UK & World News
- 27 November 2012, 9:11
UKIP Member Says Gay Adoption Is 'Child Abuse'
A leading member of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) has called for a ban on gay people adopting.
Winston McKenzie, the culture spokesman for UKIP, said placing children with gay or lesbian couples was "child abuse".
The former boxer, who is standing in the Croydon North by-election on Thursday, told the Metro newspaper: "To say to a child, 'I am having you adopted by two men who kiss regularly but don't worry about it' - that is abuse.
"It is a violation of a child's human rights because that child has no opportunity to grow up under normal circumstances."
Ben Summerskill, chief executive of gay rights charity Stonewall, replied: "These 19th Century views are not acceptable in the 21st Century."
Mr McKenzie's comments come days after Rotherham Council removed three children from a South Yorkshire couple because of their membership of UKIP.
Social workers said they were concerned about the children's "cultural and ethnic needs".
The Labour-controlled local authority has launched an investigation into the move following criticism from across the political spectrum.
UKIP leader Nigel Farage condemned it as "outrageous", while Education Secretary Michael Gove said the decision was "indefensible".
The unnamed husband and wife have said council leaders should consider resigning after they failed to apologise for their actions.
They told the Daily Telegraph they felt "slandered and besmirched" after social workers took the ethnic minority children away.
"They should be considering their position," the husband said.
"These are people on incredible salaries who are paid to make responsible decisions but they can't do it.
"It's completely baffling that they just can't put their hands up. They say this is a complex case but we don't agree. It's very simple."
In his statement on Monday, council leader Roger Stone said he had received an initial report from his officials on what he described as a "very complex case".
He said: "The Secretary of State for Education has asked for an inquiry relating to this case over the weekend. The council welcomes this. We will work very closely with and give full co-operation to the department."
Update:
Hello, regular commenting on Orange News and Sport pages closes on Thursday 30 May 2013. We will continue to provide a commenting facility on major news and sport events on orangeworld.co.uk. Contact us via http://oran.ge/OWfeedback if you have any further questions. Thanks.
what do you think?
Edgar Beckett
Couldn`t agree more but That particular candidate of that particular party at this particular time ? Who is is up to what ?
Russell6730
I totally agree 100% with UKIP's view on same sex child adoption.
Kerry Carline
Well then you have very warped views.we no longer live in the dark ages and it's people like you that harm.disgusting
Russell6730
I still agree with UKIP and whats more I still think its abusive to children and downright immoral.
Kerry Carline
U say it's abusive i say why?????
Kerry Carline
This comment has been removed for violations of our Terms and Conditions.
simon calvert
Kerry, just because the view is opted to yours it does not mean its warped, perhaps traditional and with all good will, the point is there are many decent homes with loving heterosexual couples that the children could go to rather than going to part of a social cleansing experiment for those obsessed with same sex partners able to have families which by the laws of nature they cannot. The abuse I believe to which is being referred to is that of ridicule at school day in day out making life a living bullying Hell for those children that are being used as part of this experiment. In an ideal world this wouldn't happen, however it does, its human nature.
Kerry Carline
Oh please simon.in todays society that would be a very rare thing.get your head out of the dark and open your eyes.and how dare you say it's an experiment.every man and woman has the right to be a parent as long as they can care for and love,and maybe if more same s ex couples were to adopt then the world would be a more accepting place and there wouldnt be as many small minded biggoted people with views like yours.refering to your comment about their are many people (hetrosexual) that children can go to,why do u think that so many are still in care???? the number or children in care far outweighs families wanting to adopt.
simon calvert
"every man and woman has the right to be a parent" what a selfish attitude.. No one had the right,a child is not a possession, its people with that attitude thinking of themselves that gives such blinkered ideals. I don't have an objection in principle in an ideal world however, its selfish to not take the childrens suffering into consideration.
Kerry Carline
Simon you have a very bad attitude and a very annoying habbit of twisting peoples words to satisfy your judgement of people.itis not at all selfish to want and have the right to have a child and who said a child is a possesion?????? Stop putting words into peoples mouthes.you must live in a world of your own to assume that every cgld would be bullied and as a lot have pointed out to you on here.it's the bullying and biggots that need educating.i find you very offensive and im sure im not on my own.
infamousaljones
Children put up for adoption are better with same sex couples than repeatedly being fostered or care homes, fact. Plus most councils have no chance with adoption, do people realise how long it takes for courts to put it through?! Not fair on anyone, especially those most needy.
simon calvert
You adopt a spurious line here and are twisting your words... Can you tell me if you think that children would be better off in a steady heterosexual home rather than a steady hom isexual home?
simon calvert
Why is it people on here can't answer straight questions but can thumb down?
john
David Cameron speaking on LBC described UKIP members as loony racists, he can now add homophobic to that as well.
simon calvert
Well if you like David Cameron that says more about you I'd be worried about.
john
Eh?
Nat_j2b
So instead it's better to place the child in home after home? If g ay couples are able and proven to be suitable then what is the big deal? It's just mindless homophobia! As for the UKIP couple... If they were deemed unsuitable why let the children stay with them in the first place?! Would have saved the children a lot of confusion! And why the heck won't orange let us post the word g ay but they can??!?!!
Edgar Beckett
How do such couples prove themselves to be able and suitable ?
gengisken1227
Except these UKIP foster parents had been foster parents for many years and previously been Labour voters,...........they were "suitable" foster parents before
simon calvert
Why do you think a stable g ay home makes a more suitable environment than a stable heterosexual home?
El Bubsio
Nat didn't say that it would be more suitable, only that it doesn't make a difference. Putting words into people's mouths isn't helping your case. And twisting someone's words after accusing someone else of the same does you no favours either.
simon calvert
I'm not asking for favours I'm asking a question.
Tricky One
Simon, who has suggested a g ay home is a more stable environment ?
Louisa Gieldon
Nat i agree with your point that stability is much more important to children than the particular make up of the family. Stability is what kids thrive on - have worked with so many young people who have had placement after placement, numbering into the twenties and thirties sometimes. Those kids just wanted safety, stability and a bit of affection thrown in. It is mindless homophobia and in 2012 it shouldn't be happening.
Russell6730
This should be a warning to any heterosexual couple with children.If the relationship fails. The council could use your kids as political pawns and end up with same sex carers. The implications could be un thinkable......UKIP are correct
Tricky One
Scaremongering nonsense
El Bubsio
How is placing kids with a caring, supportive couple using them as pawns? And what are these Earth shattering implications?
john
The UKIP supporters are only reinforcing David Cameron's view that they are indeed, loony racists with an added touch of homophobia.
simon calvert
For starters john, its not just ukip who believe this its labour supporters, lib dems, conservatives,greens even so, even though it maybe this members point of view it is a widespread view by much of the nation... an ideal situation and the best is for a child to be brought up by a loving heterosexual couple in a steady nurturing environment, this gives the child balance of both sexes, giving them the best opportunity to develop. Its not wrong to want to have a family it is natural whether g ay or not, however it is not in the best interest of the child to be placed in an "alternative" environment.
El Bubsio
Simon's right. Sadly homophobia is a widespread problem and needs to be tackled.
peter brady
Rotherham council were correct in their assessment of UKIP: Racist, homophobic, ignorant and just a single issue pressure group. The UKIP ship will sink soon enough. This is their short moment in the sun.
simon calvert
Absolute nonsense, this is the sort of rhetoric the labour party spouted on about while they opened the doors of this country to all and sundry and called everyone racists for wanting to stop it......people that actually had their eyes wide open to what was really going on and not having their boundaries blurred by jumped up little brain washers.
peter brady
UKIP will fade as did the other single issue pressure groups. Only the hateful and the ignorant will vote for UKIP (as they did for the BNP and their like) Labour and the moderate Conservatives will keep the UK modern, integrationaist and part of the EU.
john
UKIP, home for the Tories who think that the Tories aren't quite nasty enough for them.
simon calvert
Right, all you..."luvvies" answer this question with honesty......... Which is the better environment for a child? A....In a home with a mother and father or guardians as such. B.... In a home with two parents of the same sex. Bear in mind, they will both be stable loving environments. Which is best for the CHILD? now think about them at school when you go to collect them, when they have to go there every day and face the jibes bullying and constant abuse that this same sex parenting WILL bring...not thinking in you're utopian ethos, in the real world that you yourself exist in. I'm not against it in principle or morally,I just don't think it is fair to put the child through this for your own selfish end.
El Bubsio
My answer is there's no difference in the love and care they will receive from either a g@y or straight couple, Assuming they're decent people. If the kids are being bullied by small minded idiots for any reason, including the one you mention, perhaps that's the problem to be tackled. And in return, a question for you.... Do you believe that black couples should not be allowed to foster white children in case they too get bullied by racist idiot kids?
peter brady
El Bubsio - I was going to ask the same question as you - regarding Black and mixed race couples. But I couldn't be bothered to lower myself to the level of a UKIP supporter. You are correct to ask though.
simon calvert
In answer to both of you, firstly I'm not a ukip supporter,I don't associate myself with any party nonsense, I'm an individual with my own views. Secondly,I don't believe the prejudice from black parents with white children or vica versa would come anywhere near the pinnacle with which same sex parenting would provide. you still have also not fully answered the question and have twisted it to suit your own means... Please try again
simon calvert
Which is best for the child? Not can they give them the same care and love...I've already stated that.
Viv hanshall
Simon - most people couldn't give a monkey's if both parents are men or women. It doesn't matter - it really doesn't. If you worry about children taunting at school then worry about those who are doing the taunting not the taunted. It is the former you need to be concerned about not the latter. (It's vice versa not vica versa)
El Bubsio
Simon, I have answered your question, just not in the way you wanted. You asked what is best for the CHILD? The answer is the best thing for any child is to have a loving, caring and supportive home environment. If some mindless bullies wish to give a kid grief because his foster parents don't fit into some draconian norm, that's the problem that needs to be tackled. Let's face it, kids are bullies and get bullied all the time for the slightest little perceived thing. Chances are if they're going to get hassled, they'll be getting it anyway for being 'that kid who doesn't have real parents' or some such other nonsense. Your question also implies that only mum and dad parented families are considered normal (whether that's your own view or a tool you're using to prove a point doesn't matter). But what about single parent families, kids with mixed race parents, kids looked after by their aunties and/or uncles. There's not really any such thing as normal in today's society and I think you're pushing this idea that they WILL be bullied a little too hard. Perhaps they will, but perhaps they'll also have caring friends who don't give a monkeys.
simon calvert
Have I used the word "normal" ? Nope.....didn't think so... The duty of care is to give fostered or adopted children their best possible chance to have as good a quality of life as possible, you yourselves have agreed with my points and agree they need to be tackled yet you would knowingly send them into this life when a heterosexual family without these issues would be able to peptide them the better life. SELFISH
simon calvert
And thanks for the spellcheck, unfortunately predictive text sometimes had a mind of is own.... Like me.
simon calvert
Throw your rabbit into the pit of foxes, and when your rabbit is torn apart blame the foxes eh.....nice
El Bubsio
And where did I say you'd said normal? I said you implied it. You're right that children should be placed with parents who give them the best possible chance in life, but again imply that that can only come from straight couples. Why is that so? If, as you say, you have no problem with g@y couples adopting/fostering, then why are you attempting to push this point so hard that they shouldn't be placed with them? In my opinion, you do have a problem, and try to hide it behind the guise of what's best for the child.
El Bubsio
Oh, and your little story once again implies that g@y couples would be throwing children into a crowd of bullies and leaving them to it. Not a very good analogy.
Louisa Gieldon
If they are both stable loving environments, then i believe that they will both be good environments for children. Children are bullied for many many reasons: too fat; too skinny; too speccy; too quiet; too clever; not clever enough; because they have red hair; because they have older parents; because their clothes are not trendy enough; because their mum's car is old............They need our support through all this but as parents we cannot erradicate other people's prejudices. We have to help them accept that they will face criticism but be supported through it. As parents and members of society, i also feel we need to encourage a live and let live world. They inherit our prejudices and hold a mirror up to ourselves
peter brady
Nigel Farage has talked constantly about salaries and waste of money at the EU but he fails to mention that as a member of the Fisheries Committee, for example, he has never - never attanded any of their meetings. In 2011, no attendance and in 2012, no attendance. He keeps ranting on about scandal, the salaries that are being paid and and yet he claims a salary without doing any labour in his own committee.
simon calvert
If that were true he may be between a rock and a hard plaice.
peter brady
Nigel Farage is one of the laziest MEPs with a ten percent attendance record on his official portfolio subcommittee. (yet he claims the full wage and benefits) Mr Farage, who sits on the Fisheries Committee in the European Parliament, had attended two of the 20 meetings of that committee throughout the whole of 2009 and 2010. The reason Mr Farage originally gave for choosing to sit on the Fisheries Subcommittee was because it was a matter which directly affects his constituents in the South East of England. His lack of attendance at that committee's meetings is, however, a gross betrayal of the fishing community in the South East, and of Britain's fishing industry in general.
KneecapsNorman
This comment has been removed for violations of our Terms and Conditions.
El Bubsio
You agree with a draconian, homophobic viewpoint. I'm shocked....I really am.
Viv hanshall
It's not just the 'lefties' David Cameron called UKIP "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists".
simon calvert
The reason being,spellcheck...the main parties wish to remain so and will blight the name of anyone that seeks to take their votes, its basic smearing.
KneecapsNorman
david cameron is one of the most left-wing politicians there is
John Mechelen
8:08am on 27/11/2012
If these lefty social workers were not employed there would not be a complex case.