<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fighting for the right to adopt from bigots</title>
	<atom:link href="http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/02/03/fighting-for-the-freedom-to-adopt-from-bigots/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/02/03/fighting-for-the-freedom-to-adopt-from-bigots/</link>
	<description>Not a real vee</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 06:47:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: MacCoinnich</title>
		<link>http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/02/03/fighting-for-the-freedom-to-adopt-from-bigots/comment-page-1/#comment-54868</link>
		<dc:creator>MacCoinnich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Feb 2007 17:57:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/02/03/fighting-for-the-freedom-to-adopt-from-bigots/#comment-54868</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m never entirely comfortable with these kind of laws, but we have them, so shouldn&#039;t they be applied equally to everybody.

For instance, it would be illegal for a mixed race couple to be thrown out of a bar, because one was black and the other white.  So why shouldn&#039;t it be illegal to throw a gay couple out of a bar?

Undoubtedly, there are few gay people racing to stay in Christian B&amp;Bs, but how would you feel if you were one half of the couple famously refused a bed in Kinlochewe?  If we give Christian B&amp;Bs they right to opt out of the legislation, then why not everybody who has some particular prejudice?

The same goes for adoption.  What is more logical about giving a publicly funded adoption agency, that happens to be Catholic, an exemption from the rules, than giving a hypothetical BNP run homeless shelter the right to turn away muslims? 

As long as we have anti-discrimination laws, then they have to be applied equally.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m never entirely comfortable with these kind of laws, but we have them, so shouldn&#8217;t they be applied equally to everybody.</p>
<p>For instance, it would be illegal for a mixed race couple to be thrown out of a bar, because one was black and the other white.  So why shouldn&#8217;t it be illegal to throw a gay couple out of a bar?</p>
<p>Undoubtedly, there are few gay people racing to stay in Christian B&amp;Bs, but how would you feel if you were one half of the couple famously refused a bed in Kinlochewe?  If we give Christian B&amp;Bs they right to opt out of the legislation, then why not everybody who has some particular prejudice?</p>
<p>The same goes for adoption.  What is more logical about giving a publicly funded adoption agency, that happens to be Catholic, an exemption from the rules, than giving a hypothetical BNP run homeless shelter the right to turn away muslims? </p>
<p>As long as we have anti-discrimination laws, then they have to be applied equally.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Longrider</title>
		<link>http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/02/03/fighting-for-the-freedom-to-adopt-from-bigots/comment-page-1/#comment-54867</link>
		<dc:creator>Longrider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Feb 2007 17:55:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://doctorvee.co.uk/2007/02/03/fighting-for-the-freedom-to-adopt-from-bigots/#comment-54867</guid>
		<description>Bishop Hill sums it up rather neatly in a post where he talks about liberalism - he cited DK&#039;s stance on the Catholic adoption issue as a prime example. If you believe in liberty, then you accept that others have the liberty to do things of which you may disapprove. You have the liberty to voice that disapproval and the liberty to take your patronage elsewhere, but allow others to do as they see fit, so long as it harms none. Therefore, you agree with me as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bishop Hill sums it up rather neatly in a post where he talks about liberalism &#8211; he cited DK&#8217;s stance on the Catholic adoption issue as a prime example. If you believe in liberty, then you accept that others have the liberty to do things of which you may disapprove. You have the liberty to voice that disapproval and the liberty to take your patronage elsewhere, but allow others to do as they see fit, so long as it harms none. Therefore, you agree with me as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

