\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n

Make no mistake: The Cultural Marxists who dominate many governments and government bureaucracies across this Dominion hate and despise believing Christians. And while there’s never been a special accommodation for a hijab or turban they haven’t embraced, they seek to exclude Christians from meaningful participation in society.<\/span><\/div>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n

The\u00a0National Post’s<\/u><\/span>\u00a0(May 2, 2018) intrepid Christie Blatchford reports: “<\/span>An Edmonton couple rejected as adoptive parents because of their religiously grounded beliefs about homosexuality and gender now have been approved.\u00a0Throughout the complex process \u2014 which involved an orientation course, a home study, three personal interviews and extensive reference checks \u2014 the couple had made it clear that while they were Evangelical Christians, they would support and love any child regardless.\u00a0The husband was adopted himself as a newborn, and the wife said her heart ached for \u201cthe older children in foster care that I have met, who I know are unlikely to ever get adopted because of their age.\u00a0‘I want to offer kids like these a home and show them that they are valued.’\u00a0They are unable to conceive because of medical complications.<\/div>\n

$\"\"$ \u201cWe would never reject a child in our care,\u201d the wife said in an affidavit prepared for court. The Edmonton couple were earlier\u00a0<\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The mysterious change of mind from Alberta Child and Family Services came quietly in December last year, a month after the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms in Calgary took on the couple\u2019s case and lawyer Jay Cameron filed an application in the Alberta Court of Queen\u2019s Bench for judicial review of the decision.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

He alleged religious discrimination, saying the denial breached the couple\u2019s Charter rights to religious freedom, and accused the government of attempting to coerce the couple \u201cto abandon\u201d their deeply held beliefs as a prerequisite to adoption.<\/span><\/p>\n

‘This is the essence of religious discrimination,’\u00a0 Cameron said.”<\/span><\/p>\n

There’s a lesson here. Those victimized by the Cultural Marxists must not suffer in silence. As soon as they obtained competent legal help and went to Court, the socialist government facin an election in about a year, beat a tactical retreat.<\/span><\/p>\n

“A spokeswoman for the ministry, Karin Campbell, confirmed in an e-mail the ministry had ‘rescinded’ the earlier decision and said, ‘Families are not denied adoptions based on religious beliefs\u2026’\u00a0Yet clearly, this one had been.\u00a0The couple\u2019s file was assigned to the Catholic Social Services (CSS) for the home study and background checks.\u00a0The ‘CSS practitioner’\u00a0 asked a series of questions about sexuality, including how the couple would handle a child who was questioning their sexuality. The couple said they\u2019d explain their beliefs and reassure the child of their love. The practitioner asked how they\u2019d handle a child engaged in \u201csexual exploration\u201d and if they\u2019d encourage it. The wife said while they\u2019d be willing to discuss it, they wouldn\u2019t encourage sexual exploration, as they believe sexuality shouldn\u2019t be experienced or explored until after marriage.<\/p>\n

In February of last year, the practitioner told the couple, who are identified only as C.D. and N.D. in court documents, she was \u201cpleased to recommend\u201d them.\u00a0<\/span>But when the home study report was completed, it said the couple wasn\u2019t \u201caccepting of homosexuality\u201d and that this was \u201ca concern that cannot be mitigated.\u00a0In March, the couple was told Child and Family Services had further questions regarding their \u201cviews about sexuality\u201d: How exactly would they support a child questioning their sexuality? What if the child had a gay biological relative?\u00a0The wife responded and frankly answered that ‘Biblical principles are the foundation of our home \u2026 As such, we believe that homosexuality is wrong. We will not treat sexuality as something to be \u2018discovered or explored\u2019\u2026.\u201d And, she said, they believe that \u201cgender and sexuality are determined at birth.\u201d<\/p>\n

But she also said that she and her husband recognize that ‘young adults will choose what they wish to choose. Our hope is that by providing a stable, loving home and openly discussing our values (and reasons for them) with our children, they would want to follow our example.\u00a0<\/span>Ultimately,’ she wrote, ‘a parent\u2019s love is not, and should not be, given based on the decisions and actions of a child. It\u2019s unconditional and filled with grace and mercy\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

That led to even more questions, among them: Does that mean there are two genders (male\/female) and one sexual orientation (heterosexual)? Do you believe that people choose to be homosexual or that they choose to act on their homosexuality?\u00a0<\/span>Again, the wife replied for the couple, and said in essence, \u201cour view is that acting on feelings of same-sex attraction is a choice, and thus, homosexuality is a choice.’<\/p>\n

Later that month, the practitioner called them, telling them ‘you are a great couple’ and ‘you\u2019d be great parents,’ but that her supervisors were concerned they might return’ a child if he or she struggled with their sexuality.” [Don’t forget this is the Catholic Children’s Aid Society whose faith also supposedly teaches that God created two sexes and that the practise of homosexuality is wrong.]<\/span><\/p>\n

“With tears streaming down her face, the wife said in an affidavit prepared for court, she told the woman ‘we would never do such a thing\u2026 We would never reject a child in our care.’\u00a0<\/span>Later that night, the couple got a rejection letter with the explanation that they ‘would be unable to help a child who has sexual identity issues.’\u00a0They were crushed and angry that their views had been misinterpreted.\u00a0‘We accept that same-sex relationships exist,’ the wife said in the affidavit, ‘and that same-sex marriage is a legal reality.\u00a0Further, we accept that other people have different views than ours on this subject, and we respect their freedom to both hold that view and act in accordance with that view. Further still, and most importantly, we have and will continue to treat all same-sex attracted individuals with respect.’\u00a0But she said, ‘It seemed as though all our answers to her questions were not the answers she was looking for or were grossly misinterpreted\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

In a final meeting last May, the couple met two staff from Alberta Child and Family Services, an adoptions caseworker and a supervisor.\u00a0<\/span>The supervisor told them their religious beliefs about sexuality were incompatible with the adoption process.\u00a0What\u2019s more, she told them, this was ‘the official position of the Alberta government.’\u201d<\/p>\n

Promoting the homosexual agenda and discriminating against Christians was “the official position of the Alberta government.” And would have been had this brave couple not called them on it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

functions.php on line 5373