kowenicki said:
I realise these children will be under the court of protection and so society has a say in how hey they are raised, but this family was normal and political ideologies should not even be under scrutiny. |
No need to get particularly passionate about this with me; I'm just asking a question.
Anyhow, I don't see why it's necessary that a family with hateful ideologies would be unwilling to foster. I mean, a lot of what we would call hateful used to be the norm at some point not too far back, did it not? And it's a bit unfair to say that old-fashioned people would be unwilling to foster. As such, I'd say it's easily possible for some over-conservative but good-natured people to want to be foster parents.
Of course, whether or not society should stop fringe ideologies from being propagated by foster parents at all is the bigger question here. While most people would agree that, past a certain point of deviating morally from the norm, we should try to stop them (neo-nazis, for example, should certainly not be allowed to be foster parents, I'm guessing), this whole idea seems to have a very over-controlling government air to it.
As I said before, though, from what I see in this article, this particular case is entirely unjustified.
“These are my principles; if you don’t like them, I have others.” – Groucho Marx







