A story in the British press over the weekend relates how a couple were refused permission to adopt a black or  Asian child because they are both white. The local authority in question objects to inter-racial adoption.

The authority obviously believes that the race of a couple is a relevant factor in deciding which couples get to adopt what children. They obviously believe that it can have an adverse effect on a child’s life to be adopted out of his or her race.

It is interesting to compare this attitude with attitudes towards gay adoption. The politically correct tendency is to say that the sex and sexuality of prospective adoptive parents is irrelevant to a child, but that race is relevant. It would be interesting to see the evidence for this.

In any event, the decision of the local authority can only be justified if race is indeed a relevant factor in making adoption decisions.

Maybe it is best to try and match a child up with a loving couple of the same race. At the same time, it must be better for a child to be adopted by a loving couple of a different race than for the child to be left in foster care or an orphanage.

But if race is a relevant factor, then the sex and sexuality of prospective parents must be far more relevant and it is simply obtuse to pretend otherwise.

We are told, of course, that it is discrimination not to permit same-sex couples to adopt. But it isn’t discrimination if the sex and sexuality of a couple would make a difference to a child.

This reinforces a point we make over and over again in this blog, namely that is it not discrimination to treat different situations differently if the difference is relevant.

The local authority believes race is a relevant difference in adoption decisions. We believe sex and sexuality are relevant because we believe that children, ideally, should be raised by a mother and a father.