Child’s interests must come first in fostering

I HAVE some sympathy for the Christian couple who lost their court battle over the rights of foster carers (Yorkshire Post, March 1).

They could have remained silent about their views on homosexuality: nor is there any reason to believe that they are not “prepared to love and accept any child”.

Moreover, many children, happy and unhappy, have been raised by carers or parents who have never been questioned about their spirituality or attitude to sex.

However, it is disingenuous of Eunice and Owen Johns to suggest that they were being asked “to tell a small child that the practice of homosexuality was a good thing”. They have been asked nothing of the sort.

“Promotion” of homosexuality is a myth spread by anti-gay propagandists. Homosexuality and heterosexuality are neither good nor bad: they are a fact of life. I also wonder if the couple in question have been influenced by the message from ante-diluvian former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey that individuals should unconditionally stand up for their rights to follow the scriptures.

The law courts’ concern that a negative attitude to homosexuality could be harmful to a child within a Christian family is not without foundation. The child’s interests must be paramount. What if that child is homosexual? What if that child thinks that God doesn’t love him or her because of the way he or she feels? And who, when the term of foster care ends, will be left to pick up the pieces?

The most cogent remarks I have ever heard on parenting came from England cricketer Steven Davies, who knew from an early age that he was gay. He is grateful to his parents for their understanding. Many other gay youngsters, he testifies, have been less fortunate.