How disgusting that peoples grandchildren have
been taken away from them and will now be at risk of being sodomised
against their will. Those who made this decision should be arrested and
tried for aiding and abetting criminal behaviour.
These grandparents were only 46 and 59 so
obviously the intention was for some pervert to hand the children over
to his mates.
It is time that the word Gay was made a criminal
offence when used in conjunction with filthy perverts.
Sodomy is the correct
terminology - look it up in the dictionary.
Now look up the word Gay and see
if you feel guilty if you have used it in connection with sodomites!
It is time the
people took control and rescued the morals and welfare of their country
and punished the criminals responsible for giving sodomites open access
to paedophilia.
'They say we're too old to care for our grandchildren':
Social workers hand brother and sister to gay men for adoption
By Graham Grant and Marcello Mega
Last updated at 4:14 PM on 28th January 2009
Embrace for comfort: The grandparents
yesterday were distraught
Two young children are to be
adopted by a gay couple, despite the protests of their grandparents.
The
devastated grandparents were told they would never see the youngsters
again unless they dropped their opposition.
The couple, who cannot be named,
wanted to give the five-year-old boy and his four-year-old sister a
loving home themselves. But they were ruled to be too old - at 46 and 59.
For two years they fought for
their rights to care for the children, whose 26-year- old mother is a
recovering heroin addict.
They agreed to an adoption only after they faced being financially crippled by
legal bills.
The final blow came when they
were told the children were going to a gay household, even though several heterosexual couples wanted them.
When the grandfather protested, he was told: 'You can either accept it, and there's a
chance you'll see the children twice a year, or you can take that
stance and never see them again.'
The man said last night: 'It
breaks my heart to think that our grandchildren are being forced to
grow up in an environment without a mother figure. We are not
prejudiced, but I defy anyone to explain to us how this can be in their
best interests.'
Social workers themselves have
admitted that the little girl is 'more wary' of men than women.
The case, in Edinburgh, raises
worrying issues about state interference in family life.
It will also fuel concern over
the practice of gay adoption, which has been promoted by Left-wing
ministers and council bosses.
Some local authorities forbid
adoption by smokers and obese people but actively support gay fostering
and adoption - even though research
shows overwhelmingly that children are best brought up by a mother and
father.
The grandparents first stepped in
because the children's mother was unable to look after them.
But council social workers became
worried that the grandparents' ages and health problems meant they
would also be unable to care for the children properly. (As if sodomites would care for them properly! This is
the filth that my mother used to warn me about as a child N.M.)
The 59-year-old grandfather, a
farm worker, has angina while his wife is receiving medication for
diabetes.
The children were taken into
foster care during the two years of court hearings.
When the grandparents eventually
conceded defeat, they were assured by social workers that they would
still have regular contact with them.
The fostering arrangement worked
well, but the council decided that the children should be adopted, to
give them a permanent home.
The grandparents agreed - as long as they could be assured that the adoptive
parents would be a loving mother and father.
The couple were then told an
adoption had been arranged - but the grandfather 'hit the roof' when he
discovered that the adoptive parents were two gay men.
Social workers dealing with the
case admitted that heterosexual couples who were approved as adoptive
parents had also been keen to adopt the children.
The decision was taken even though a confidential social work
report - now part of the court records held by the grandparents -
contained that the little girl is generally not as happy around men.
The report says she 'has tended
to be more wary of males in general.'
Her grandparents insist they are
not homophobic.
But they reject the view of
social workers that the decision to allow the gay couple to adopt the
children was made 'in accordance with who can best meet their needs.'
When they made their opposition
clear, however, the couple were told that social workers would
'certainly look' at allowing them access to the children 'when you are able to come back with an open mind on
the issues'.
The grandfather was told by a
social worker: 'If you couldn't support the children [in the gay
adoption], if you were having contact and couldn't support the
children, and were showing negative feelings, it wouldn't be in their
best interests for contact to take place.'
He said last night: 'The ideal
for any child is to have a loving father and a loving mother in their
lives.
'But in our society the mother is
generally the cornerstone of the family and the most important person
for a young child.'
His wife added: 'It's so
important for children to fit in, and I feel our grandchildren will be
marked out from the start when they draw pictures of their two dads.'
The last time the couple saw
their grandchildren was shortly after the agreement for them to be
adopted but before the decision to place them with a gay couple.
They took dozens of photographs
and tried, for the sake of the youngsters, not to break down.
'Granny, I'm not going to see you
for a very long time,' said the five-year-old boy. 'Maybe when I'm in
Primary Seven I'll be able to see you.'
'We'll try our very hardest to
see you soon,' said his grandmother, choking back tears.
The boy told his grandfather:
'Grandad, if you want to see me you will have to pick me up because I
will be a very long way away.'
Then he added innocently: 'We are
getting a new mummy and daddy.'
A spokesman for the Roman
Catholic church condemned the council's decision last night, warning
that the children's welfare could be jeopardised.
Peter Kearney said: 'This is a
devastating decision which will have a serious impact on the welfare of
the children involved.
'There is an overwhelming body of
evidence showing that same-sex relationships are inherently unstable
and reduce the life expectancy of those involved.
'With this in mind, the social
work department has deliberately ignored evidence which undermines
their decision and opted for politically correct posturing rather than
providing stability and protection.
'It is impossible to see how this
decision is in the best interests of the children.'
The City of Edinburgh Council
said last night that it could not comment on individual cases.
Adoption by gay couples in
Scotland was approved by MSPs in 2006 - despite an official
consultation process which showed that nearly 90 per cent of people
opposed it.