Rotherham Foster Carers

Anyway, this isn’t a thread about the EU, but some politically-motivated council employee who couldn’t care less about the lives she destroys.

@sceptical guy wrote:

forging a Christmas card to Kenty from Terry

Shouldn’t that be ‘farraging’?

@terry wrote:

@rusty trawler wrote:

intelligence is a social construct and it requires the ability to take on board ideas and concepts that you might not necessarily agree with and to put them under some sort of rational analysis.

Concepts that I “might not necessarily agree with” always come after my “rational analysis” of them. What you need to try is a bit of research and establish your own view of the EU and its benefits (if any exist).

Reread my previous posts, take a look at your replies. Then let me know if that rings true.

Don’t bother, I can take a decent stab at guessing your reply.

@mrs_teapot wrote:

Ive just listened to an interview with the foster parents and I stand by my original thoughts on this case. The kids should have stayed put there was no need whatsoever in my view for them to be removed.

It seems the mere mention of the name UKIP brings out the very worst in people.. I have never voted UKIP but because I have started to doubt if we should be in the EU I have started looking at their policies. I’ll be honest I haven’t seen anything in them I think is racist. I’m not persuaded to vote for them yet, Im still waiting for an informed debate on the EU…so who knows?

I dont think the kids should be returned to the carers now…. I fear they would be stigmatized any damage has been done by moving them….. I just hope their best interests are what matters now and not political point scoring.

That’s been my suspicion all along, re the Rotherham carers, Mrs T. I have a nasty feeling that it’s some insensitive blundering by Social Services – it’s not unknown.

If it’s more than that, then we’ll know pdq, as party fortunes are at stake in the by-election at Rotherham tomorrow.

You’re wise to keep your powder dry on the EU. Most people in this country want out at the moment; I don’t think that will be the case once a campaign takes place. But the EU now is in deep crisis over the Eurozone, and is changing to meet the crisis in fundamental ways.. How it changes won’t be known for a couple of years, and then we can sit and assess. That’s when a referendum is likely. I know where my hopes lie.

@sceptical guy wrote:

@terry wrote:

Having been on the receiving end of several of your limp-wristed insults…

I see the UKIP candidate for Rotherham has denounced gay foster-parenting.

They do seem to have an obsession, don’t they?

I think that whether the foster-parents are UKIP members, BNP members, Communists, or gay should have nothing to do with the issue. It should be whether theya re caring parents.

In Principle, it’s easy to agree with you, but it is possible to be a caring foster parent and hold views which although perfectly legal, despite how others feel about them, may be detrimental to the welfare of the children. For example, if potential foster-parents believed sexuality is primarily a lifestyle choice rather than something innate and that ‘errant’ sexuality can be medicated and therapeutically treated, my opinion is that it would be ill-advised to place certain children of a very specific nature under their care.

People are entitled to maintain the beliefs they choose, despite how reprehensible I or other people may find them. It’s when they impinge on the lives of others that it becomes a public issue. I think we are fortunate to live in a society were it is deemed unacceptable to maintain sexist, racist, homophobic and other similar views, but we can’t prevent such thinking being prevalent with some people. However, we can seek to prevent such views causing harm by using legislation and social influence.

I think this is was the intention of Rotherham Council although they may have been misguided. I don’t think there is sufficient information about how they made their decision to hold a properly informed opinion about this. It seems like this information will be withheld anyway.