(Untitled)

[rickbot]

I would never argue it is one of my gay rights to tell a child they're inferior for being black or Christian, so I wonder why some people think the opposite might be acceptable.

Comments

[absinthecity]

Quite. I think the woman involved was on the radio this morning and it struck me even while mostly asleep that it was possibly the most ludicrous thing I'd ever heard...

[vardebedian]

The issue is not really one of rights, IMO, but of harm. The child has a, let's say, 10% chance of being gay. Of course two maniacs who will tell him that this is morally wrong can't be responsible for his upbringing.

The only thing wrong with this decision is that it isn't being applied to all parents, not just the ones who adopt or foster.

[rickbot]

Well, I would view the 'right' as being the right not to be harmed, so I guess we're on the same page. A 'right' should rarely permit you to infringe on anothers rights ... but I guess it is hardly surprising that Christians might believe they have the right to persecute harmless children.

[editor]

It's one rule for Christians and another for Herod.

[rickbot]

Exactly! The Christians get to run around fucking and eating toast, while Herod just has to lie dead like he has for the past 2,000 years.

[elaine314]

yeh, apparently they would 'talk to the child about where it was coming from'. This made me remarkably irritated in a 'but is the problem not astonishingly obvious' way, presumably as I currently recieve my info via the Telegraph.