A CHRISTIAN couple who fostered 28 children have been forced to quit be*cause they refuse to promote homosexuality. Vincent Matherick, 65, and wife Pauline, 61, have also had their 11-year-old foster son removed from their care after their failure to sign a contract enforcing sexual equality. They say social services told them they must tell children it is “good” to be homosexual. They must also take them to gay meetings if they were curious about same-sex relationships. The Mathericks’ “crime” was to refuse to sign, on principle, an agreement implementing new laws which promote sexual equality. The couple say they neither condemn nor condone homosexuality but cannot promote it because of their religious beliefs. Officials told them they would be taken off the foster carers’ register and be unable to care for any more children if they objected – which they did. Their 11-year-old foster son, who has been with them for two years, will go to a council hostel. Mr Matherick, a retired travel agent who is now a Christian minister, said they had been forced to retire from fostering rather than be deregistered. The primary school governor said: “I could not agree to do it because it is against my central beliefs. We have never discriminated against anybody but I cannot preach the benefits of homosexuality when I believe it is against the word of God.” The Mathericks have three children of their own, six grandchildren and one great-grandchild and both are ministers at the non-conformist South Chard Christian Church, near their home in Chard, Somerset. They began fostering in 2001, taking in single mothers with their babies, and then moved on to caring for children of primary school age. In the last seven years they have fostered 28 children through Somerset County Council’s social services and are still in contact with many. In February a social worker arrived at their home to tell them about the implementation of the Sexual Orientation Regulations which outlaws discrimination on the grounds of sexuality. Mr Matherick says an official told them: “You have to agree to promote homosexuality. If you don’t, you will be deregistered.” The couple have decided to retire rather than be humiliated. They asked if they could continue caring for their foster son until he was found another home but the council refused. Mrs Matherick said they had been forced to hide the truth of the row from their foster son and simply say they were retiring. “He was very upset,” she said. “We are all very close but he’s a mature young man and he’s dealing with it. I hope he doesn’t find out about the reality.” Mr Matherick said: “It’s terrible that we’ve been forced into this corner. There are not enough foster carers around anyway without these rules. They said we had to be prepared to talk about sexuality with 11-year-olds and to explain how gay people date. “They said we would even have to take a teenager to gay association meetings. How can I do that when it’s against what I believe? “I can’t condone homosexuality but we don’t con*front people about it.” Somer*set Council, which has 72 children which it is unable to house with foster parents, said the row was “not about promoting homosexuality but about carers being aware of equality issues.” Charlotte Thorneycroft of Christ*ian Concern for Our Nation, said it was “discrimination against Christians” to stop a couple fostering because of their belief in the traditional family. Tory MP David Davies said: “I’m certain social services would never dare to ask a member of any other established religion to agree to such a stance on homosexuality.” The Mathericks will fight the case with the help of the Lawyers’ Christian Fellowship
While I agree that it's unreasonable to enforce the law (on sexual equality), HOWEVER, and that's a HUGE however, I don't think it's very truthful of them to say that they do not "condemn" homosexuality. Which part of "neither condemn nor condone homosexuality" is it to "disagree being open-minded about it" (as indicated to their reluctance towards letting their foster children explore same-sex relationship via gay meetings)? If they do not CONDEMN homosexuality, what is so problematic about taking their foster children to gay meetings if they were curious about same-sex relationships? Pushing their attitude (which is condemning, by the way) towards homosexuality onto their religious belief DO NOT, and I repeat, DO NOT, means that they are neutral on the matter. And I think the Tory MP is retarded, they fragging inflict such discriminating attitude/stance towards common law, homosexuality, non-religious folks. Somehow THAT is okay? Hypocrisy.
