Quote Originally Posted by mhailey View Post
While this may be true in Oz (I make no comment on their laws), in the US this is far from true.
On the other hand the case under discussion is in UK and has nothing to do with US laws, so your comments on US laws are irrelevant.

Quote Originally Posted by mhailey View Post
This is my problem with the issue presented in this thread. The unpopular minority (or shall I say unpopular silent majority) is being denied the ability to foster a child because of their unpopular speech.
And then you have to also consider the same argument for the other side. Potentially homosexual child (minority) is being placed under the authority of people who believe that child is constantly acting out of his/her free choice against their beliefs.
Now to my knowledge the current laws in UK and US do not consider homosexuality to be a crime or aberrant behavior, anymore and that is fairly important.

My question is why you, being a lawyer, appear so concerned with the protection of a religious minority i.e. the parents but don't even consider the possibility of the rights of a homosexual minority. Seems like a personal bias trumping professional integrity. But setting that apart which minority rights are more worthy of protection in this case?