(Nut) Case Law

One of the features of the British Way of Doing Things is that a large amount of our law is made by judges deciding how existing laws apply to new situations.

This by-passes parliament in ways that may seem undemocratic, but as, historically, our judges have often been wiser than our politicians, that is not necessarily a bad thing.

However, they now seem as bad or worse in some cases. The Johns case, deciding that disapproving of homosexuality made you unsuitable to be a foster parent, and declaring Christianity to be inimical to civilisation (or whatever weasel words they used) sets an alarming precedent.

I predict that it will not be long before the following are decided and imposed on the British people, not by their politicians following due process, but by judges:

Parents who do not agree to submit their foster daughters for abortions in the face of unplanned teen pregnancies will be deemed not suitable;

Parents who do not agree to submit their foster daughters for long-term contraceptive implants will be deemed not suitable;

Parents who do not agree to allow their foster children to indulge any sexual whim will be deemed not suitable;

Parents who do commit to teaching their foster children historic Christianity, as the truth, will be deemed not suitable.

Good job it's Lent: we need lots of prayer and fasting and almsgiving...