Massachusetts bans couple from having foster children due to their Christian beliefs

how it is not? wrote:

Precious Roy wrote:

People who do foster care get paid and are effectively working for the government. This is more akin to the lawsuits by county clerks who refused to certify same sex marriages. You cannot use your religion to get around job requirements when you chose to work for/with the government. If you are going to be a foster care provider and take tax payer dollars, you are going to have to provide an environment for the child that conforms to the government's requirements. The government does not want to have foster parents being in conflict with LGBTQ kids and try to convince them that they are committing a sin against God or whatever religious BS they would want to throw at them. Kids in foster care are extremely vulnerable and LGBTQ kids are also often the victims of bullying, discrimination, etc. Put those two together and you have a very precarious situation for a child. The last thing in the world that child needs is a bible thumper foster parent telling them that baby Jesus cries because the kid isn't attracted to the opposite sex or is a girl who feels more like a boy.

This is BS. You are still advocating a system that is not neutral. You want to punish the Christian for being pro-traditional family values, but not punish the couple who is pro lgbt which is the opposite.

Yea kids are vulnerable. YOu want them groomed. If you cared about kids you would want them with Christian parents who will steer them away from sickening perversion like sodomy.

deweydecimal wrote:

Newname wrote:

So what? That's their religious belief.

It doesn't matter what religion they are following, or whether or not they are religious. The only thing that matters is whether or not they are actively hostile to LGBT people when they could have a foster child who is potentially LGBT. Since the couple was clearly hostile towards LGBT people (in this case because of their religious beliefs) they did not meet the state's criteria for being foster parents. Being a foster parent is a job paid for by the state. If you were applying for a job as an elementary school teacher, but you had a long track record of being actively hostile towards children with disabilities, you would likely also be denied that position.

You have the right to believe that gay people are sinners that are going to burn in hell. You have the right to attend a church that believes homosexuals are going to burn in hell. You also have the right to have your own biological children, use a sperm donor, or a surrogate, or pursue a private adoption. However, the state's role is to protect children, including children who might be LGBT, who are under their care. Why would you want a couple who is steadfast in their belief that LGBT people are going to hell, to parent a child who is potentially gay when it has been well established that having unsupportive parents, or growing up in a household that teaches that LGBT people are sinners, is extremely detrimental to their well-being?

Newname wrote:

deweydecimal wrote:

It doesn't matter what religion they are following, or whether or not they are religious. The only thing that matters is whether or not they are actively hostile to LGBT people when they could have a foster child who is potentially LGBT. Since the couple was clearly hostile towards LGBT people (in this case because of their religious beliefs) they did not meet the state's criteria for being foster parents. Being a foster parent is a job paid for by the state. If you were applying for a job as an elementary school teacher, but you had a long track record of being actively hostile towards children with disabilities, you would likely also be denied that position.

You have the right to believe that gay people are sinners that are going to burn in hell. You have the right to attend a church that believes homosexuals are going to burn in hell. You also have the right to have your own biological children, use a sperm donor, or a surrogate, or pursue a private adoption. However, the state's role is to protect children, including children who might be LGBT, who are under their care. Why would you want a couple who is steadfast in their belief that LGBT people are going to hell, to parent a child who is potentially gay when it has been well established that having unsupportive parents, or growing up in a household that teaches that LGBT people are sinners, is extremely detrimental to their well-being?

They believe homosexuality is a sin. It is their religion. They don't attack Gays. They are not hostile.

Link:rumble.com/v34jul5-hate-laws-making-cr...