Not again...

Fanny Cradock

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/4557618/Christian-foster-mother-struck-off-after-Muslim-girl-converts.html

While I support certain aspects of secularisation in society, surely this case (and I recognise that one article doesn't necessarily tell the whole story) goes to provide evidence that there are areas that you cant simply apply a hard and fast rule.

Húrin

The Telegraph strikes again.

I've never been much of a fan of the "war against Christianity" claims about what is going on in the secular west, but stories like this make you wonder.

PDN

So a teenager rebelled against her religious upbringing. How shocking!

robindch

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I recognise that one article doesn't necessarily tell the whole story

Would it be better to wait until the full facts came out before drawing a conclusion?

Fanny Cradock

Yes, while I don't see an agenda myself, it does make one wonder what the heck is going on. Hopefully more facts will come out about the case. But as it stands, it seems that public organs in England are thrown into all sorts of hysterics at the merest mention of the 'R' word.

Fanny Cradock

robindch wrote: »

Would it be better to wait until the full facts came out before drawing a conclusion?

Indeed! And I think that I've admitted as much.

JimiTime

robindch wrote: »

Would it be better to wait until the full facts came out before drawing a conclusion?

Is there a need to point this out, when the OP pointed it out in his OP?

EDIT: FC beat me to it.

robindch

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

it seems that public organs in England are thrown into all sorts of hysterics at the merest mention of the 'R' word.

Personally, I'd have said it was evidence that certain right-wing publications become hysterical at the merest mention of religion. Gets good coverage, which is what most newspapers are all about.

Still, I look forward to finding out what really happened.

Fanny Cradock

robindch wrote: »

Personally, I'd have said it was evidence that certain right-wing publications become hysterical at the merest mention of religion. Gets good coverage, which is what most newspapers are all about.

Still, I look forward to finding out what really happened.

Well, I think that we have both outlined our positions. Whether this story is being cynically used by certain pressure groups or whatever hardly detracts from the the story itself. If the facts have been reported accurately then I really don't see how your position could remain justifiable.

robindch

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

If the facts have been reported accurately then I really don't see how your position could remain justifiable.

Well, it's from the Daily Telegraph, so I assume that the story is spun sideways. If the same text had arrived from a less hysterical news source -- say the BBC -- I'd treat it with far more circumspection.

Húrin

Does the Telegraph have a history of spinning rubbish? perhaps I shouldn't have said anything!

sorella

Thank You, Jesus, for another soul won from darkness.. Praise and thanksgiving.

What happened was a conversion.

Which satan hates of course.

Fanny Cradock

Húrin wrote: »

Does the Telegraph have a history of spinning rubbish? perhaps I shouldn't have said anything!

I think it considered a bit of a Conservative mouthpiece.

Nodin

sorella wrote: »

Thank You, Jesus, for another soul won from darkness.. Praise and thanksgiving.

What happened was a conversion.

Which satan hates of course.

yes, Jesus strikes another blow against Wrong Religon. Go Jesus.

Nodin

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I think it considered a bit of a Conservative mouthpiece.

'home counties' fright rag....

JimiTime

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I think it considered a bit of a Conservative mouthpiece.

During my 3 years in London it was referred to as 'The Daily ToryGraph'.

Fanny Cradock

JimiTime wrote: »

During my 3 years in London it was referred to as 'The Daily ToryGraph'.

We will just have to wait and see if this story has legs. On the face of it I would think this is much more worrying than the brouhaha over the nurse.

JimiTime

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

We will just have to wait and see if this story has legs. On the face of it I would think this is much more worrying than the brouhaha over the nurse.

I can only hope that its spin, something tells me though, that its not. I think the R word does seem to cause hysteria amongst certain folk.

sHnaCk

Fruit of the Spirit eh... as the servant is not above the master

sHnaCk

The remarkable thing about the persecution of the Church is that no matter how bad it was during the early days, in the 20th century alone, more Christians have died as a result of persecution than in all of the previous 19 centuries combined. Currently, the majority of persecutions is occurring within the 10/40 window, primarily in China and the Moslem countries.

sorella

Amen; or, rather, Maranatha; come , Lord Jesus.

And soon, we beg of Thee; soon now Lord.

Nodin wrote: »

yes, Jesus strikes another blow against Wrong Religon. Go Jesus.

Mickeroo

Sounds like the foster mum was hard done by to me on the face of that article,but i guess it can't be taken as gospel...no pun intended.

fitz0

Judging from the article, this is disgraceful. The girl was old enough at 16 to make her own decision and I can't help but wonder how much fuss would have been made if a jew/JW/anything else converted to anything else. I think there is a heightened sensitivity these days when islam enters into the equation. Not to mention that the woman has fostered over 80 kids. That alone deserves commendation.

Nodin

fitz0 wrote: »

Judging from the article, this is disgraceful. The girl was old enough at 16 to make her own decision and I can't help but wonder how much fuss would have been made if a jew/JW/anything else converted to anything else. I think there is a heightened sensitivity these days when islam enters into the equation. Not to mention that the woman has fostered over 80 kids. That alone deserves commendation.

Religion
It is important for a child’s identity and possible reunification with his or her birth family that a child’s religious practices and beliefs are represented during a period of separation from their birth family. Foster carers cannot change a child’s religion.
Foster carers must encourage and support the child placed with them to practice his or her religion.

http://www.fostering.ws/#/rfostering/4530525080

Don't see any exceptions there....

sorella

Slightly fuller version here of this
.
http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2009/02/woman-struck-off-list-of-foster-carers.html

And in Scotland, grandparents are fighting in the courts to prevent their grandchildren being adopted by homosexuals.

And Jesus weeps.

Handsome Bob

She claims that she did not pressurise the girl, who was put in care after being assaulted by a family member, to convert, and actually tried to discourage her initial interest in Christianity.

"We had a multicultural household and I had no problems helping the young person maintain her faith of birth," the woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, told the Mail on Sunday.

"I have always prided myself on being very professional in what I do."

I hope a few heads roll over this. The above quote sums up the ludicrousy of the case.

ChocolateSauce

I think this is more serious than Christianity being under attack. This isn't about attacking Christianity, this is about bending over backwards to accommodate Islam, for misguided reasons of "tolerance" and multi-culturalism. You can bet if she converted from Christianity or any other religion to Islam, there'd be little objection. Islam has managed to paint itself in Britain as a desperately oppressed minority, so much so that the politically correct establishment refuses not only to criticise it, but refuses to even admit it is causing problems.

According to Islam, this girl should be put to death for apostasy. She was in foster care to begin with because she was being beaten by her male relatives, and she converted probably at least partly because she saw how much better Christian women had it to Muslim ones, and yet because she did this (a clear sign she was not happy with her up-bringing), the state put her back into the home she was raised in, presumably to encourage her to become a Muslim again, and this presumably to avoid accusations that the state was causing Islam hassle.

JimiTime

sorella wrote: »

And in Scotland, grandparents are fighting in the courts to prevent their grandchildren being adopted by homosexuals.

Article here


I didn't realise this was legal? So is it legal in the UK, to give a child to a homosexual couple in adoption? Is ths common knowledge? Or a I missing something?

BrianCalgary

A teenager left free to make her own choices makes a choice that the government didn't like.

I wonder if the care giver would be in this much trouble if the girl had become a dug dealer?

MatthewVII

sorella wrote: »

Slightly fuller version here of this
.
http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2009/02/woman-struck-off-list-of-foster-carers.html

And in Scotland, grandparents are fighting in the courts to prevent their grandchildren being adopted by homosexuals.

And Jesus weeps.

That article (and your remark) are some of the saddest and most destructive things I've seen on these boards in this last while. I think this line is that I have most beef with

"This is a devastating decision which will have a serious impact on the welfare of the children involved.

There is an overwhelming body of evidence showing that same-sex relationships are inherently unstable and reduce the life expectancy of those involved"

What the hell? I have never come across such evidence and would love to see it if it exists (perhaps someone who knows can link?)

That the grandparents would fight even harder had they known it was a homosexual couple is disgustingly intolerant. The remarks made by the Church spokesman highlights what a remarkably dark age we live in. Gay relationships unstable? Reduced life expectancy? 50 years ago I would have expected this kind of bigotry, but for this to exist today takes the cake.

Were this merely a case of grandparents wanting to take care of their grandchildren I would understand. But they are just pursuing an anti-gay agenda. Naturally, the only side of the story we get is from the dear old grandparents who recant about farmyard frolics and how happy their grandchildren were. I guess we'll never hear from the other side, they'll be too busy being unstable and dropping dead at a young age.

This is unbelievable.

Nodin

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I think this is more serious than Christianity being under attack. (........) Islam hassle.

Amazing how you get to that when we don't even have a detailed explanation of why the council removed her from the register.....

JimiTime

MatthewVII wrote: »

That article (and your remark) are some of the saddest and most destructive things I've seen on these boards in this last while. I think this line is that I have most beef with

"This is a devastating decision which will have a serious impact on the welfare of the children involved.

There is an overwhelming body of evidence showing that same-sex relationships are inherently unstable and reduce the life expectancy of those involved"

What the hell? I have never come across such evidence and would love to see it if it exists (perhaps someone who knows can link?)

That the grandparents would fight even harder had they known it was a homosexual couple is disgustingly intolerant. The remarks made by the Church spokesman highlights what a remarkably dark age we live in. Gay relationships unstable? Reduced life expectancy? 50 years ago I would have expected this kind of bigotry, but for this to exist today takes the cake.

Were this merely a case of grandparents wanting to take care of their grandchildren I would understand. But they are just pursuing an anti-gay agenda. Naturally, the only side of the story we get is from the dear old grandparents who recant about farmyard frolics and how happy their grandchildren were. I guess we'll never hear from the other side, they'll be too busy being unstable and dropping dead at a young age.

This is unbelievable.

I don't think that there would be many Christians who would agree with homosexuals adopting children. You don't realise that? I see your point however, about the parents fighting harder when it was clear a HS couple were adopting. Does raise a few questions as to why they didn't fight so hard in the 1st place. BTW, are you aware of the legalities of this in the UK? Do you know if HS adption is allowed?

Nodin

JimiTime wrote: »

? Do you know if HS adption is allowed?

Yep.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_adoption

And fostering.

Dades

JimiTime wrote: »

Does raise a few questions as to why they didn't fight so hard in the 1st place.

It certainly does. Given the children supposedly didn't want to leave, and the grandparents lived in the idyllic countryside, etc etc.

That said, despite (some of) our enlightened internet personas, I wonder how many of us would be happy to see their child/grandchild adopted by a gay couple...

JimiTime

Nodin wrote: »

Yep.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_adoption

And fostering.

So why is it argued that same sex marriage will open the door for same sex adoption? It seems, by your link, that its already legal, and obviously already happening.

JimiTime

Dades wrote: »

That said, despite (some of) our enlightened internet personas, I wonder how many of us would be happy to see their child/grandchild adopted by a gay couple...

A question to which the answers I'd take with a grain of salt tbh. Its only when met with the prospect, will it stop being ideals, and start being reality.

sorella

Sadly, yes perfectly legal . Some Catholic adoption agencies have been forced to close thus of course as they refuse to place children with homosexuals.

I do not have the data to hand; but google will help:)

They are favouring homosexuals to be PC.

JimiTime wrote: »

Article here


I didn't realise this was legal? So is it legal in the UK, to give a child to a homosexual couple in adoption? Is ths common knowledge? Or a I missing something?

sorella

A young Muslim woman in Australia became a Christian. She wanted to enter a convent in the US; the New Jersey Dominicans. They raised the air fare.

But the family contacted her and told her that unless she returned and married the old man they had chosen for her, they would kill her (female) cousin, who was still in Australia.

The girl had of course no choice.

This girl has had a conversion; she knows her danger now.

May Jesus protect them and shield them.

Truly this council is doing evil work here. Because of course as they have no faith, none of this has any reality.

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I think this is more serious than Christianity being under attack. This isn't about attacking Christianity, this is about bending over backwards to accommodate Islam, for misguided reasons of "tolerance" and multi-culturalism. You can bet if she converted from Christianity or any other religion to Islam, there'd be little objection. Islam has managed to paint itself in Britain as a desperately oppressed minority, so much so that the politically correct establishment refuses not only to criticise it, but refuses to even admit it is causing problems.

According to Islam, this girl should be put to death for apostasy. She was in foster care to begin with because she was being beaten by her male relatives, and she converted probably at least partly because she saw how much better Christian women had it to Muslim ones, and yet because she did this (a clear sign she was not happy with her up-bringing), the state put her back into the home she was raised in, presumably to encourage her to become a Muslim again, and this presumably to avoid accusations that the state was causing Islam hassle.

sorella

Sadly predictable .

Your words are the sad ones.

You write this knowing the beliefs on this, from God's word.

And unlike some of your mails, this is highly literate.
Makes one wonder, does that. Two distinct styles? ( a trained writer sees these things)

We are children of Light.

Living by the Word of God.

Not of darkness.

Children are created by man and woman; that is their origin and their undeniable heritage. From the Lord God. Period.

Your words are also intolerant in the extreme.

"Get thee behind me satan" is inscribed on the Holy Profession Crucifix we wear. Needful indeed. Words of Jesus.

Jesus bless your journey.

MatthewVII wrote: »

That article (and your remark) are some of the saddest and most destructive things I've seen on these boards in this last while. I think this line is that I have most beef with

"This is a devastating decision which will have a serious impact on the welfare of the children involved.

There is an overwhelming body of evidence showing that same-sex relationships are inherently unstable and reduce the life expectancy of those involved"

What the hell? I have never come across such evidence and would love to see it if it exists (perhaps someone who knows can link?)

That the grandparents would fight even harder had they known it was a homosexual couple is disgustingly intolerant. The remarks made by the Church spokesman highlights what a remarkably dark age we live in. Gay relationships unstable? Reduced life expectancy? 50 years ago I would have expected this kind of bigotry, but for this to exist today takes the cake.

Were this merely a case of grandparents wanting to take care of their grandchildren I would understand. But they are just pursuing an anti-gay agenda. Naturally, the only side of the story we get is from the dear old grandparents who recant about farmyard frolics and how happy their grandchildren were. I guess we'll never hear from the other side, they'll be too busy being unstable and dropping dead at a young age.

This is unbelievable.

Húrin

sorella wrote: »

Sadly, yes perfectly legal . Some Catholic adoption agencies have been forced to close thus of course as they refuse to place children with homosexuals.

Ah yes, I see the secular agenda is making the world a happier place.

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I think this is more serious than Christianity being under attack. This isn't about attacking Christianity, this is about bending over backwards to accommodate Islam, for misguided reasons of "tolerance" and multi-culturalism. You can bet if she converted from Christianity or any other religion to Islam, there'd be little objection. Islam has managed to paint itself in Britain as a desperately oppressed minority, so much so that the politically correct establishment refuses not only to criticise it, but refuses to even admit it is causing problems.

Do you really believe this conspiracy theory?

sorella

Yes; dreadful is it not?

I was in Scotland when they started the campaign to introduce teaching in schools that "gay" union was a life style as much as marriage.

Some of the material planned for 5 year olds was...words fail.

It was then already allowed in UK schools.

This was in an area where the head of social services was an active Lesbian as were other leading figures.

It is a hard world these days.

So sorry Jimitime...

JimiTime wrote: »

So why is it argued that same sex marriage will open the door for same sex adoption? It seems, by your link, that its already legal, and obviously already happening.

JimiTime

sorella wrote: »

Yes; dreadful is it not?

I was in Scotland when they started the campaign to introduce teaching in schools that "gay" union was a life style as much as marriage.

Some of the material planned for 5 year olds was...words fail.

It was then already allowed in UK schools.

This was in an area where the head of social services was an active Lesbian as were other leading figures.

It is a hard world these days.

So sorry Jimitime...

I can't say I'm surprised by the direction the world is going. I just never realised it was at such an advanced stage. We live in a sexed up world where desire is king. Its direction is inevitable. We are told in scripture where this world would go, and low and behold.. it was right. Its like scripture is somehow divine;):)

CerebralCortex

sorella wrote: »

Yes; dreadful is it not?

I was in Scotland when they started the campaign to introduce teaching in schools that "gay" union was a life style as much as marriage.

Whats dreadful about that?

sorella wrote: »

Some of the material planned for 5 year olds was...words fail.

Couldn't have been that bad, I assume it was responsible adults doing the planning?

sorella wrote: »

It was then already allowed in UK schools.

Sure why not?

sorella wrote: »

This was in an area where the head of social services was an active Lesbian as were other leading figures.

It is a hard world these days.

So sorry Jimitime...

Never thought I'd hear something of that nature from a Nun. But in fairness I shouldn't be surprised having grown up in Ireland.

sorella

Reporting this post as a personal attack

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Whats dreadful about that?



Couldn't have been that bad, I assume it was responsible adults doing the planning?



Sure why not?



Never thought I'd hear something of that nature from a Nun. But in fairness I shouldn't be surprised having grown up in Ireland.

AtomicHorror

Húrin wrote: »

sorella wrote:

Sadly, yes perfectly legal . Some Catholic adoption agencies have been forced to close thus of course as they refuse to place children with homosexuals.

Ah yes, I see the secular agenda is making the world a happier place.

Is there evidence that adoption by homosexual couples reduces the happiness of people other than conservative Christians? By evidence I mean peer-reviewed psychological studies, not Christian pamphlets.

AtomicHorror

sorella wrote: »

Reporting this post as a personal attack

Sorella, I really don't see where the personal attack in that post was...

AtomicHorror

JimiTime wrote: »

I can't say I'm surprised by the direction the world is going. I just never realised it was at such an advanced stage. We live in a sexed up world where desire is king.

What does that have to do with committed, monogamous homosexual couples? The sex part of their life is a sin by your reckoning, granted. But you could hardly claim the union and it's commitment to be any more motived by sex than a heterosexual marriage. Surely, commitment and exclusivity would be quite a low priority in a world where desire is king?

MatthewVII

sorella wrote: »

They are favouring homosexuals to be PC.

Sorry to disagree with you sorella, but they are not favouring homosexuals to be PC, they are allowing homosexuals to adopt to be fair and treat them equally. They're not trying to be "hip" or "trendy" (as another poster on the Homosexuality as a sin thread) - it makes sense to give the same rights to people of different sexual orientation.

sorella wrote:

And unlike some of your mails, this is highly literate.
Makes one wonder, does that. Two distinct styles? ( a trained writer sees these things)

Reporting this as a personal attack. And not a very graceful one at that, considering who it comes from. I would consider a little more humility and a little less patronisation

JimiTimi wrote:

I can't say I'm surprised by the direction the world is going. I just never realised it was at such an advanced stage. We live in a sexed up world where desire is king. Its direction is inevitable. We are told in scripture where this world would go, and low and behold.. it was right. Its like scripture is somehow divine

You're right, consenting homosexuals are clearly sex-driven maniacs unable to control their dark impulses and who have endless cisterns of lust they need to fill. I would recommend getting to know homosexuals (from a neutral standpoint) and learn that they are just the same as heterosexuals.

sorella wrote:

I was in Scotland when they started the campaign to introduce teaching in schools that "gay" union was a life style as much as marriage.

Some of the material planned for 5 year olds was...words fail.

It was then already allowed in UK schools.

God forbid they would learn tolerance and acceptance from a young age instead of learning how deviant and wrong homosexuality is

sorella wrote:

You write this knowing the beliefs on this, from God's word.

I guess I'd deluded myself into believing that christians would merely be influenced on the matter of personal choice by listening to God's word, instead of interpreting god's word as meaning that they had to trample on the rights of others.

Fanny Cradock

People, if you really want to get into the mire of the rights and wrongs about homosexuals adopting then start a new thread or take it to the existing 'homosexuality' thread. Thanks.

Nodin

JimiTime wrote: »

So why is it argued that same sex marriage will open the door for same sex adoption? It seems, by your link, that its already legal, and obviously already happening.

No idea, and yes indeed it is.

Fanny Cradock

Let's keep this on track, folks. If you must discuss other matters then take it to another thread. From here on in I will consider deleting any posts that are not related to the original topic.


Grrrrr!