|
Did anyone catch that UCC's general synod voted today to approve a resolution to endorse same-sex marriage?
Andy, I hope you don't mind if I expand this discussion, but it really touches on a concern I have about the foster care system. The foster to adopt siblings we had in our home last year came from a group home. It was supported by a religious organization and the children who lived there were required to attend a church that held very conservative Christian views. Our transition was made more difficult as a result, because the girls came to us believing there was only one "right" way to pray, one "right" thing to believe, etc. They also had a very strong sense of what was "good" and "bad" - which created a whole other set of beliefs we had to deal with. Anyway, we had taken them to the church we go to on Father's Day and our minister also took a moment to recognize single mom's who are both mom's and dad's to their children as well as lesbian couples with children, who also play both roles. One of the girls asked me what he meant and I explained that was when two women make a commitment to one another or get married. Her response shocked me. It was one that she could have only gotten from an adult in her life, do to the religious aspects of her response as well as knowing the houseparents who cared for her, it wasn't a stretch to figure out where. I can't remember exactly, but something about it being "gross" and a sin. This all happened in a matter of whispered moments in our pew and the whole thing unseated me for a minute. Anna was on the other side of her and just said quickly everybody should have someone to love them and it doesn't matter if they are a man or woman. That got us through the moment, but it opened up alot of discussions later on.
My issue is this... While the group home was supported by a religious organization, it recieved STATE MONEY!!!! As a result, they are not allowed to discriminate against a child based on race, religion, etc. But, shouldn't they also not be allowed to teach the children discriminatory viewpoints. They don't have any control over whether a child goes back to there parents, whether they're adopted or who they're adopted by, so how in the world are they able to force their religious beliefs on these kids. They could have easily have come from or been matched with a family of a different faith or a different sexual orientation.
The sadest and hardest part for us was that I feel they took advantage of the girls vulnerability - they were desperate for ANYTHING to believe in. That they found comfort in a belief in God was something I thought was positive, but the fundamentalist aspects of those beliefs was a real area of struggle. A group home should be a temporary situation, therefore IMO, it is not the place to teach a narrow definition of values - especially if the child has no choice in the matter. By definition a child who has been taken from the only family they know (no matter how horrific the situation) has no ability to make such a choice for themselves while in a temporary home. Instead, the specific aspects of belief should have been left for the child's permanent family to teach, whether they return to their families or become a part of a new one through adoption.
Anyone have thoughts on this?
|