Another UK Couple Rejected for Fostering Children over Religious Beliefs on Homosexuality
<H4></H4>

By Hilary White

OAKWOOD, Derby, UK, February 27, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In November 2007, LifeSiteNews.com reported that a Christian couple in Somerset, UK, was being forced to retire from fostering needy children on conscientious grounds after the local council imposed rules requiring them to discuss homosexuality with the children. Now a similar case is reported in Derby, in which the local council is being sued after rejecting an application from a Christian couple to assist foster children under ten years old. The Telegraph reports that Eunice and Owen Johns refused to talk to children about homosexuality as though it were an acceptable "lifestyle".

The Labour-controlled council adoption panel was also reportedly "upset" that the couple insisted that children in their care would be required to accompany the family to church on Sundays. The Johns have been married for 39 years and have four adult children of their own. Mrs. Johns is a retired nurse and Sunday school teacher.

The adoption panel admitted in internal documents that Mr and Mrs Johns of Oakwood, in Derby, might have grounds to feel that they had been "discriminated against on religious grounds".

In the Somerset case last year, Vincent and Pauline Matherick were able, after their case caught national media attention, to reach an agreement with their local council authorities and keep their current child, a ten year-old boy, in their home. They had made almost identical complaints and told media that they intended to retire from fostering children after the council insisted that they participate in discussions about homosexuality.

Mr. and Mrs. Johns' lawyer said the couple were not 'homophobic,' but believed that sex outside of marriage was wrong and that marriage cannot include same-sex partners. The couple are being represented by the Christian Legal Centre, which is asking for a judicial review of the council's decision.

Evangelical Alliance General Director, the Reverend Joel Edwards, said, "We are worried about this issue because it appears someone can be disqualified from giving care to vulnerable children because of a local council's attitude to their conscience - which we believe violates their rights as citizens."

Stephen Green, national director of Christian Voice, said, "It seems that Christians are gradually being squeezed out of the adoption process. It's exactly what we said would happen. In the name of equality, it's discriminating against Christians."

"I would like to see the council back down and adopt a more realistic approach. Either that or tell Christians that they are not welcome to foster in the future. At least that would be more honest."

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

UK Christian Couple who Refuse to Promote Homosexuality Forced out of Child Foster Care
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/oct/07102502.html

Christian Couple no Longer Required to Promote Homosexuality in Fostering Children
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/nov/07110205.html ;

I think telling any Christian family that they will be eliminated from adoption would cause more problems....If a family has practiced one religion all their life, and has been approved for having foster children in their home, it would be hard to change their standards...But I do feel that if a child is to learn about homosexuality, then it should come from within their house from people they trust...Hearing it on the outside can result in a twisted version, doing more harm than good....My concern would be more on making sure the family is not abusive toward the child, not on their religion........

I tend to agree with you, there are so many children in need of a loving home and there are more important things to consider such as abuse or neglect. If a loving family is willing to open their home to a child in need they should be allowed as there are many children in need of loving homes.

I'm not against teaching tolerance of all people, including homosexuals. But is there any need to force children to learn about homosexuality? I mean, if I were a parent, I would not take my child aside and give them a lecture on heterosexuality (at least, not until they reached puberty and started thinking about sex). So why is it so important that children be taught about homosexuality at an age when they're more interested in playing with dolls or actions figures?

We already have an active thread going on this, PA. You might want to merge them.

More to your point, they are not being asked to teach children about homosexuality. They were asked the question, "if a child in your care came home from school crying because they were picked on for being gay how would you react?" They said they would tell the child that they don't believe in homosexuality and being a homosexual is inappropriate because of their religion. This is a bigoted world view no matter its source. Replace gay with any other word and there would be no question such is the case.

Also note, they only watch kids on weekends and only watch the same child for short stints. It's not like they're adoptive parents.

what most seem to be missing is the 11 year old was starting to identify as gay !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! about the right age to start noticing things like sex. it was about the age I started really noticing the girls ! even though I knew I was 'different' and had girl 'crushes ' since about 6.

science has more and more evidence this is how you are born aka not a sin !!!! but as natural as being straight !!!

so get over it ......if the kid is gay and questioning he shouldn't have it thrown in his face that it's wrong. That is how you screw a kid up.

taking a kid that may be gay and telling them it's a sin and wrong and shameful ..............that's abuse.

I didn't have a great look at the links provided and was just going on the original post, which read:

In November 2007, LifeSiteNews.com reported that a Christian couple in Somerset, UK, was being forced to retire from fostering needy children on conscientious grounds after the local council imposed rules requiring them to discuss homosexuality with the children. Now a similar case is reported in Derby, in which the local council is being sued after rejecting an application from a Christian couple to assist foster children under ten years old. The Telegraph reports that Eunice and Owen Johns refused to talk to children about homosexuality as though it were an acceptable "lifestyle".

If that is not what this thread is about, then I will look at it again tomorrow when it is not 3am and when I have not just come home from the Night Shift. I still do not sexuality (either heterosexuality or homosexuality) to be an appropriate discussion for young children, though.

Speaking from a religious point of view, whether it is natural or not is irrelevant and does not impact on whether it is considered a "sin". There are many things that we as humans do which are entirely natural, yet Christianity sees as wrong. Christianity also sees sex-before-marriage as sin, and it views pornography as sin, and these heterosexual sins no worse and no better than the act of homosexuality. Natural or not, homosexuality would still be wrong if you wish to follow the Christian God. Of course, if you don't want to follow this God then that is your prerogative, and you are then of course free to live whatever life you wish, which would include homosexuality. I do not think that Christians have the monopoly on morality and they certainly do not have the right to deny two people (even if they are of the same sex) from having sexual relations.

But if you want to follow the Christian God, there are certain kinds of acts that should not be done, even if they are considered natural (though my personal belief is that both genetics and environment must play their part in equal measures).

~ Regards, PA

If such were the case the base percentage of homosexuality in every culture (even those which kill you for it) would not be about the same.

Christian Parents of a Gay Teen
http://www.hhproject.org/articles/christiangayteen


Children of the right: in Family Fundamentals, filmmaker Arthur Dong shows how religion can shatter families with gay children - film
Advocate, The, Nov 26, 2002 by Etelka Lehoczky
With Family Fundamentals, his new documentary about conservative religious families with gay kids, Arthur Dong hopes to shock many gays and lesbians out of their complacency about the religious right.

"Oftentimes the gay community just kind of laughs [at Christian conservatives]," he says. "They just kind of shove it aside, like, `Oh, this is just a bunch of fanatics.' But you know, they're not. They're large and organized and well-funded, and we have to deal with them."

This statement-confrontational yet calm--is characteristic of Dong, whose films are united by their commitment to representing both sides of seemingly intractable conflicts. His best-known film, 1994's Coming Out Under Fire, which won a Sundance jury award, deals with gays in the military; 1997's Licensed to Kill profiles men convicted of murdering gays.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m158...i_95263255/pg_1

while I see the original arguement is based on a boy getting abused by 2 men who adopted and by all rights get mad.........( do you realise how many straight people abuse ?)

talking about gays to your kids should be an extension of the birds and bees talk since they need to know that information at the same time..... you can't assume your kid is straight.

you may see sex before marriage a sin ....... but it's also a choice ! being gay is not..........

did you choose to be straight ?

It's interesting that the christian churches even take a stand on homosexuality and/or premarital sex, as even in their own texts, christ says NOT ONE WORD about either. so you can, in fact, follow the christian God and not condemn homosexuality or heterosexuality, as jesus himself never adresses either one. STrange, right, how things our christian leaders are so obsessed with were apparently not worth mention to the God they claim to follow...

I thought I had made the distinction clear in the previous post. Presumably it was not as clear cut as I had thought. I agree that sex before marriage is a choice. And I agree that being gay may not be a choice. But here is where the problem arises. Being gay is not a sin. Choosing to have homosexual sex is. Just as sex before marriage is a sin, so is homosexual sex. Just as pornography is a sin, so is homosexual sex. Being gay, in and of itself, is not a sin. Choosing to act upon it, though..... Do you understand my meaning better now?

~ PA

PA, you don't find that to be height of ridiculousness? Really? So your god wants gay people to be lonely their entire lives? Or does he wish for them to enter into sham marriages to save face?

I mean, that's just foolish, is it not?

so being gay isn't a sin but having sex is. that's like saying being straight isn't a sin but having sex is.

trust me , being gay isn't a choice. unless your choosing to be straight. I don't know anyone who chooses either. If they do ........ they are lying to themselves.

I definitely would not suggest a sham marriage. Since this thread is not actually about homosexuality, I won't go too far into it, except to point you to a book that I have found most enlightening. It is called [i]"What some of you were"[/b]. It is a series of Testimonies written by homosexual Christians who believe that homosexuality is wrong, and have therefore decided to live their lives free of homosexual sex. It is most definitely a worthwhile book to get a hold of, if you can.

~ PA

Being straight is not a sin. But having sex is a sin (unless it is within marriage). Marriage is the only acceptable form of sex that God permits. Any other form of sex, or even sexual thoughts (pornography) is sin. These are choices, just as much as choosing to act on homosexual urges is sin. They are all just as wrong as each other.

As I said though, if you are not a Christian, you are of course free to act however you choose - you are not morally bound by the strictures of the Christian God. I certainly won't impose them on you. I won't condone them. But I definitely won't condemn you for them.

All the best,

~ PA

Sorry, I find those organizations to be some of the most repugnant and disgusting things on the planet. Second only to the Westboro Baptist Chruch. I'm all set with reading some brainwashed folks testimonials. Trust me, all those people will end up in a same sex relationship again. Difference is, now, they'll have to hide it, they will be wracked with guilt and it will ruin their lives. So, no thanks.

Well, if they're just foster parents - not adoptive parents - then I don't think they should push their ideas onto the child.

I think you should teach them basic important things like don't steal, don't rape, don't murder, treat others as you want to be treated. Which means, if you don't want to be discriminated against then don't discriminate others.

I don't think they should necessarily have to specifically bring up homosexuality - just teach them to be kind and tolerant of everyone. Because even if you're a Christian and don't agree with certain things, God will be the one to deal with them - not you.

So I don't think they should be told that homosexuality is right or wrong - just teach them tolerance for everyone and they'll decide their own opinion as they grow up.

As for church - I think you should ask the child. If they don't want to go then don't make them, if they do want to go then let them.

lol follow those so called homosexual sex free persons and you find eventually they are A. miserable B. not really gay and C. tend to go back to being gay.

Christianity has this insane belief gays can change. and I guess they could , about as easily as you could become gay.

but it's a lie. look at the long term. these are unhappy people period.

try reading the facts .

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html...s_changing.html

But Christ came to bring a new law, right? In effect, christians believe that christ came to bring a new law that replaces the old testament law.

He said a whole lot about loving your neighbor, sacraficing of yourself for other people, not judging or throwing the first stone, and about service and unconditional love for your fellow man.

He never once mentions sex of any kind.

So why do "christians" seem to ignore this and keep going back to the old testament for their ideas about sex? If it's so important, wouldn't christ have at least mentioned it? Instead, he doesn't. EVER. But the whack jobs that came decades after him seem to have latched onto it with a vehimence I would characterize as obsession. Especially Paul.

Yeah, I can't imagine those people are happy.

It would be like me trying to pretend to be a boy because someone told me being a girl is sinful. In the end, I'm still a girl no matter how hard I try to act like a boy.

You can pretend all you want but sometimes you just can't change who you are.

Ok, so the OT should be thrown out and the 'whack jobs' that wrote the majority of the NT should be thrown out, you would keep only the Gospels? I suppose you'd also like to remove all of Christ's references to Hell? Maybe do away with the times that he did call sex outside of marriage a sin?

PA is right about basic Christian beliefs. You don't have to believe in the Christian God, but if you do, it's very hard to get around the moral prohibitions about sexuality and keep a cohesive and coherent faith. It's not wrong to be tempted to do wrong stuff (being gay) but it is wrong to do wrong stuff or to entertain those thoughts (gay activity or fantasizing). The same is true of all sins... it's not wrong to be tempted to steal, but it is wrong to give in.

As far as the 'coming out of the gay lifestyle' literature and sites, I see no problem with them. If you believed the activity was wrong and that you could free people from the destructive lifestyle, hopefully you'd do something similar. They don't do what they do for a power trip, they do it to try to help people. Maybe they're misguided (which I don't believe) but at least they're doing what they believe they should out of love for another person (whom others say they're 'phobic' about, ridiculous).

As to the OP, unless you use a religious litmus test, not allowing foster parents to correctly teach their standard religious views is rather ridiculous. The only exception is when the foster parent would teach a radical or fringe belief that requires or endorses illegal activity. But any mainstream, legal, religious view should be acceptable.

JS

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, ¹⁰nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, ²⁷and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. ²⁸And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God. He created Adam and then made a woman. This is what God has ordained and it is what is right. Unlike other sins, homosexuality has a severe judgment administered by God Himself. This judgment is simple: They are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:18ff). As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing. Without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus. Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation.
Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot love him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin and like any other sin, it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible. It needs to be laid at the cross, repented of, and never done again.
As a Christian, you should pray for the salvation of the homosexual the same you would any other person in sin. The homosexual is still made in the image of God -- even though he is in grave sin. Therefore, you should show him same dignity as anyone else you come in contact with. However, this does not mean that you are to approve of their sin. Don't compromise your witness for a socially acceptable opinion that is void of godliness. I believe the Bible is God's word and it does state that homosexuality is a sin, I don't see that it is anyone's business though thats between the individual and God. We have no right to judge anyone, I really hope I don't offend anyone by my post I just wanted to put forth the bibles view and while I do believe in the bible I do not agree with condemning anyone as thats not my place nor should it be.
Always a pleasure

so where are christians complaining about all those other laws that go unheeded daily ??? One easy one........... working on the Sabbath. since I know everyone pretty much breaks it. what about clothes of mix blends ??? we could be here all day..........!!

the fact is that homosexuality was not the sin of soddom and gomorrah .......... and the homosexual activity they refer too in the bible is MALE PROSTITUTES! common amoung the romans. right there listed with female prostitutes. Jesus said nothing .. not one word about gays. He did refer to Eunichs........ men who never had sex with women from birth and prefered men to be like that.



think of it this way .............. it would be like a white family adopting a black baby while being predjuice , or belonging to the KKK or somehow stressing that baby was less than , shameful , sinful ............... would you let them adopt ??

would you let a couple adopt that didn't like blacks ? how about mexicans ? Jews ? would you let any backwards thinking person adopt ? well those beliefs about gays are just as backwards.

I think it,s rediculas for these people not to be able to foster, after all they have a good record and their arn,t enough foster homes where kids are treated with real love and careing! Having said that i also believe it,s every foster parents duty to teach children right from wrong, however i believe that when it comes to choosing who these kids are going to love is up to them! And though some kids may just experiment with being gay, if thats the way they are born, no amount of rules or effort to keep them from it is going to work! You,ll either drive them to suicide, or a very angry unhappy life, or a total breakdown! So i don,t agree with pushing a child as young as 10 to be one or the other, but raise them to be the best they can be, use their common sense, and realise it,s between them, their conscience, and the God they choose or choose not to follow! But first help them to grow into happy , confident, resposible human beings! The rest is up to them!

Yes it a sin along with lying, cheating, gossiping, lusting, envying, gluttony, dishonoring your parents, drunkenness and adultery. Oh wait a minute that about covers everyone you and I know, including ourselves, so if homosexuality is a sin then they are sinners just like the rest of us no greater no less they are in the same boat as us and need redemption.
Any Christian or non that thinks otherwise is guilty of judging and in danger of being judged themselves.

Irish

yes i did. i got myself out of the habbit of being bi and developed a stronger interest in women than men. and eventually became straight.

No God didn't ordain any of this ........... man did. this is opinion .

and relook what actually a homosexual is in the bible under Leviticus ....... this is about male prostitution.

and the bible is as much the word of God as this weeks tv guide. all based on the culture it was in.

I could write a God inspired book , and it truely be such , saying most of what was written in the bible is wrong..... God is just fine with gay people. God made them that way.

homosexuality is a choice...

http://www.queerbychoice.com/

edit: but weather or not you believe it, thats your opinion and i respect it.


P.S. i already know i'll be getting flamed for my opinion and link.

Ther you go saying what i,m thinking , but saying it much better than i could!

150 members...


I've been since 1982... I've met thousands of gay people. I have never ever met one who was one by choice. ever. all I can say that is a strange site.

Your absolutely right Ripley

Homosexuality is known to have a genetic foundation.

that's just it .......... between me and God . I haven't sinned in respects to sexuality. I'm only who he made me to be. no more no less. a sexually active joyful loving lesbian that sometimes gets tired of being seen or thought of as less than ........... second class.

perhaps you might wanna read the "Gay Gene" studies.

But if you are guilty of any of those on the list (even once in your life)your back in second class with the rest of us

yes ...... most are christian sites arguing against.... but most science thinks otherwise.


for example -

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/mg...y-genetics.html

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn...n-the-womb.html

first ... let me state I don't believe in sin ... but rather all we do is from Gods purpose. so all is as it should be in Gods eyes.


second class by our society ......... that will change soon enough. as will religion. both evolve or fade away. it's the nature of the beast.

Capeo and Lt Ripley, you seem to be under the misapprehension that this book I am recommending is filled with testimonials of people who are saying "Praise God that I am cured of my homosexuality". That is simply not the case. Many (indeed, most) of those testimonies of people who are still homosexuals, they just choose not to engage in homosexual sex.

Is it so hard to believe that there might be homosexuals who happen to be Christians who believe that how they feel should not be acted upon? After all, we have priests and monks who's Faith leads them to make a vow of celibacy. There is nothing fundamentally different here, is there.

I don't see how this is brainwashing.

~ Regards, PA

I'm not using the Old Testament to back my claims. I don't believe it is contextually accurate to use Leviticus 18 and Leviticus 20 to condemn homosexuality. The context in which those passages are written address the issue of homosexuality within the context of idol worship. There is nothing in the Old Testament that addresses the relationship between homosexuals in other contexts.

The New Testament, however, does have references to homosexuality, and despite the claims that the word is better translated as "male prostitute", there is no textual evidence in history to back the claim. The word is fairly unique. Of course if I were to play Devil's Advocate, that also means that the textual evidence supporting it as "homosexuality" is also just as lacking. But the context of the passages themselves seem to support homosexuality in this instance.

That said, I am not latching onto homosexuality with vehemence, nor obsession. Homosexuality is no different than any other sexual act outside of marriage. I speak out against pre-marital and extra-marital sex, as well as pornography, just as much as I do about homosexuality. That is not an obsession. That is keeping the topic in perspective. It is the non-Christians that are hell-bent (no pun intended) on turning homosexuality into such a big issue. *though to be fair, there are some - stress, SOME - groups of Christians that do place an unhealthy (and unbiblical) weight on the issue of homosexuality.

Just a few thoughts to consider.

~ Regards, PA

First, there are some Christians out there who do hold the Sabbath as Holy and do not work on the Sabbath. And like homosexuality, this law only applies IF YOU ARE CHRISTIAN. However, there are also other Christians who see Hebrews 4 as a spiritual fulfillment of the physical law of Sabbath keeping. Hebrews 4 speaks of us having a "Sabbath Rest" in heaven continually, through Jesus. By dwelling in Jesus we are partaking in that Sabbath Rest every day.

Whatever the case, I stand by my previous statement - if you are not Christian, then the law does not apply. But if you are, and if you do hold the opinion that the Sabbath is a Saturday, then you will find that they speak out against Christians working on Saturday just as much as any other sin (see Seventh-Day Adventists, for example - they will decry any mainstream protestant as not keeping the fourth commandment).

No disagreements with Sodom and Gomorrah. But Male Prostitution? As I mentioned in a previous post above, there is no textual indication that this is a correct interpretation. There is none against it either, so you have to read the New Testament passages which refer to it, and both of the contexts seem to support homosexual sex.

A few thoughts

~ Paranoid Android

actually this is a pretty good paper on the subject......

Homosexuality and the Bible

by Walter Wink


Professor of Biblical Interpretation, Auburn Theological Seminary, New York City.



http://www.bridges-across.org/ba/winkhombib.htm

The man who came up with that lied.

There are a lot of things that are part of so called Christian teachings that Jesus never saw fit to speak on. What you begin to notice is that the ones who shout from the rooftops about being Christian, are always correct. It makes no sense to question their tenuous arguments.



It seems maybe He wants them to enter into the priesthood from all the news lately.

Known by who? Certainly not by scientists. I have read the findings of many of the scientists who worked on this, and at best, they have been able to claim that they have found evidence that "may suggest a possible link to genetics", or something very similar. Additionally, I have also never seen the same study repeated with the same results. Repeatability is essential to the Scientific Method, is it not? If an experiment cannot be repeated with similar results, as has been observed that gay studies cannot, then it cannot be considered Scientific.

So who knows what you claim? If the scientists cannot say, then who else?

~ PA

Interesting article. He makes many good points and I agree with him in many areas (particularly concerning his discourse on divorce), and his plea for tolerance. However, there are many things i disagree with in his essay also. Being that this is the Spirituality, Religion and Beliefs board, I won't go too deeply into it, but suffice it to say there are holes. But then, he admits as much himself. I know the same can be said for my argument, which is why he calls for Respect and Love for others. I am happy to respect his beliefs (as I do respect all beliefs and all people regardless of sexual orientation). But in this instance, I cannot sanction them.

~ Regards, PA

well he's a respected scholar ... not as neutral as I'd like him to be , but very thoughtful nonetheless.

I'm also curious as to your credentials. Where you have taught and been the head of. how long in the feild ? and how much of the culture of the past you understand ?

religion has changed in it's stance to the bible. it has had too in order to survive this long. the bible may be a starting point for a culture mostly uneducated , living by superstition, but that is not today. It may have been a sin 2000 years ago to be 'gay' ( a term they didn't really understand except through prostutition) but that doesn't hold water especially with science today.

it's time for religions to grow up.

If this had been reversed and it was a homosexual couple this would have been all over the news. I know because Utah tried to pass a law keeping homosexual couples from being foster parents.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/dispomim.cgi?id=306995

Gene switch altered worm's sexual orientation?


for the arguement of not even all identical twins born are both gay ===that some use to show it isn't genetic.

just within the past few weeks they have discoved that genes between 'identical twins' isn't the same...

Identical Twins Often Have Different DNA
Thursday, February 21, 2008

By Charles Q. Choi


Identical twins may not be nearly as identical as once believed.

Research in 2005 found that identical twins differ in how their genes express themselves.

Now scientists have learned that all identical twins may actually differ genetically from their partners to some degree.


from Fox news . so it must be right
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331728,00.html


"Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the life cycle, possibly even before birth. It is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different moral values and standards of a particular culture." Statement on Homosexuality, American Psychological Association, 1994-JUL.


http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_caus6.htm

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_caus4.htm


trust me ...... the evidence is leaning biological. and no doubt will prove it. why ? because we have years and years of data showing gays being born in straight houses to good parents with straight siblings. raised the same.
there are homes with large amounts of siblings were 2 or more are gay , yet still the majority straight.years and years of data of straight kids being born into gay homes.

the old erroneous addage of a strong mother weak father or absent father or abuse is nonsense. any educated professional worth thier degree knows this.

yes , but the homosexual couple wasn't trying to warp a kid by telling them in thier beliefs that they were sinful , less than and 'going to hell'.