GAY TRUTH

Image via Wikipedia For 15 years, Owen and Eunice Johns served as foster parents to British children. Social workers praised them as “kind and hospitable people” who “respond sensitively to” children. But London’s High Court has just ruled that the Johnses are unfit to foster. The reason: The Johnses are devout Christians , and their views about homosexuality may harm the children in their care. This opinion echoes that Britain’s Equality and Human Rights Commission , which, according to the Daily Mail, claimed foster children risked becoming “infected” by the Johnses’ Christian beliefs . The case came about when the Johnses re-applied to the Derby City Council to foster children after taking a break. But instead of welcoming them back with open arms, social workers expressed concern that the couple’s beliefs were in violation of the new Equality Act Regulations, which protect the rights of homosexuals. The Johnses could not believe that being Christians automatically excluded

Image via Wikipedia Following the decision of London’s High Court last week that a Christian couple could be banned from foster care due to their unwillingness to support the homosexual lifestyle, some commentators are pointing out that the decision amounts to a ruling on what is and is not authentic Christian doctrine. The court’s ruling found that Eunice and Owen Johns had not been the victims of religious discrimination when the Derby City Council declined their foster care application, based on the Johns’ alleged inability to “promote diversity.” Despite the Johns’ statement in a conversation with a social worker that their beliefs regarding homosexuality “stemmed from their religious convictions and beliefs,” both the Fostering Panel and the High Court attempted to disassociate the Johns’ religion from their views in support of traditional marriage in order to avoid charges of religious discrimination. According to the Court decision , in a 2007 Panel meeting considering the

Image via Wikipedia I have thought long and hard about whether to blog about a recent legal judgment that has made the headlines here in the UK , and about what I would want to say if I did. There has been much print spilled in some of our newspapers, many blogs written, and perhaps much confusion as a result. In particular there has been much attention drawn to a quote attributed to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission ( EHRC ) submission in this case, which apparently stated that children risk being ‘infected’ by Christian moral beliefs. The Commission  has since apologized for this , stating: Unfortunately a mistake within our legal submission led to an inference that we did not intend and which was misconstrued as suggesting that the Commission equates Christian moral views with an infection. This oversight was caused by a drafting error in our submissions to the court. This should have been picked up in our internal clearance process for the legal documentation and does n

Image via Wikipedia A UK Christian couple fighting their local council adoption panel over a decision to bar them from providing foster care because of their faith and their unwillingness to affirm  homosexuality, have lost their appeal to the High Court in London . In February 2008, Eunice and Owen Johns of Derby filed suit against Derby City Council when they were refused for fostering because they said they would not talk to children about homosexuality as though it were an acceptable “lifestyle,” and that they would insist that children in their care accompany the family to church on Sundays. In November 2010 both parties jointly asked the Court to rule on whether the Johns were able to foster children, or whether they could be excluded from doing so under equality law because of their Christian beliefs . Eunice and Owen Johns According to the  Daily Mail , Lord Justice Munby and Mr. Justice Beatson ruled that laws protecting people from discrimination because of their sexual