The Patch

January 30, 2007

Tuesday 30th January 2007.

Filed under: UK News — Claire @ 1:36 pm

This week, there’s been a lot of talk about Gay adoption. The centre of discussion was about the fact that the Catholic Church expressed a wish for an ‘opt-out’ from new regulations which mean faith based adoption agencies have to consider placing children with gay couples.

Ruth Kelly, Minister for Women and Equality amongst her many titles, worryingly campaigned against equality for homosexual people, supporting the opt out. This resulted in a cabinet revolt, with the majority of Parliament agreeing that she was off her rocker. Hell, when even David Cameron is against you, you know you’re fighting a losing battle.

The Prime Minister, one of Ruth Kelly’s few allies, has now announced a comprimise, saying that although religious adoption agencies will not be given an out from letting gay people adopt children, they will be given 20 months to sort themselves out.

How this has even been an issue at all really scares me. Why should anyone be denied the chance to look after a child on the basis of sexuality? Yes, homosexuality is wrong in various religions. But I fail to see how that would impact on the level of care they could give a child.

It’s wrong, in the eyes of certain religions, to have affairs, but no doubt people who have had affairs can adopt children from religious agencies. It’s wrong, in the Catholic Church, to use a condom, resulting in many unwanted children who need to be adopted. Who are the Church to say that a gay couple have no right to help? They are creating a problem which they need to solve, who are they to say that certain people can adopt a child whilst others cannot?

Now, I’ve not conducted studies, but I’m pretty sure gay people have no qualities which would make them less able to look after a child than a heterosexual couple. We can’t let religion cloud jugdements over where a child should go. The most important thing is that a child doesn’t grow up in a children’s home, surely? Not whether they have two Mums or Dads…

The Church, as they do whenever they’re told what to do, says that the Government’s refusal to let them tell gay couples to sod off when it comes to adopting kids is an attempt to ban religion from public life. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, leader of the Church in England and Wales, says he doesn’t not like gay people, he just doesn’t want them looking after children. A paraphrase, I admit. Basically, he believes a child needs a Mother and a Father. Clearly it’s just slipped his mind that there are many single parent families out there that produce perfectly functional children. Maybe a child needs a male and a female role model, but does that have to be a parent?

We go on about people being racist, the international furore over Big Brother, for example, and yet the Church can say that because someone chooses to have a relationship with someone of their own sex, they’re not fit to look after children, and that’s OK? It’s homophobic, and in a World where equality is percieved as an ideal, we cannot afford to let religion have such an impact on something as big as who looks after our children.



  1. Oooo I’m really glad you pulled this together for today, I’m glad to learn about this issue. Doesn’t it just make you angry? We “Patchers” should be in charge of things, we know what’s right.

    Comment by Amie — January 30, 2007 @ 6:05 pm | Reply

  2. The problem with religion is that it is such a wide subject, and even the people who are in the church community and work as priest and so forth dont know everything about their religion, so how are we as uneducated blasphemers supossed to be able understand religion to a good enough extent as to argue our point using religious references, well the fact is we dont have to, our society should be enough of an argument, now being gay and having abortions and all the rest that is bad in the bible doesnt make the people themselves evil,the church (and other religions)live by there own rules, in many cases stating that the laws of god over rule the laws of man and feel they can do what they like and say it’s gods will, but things like adoption and abortion and not being able to use a condom when having sex, is not up to them, now i know that i said we mear mortals cant use religious references as we dont know enough, but im making an exception for myself cos i said it and im gunna anyway, now correct me if im wrong but “god” gave man/woman free will to make their own choices, whether they are right or wrong ones, now who is the church to try and take that away from us, it’s like defying god. Right, bit of a ramble there probably incoherant, but i’ve be told i have to post, so i wanted to atleast sound mildly intelligent and informed on the matter, i’ll leave you people to be the judge of that. By the way glad to see the patchers nickname is catching on.

    Comment by andy — January 31, 2007 @ 8:18 pm | Reply

  3. I’ve always thought of this as a kind of self preservation thing built into most religions. Go back a hundred years, in a time machine or whatever – I just use my mind, and find me a Catholic/Muslim couple who love each other very much and want to get married and have children. WOA! NO! CAN’T! Not without people from both communities frowning at you and tutting in the street. Why? Because of the babies. So Catholic Woman wants children with Muslim Man. Great. But what religion will the kiddies be? Islam even has the whole “You can have four wives, no, wait, six if you can prove you can afford to keep them. Have lots of babies and make them all Muslim and thus our religion grows” rule. Mainly from long ago times when the religion wasn’t doing quite so well thanks to those Christians killing them all off. But yes. Muslim + Muslim = Muslim Babies = Good. Catholic + Catholic = Catholic Babies = Good. Catholic + Muslim = UNKNOWN Babes = BAD.

    And it’s a similar thing with the homosexuality thing. Christianity doesn’t like homosexuality; they’re quite happy, being a “modern religion” and all, to acknowledge they exist but just try and ignore them and maybe hope they’ll all die out eventually. It kind of fits in with evolution (yes, I’m using evolution to express orthodox Christian’s views – stay with me hear…) – they can’t make babies and so can’t impose their opinions on little children and this whole silliness should stop.


    Eventually they might all realise that children grow into people who make up their own minds. When I was younger, Mother insisted I had a side parting in my hair. Do I have one now? No. I’m free to make up my own mind, and while I had opinions and values taught to me as a child I get to pick and choose which ones to live by now I’m an adult. My Father is homophobic, I am not. My Mother is a Muslim, I am not.

    Comment by Gary — February 8, 2007 @ 9:20 am | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: