|
You are correct that this is about the state's right to refuse a couple to adopt. On that point, I think everyone here would agree. Screening prospective parents before they adopt is important. Not everyone is fit to be a parent (financially, mentally, etc.).
The point upon which we appear to be disagreeing is whether vegetarianism is just cause for rejecting prospective parents. A number of us are saying, we do not draw a line of acceptance here and, despite being meat-eaters ourselves, don't see any reason why anyone else should either. Whether you eat meat or not has nothing to do with raising a healthy baby. Nothing.
There is nothing here to suggest that the child being adopted is anything but a baby. To introduce the suggestion that the child is now 12, is just grasping at straws. Clearly if the child is 12, it has a voice and can make up it's own mind. But you know, as well as everyone here in this thread that we are not talking about a 12-year-old child.
Further to all of this, you are still wrong to suggest that vegetarianism is somehow "bizarre". It doesn't matter whether it is for religious, moral or just because, that you are a vegetarian. Going without meat, while unthinkable to many, is not something that is going to harm the child. While it is different from what you see as normal, I can assure you that there are many people who would look at your lifestyle and suggest it is equally bizarre. The truth is, neither is bizarre. It is just different.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
|