Michael and Catherine Burke allege that the state’s Department of Children and Families discriminated against them for their Catholic viewpoints.

  • diprount_tomato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    91
    ·
    1 year ago

    “This is why protecting traditional families is so important. Imagine being a foster kids because of the US failed social safety net, only to be re homed in a LGBT groomer house?! That’s what the GOP wants for kids.”

    I literally just changed two things and it went 180 degrees on the other extremist side of the spectrum. Do with that info as you wish

    • kescusay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And with such a simple change, you turned it into a disgusting and bigoted lie, when the person you responded to was completely accurate.

    • czech@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Do with that info as you wish

      You mean put it into proper context, look at the stats, and acknowledge you’re full of shit? Sure thing! But you won’t let facts get in the way of your feelings amirite?

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh the difference is that religious bigots exist. And in huge, huge numbers.

      “LGBT groomers” are not a thing. It’s a figurative Boogeyman you invented or someone convinced you exists in an attempt to create a dichotomy where one does not exist.

    • Melpomene@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Given that the vast majority of child exploitation happens in heterosexual, traditional families… I’m going to call bullshit. Changing words does not change the reality of child exploitation, nor does it excuse your hiding behind a bigoted little stance because something something tradition.

      If tradition involves bigotry or hate, tradition can fuck all of the way off, forever.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You changed two things and into something imaginary. There is no such thing as an “LGBT groomer house.” You can’t force a child to be gay or trans no matter how much you want to.

      You might as well say “only to be rehomed in a dragon’s den.” It would make about the same amount of sense.

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Uhhhh what? One, “traditional families” aren’t anti LGBTQ by default. Second, LGBTQ parents aren’t groomers. (can LGBTQ individuals be terrible humans just like everyone else? Yes!) Third, asking a foster family if they hate LGBTQ people is critical for the safety of foster children because mathematically 10% will be LGBTQ. And since there’s no “Gaydar” to tell you can’t risk putting any child with them!

      You didn’t prove anything except how ignorant you are. Do with that info as you wish

      • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Pendantic though it may be… 30 percent is more accurate for children in foster care to be LGBTQIA+. Many lose their homes of origin and support BECAUSE they are LGBTQIA+ so the instance is way higher.

        Kind of a no brainer to have homo/transphobic foster parents struck from the rolls. It’s enough to be traumatized once by having your authentic self rejected by a supposed safe haven. Twice is unconscionable.

      • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        These boneheads seem to mix up up supportive with grooming. I had a conversation at a bar the other day with some dipshit that said if you support your child coming out as gay or trans, you’re effectively grooming them to be a sexual deviant. They fail to realize that grooming is an active nudge or conditioning in the direction of a desired behavior, whereas being supportive is unconditional love regardless of identity. My buddy’s kid is identifying as a girl atm, and while he and I both think it’s a phase (he’s 15 and just an awkward kid in general), we are supportive of his/her choice.

        On the other hand, there are parents out there that actively nudge their kids into being some brand of queer from a young age (not just in providing an open minded atmosphere, but almost to discerning them gay from a stupid young age) that, to me, begins to cross a line. In my mind, let be kids be kids that become teenagers and then adults, and just support them in their choices while guiding them to be the best person they can be.