Question:
Uk: Are Gay rights laws really a danger to our freedoms/free speech?
anonymous
2010-11-01 04:02:25 UTC
In the paper to today there a story of a couple of foster parents barred form fostering because they refuse to give up there pentecostal religious belief that homosexuality is unacceptable.
the Church of England say Gay rights are stifling free speech.
I was listening to a bbc radio show couple of days ago and the subject in discussion was about teaching children at school all about gay relationships/homosexuality.
Nearly or most of the calls were from ( hetrosesexual ? ) mothers saying this should not happen as they don't want there kids to be taught about gay relationships.
Yet is this the same suppression of free speech ? does it work both ways ?
How Many hotel owners refuse gay couples to sleep together in there hotel rooms because its there "beliefs"
Yet do these same hotel owners refuse adulterers/divorcees from sleeping in the same hotel because that also part of the 10 commandments? - thal shall not commit adultery ?

It seems to me that these ppl expressing the "religious" beliefs are cherry picking parts of the religion to suit themselves rather than a reflection of their devotion to the religion.
Of all of them mothers wishing not to have there children taught about homosexuality at school what happens if they have another child which could possibly turn out to be gay ?
I understand GRL are badlly draughted but condemnation of homosexuality buy heterosexuals just because they are a minority is that the true danger/stifling of free speech ?
Sixteen answers:
Blue Eyed Christian
2010-11-01 09:40:25 UTC
Would it be right to deny an atheist couple the right to foster parent a child because they believe that Christianity is crap and would teach that to the child? Probably most people would agree that this would violate their rights. Guess what, it's just as bad to deny Christians the right to foster a child because of one belief that they have.



>Yet is this the same suppression of free speech ? does it work both ways ?



Free speech is one thing; educating young children about adult sexual relationships is quite another. They're supposed to be learning reading, writing, math, history, etc., not sex. This is NOT an issue of free speech, but of teaching children things that they really don't need to know. Parents should be the ones to teach their children about sex and sexuality, NOT schools.



>How Many hotel owners refuse gay couples to sleep together in there hotel rooms because its there "beliefs"



I'm guessing none. I've stayed in motels and never been questioned about whether I'm a lesbian or not. That doesn't really happen. I mean, unless you have proof that it does....do you?



>It seems to me that these ppl expressing the "religious" beliefs are cherry picking parts of the religion to suit themselves rather than a reflection of their devotion to the religion.



And it seems to me that you're judging all religious people based on the actions of a few. A lot of people that I know who think homosexuality is a sin also think that adultery and fornication are sins too. That's pretty common.



>Of all of them mothers wishing not to have there children taught about homosexuality at school what happens if they have another child which could possibly turn out to be gay ?



Not wanting it taught in schools does not equal teaching their children hate! I wouldn't want my kids learning about that kind of thing in school either but we aren't teaching our kids hate. It's a "quality control" thing - *I* want to be the one to teach them about this stuff, rather than allowing a teacher who may well have an irritatingly PC morally relative slant to do it.



Why do you assume that, because these women have a problem with teaching young children about homosexuality, they would be bad mothers to a child of theirs that turned out to be gay?



>but condemnation of homosexuality buy heterosexuals just because they are a minority is that the true danger/stifling of free speech ?



No. Know what's a danger to free speech? Hate speech laws. Here in Canada, people can now go to jail if they stand up and say "homosexuality is wrong" and a gay person gets their feelings hurt or feels offended. THAT is a danger to free speech. I don't agree with people using their right to free speech to threaten or abuse others; however, I do support their right to express an opinion that others may find stupid or wrong or politically incorrect. Punishing someone for sharing an opinion is a violation of our freedom of speech. And guess who is behind that particular law? Not all of them are heterosexuals. Don't try to make it look like homosexuals are victims in this situation...they are every bit as capable of hate speech and bigotry as anyone else.
anonymous
2010-11-01 13:13:50 UTC
Yeah, and soon the blacks will want rights, too! I don't want my son learning that homosexuals or black people exist! Especially in a learning environment! (sarcasm to give perspective)



"Yet do these same hotel owners refuse adulterers/divorcees from sleeping in the same hotel because that also part of the 10 commandments? - thal shall not commit adultery ?"

-Well none of the ten commandments say "Thou shalt not have the gay buttsex."



"It seems to me that these ppl expressing the "religious" beliefs are cherry picking parts of the religion to suit themselves rather than a reflection of their devotion to the religion."

-Best, most intelligent observation I have seen in the Gender Studies category.
True Blue Brit
2010-11-01 12:19:38 UTC
I'm not particularly for gay rights being taught to young children - I think children are too young to have to deal with this.

On the other hand, I am against Pentecostals being allowed to adopt and force their religious beliefs on innocent children. I

I would prefer gay rights was not an issue in an adoption process. I would prefer a male and female couple to adopt, rather than a gay couple. I would prefer if religious people adopted, there views were moderate.

Stifling free speech - I don't think free speech is applicable in an adoption process. The children should come first - not politics.
?
2010-11-01 11:12:24 UTC
I'm glad the foster parents were barred from fostering a child. You realy need an open mind & open attitude to be a parent or gaurdian. Imagine if the child was gay, or turned out to be gay? He or she would be "unacceptable" to those "parents".



As for the rest of it, my kids are already aware of gay relationships & homosexuality. I've never heard of hotel/motel owners doing any of that (money is money and I live in australia so it might be different). Also I'm an atheist so I have no issues with gays anyway.
jupiteress
2010-11-01 12:09:39 UTC
oooh hark at you wabbitting on... I wholeheartedly agree with parents about the education of their children. There is no reason for the education authority to inform children about sex between consenting adults. What consulting adults do in the bedroom or where ever is no one elses business and certainly not of an education authority. If I was homosexual I would not be happy to think my sex life was being discussed in schools. Education authorities should be informing pupils 'how the body works' that is not sex education, but something they need to know. Telling 5 year olds how to look after their feet, bone structure, mussels, how to stay healthy is much more constructive. Once they reach semi adulthood the 'how the boy works' education can then inform them what to expect of their bodies.

I do not know why homosexuals need to bring their sexual preferences to the fore. It is so very boring...and no one cares a hoot. Tomorrow I will have a placard stating Heterosexual and go shopping. You are right to say hterosexuals are in the minority. So let's hear the voice of the minority.
anonymous
2010-11-01 11:27:19 UTC
I don't think foster parents should be subject to such religious discrimination any more than foster parents should be barred from being homosexual. There's a difference between holding a religious belief and advocating hate or violence.



I do think homosexuality, as part of the world in which we all live, should be discussed in school, when children are old enough to understand.



I don't think hotel owners should be permitted to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, marital status, or race for that matter.
Helena
2010-11-01 11:25:14 UTC
I think it is right to refuse foster parents who will tell children that being gay is wrong - there is 10% chance the child will be gay and a greater chance that they will grow up to be someone who is prejudiced against gay people.



Freedom of speech is important but people with prejudices cannot be in positions where they will ifluence children. Children cannot judge for themselves but believe the adults who care for them. This is sadly unavoidable when people have their own children but education about gay relationships at school will be invaluable to children realising they are gay who have parents who believe this is unacceptable.
izzy711
2010-11-01 11:26:53 UTC
old_skoo...



"God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve"



And "God" also gave man free will. And with that free will came the ability for recognize right from wrong. It is wrong to judge some one for their sexuality or their skin color. And only a small minded person would think other wise.

This is just like saying the schools should not teach any thing about the African americans because the bigets don't like niggers.

And the straights don't like the fagets.

When are people going to stop hating each other.
Colonel Reb
2010-11-01 18:55:28 UTC
If it's to the point where you can't even say you think homosexuality is wrong without someone wanting to charge you with a hate crime for it, yes it's gone too far. This particular case went too far.
anonymous
2010-11-01 12:45:48 UTC
Being homophobic is just as bad as being racist. Those children could grow up to discriminate against gay people because their foster parents brainwash them. I don't think it's right. If my child was gay I wouldn't mind.
anonymous
2010-11-01 11:21:10 UTC
never heard of a hotel turning down anybody, gays or adulterers. Maybe it happens. Just never heard of it. I also believe religious nuts should have just as much of a right to screw a kid's head up as gays do.
anonymous
2010-11-01 22:00:09 UTC
Raising a child isn't a right; it's a privilege. Anti-gays and racists shouldn't be allowed to raise kids. /END OF.
anonymous
2010-11-01 11:20:45 UTC
YES!!! I az a krischun reelaize taht teh evul gheyz cant be gived rites coz tehyll raep ar childrun and steel us mormal streiht pepulz ritez.



Of course they're cherry picking, it's what bigotry is, particularly religious bigotry.
Roger
2010-11-01 11:17:03 UTC
they should not have been barred from fostering because of their beliefs. The most important part of fostering is are the foster parents going to be good parents. If they are they should get the kids. End of.



Gays are not unnacceptable, they should be judged on their characters not their sexuality.
Conor A
2010-11-01 14:37:20 UTC
No and gays should be allowed to adopt or foster kids.
anonymous
2010-11-01 11:05:11 UTC
God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...