. Should stright couples get preference over same sex ones? I think so. But where there are shortages of willing families wanting to adopt, gay and lesbian families may have a lot of love to offer - and that's surely better than being in "the system".

Edinburgh social work dept should be ashamed of itself.
110

Cockney Ranger,

Grays 02/02/2009 14:13:38
# 120 comment: the decision of a court and recommendations of several professional workers,

1/ The whole family court system needs overhauling for this modern age,

2/ Professional workers who constantly make decisions behind closd doors without any explanations, and then cover their own backs, deny any responsibilty and ONLY do something when forced upon them by publicity such as in Haringay.
111

JAL,

Duns 02/02/2009 14:21:34
Far too much speculation without information. Gay adoption is not the issue and there is no information in the article about the grandparents apart from the fact of their age and one has diabetes while the other has angina. Those alone would be unlikely to disqualify them from looking after their grandchildren so there's likely to be much more to the social work dept. decision that is not in the article.
112

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 14:38:41
125....Yes and lets not forget the Homophobes...
113

,

02/02/2009 14:42:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
114

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 14:43:15
Gay adoption is still adoption so I cannot understand the problem.
Are they concerned that the child will be guided into homosexuality? If so, perhaps they should ask why perfectly normal parents consisting of a father and a mother raise homosexual girls and boys. You are either born gay or you are not, you dont suddenly become gay.
And given the choice between gay adoption or altar boy, you would think that gay adoption would be the best choice as the latter usually leads to rape by an elder within the church - The punishment, a transfer approved by the Vatican.
The real threat is not gay marriage or gay adoption, it is the deceit of the church.
115

,

02/02/2009 14:43:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
116

Canada,

Canada 02/02/2009 15:07:57
If you oppose Gay Rights: you're bigoted, homophobic, a hate monger, end of discussion. If you believe in God you are deluded. The Gay Rights pc alliance have solved everything. Hallelujh, praise be, now all we Christians can rot in a hell of their making, for they know it all and we are but superstitious dummies, eh sorry not a pc word, fools.
117

grannie,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 15:10:24
I understood that where possible it was essential and in the best interest of children to be brought up by family members,in such cases. If social workers feel the grandparents are not fit enough for this job I would think they would be able to provide physical help ie. home help worker to ease their burden. This would prevent putting the children into a different and strange envirement. Willing social workers can solve this.
118

,

02/02/2009 15:11:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
119

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 15:14:06
Canada

I think the problem has arisen because religion has involved itself in something that has little to do with them.
god, whatever it is, is not for all people. Therefore, the church should be tending to its own disciples, not those who careless for their rhetoric.
The Gay Rights Movements only asked that they have a right to be gay, just as religious folk have a right to believe in god.
It is all about respect and quite frankly, the church has little of that quality on offer.
120

,

02/02/2009 15:14:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
121

,

02/02/2009 15:16:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
122

,

02/02/2009 15:19:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
123

,

02/02/2009 15:20:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
124

,

02/02/2009 15:22:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
125

Strict Ivan Jellicoe,

Renfrew 02/02/2009 15:24:11
#134 Canada
That was quite a rant! You missed one word out of your judgemental list - Christianophobe! You don't have to look to far to find one - perhaps the nearest mirror!
126

Canada,

Canada 02/02/2009 15:26:24
Obituary

After a long illness on February 1, 2009, peacefully in Edinburgh, the Church of Scotland passed away. Predeceased by Wishart, Knox, Covenanters, martyrs, Jane Haining,it was all quiet in the end. The pulpits were as empty as the pews. The few remaining congregants silent. The once backbone of a proud nation gone forever. Floral tributes to to Gay Lesbian Alliance, Humanist Society, Council of Aethiests, and any other Godless bunch that takes your fancy.
C of S. RIP.
127

,

02/02/2009 15:26:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
128

,

02/02/2009 15:30:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
129

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 15:34:55
Theere are two issues here.

Firstly the ability of the grandparents to look after their children. The COURT made the decision that they couldn't - not an individual Social Worker. Courts are not in the habit of making decisions like that if there is a valid alternative.

Secondly these children have been in foster care for two years.

So these children are not being taken away from their grandparents to be adopted by two gays men. They are being placed with adoptive parents after having been in care for two years, after a court has decreed that they should not be returned, and after Social work have assessed the suitability of the adoptive parents on their books. Posters are conflating two issues. And so, indeed, are the Catholic church.
130

Canada,

Canada 02/02/2009 15:42:40
#137

The church does not cease at the door on Sunday. It has to get involved in all of life. Love God and your neighbour and enemy as yourself. Christ forgave the woman caught in adultery, but cautioned, "Go and sin no more." That applies to us all, gay, straight, drunk, thief, me, you, Go and sin no more. You are forgiven. Shout it from the rooftops, practice it in the back streets. Be not afraid.
131

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 15:44:48
Veritas - if you aren't familiar with the case and don't know it's ins and outs then how can you declare for either side? Only those involved, including courts and social work know the real facts.

Schools and our streets are full of abused and neglected kids. Virtually all of them come from hetero families, broken or otherwise. The churches, with their sorry record of child abuse and their fantastical gods, have no place in this argument.
132

,

02/02/2009 15:44:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
133

Duncan in Edinburgh,

02/02/2009 15:46:26
#145 Veritas, you should be ashamed of your posts on this subject, today and last week. You try to paint others as bigots while expressing the most heartless, dismissive homophobia yourself.

Read #147. She's right. You're wrong.
134

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 15:47:24
Stan - depends on the basis of your argument and the case involved.

If your sole argument is that gays are 'unnatural' parents then yes it is homophobic. Remember, many parents also conceived through 'unnatural' IVF treatment - something the CC also oppose.

Better to have good parents, whoever they are.
135

,

02/02/2009 15:48:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
136

,

02/02/2009 15:49:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
137

,

02/02/2009 15:50:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
138

,

02/02/2009 15:55:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
139

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 15:57:32
157...Stop trolling.
140

,

02/02/2009 15:59:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
141

Eric D,

02/02/2009 16:02:18
The very thought of having your own kith and kin taken from you, and put into the hands of a pair of h*mo strangers must be difficult to accept.Perhaps the RC church could raise an appeal for the public to contribute to such a worthy cause.

Good luck to the grandparents, and thank you to the businessmen your efforts are appreciated.
142

L.F.,,

Scotland 02/02/2009 16:05:58
The grandparents asked for the children to be adopted, the social work arranged this. The social work were in the process of arranging regular contact with the grandparents with the prospective adoptive family.
The grandparents about turn appears to have only come about when it became knowledge that it was a gay couple who were being proposed. The grandparents have now changed their mind, and the social work department are being condemned.
It has to be said that the grandparents/mother/immediate family (whoever) are the only ones who could have courted such blatant and adverse publicity contacting the press and have fuelled this condemnation to the detriment of the wellbeing of the children. I think given how hostile the grandparents are to the prospective adoptive parents, I could understand why there could be an issue with contact. I would argue that is the basis of the alleged statement from social work – I would also query whether it was said quite in the manner that the press are making a meal of, knowing full well that SW cannot argue back.
The grandparents could have argued against the decision without turning it into a media circus, although these decisions are not made lightly by SW without considering ALL avenues.

I think, taking it beyond issues of the grandparents health/age, no mention has been made of how much contact the mother still has with the grandparents - perhaps quite a bit, which would make no sense to house the children in the same damaged environment that was deemed unsuitable in the first place. It could take away the one support network that their mother has for her problems.

One also has to question the attitude of the grandparents and how healthy that kind of attitude would be should they continue to see the grandchildren, which is more likely where social work are now between a rock and a hard place. The grandparents would continue to undermine any attempt at stability for the children with this attitude towards the pro
143

L.F.,,

Scotland 02/02/2009 16:06:28
One also has to question the attitude of the grandparents and how healthy that kind of attitude would be should they continue to see the grandchildren, which is more likely where social work are now between a rock and a hard place. The grandparents would continue to undermine any attempt at stability for the children with this attitude towards the prospective adoptive family. They are also making it impossible for themselves to be able to have a relationship with the children, which up until now, has been the plan of the prospective family and the social work department.

Given the condemnation and adverse press, I should imagine that any prospective adoptive parent would need to move outwith the area for the protection of the children.
An own goal of the grandparents I would argue.
144

,

02/02/2009 16:06:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
145

Miss H,

02/02/2009 16:08:00
121 Sure, details that could identify the children will be kept confidential. It is the details about the grandparents that are the issue however – is that not the case? The judicial review would be into whether social workers had made the wrong decision putting the children into foster care rather than leaving them in the care of their grandparents. If no details can be released about that then why is the Scotsman running the story?
146

,

02/02/2009 16:08:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
147

Rothaymere,

Arizona, USA 02/02/2009 16:11:53
In my humble view ... this is not a question of Catholic Church doctrine, nor of anyone's private rights to do anything, in this case a gay couple. Rather it is a matter of children's rights and their immediate family's right to take care of them when a crisis arises in a family (in this case, a 26-year-old mother who is a recovering heroin addict). The children's interests are paramount. These two babes have screamed their preference to stay with Grandma and Grandpa who have brought them up very well so far. The little girl is said to be "wary of men" (and to be thrown to the wolves in a 2-man household, has someone lost his/her marbles?). It is also a question of what is too old and what is sick. There are millions in the U.S. who have diabetes. Many also have children and manage very well thank you very much. If 50 something is old, then I fear for many actors and actresses out there who keep up appearances. This is a deliberate attempt to keep up a Gay Adoption Quota. But there is hope - an anonymous person with a conscience and the money to back it up. Final note: children are very susceptible to what goes on around them, they soak up things (particularly languages, it has been proven). I wince when I think of 2 men disappearing into a bedroom in front of little children. Most heterosexuals take care about such things. This is truly an iniquitous society. God bless this unknown rescuer and the businessmen. Shame on this disgrace Social Services den of iniquity in Edinburgh (one of my favourite cities).
148

L.F.,,

02/02/2009 16:13:05
147#

Valid points, reasoned arguments unlike some here.
149

,

02/02/2009 16:14:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
150

Scottish 'N British,

02/02/2009 16:19:14
122

Read it again.


"The grandparents, who cannot be named, said they had fought for two years to care for their grandchildren and only agreed to adoption after facing massive legal bills.

On hearing that their legal costs were being taken care of, the grandmother said: "I can't believe anyone would do that for us. We are so grateful."

Her husband added: "We never wanted to let (the children] go and, if we had known it would come to this, we would have fought it to our last breath.

"We can now see it was the wrong thing to do. We were bullied and manipulated.

"Now, because of the generosity of a stranger, we might have a chance to put things right – not only for our family but for others who are put in this position."


The English contained in that article seemed relatively easy to follow.

151

Strict Ivan Jellicoe,

Renfrew 02/02/2009 16:23:09
#162 LF "The grandparents about turn appears to have only come about when it became knowledge that it was a gay couple who were being proposed."

So people can change their mind - particularly when they are confronted with somthing unnatural and revolting. When did changing your mind in the light of new information become a hanging offence?
152

,

02/02/2009 16:24:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
153

Duncan in Edinburgh,

02/02/2009 16:25:19
#157 The Catholic Church is one of the richest organisations in the world, wielding enormous power and influence and subjecting people to involuntary control on the basis of a pack of lies told about a Jew who lived 2000 years ago. Frankly, it is not in need of defence - it is in need of disbandment.

Your pious self-righteousness is a thin smokescreen across your homophobic hatred. You are so scared of love between people of the same sex that you cannot even rationalise it.

I pity you.
154

,

02/02/2009 16:25:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
155

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 16:26:03
Canada #148

The Church has no right to preach god to me. I dont care for such rhetoric. It is anti human!
You said that the Jesus fellow said "Christ forgave the woman caught in adultery, but cautioned, "Go and sin no more." So what? Who is he in my life? He was a long haired dysfunctional loner who roamed about with 12 other men. Would he have been able to adopt a child? Him and his 12 men friends.
You see, when you read between the lines, as opposed to only reading what you want to read, you unearth more and more questions.
156

L.F.,,

Scotland 02/02/2009 16:26:51
I would argue that your opinion towards gays is unnatural and revolting. The home that is being offered to the children is a safe environment - heroin free.

Please try to remember, there are two children sitting in the middle of this apparent argument between the "anti-gay" camp, the "catholic supporters" etc.

Unlike many of the above "attempted point scoring" postings, 172# included, I have kept these children at the forefront of my comments.

157

,

02/02/2009 16:28:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
158

,

02/02/2009 16:31:12
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
159

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 16:32:38
165 Why have the Scotsman been running the story for days ? Presumably because it gets hundreds of comments from people - many of whom apparently haven't read the article (or articles in this case) in any great depth.

160

,

02/02/2009 16:34:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
161

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 16:36:38
Veritas #178

Just because someone believes that the Catholic Church should be banned, does not make them hate mongers. I know people who are against the death penatly, but they dont condone murder.
Like it or not, the organisation is stained with the blood of thousands. We know how they treated Galileo in order to protect their power. We know that the Popes who were involved in the inqusition still have their names on the vicars of christ list, which is odd since Germany had to apologise for the holocaust and Blair had to apologise for slavery.
And when you make mention of the RCC and their 1 billion followers, tell me how many of that 1 billion are catholic?
162

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 16:37:09
181 I was thinking more of you.
163

,

02/02/2009 16:43:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
164

nala64horses,

paisley 02/02/2009 16:45:34
I'm not affiliated to any church,nor homophobic,but no two self same sex people should be preferred to adopt if there are married couple (male & female) available.How is a Male going to explain to a girl about her periods etc.Or vice versa a Female advise a boy about Erections ?
No one should be denied the right to a Mother & Father if possible,and Social Workers should attempt to secure this before alternatives.
165

Duncan in Edinburgh,

02/02/2009 16:46:40
#178 There is absolutely nothing irrational in my view of the Catholic Church, and I certainly don't hate it. As for your accusation that I hate Catholics - that is an outrageous slur. Many of my family are Catholics, and I love them dearly.

The only help I seek is to help people like you, blinded by the falsehoods spread under the guise of organised religion into believing that certain people and certain relationship are subnormal, to open their eyes to the rational, real world and discard the paternalistic irrationality of religion.

What harm would it do you to acknowledge that the inherent decency of a person does not reside in their sexual orientation? What are you scared of - that your whole world view shaped around stories of miracles and righteousness might fall apart, and you be left as an insignificant speck on an insignificant planet?

Time to grow up. That is precisely all you are. It is all we all are.
166

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 16:51:56
Vincent W

Revisionist twaddle - Is that best you have?
You aim to protect one of the most evil organisations on the planet with that? lol

As for any person who calls themselves Catholic; unless you are in 100% agreement with the RCC regarding abortion, gay adoption, homosexuality and contraception, you are not Catholic.
You either agree with the Vatican or you disagree or PROTEST- Aint that a spanner in the works
167

Come on, are you serious....,

Edinburgh 02/02/2009 16:53:56
What a high number of comments.

Has anyone seen the case file for the Grandparents? Other than the sound bites to the press how can everyone make judgement? The fact that it's a gay couple seems to stir up a huge amount of discussion although this is all we know of them. Who gives a damn what the sexuality of the couples. All of the individuals that are against gay adoption should tomorrow register to become adoptive/foster parents then children would be less likely to end up in a gay environment. Maybe they would all prefer that the Catholic Church take care of them, after all Priests and Nuns have such good reputation with children. Problem solved!

Besides the health and age of the grandparents I want to know how much interaction the children might still have with their mother if the grandparents adopt?
What was the daughter’s relationship like with her parents?
Maybe this could shed more light on the adoption issue.

I'm all for children being adopted with the biological family but I think there has to be more to this story than we are being told.
168

Duncan in Edinburgh,

02/02/2009 17:00:35
#189 You forgot to mention that faith trumps rationality, but otherwise congratulations on posting a classic self-righteous, scared-Christian cry in the wilderness.

If there were a secular/gay rights orthodoxy in this country we wouldn't be having this conversation about a church interfering in an adoption case solely because of the sexuality of the couple making the greatest sacrifice of all.
169

,

02/02/2009 17:05:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
170

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 17:05:24
James James James - #189
Surely you did'nt - Hang on let me look again - Oh no, you did. School boy error young man.

Define unholy, or if you will, define holy.
Was it not a holy duty to kill a non believer?
Was it unholy to want to be free to think for yourself?

You suggested that people against the RCC do nothing but - WAIT FOR IT! Peddle lies(Rich indeed, at least we tell our children the Sun is the centre of the universe)spread Myths and half truth about the RCC. Speaking of myths and half truths, seen god about town lately?
You say, the church is at its best when it is being persecuted. Perhaps, but history tells us it's at it's very best when it is murdering non believers and harassing homosexuals. If only gay priests were dealt with, with such venom.
The church can only get stronger - it would be dead if got any worse.
171

Come on, are you serious....,

02/02/2009 17:09:52
Galileo statue scrapped – does Vatican still resent man who said Earth goes round the Sun?

http://news.scotsman.com/world/Galileo-statue--scrapped-.4929703.jp

Remember the Church isn't always right and ready to forgive....

M
172

Duncan in Edinburgh,

02/02/2009 17:11:50
#192 Take away God, what is left? Everything that is here now. Because God does not exist.

Mao, Hitler, Stalin and death of countless millions happened without God; civilisation, art, the achievements of modern technologies, democracy and charity all happened without God too.

Man is responsible for the very worst and the very best. God was a story dreamed up to give us something to cling to in the vast confusion of the world; like Santa Claus and the tooth fairy, he isn't needed now that we've grown up.
173

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 17:13:38
189 The RC church brings criticism on it's own head by the hysterical nonsense it releases to the media to further it's cause.

If it adopted a more sensible and rational attitude then it would not receiver the response that it does.

Let's be clear when the Church talks about allowing gays to adopt as being ''wicked'' it is entering into ''gotesque procedures of frankenstein proportions'' territory. It has left rationality behind. The church has started the argument here, it's supporters can hardly complain when people argue back.

174

Duncan in Edinburgh,

02/02/2009 17:14:31
#194 Giving your entire life over to becoming parents to children who don't have a family is a far greater sacrifice than I'll wager you have ever made.
175

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 17:18:12
James -

Jesus, the Jewish robe wearing loner who roamed about with 13 other men - would he be a suitable candidate to adopt?
176

,

02/02/2009 17:18:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
177

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 17:21:48
201 So you think that grandparents have automatic rights to raise their granchildren even if a court has decreed that it is not in their interests ? Why ?
178

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 17:23:46
Observer: And you think it is right that the Catholic church is anti human and anti homosexual? Why?
Should they not be more interested in banning Altar boys as opposed to gay adoption?
179

Miss H,

02/02/2009 17:27:41
188 Well that's the point - no they haven't.

Despite those of us who have tried to say we don't actually have all the facts here we still have over 200 comments mainly made by people who have no issues about reaching conclusions without any evidence.

Let's hope that none of them are social workers!!
180

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 17:29:53
203 I think that the Catholic church is entitled to believe whatever foolishness it likes. I don't particularly care, it is none of my business. I only take issue with them when they seek to impose their (bizarre) moral beliefs upon people who do not share their views.


The Church is taking on this case becauise it does not accept that it should be governed by the law of the land. It thinks it is special. It thinks that it should be allowed to discriminate against gays, and wants to use this as a test-case. It needs to be shown that it is not, it has no more - or any fewer - rights than anyone else.
181

,

02/02/2009 17:32:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
182

,

02/02/2009 17:34:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
183

,

02/02/2009 17:35:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
184

,

02/02/2009 17:37:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
185

,

02/02/2009 17:37:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
186

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 17:37:59
207 - where have I been bigotted ? Unless you regard criticism as bigotry ?
187

,

02/02/2009 17:39:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
188

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 17:40:23
207 The Scotsman must be bigotted too then ? They say this is about a challenge to gay adoption.
189

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 17:40:40
Can you imagine Jesus was on the way back? (Ok that is like believing Santa Claus is coming in December) but just for the sake of this post, imagine Jesus was on his way back.

The Vatican would be in a state, all of them rallying to prevent the long haired Jew from taking over. They would need to make him disappear, and it would be the most ironic moment in the history of humankind lol
190

,

02/02/2009 17:41:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
191

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 17:42:23
212 Ha ha ha very funny. It sems that only one ''side'' gets freedom of speech - if someone like me makes my case I am a ''bigot''.
192

,

02/02/2009 17:43:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
193

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 17:43:08

Can any of the resident experts tell us how many children Edinburgh have placed for adoption since the legislation was introduced and how many have been placed with gay couples?

194

,

02/02/2009 17:44:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
195

,

02/02/2009 17:45:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
196

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 17:47:27
217...Aye...yer right actually...jist whit exactly wis aw that aboot eh?....male bonding?....boys only club?...or wis JC more comfortable sharing quality time wae the male sex?
197

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 17:48:27
221 I haven't posted any bigotry to delete. I posted criticism of the RC church - it is allowed you know. Or is it only your freedom of speech that you uphold ?



198

,

02/02/2009 17:51:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
199

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 17:52:17
James #217

Of course I can see the contradiction -
Can you?
Would the very church that is opposed to gay adoption challenge Jesus and his 13 men friends if they wanted to adopt a child?
200

,

02/02/2009 17:53:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
201

,

02/02/2009 17:53:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
202

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 17:56:24

Interesting quote from the grandmother

"It's so important for children to fit in, and I feel our grandchildren will be marked out from the start when they draw pictures of their two dads."


Having two male homosexuals as parents marks children out as different from their peers. That's not homophobic, it's simply a statement of fact.

It's clear that the adoptive parents have put their own wants before the needs of the children.

The whole essence of being a parent is that you always put your children's needs first.
203

Observer,,

02/02/2009 17:57:07
225 So the church is quite happy to accept the law of the land (which forbids discrimination against gays as potential adopters). It doesn't think it should be able to apply its moral judgements on other people, and it will drop its case to do that.

Err except that's not true is it ?
204

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 17:57:18
Veritas

Im not sure if JC wanted to adopt, but a long haired robe wearing wanderering male who spent his time with 13 other men is probably not going to cut the mustard with the RCC - So it appears JC is oot!
205

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 17:57:34
223...Naw pal...genuine enquiry..so whit dae ye think then eh?
206

,

02/02/2009 18:00:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
207

,

02/02/2009 18:01:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
208

,

02/02/2009 18:02:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
209

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 18:03:26
234 Dunno what you mean they were based on fact as I have demonstrated. But you keep chuntering away if you like.
210

,

02/02/2009 18:04:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
211

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:05:28
234...Actually they are quite an accurate observation...the Catholic church regularly attempts to interfere in matters that it may be concerned about but that it does not have the right..or the authority to meddle with...thankfully reason saves the day and it is usually sent packing back to its smoke and mirrors...
212

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 18:05:53
The god thing apparently came from nothing, no man, no woman, just nothing - Then this nothingness makes a man, just a man! Under pressure he then makes a woman. Then he makes himself an actual son, who was born to a mother who never had sex - then he hangs about with 13 men. Quite a dysfunctional lot.

Maybe the god thing was a human from another planet and he artificially inseminated this Mary woman because sha%%in her would be against protocal.Then maybe she gave birth to this clone who went mental and began wandering aboot telling everyone he was the son of the gods. And on his travels he picked up 13 men as opposed to 13 women.
and then when he got killed maybe the spaceship guy came down and took him away with him?
Far fetched? You better believe it, but more authentic than the nonsense we are fed as children.
213

,

02/02/2009 18:06:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
214

,

02/02/2009 18:07:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
215

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 18:08:50
Well there we have it - The RCC would more than likely refuse Jesus the chance to adopt, because he was a long haired, sandle wearing, robe cladden man who wandered aboot with 13 other men - ooolala was Jesus a gay?
Oh mei gawd, was Jesus the onlee gay in the villaage?
216

Canada,

Canada 02/02/2009 18:09:03
Bigotry, homophobia, sexism, racism, fascism. Where would the pc brigade without constant use of these words and other well worn cliches to guillotine any reason and logical discussion?
217

,

02/02/2009 18:11:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
218

,

02/02/2009 18:13:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
219

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:14:03
243 Aye those five words just about sum up the catholic church...well done....
220

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:14:36
Och but ye firgoat misogyny....hiv ah spelt that right?
221

,

02/02/2009 18:15:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
222

,

02/02/2009 18:16:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
223

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:16:31
247...Whose god?...certainly not mine...or theirs...

"Normal life" "Nature intended"..

What do you know of "Nature" you speak of "God" and that is not natural but a man made invention...a supernatural fairy tale to soothe humans in the dark...
224

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 18:16:57
Veritas #244

Inside my head or not - remembered or not -
The man was GAY, nothing wrong with that. You see the thing is, if Jesus was about today I would shake his hands and say "live and let live" I would welcome his gayness, his man love and his 13 men friends as equals and I would say, adopt if you must - Unfortunately he would find problems with the church though, they would sooner kill him than let him adopt.
225

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:17:29
249...Shooosh yer bigotry, Veritas
226

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 18:18:08
Joe: Jesus was gay though! So what is the problem?
227

,

02/02/2009 18:18:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
228

,

02/02/2009 18:18:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
229

Tim Hopkins,

Equality Network 02/02/2009 18:19:36

Veritas,

Gay rights groups supported new laws to ban anti-Catholic prejudice.

Gay rights groups have never called for Catholics to be banned from marrying or adopting.

The Catholic leadership (but not ordinary Catholics) opposed new laws to ban anti-gay prejudice.

The Catholic leadership (but not ordinary Catholics) have and continue to call for gay people to be banned from marrying or adopting.


And you expect us to take you seriously when you assert that it's the gay rights groups that are the bigots?



230

,

02/02/2009 18:20:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
231

,

02/02/2009 18:20:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
232

,

02/02/2009 18:21:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
233

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:21:54
Och c'mon..right...lets just say he existed (nah..me neither)...bit o' a free spirit right!...aside fae that...he wisnnae jist hingin aboot wae aw thae lads...thon Mary Magdalene (Not a prozzie - recent Catholic church observation)..wis financing JC and the boys...rumours are that she wis a bit o' a teacher herself...could it be??..Mary was an apostle too?...but oh no..that would never do because then the Catholic church would have to accept female priests and potentially a female pope...hah hah hah...perish the thought....

But anyway...its obvious that JC wis somewhat enamoured of Mary doll and wis sharin a fair auld bit o' quality time wae her...so naw...ah dont think this mythological figure wis gay at all...
234

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 18:22:16
Jesus the homosexual robe wearing man lover was a decent person - so why would the church refuse him the right to adopt?
235

,

02/02/2009 18:22:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
236

,

02/02/2009 18:23:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
237

,

02/02/2009 18:25:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
238

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 18:29:30
#257 Tim Hopkins

Do you accept that due to the adoptive parents being a male homosexual couple these two children will be subjected to name calling, jibes and ridicule by their peers?
239

,

02/02/2009 18:29:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
240

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:31:15
263....If a topic is being vigorously debated posters tend to focus (unless they are a troll)on the subject of the ongoing debate...now in my case I am being accused of being obsessed with Jesus Christ...strange considering I could be debating high heels in the workplace and would then be accused of same obsession...HOWEVER...this could be rather interesting from the perspective of a psychoanalyst because the person raising the issue of obsession is focusing most of his attention on homosexuality...has done so previously and will continue (as per habitual behaviour)to do so in future...the conclusion here of course is that the 'accuser' is a closet homosexual...not necessarily the case...this person does however...have an issue with homosexuality..indeed hatred...potentially self hatred but may also be hatred through fear and indoctrination etc..of course we could always ask the individual why he is obsessed with homosexuality...?


So pal...Homosexuals goat inside yer heid lately?
241

,

02/02/2009 18:33:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
242

,

02/02/2009 18:34:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
243

,

02/02/2009 18:35:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
244

,

02/02/2009 18:38:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
245

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 18:43:38
Veritas:

I described Jesus as a robe wearing, long haired wanderer who spent all of his time with 13 other men. I then suggested that based on this information, the CHURCH would probably refuse him the right to adopt.

Confronted with such horror you now retreat to a position of defensive rhetoric and begin to dispense exhausted and fragile responses about "JC being in my head"
Forgetting, that Jesus would be safer in my head than in the hands of the current Vatican members. At least in my head he would be free from persecution for being gay, at least in my head he would be free to adopt without feeling he was anti human.
I dont care much for religion, I dont care much for god and I could careless that Jesus maybe had some nails banged into his hands, but I respect his right to be gay and live with 13 other men, which is more than you and your church would do.
246

,

02/02/2009 18:46:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
247

,

02/02/2009 18:46:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
248

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 18:48:42
James #272

So by expressing someone as homosexual I am being offensive - Care to tell us why it is an offence to be gay?
And whilst you are it - Please answer the following yes or no.

If a man with long dirty hair, wearing a robe and sandals walked into an adoption office today with is 13 men friends and asked to adopt a child, would the adoption agency consider his application?
249

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:48:49
273...and yet at 136 you had the disgusting cheek to insult the man by demanding why he called himself "Gay christian" instead of "Homosexual christian"...and please do not be a coward and deny it..because that is exactly what you were doing...

Lower than a snakes belly...
250

,

02/02/2009 18:49:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
251

,

02/02/2009 18:49:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
252

,

02/02/2009 18:50:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
253

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:53:13
276...Religion is an interesting subject..I am constantly amused and bemused at the gullibility, naivete and ignorance of my fellow human beings....

You are doing the Catholic church no favours in your protestations...your bigotry is screaming from you and really just confirms peoples views on the bigotry and evil within the Catholic system of brainwashing...
254

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 18:54:18
Strewth its printing Kylie lyrics now...here wait a minute...maybe I was right first time about the "Self-hatred" bit eh?
255

,

02/02/2009 18:54:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
256

,

02/02/2009 18:56:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
257

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 18:58:18
Veritas

I understand you are not in a position to respond my questions about Jesus and adoption. You can see the Tiger in the bush and therefore you must tread left, then right, mostly backward but never forward, for to confront me means you must fall on your sword - you cant do that because it would mean confronting the questions that have been bothering you for a while, and you arent quite ready for that shattering realisation.
Was Jesus gay? Hard to say, but since he spent all his time with men it would be difficult to deny that he wasnt gay. With that in mind it is safe to say that the current hierachy of the RCC would NOT support him in a bid to adopt, or would hypocrasy win the day?
258

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 19:02:43
Anyway, it is getting late - we are 2 hours ahead of you.
Perhaps I should read my children a wee story about a man who wandered around with 13 other men claiming to be the son of the entity responsible for murdering Egyptian babies - Or I could just read some Harry Potter and spare them the horror that lies within that malicious wee book known as the bible.
259

,

02/02/2009 19:03:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
260

,

02/02/2009 19:04:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
261

,

02/02/2009 19:06:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
262

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 19:07:46
James:

On the contrary, repetition is reserved for the RCC and their constant quest to harrass homosexuals.
What I am doing is drawing a comparison that is to close to the bone for you to handle.
The RCC are against gay adoption - therefore, based on what we know about Jesus;

"would the RCC also deny him the chance to adopt"?

That question CANNOT be answered by you or Verita, it just cannot be answered, there is no possible way you can answer it because you will open yourself up and that is a sign that my work here is done.
263

,

02/02/2009 19:09:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
264

nala64horses,

paisley 02/02/2009 19:14:58
Could these arguing bums stop wasting time and let other people comment on the 2 children ?????
265

St Caledonia,

02/02/2009 19:15:16
As I said - you cannot answer the question!

And when a believer cannot answer a question it is because their natural being is at odds with their indoctrinated being - The conflict within you is nothing personal, neither is it abnormal - go with it

Bye
266

,

02/02/2009 19:18:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
267

,

02/02/2009 19:20:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
268

,

02/02/2009 19:21:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
269

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 19:23:51
Veritas are posting as a deep cover agent of the national secular society (nutter branch) because you ain't exactly doing much to convince people of your alleged point of view.
270

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 19:28:03
You didnt let me down at 281 Veritas..I knew you would not have the bottle to admit that you were goading a fellow god botherer...cos it dont look good now do it..

And now you are hailing the joys of Tina Charles!!...a regular aficionado of popular gay disco music mate aintcha??..!
271

,

02/02/2009 19:28:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
272

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 19:30:29
303 I missed out a ''you'' it was meant to be a question.
273

,

02/02/2009 19:30:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
274

,

02/02/2009 19:33:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
275

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 19:37:04
Veritas let's go back to post 205 which you said was bigotry.

How so ? The RC Church did argue that it was special and should have been exempted from laws on adoption by gay couples. It said that ''the rights of conscience cannot be made subject to legislation''.

Is not the position that the Church retains ?

Is that now what this is fundamentally about - their objection to same sex couples adopting ?

And how is it bigotry to point that out ?

You want them to win this case, I want them to lose. That's a disagreement - it's not bigotry.
276

,

02/02/2009 19:37:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
277

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 19:38:00
307...You dont understand V..you dont have to...you would insist upon calling gay catholics or christians "Homosexuals" in an effort to insult them and to demean their position as fellow god botherers...

Sad really...says a lot about your christianity...hollow.
278

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 19:40:34
308...If you disagree with this hypocrite then you are automatically a bigot...he has proven this parrot fashion in the past...this character is not very articulate at clarifying his position...its a case of..

"Just because ALLRIGHT!!"

Cos the bible tells him so...
279

radge dug,

02/02/2009 19:41:09
Is Veritas paid to be on here or is he another religious nutter?

In this age or plastic breasts, IVF fertilisation on demand, morning after pills, botox injections etc, then two loving homosexual parents could be good for a child. Like others, if you compare this (again, it depends on the individuals involved - anything eles is predjudice)with the sheer amount of unsuitable hetero/ nuclear families who neglect or abuse children then it pales into insignificance.

The Catholic Church can't have it both ways. Complain about bigotry then dish it out it spades. There was a time when marrying a Catholic was as 'perverse' as marrying a black/ Asian or someone of the same sex. Personally, i would rather a child be brought up by two loving open-minded parents than by religious fantasists who fill the child's head with baseless mumbo-jumbo and ancient hatreds.

When the religious can keep their faith and views to themselves, their own homes and churches then i'll respect their freedom. Freedom is not abusing it to force unproveable myths and it's associated predjudices on others.

Like others here, i tend to sympathise with the grandparents but i don't know all the facts and i won't bow to base hatred of others.
280

,

02/02/2009 19:42:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
281

radge dug,

02/02/2009 19:43:35
Btw... plastic breasts, IVF, GM food, etc aint necessarily 'bad' things - but they are arguably as 'unnatural' as loving someone of the same sex.

Btw2 - i remember Vincent on another post saying he had nothing against gay 'loving' relationships. Am i correct?

Certainly, both Vincent and Veritas - same person? - seem to be on here 24/7. Are they paid by the CC?
282

,

02/02/2009 19:43:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
283

,

02/02/2009 19:44:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
284

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 19:45:43
315....And this post just proves my previous point...any challenge to the church is bigotry...has to be...no other way to describe it....aint that right V doll?
285

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 19:46:28
312 None of us know the facts - and we won't learn them because these records will be sealed both by the court and also the dpa.

But Social Work Departments use adoption as a very last resort. They always try and keep families together, and if that doesn't work then kinship carers - like grandparents - are plan B. It is incredibly common for grandparents to have custody of their grandchildren in cases where the parents aren't capable. So for the Social Work to have rejected that - and for the Court to have agreed - I think we can make an assumption that there is stuff going on that we don't know about.
286

Beverly,

New York 02/02/2009 19:46:28
It's a sure sign that you live in a totalitarian state when your Government can rip your children out of your family. And dictate to you what you must consider normal and correct in sexual relations.

THAT's the problem with this situation.

(Note to the supporters of homosexual adoption: this cuts both ways. You revolted when the government dictated that gay adoption was bad, saying they had no such right.)
287

radge dug,

02/02/2009 19:47:03
Vertias - not only does the CC have an appalling record on child abuse and human rights (though brave individuals have acted against official CC doctrine) but it's record like other churches in influencing govt policy is shameful too.

All people should have freedom to follow whatever myth/beleif they wish. It should not impact on the law of the land though. Imagine if our courts were to run on religious logic? Every nutter would claim 'faith' as his reason - 'god told me to do it'. And, following the logic of faith, how could a jury or judge say otherwise.
288

,

02/02/2009 19:47:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
289

,

02/02/2009 19:48:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
290

radge dug,

02/02/2009 19:48:48
Veritas - just answer the points.
291

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 19:49:42
313 OK maybe I used the wrong form of words - the Church, I believe, will challenge the law wherever it can. Because it doesn't agree with it. Fair do's I would do that if a law was passed that I didn't agree with.

But I think they could be a bit more up-front about it.
292

,

02/02/2009 19:49:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
293

radge dug,

02/02/2009 19:50:30
All churches have shameful records - though the CC as one of the biggest and richest has one of the worse.

Answer the points.
294

radge dug,

02/02/2009 19:51:36
#324 aye but would we want to live under Catholic laws? I would be like Saudi Arabia or Iraq.

Time to leave religion to the dark ages.
295

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 19:56:15
327 I am a secualrist so the answer is obvious from my point of view.

But the Church has been behaving like a mix between a lobbying group and a media firm in the way they are dealing with issues like same-sex adoption and the recent embryo bill. They are using whatever tool comes to hand to put forward their point of view. Press releases, letters to the papers - they are very slick.

And then respond to people who challenge what is a campaign by the church, by calling them bigots.
296

Iain Mac,

02/02/2009 19:58:42
It's clear that those involved in this challenge are only doing it because of the sexuality of the couple involved. I hope the challengers are brave enough show themselves so we can see them for the bigots they are. I wonder if they have challenged any other unsuitable adoptees that are heterosexual.

Looking on this post throughout the day, i do see some of the same names popping up again and again. Maybe they are part of the bigots' campaign machine.
297

,

02/02/2009 19:59:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
298

,

02/02/2009 20:00:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
299

,

02/02/2009 20:01:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
300

,

02/02/2009 20:01:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
301

,

02/02/2009 20:02:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
302

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 20:06:40
330 How can you have equalities legislation which doesn't need to be applied by people who don't believe in it ? There are other points of view, and many of us delighted in The Equality Act. For us that is a matter of liberty, and a long time coming at that.

Ultimately people need to compromise, but not when it means undermining legislation. That's the only thing that applies to us all, whatever we believe in as individuals.
303

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 20:08:52
335 I don't object to them challenging the law. I do object to them dressing up what must be a very complicated situation as two children torn from the arms of their grandparents to be adopted by gays. That is less than honest, in my view.
304

,

02/02/2009 20:14:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
305

Iain Mac,

02/02/2009 20:18:18
Why should a church be respected in terms of law any more than a group of Stonehenge worshippers? Does that make me an anti-pagan bigot?

#337 - I agree, the intervention of people soley on the grounds of their chosen religion has probably made a bad situation worse. I feel sorry both parties.
306

Iain Mac,

02/02/2009 20:19:07
Veritas- But I do believe - as does the Church - that parenting is best provided by a loving father and mother, and that homosexuals - particularly in this case - are inappropriate adopters.

Do you have evidence for this?
307

,

02/02/2009 20:21:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
308

,

02/02/2009 20:21:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
309

Iain Mac,

02/02/2009 20:22:21
Surely the sexuality, race, profession, language and even religion of the parents should not be an issue provided they can provide the children with a stable loving home?

Like others here, i could point to a multitude of 'normal' families where children have been neglected. It is sadly ironic that the very public voices of the CC and their anonymous businessmen friends are silent then.
310

,

02/02/2009 20:22:24
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
311

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 20:22:53

Those fulminating against the Catholic Church and accusing it of like totally disgraceful homophobia and stuff seem not to realise that what the Church objects to is adoption by homosexual couples.

The Catholic Church does not oppose adoption by single homosexuals indeed Catholic adoption agencies have placed children for adoption with single homosexuals.
312

,

02/02/2009 20:24:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
313

,

02/02/2009 20:25:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
314

Iain Mac,

02/02/2009 20:25:43
#341- I agree with the other posters that this case is strangely reminiscent of the anti-Catholic bigotry of past decades. I just wonder how we can oppose the bigotry of the Orange Order when you yourselves are so public with your predjudices. Remember, the Orange Order also claim the Bible as their 'evidence' against the Cathlolic faith.
315

Iain Mac,

02/02/2009 20:26:46
#346 - where is your proof. I know faith doesn't require proof, but our laws and courts do.
316

Iain Mac,

02/02/2009 20:28:29
Seriously, i would like Veritas, stan or Vincent to provide proof that TWO homosexual parents are detrimental to a child's upbringing as opposed to only ONE (!?) or a heterosexual couple.
317

,

02/02/2009 20:30:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
318

,

02/02/2009 20:30:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
319

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 20:31:19
Hey the Catholic bigots are back!

It's WRONG to hate us...

but VIVA persecution of anyone WE don't like!

Iain - you aint gonna get our proof! Didn't anyone see David Attenborough last night? We should bury religion once and for all.
320

,

02/02/2009 20:32:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
321

,

02/02/2009 20:33:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
322

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 20:33:40
Is this the same Catholic church that supported Hitler, Franco and Mussolini? As well as anti-Jewish fascists in Britain and Ireland. Check out Chrisy Moores' (himself raised a Catholic) "Viva la Quinta Brigada".
323

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 20:34:25
Guess, the CC know bigotry when they see/ support it.
324

,

02/02/2009 20:35:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
325

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 20:35:19
Hey Iain, notice Verity babe has gone shy on the proof front? So exactly WHY are two gays bad, one gay good as parents?
326

,

02/02/2009 20:35:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
327

,

02/02/2009 20:36:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
328

,

02/02/2009 20:36:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
329

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 20:37:20

#350 Iain Mac

What is detrimental to any child's upbringing, particularly children who have already had a difficult time, is to mark them out from the normal.

More than anything else children want to fit in with their peers.

Being adopted by two male homosexuals makes that impossible for these kids. They'll always be a bit different to their school mates.

Like it or not they will be subjected to name calling and ridicule by their peers.

Why should they be subjected to that just to satisfy the selfish desires of adults?
330

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 20:37:23
To quote Christy Moore, an Irish lapsed Catholic (a bigot too?)...

Many Irishmen heard the call of Franco.
Joined Hitler and Mussolini too.
Propaganda from the pulpit and newspapers
Helped O'Duffy to enlist his crew.

The word came from Maynooth: 'Support the Fascists.'
The men of cloth failed yet again
When the bishops blessed the blueshirts in Dun Laoghaire
As they sailed beneath the swastika to Spain.
331

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 20:38:20
STAN - can you prove what 'normal' is? I minds kids getting punished for having red hair or spex? Are YOU normal?
332

,

02/02/2009 20:38:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
333

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 20:39:15
Why doesn't Stan campaign for more acceptance of others then? Including both gays and those who follow stupid faiths?
334

,

02/02/2009 20:39:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
335

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 20:39:48
341 As far as I can recall Veritas, it was proposed that there would be a sort of gentleman's agreement that would allow the ''authorities'' to look the other way when it came to Catholic adoptions, as they only account for around 4% of adoptions carried out. I personally could have lived with that no bother, especially as the 4% of adoptions that the Church undertook tended to be older, trouble childrem who were difficult to place.

I can't remember why that broke down - to be honest I think it was a combination of both ''sides'' more militant elements insisting that they were right which, caused an absolute decision to be made, with no room for what I think could have been a resonable compromise.
336

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 20:41:14
Come to think of it... I mind the 'different' Catholic kids down the road getting pelters too.

Just who is 'normal'? Sounds like master race stuff here. The Pope will love that.
337

Observer,,

02/02/2009 20:41:33
369 - sorry that should read ''older troubled children''
338

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 20:42:50
Very babe - there IS no normal. Variety is the spice of life. Now, go to bed, you've been here all day. Though i imagine the CC is rich enough to pay your overtime.
339

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 20:43:02
351...Liar liar pants on fire..


Pope condemns homosexual behaviour

Pope Benedict said in an address on Monday that it was the Roman Catholic Church's right to "speak of human nature as man and woman, and ask that this order of creation be respected".
(AP)

Saving mankind from homosexual and transsexual behaviour is just as important as saving the rainforest from destruction, said Pope Benedict on Monday.

In an end-of-year address to Vatican officials, the Pope said the Catholic Church “should also protect man from the destruction of himself”.

A “sort of ecology of man is needed”, he said.

The Catholic Church strongly opposes homosexual relationships and same-sex unions.

“The tropical forests do deserve our protection. But man, as a creature, does not deserve any less,” he said in the address, which was later released to the media.

In an attack on transsexuals, the Pope said, “It is not man who decides who is a man or woman but God.”

Non-heterosexual behaviour was “a destruction of God’s work”, he said, adding that humanity needed to “listen to the language of creation” to properly define the roles of man and woman.

Ah yes...the utmost respect...old nazi...
340

,

02/02/2009 20:46:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
341

,

02/02/2009 20:48:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
342

,

02/02/2009 20:48:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
343

Observer,,

02/02/2009 20:49:28
363 You make the assumption Stan that there is a ready-made heterosexual couple ready to take on two older children. There might not be. We simply don't know - that is why I find it quite depressing that so many people are prepared to leap to conclusions without knowing the facts. Just because homosexual couples are now able to apply to adopt doesn't give them any degree of priority. They could just have been assessed as the best people to take care of these kids.
344

,

02/02/2009 20:49:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
345

,

02/02/2009 20:50:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
346

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 20:51:57
Aye and you really need to read this folks..from the "Catholic Culture"...

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/liturgicalyear/activities/view.cfm?id=528

Pity the poor gay kid...dragged to a shrink and a "Good confessor"...laugh?...I nearly did meself an injury....

This is vile nonsensical brainwashing and it does not take a psychologist to tell you that it is a load of guff...propoganda from the Religious machine...

Respect?...not even a glimmer...patronising piffle...
347

Observer,,

02/02/2009 20:52:08
374 You mean the Act of Succession ? Take it up with Labour they were supposed to have abolished it years ago. Like Reform of the House of Lords (only the established faith get entry automatically) they seem to have forgotten about it.

348

,

02/02/2009 20:52:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
349

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 20:53:33
375...And your inability to respond to the evidence speaks volumes...a cowardly blowhard making a lot of noise and not saying anything...
350

,

02/02/2009 20:53:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
351

,

02/02/2009 20:55:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
352

Observer,,

02/02/2009 20:56:07
379 Who's told us ? I'm not being a smartass here or avoiding the issue, but we simply don't know what these kids needs are, or who is best placed to adopt them. If the Church & supporters want to pay for a judicial review, then fine, but we're never going to find out what information that review considers. So much of this is sheer speculation.
353

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/02/2009 20:57:42
381 Aye, of course.
354

,

02/02/2009 20:58:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
355

Observer,,

02/02/2009 20:58:39
soz 387 for 384

Anyway off now, adios.
356

,

02/02/2009 21:01:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
357

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 21:03:57
#377 Observer

If you know anything about adoption you would realise that there will be no shortage of heterosexual couples willing to adopt these children.
You say homosexual couples don't have priority. But they do have a right to sue for damages if they have been discriminated against. What better way to avoid such an action than to give them what they want.

Read up on the Pontefract case and see what happened to young boys because the council social work department was anxious not to be accused of homophobia.
358

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 21:09:12
#364 Calum Crubag

It's a good song.

The book its based on is a good read and is more historically accurate.

But as evidence that the Catholic church is a pro nazi organisation, sorry you are way off beam.

Was the Polish JPII a nazi as well?
359

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 21:26:18
390...Merely echoing the immaturity of your childish partner in piety...

I know the difference the catholic church makes and it is a lot of hypocrisy..as is your argument...heard it already sunshine...aye sure they accept homosexuals as long as they are not sexually active...these people must remain celibate for the rest of their lives....get a grip of yourself and grow up...

You have no respect for people when you are telling them that loving a partner of the same sex and having sexual relations with them is abnormal..two adults in a consenting sexual relationship are harming no one...and it is NONE of your business...or that of the catholic money grabbing church...

The Catholic church and its ilk teaches nonsense...it is offensive and needs to be closely watched...and kept in its place....it should hang its head in shame at its history with regards to collaberation with the nazis (for which it has recognised and apologised) and now its victimisation of homosexual people....not to mention the abuse and exploitation of innocent Africans...many of whom who will have lost their lives because of the Catholic anti condom drive in Africa....it sickens me to the very core...

This type of religion is evil and should answer for the damage that it has caused in the world....
360

JG,

Fife 02/02/2009 21:30:03
#394 HC
They've only just realised that Galileo was actually right and the world is round. Nice to keep up!
361

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 02/02/2009 21:33:55
Can't the churches find better things to do with their time llike feeding the hungry and dispossessed? How can they worry so much about gays when it seems half their clergy are at it like rabbits with 12 year old boys?
362

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 21:39:23
395...Hi JG...Howzitgaun doll?...aye but apparently they did a U turn on the proposed statue to the aul fella...felt it wis jist too much a reminder o' thir monumental gaff and wanton stupidity...heh heh heh...
363

JG,

Fife 02/02/2009 21:47:38
#397 HC
Fine ta - looking forward to the rugby next week heh heh he!! And you? I'm seek o' this garbage weather!
Nice to see old Pax is back, don't you think?

364

Miss H,

02/02/2009 21:51:22
Let's imagine, just for the laugh of it, that the grandparents had stipulated that they did not want the kids to be adopted by Catholics.

What do we think would have been the reaction?

Tell you one thing - we wouldn't be allowed to comment on it for a start.
365

,

02/02/2009 22:06:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
366

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 22:09:39

Miss H

When these two children go to school how do you think the other children will react when they learn that the adoptive parents are a male homosexual couple.

Do you think this will help or hinder them being accepted by their classmates?

Will it help them to fit in with those around them, or will it mark them out as different?

How do you think the children will feel about it?
367

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 22:15:59
398...Aye JG...thighs oot fir the girls eh?...Thon "Pax" fella is a tired auld troll and will always return in one different guise after another..bit ye kin always smell the incense..fire and brimstone...thirs nae hidin tha whif o' mentariligist troll noo is thir?...

400...I'm an anti Catholic/Protestant/Jewish/Islamist/Christian and any other doolally god worshipper from the planet 'been had' in other words any ignorant fundamentalist that cares to slag off, victimise and hurt people who are homosexual, bi-sexual or transgender...and dont you forget it...

I despise pious hypocrites...
368

Alba Abú,

02/02/2009 22:21:01
Once again the Church of Scotland of which I am a member,keeps its head down and allows the Catholic church to take the flak on a moral issue which the church of Scotland should be taking a stand on.Shame on them.
Absolute cowards. #8 I agree with your post.
369

,

02/02/2009 22:21:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
370

Artemis,

02/02/2009 22:23:37
#401 - let's hope the kids at school have been brought up by parents with better values than most of the people posting here, and that the other children won't think anything about it. It's not hard to say to children that some men love ladies and some ladies love men and some ladies love ladies and some men love men and some people have a mum and a dad, and some have one mum, and some have two mums, and some have one dad and some have two dads. Is it?

Most people here seem very certain that the grandparents are telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. They were willing to give the kids up for adoption before, and the children & families department wouldn't have pushed for that without good reason. Something's going on that the grandparents aren't telling the press, and the council can't say because of confidentiality. There's a reason the council chose to pursue adoption, and it's more than the grandparents are saying.

The grandparents were willing to have the kids adopted until they found out the adoption would be by two men. As far as I can see, that makes them homophobes and bigots. The council are quite right to tell them that if they don't stop their negative remarks, they won't be able to see the kids. Adopted children need a lot of support to settle into their new family and having grandparents criticising the adoption won't help them at all. The grandparents should shut up.

As far as the church goes, Christianity is based on Christ's teachings, and he didn't mention homosexuality once, so he clearly didn't think it was a big deal. And if the son of god, sent to earth to do god's work and spread god's word, didn't think it was worth mentioning, why should anyone else?
371

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 22:23:56
In fact, in light of the bigotry displayed, there should be a concerted campaign to close down all 'faith' schools, be they Catholic or Muslim, as their power to fill young heads with hatred is self-evident.
372

Alba Abú,

02/02/2009 22:25:14
402 Horrible cankers.
I would seek help quickly,if I were you and I am so glad that I am not you,you dont know how glad.
373

Calum Crubag,

02/02/2009 22:28:55
#405 - some interesting points.

I'd further point to the high numbers of single-parent children in our schools. In some classes, almost half the kids come from 'broken' homes. Is divorce not illegal in Catholic teachings too? Should these kids be withdrawn from school because they're not 'normal' as Stan says?

Is there a Catholic 'league table' of sins? Homosexuality, massturbation, divorce, contraception, fertility experiments, adultery, sex outwith marriage... could Veritas explain which is the worse and why? And is there any non-sinner here who should throw the first stone?
374

,

02/02/2009 22:32:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
375

Stan Butler,

02/02/2009 22:45:35
#404 Calum Crubag,

Whether you dislike the argument is irrelevant.

It's the reality these children will have to face.

Your failure to answer the question suggests you don't like the answer.

It's easy for you to dodge the question. Unfortunately these children don't have the option to dodge the reality that faces them.
376

JG,

Fife 02/02/2009 22:47:07
#405 Artemis
"The council are quite right to tell them that if they don't stop their negative remarks, they won't be able to see the kids"

From what I remember from the articles earlier in the week, the grandparents had taken the case to court and had contact with the children until 4 months ago. Whether or not you think them to be bad people or think they should be punished because they've spoken out against the prospective adopters is neither here or there. WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO PUNISH THE KIDS BY STOPPING THEM FROM SEEING PEOPLE THEY KNOW?
377

Lateinos,

02/02/2009 22:55:28
#2.
..."I have no objection on principle to the adoption of children by gay couples. I am aware of no evidence that suggests that adoptive gay parents cannot rear children effectively in a loving environment..."

Oh!

Are you aware of any evidence that suggests that adoptive gay people can rear children effectively in a loving environment? I cannot say that I am - please advise... There may be a simple answer, but is there evidence?

Are you aware of any evidence... that these particular grandparents are unfit to rear the children effectively in a loving relationship? Unless, you profer some evidence then I'm for supporting the 'challenge'...

There are 'Rights' and there is the 'Right' thing...

The debate should not be closed off just yet...
378

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/02/2009 23:00:19
407...Thats right doll...there can only be one of me....I suspect you are of the bible bashing ilk and I am forever grateful that I was able to suss out the brainwashing from a young age...otherwise I'd be spouting a whole loada merde that they tried to drum into my young head...whewh but it was a close one!

Two carers..two men...cant do the job??

OH YES THEY CAN !!
379

,

03/02/2009 07:24:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
380

Beth Boyle,

NY 03/02/2009 08:34:36
Taking these children from their grandparents is so wrong. I find this really shocking!
381

,

03/02/2009 08:40:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
382

Calum Crubag,

03/02/2009 08:40:51
Maybe Stan's kids...
383

Calum Crubag,

03/02/2009 08:41:28
Close down faith schools.
384

,

03/02/2009 09:26:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
385

,

03/02/2009 09:31:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
386

,

03/02/2009 09:32:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
387

,

03/02/2009 09:35:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
388

Corky,

03/02/2009 11:19:58
Mr Crubag,

You really are very silly as well as rude. My education has taught me to think and consider, how dare you suggest otherwise?

In fact atheism is a complete myth, a fairy tale, a sanctuary for a feeble mind. Do you indoctrinate your children with your fundamentalist atheist clap trap or do you allow them free thought like my parents and teachers allowed me?

Proper analysis can only result in agnosticism as no-one can prove or disprove the existence of God. However the freedom of thought given to me by my Catholic education allows me to examine the problem from a position of knowledge, a position you would deny.

Agnosticism is a spectrum, from people who profess total faith to those who profess atheism. These extreme positions are feeble, you are feeble, nothing more than a ranting bully. Most intelligent people live on the middle reaches of this spectrum.

The most offensive, disgusting and odious aspects of your posts here and elsewhere are your intolerance, ignorance, rudeness, shallowness and bigotry. You are appear to be very clever but have little wisdom or kindness.
389

Robert M,

Atlanta, U.S. 04/02/2009 01:00:56
Lateinos (#412) - In fact, there have been a number of studies, which show that children raised by gay people have the same outcomes as children raised by straight people. I personally know of two gay male couples and one lesbian couple who reared fantastic children to a stable and productive adulthood. As a child who was left by my parents at age four, it would have been wonderful to be taken by adoptive parents who loved and nurtured me. My grandparents, who were in their 50s when I arrived, did the best they could, but by the time I reached adulthood, they were suffering from a multitude of health problems and struggled just to feed and clothe me. If a gay or lesbian couple had reared me with love, attention, and stability, my childhood would likely have been less deprived and carried less daily fear of my grandparents dying and leaving me alone, again. I made it and have reared two children of my own. One is now a practicing attorney here and the other is in law school as well. Not too shabby for a gay man, wouldn't you agree?
390

Graeme M,

smithfield plains 05/02/2009 00:59:19
I don't know about anybody else but this modern day stuff about gay rights and unholy connections with people gives me the creeps...I know these boys and girls must have been around in the 30's and 40's when I was a boy.But this Soddom and Gemmora idea where anything goes is really way out.If two men can't have children, it shows there is something wrong in the system, and it wasn't meant.Handing over two innocent children over the the likes of these doesn't wear well with me for sure.I mean, what assurance have these kids got that there would be no hanky panky?. But perhaps the biggest sinners are the Grandparents, their own kith and kin?...How can they look at themselves in the mirror?...I know what they would see, pure rotten sods!...At 73, I would take the kids in a minute, I am sure life would be a lot more stable for them here.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
 

More Gay and Lesbian issues

More Gay and Lesbian issues >>

Today's Vote

Should an inquiry take place into the gay adoption against the grandparents’ wishes?
Yes, the family’s views are the most important thing
No, social services will have been thorough
No, it will only cause more problems for the children

Web Links:



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.