Lentaubman, I have no problem with fundamentalist Muslims fostering children. They’d be excellent candidates for Muslim children needing a placement.

Placing children ideally should be case by case, find the most suitable family for each child. This hardly ever happens but hey we can all dream.

lentaubman

My view is that a true fundamentalist Muslims are not fit to be a foster parent because the parents would be trying to follow the teachings of Mohammed and inflict this on the child. Compare Mohammeds teachings with the teachings of Christ and you will get the drift. The same would be the case with many secular fundamentalist who pursue the immoral lifestyle of many of their high priest and then encourage their kids in it.

A person can't be a Christian unless they believe in the fundamentals of the Christian faith (ie Christ's death and resurrection, the need of a Saviour etc). This belief is not forced on anyone but is received by revelation and by reason. Many kids grow up very happy in Christian fundamentalist homes without ever converting themselves. Free will and choice is not taken from them. The boys (in most cases) and girls (never)are not circumcized which among girls is a barbaric practice.

Many moderate Muslims (who don't follow Mohammed's) teachings would make good loving moral foster parents. Probably more so than most secularist.

Runner

Thanks for your answer. But you do see the difficulty here? A secular state cannot favour one religion over another. The moment it does so it ceases to be secular.

The more I think about this the more it seems to me we have a real can of worms here.

How far do we inquire into the personal beliefs of foster or adoptive parents?

Inevitably foster parents and adoptive parents will impart some of their beliefs to those entrusted to their care. In our household it would not fostered or adopted kids long to figure out that we:

*Do not practise any religion

*Take global warming seriously but think the Greens are a bunch of watermelon wollies

*Oppose the funding by government of religious schools

*Agree with John Howard on “border security”

*Tend to sympathise with the Israeli side in the Arab-Israeli conflict

I guess for many people that would make us unsuitable foster / adoptive parents.

On the other hand, as Jewely asks, what about couples that are outright racist in their beliefs? And how would you define “racist”? You may or may not consider Islamophobia to be a great evil but is it any more racist than Christianophobia?

I can pose these questions but I have no answers.

This, however, I do know. Take Christian couples out of the equation and the whole foster care system would collapse

Here is a case involving gay adoptions. It is a rough mirror image of the original case on this thread.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1329547/Tribunal-fight-Christian-doctor-axed-panel-gay-adoption-row.html

Tribunal fight for Christian doctor axed by panel in gay adoption row

"Dr Matthews, a Christian since she was a teenager, said she had concluded after years of research that gay households were not as good for vulnerable children as a father and mother.

"Rather than voting against the gay applicants, however, she told the head of Northamptonshire’s adoption team that she would abstain.

"In April last year, however, she was summoned to a meeting with the head of children’s services. A month later, she was removed as a full member of the panel. In August, the NHS Primary Care Trust, which had allowed her to continue as the medical adviser without voting rights, replaced her in this role. In March this year she resigned.

"Dr Matthews said the council had acted unreasonably as only a tiny number of cases involved gay couples, and it would have been easy to allow her to abstain or find a substitute for her on the panel on those occasions."

Here is how the Guardian reported the case of Eunice and Owen Johns

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1329547/Tribunal-fight-Christian-doctor-axed-panel-gay-adoption-row.html

lentaubman

you write
'Thanks for your answer. But you do see the difficulty here? A secular state cannot favour one religion over another. The moment it does so it ceases to be secular.'

That is exactly what is wrong with a secular state. How can a state holding totally contradictory standards make a decision on these issues. That is why we end up with so many abused kids. When our society was based largely on Christian values things were far from perfect but much better than now.

We now have the State deciding that it is fine to go with parents who would encourage kids to mimick perverse acts such as ga ga and then oppose parents who might smack their kids for rebellion. Secularism with its moral relativism just leads to contradiction and hypocrisy.

You are right that it is a can of worms made more so by political correctness winning out over commonsense. The sad part is that fundamentalist secularist would rather a child placed in a drug filled immoral home than a loving Christian family that would teach the child biblical values. We saw recently a young aboriginal girl being packed raped because the pc brigade insisted that she be placed with people of her own skin colour. I wish this was an isolated incident.

“This, however, I do know. Take Christian couples out of the equation and the whole foster care system would collapse.”

Inshalla, it is nothing but a mess of alternative abuses visited on children that exit the system worse off than their peers.