This site will look much better in a browser that supports web standards,but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Skip to content....

text size: Decrease text-size Increase text-size

Skip to content....

Appalling judgement in fostering case

01 March 2011

 

Statement by TUV Leader Jim Allister QC:-

 

“I am dismayed by the judgement handed down in GB against a Christian couple wishing to offer fostering services but denied that opportunity because of their orthodox view and religious belief on sexual ethics.

 

“I trust this retrograde judgement will be appealed, because its elevation of promotion of ‘sexual orientation’ rights above freedom of expression and religious belief is deeply troubling. It speaks to the distortion of values in our society that a court can conclude that in a hierarchy of rights the protection of the homosexual lifestyle from criticism takes precedence over the right to freedom of expression and religious belief. If this is the point to which so called, but lopsided, ‘human rights’ has brought us, then our law has got totally out of kilter with the  protection of freedom of expression so central to the constitutional imperatives upon which our nation was founded.

 

It is time that Parliament redressed the balance so foolishly skewed in its plethora of legislation dealing with sexual orientation and related topics.

I for one find myself in total agreement with what Mr & Mrs Johns said after this ruling. And, since I can’t express the issue any more clearly than they have so eloquently done, I now set out their thought-provoking words:

“We are extremely distressed at what the judges have ruled today.

“All we wanted was to offer a loving home to a child in need. We have a good track record as foster parents.

“But because we are Christians, with mainstream Christian views on sexual ethics, we are apparently unsuitable as foster parents.

 “We have been excluded because we have moral opinions based on our faith and we feel sidelined because we are Christians with normal, mainstream, Christian views on sexual ethics.

“The judges have suggested that our views might harm children.

“We have been told by the Equality and Human Rights Commission that our moral views may ‘infect’ a child.

“We do not believe that this is so. We are prepared to love and accept any child. All we were not willing to do was to tell a small child that the practice of homosexuality was a good thing.

“Worst of all, a vulnerable child has now likely missed the chance of finding a safe and caring home at a time when there are so few people willing to foster or adopt.

“We feel excluded and that there is no place for us in society.

“We have not received justice.”

 

back to list 

General