Contentious!!
21 July 2004, 10:54 AM
#62
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Peanuts
Telboy,
I have absolutely no doubts that the only real immediate threat to the child will be mocking by the narrow minded children in the school.
I have absolutely no doubts that the only real immediate threat to the child will be mocking by the narrow minded children in the school.
Yep, that's the only justifiable reason i can see here. And even that one is manageable, i would have hoped.
21 July 2004, 10:55 AM
#63
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Peanuts
Telboy,
I have absolutely no doubts that the only real immediate threat to the child will be mocking by the narrow minded children in the school.
I have absolutely no doubts that the only real immediate threat to the child will be mocking by the narrow minded children in the school.
Children will be children. They'll all take the p!ss. Children may grow up to be tolerant, but as children I guarantee they'll take the p!ss.
Calling a child narrow minded is bizarre. Young, foolish, un-thoughtful yes....but narrow mindedness is reserved for over 14's IMO.
21 July 2004, 10:56 AM
#64
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TelBoy
It's fair provided that their sexuality doesn't affect their parenting abilities. And that they don't force their child to accept homosexuality as the norm.
I think a lot of people here are assuming that the above two conditions would not be met.
I think a lot of people here are assuming that the above two conditions would not be met.
If you are gay, homosexuality IS the norm.
21 July 2004, 10:57 AM
#65
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The land of Daisies and Bubbles!
Posts: 5,560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have any first hand experience, which is why I haven't stated an opinion. It baffles me that people get angry and defend their opinions when they have nothing to back it up.
I'm not at all quiet - my hubby will vouch for that!
But I don't spend my time spouting opinions on topics I know nothing about. That's my point in the other thread - why do people think it's OK to have massive chips on their shoulders about subjects they have absolutely zero experience of? That's how victimisation starts and ultimately it's how wars start.
Take more time to understand things you think you disagree with. Read books that challenge your opinions. Have more of an open mind. If you don't know enough about something then go ask someone who does. Be prepared to be wrong sometimes.
You have every right to an opion, but I have no respect for someone who cannot back up that opinion with sound reasoning/ experience.
I've been in situations where people have made judgements and formed opinions on me when they have no idea about the what has really happened - frankly I don't loose sleep over it, but other people do and that's not fair.
I'm not at all quiet - my hubby will vouch for that!
But I don't spend my time spouting opinions on topics I know nothing about. That's my point in the other thread - why do people think it's OK to have massive chips on their shoulders about subjects they have absolutely zero experience of? That's how victimisation starts and ultimately it's how wars start.Take more time to understand things you think you disagree with. Read books that challenge your opinions. Have more of an open mind. If you don't know enough about something then go ask someone who does. Be prepared to be wrong sometimes.
You have every right to an opion, but I have no respect for someone who cannot back up that opinion with sound reasoning/ experience.
I've been in situations where people have made judgements and formed opinions on me when they have no idea about the what has really happened - frankly I don't loose sleep over it, but other people do and that's not fair.
21 July 2004, 10:57 AM
#66
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Senior_AP
If you are gay, homosexuality IS the norm.
And you base that sweeping generalisation on *what*, precisely??
Are you saying that all gay people don't realise that homosexuality is the usual sexuality?
21 July 2004, 10:58 AM
#67
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Senior_AP
I'm a asking a fundamental question. Is it fair on the child, he/she cannot choose.
Gays have made their 'lifestyle' choice and they have to live with the shortcomings of that decision. To try to gerrymander society's estabblished values to suit their wants verges on the immoral IMHO.
UB
21 July 2004, 11:00 AM
#68
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by unclebuck
No, I don't think it is. The adoption in this case is purely for the gratification of the 'parents' and it's a complete fabrication.
Gays have made their 'lifestyle' choice and they have to live with the shortcomings of that decision. To try to gerrymander society's estabblished values to suit their wants verges on the immoral IMHO.
UB
Gays have made their 'lifestyle' choice and they have to live with the shortcomings of that decision. To try to gerrymander society's estabblished values to suit their wants verges on the immoral IMHO.
UB
So we'll include infertile (and all the other reasons people can't have kids) couples in this too shall we?
Sorry UB, your opinion is biased from your anti-gay stance. Fair enough - but at least admit it to yourself!!
21 July 2004, 11:02 AM
#69
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have any real animosity towards homosexuals although I have to say that I think that homosexual sexual practices are abhorrent and against nature.
I am sure that a homosexual parent is just as likely to be a good loving parent as any other person. The problem though is that I think it is vitally important that children are brought up by a male and female parent. They need both male and female influence to have a balanced upbringing. This also shows when a child is brought up by a single parent as well as the extra difficulties that the parent faces. This is why I think it is wrong that people deliberately set out to have a child as a single parent.
Years ago people were unselfish enough to stick together for the sake of the children in a marriage and were prepared to suppress their incompatibility at least until the children had grown up. They would admit their own mistakes in respect of their relationship but accepted that they should put up with it, We are seeing the bad effects of divorce and single parenting now as well of disfunctional parents who can't be bothered to supervise their children.
The children are the important ones in a family relationship. I think it is basically wrong for a pair of homosexuals to bring up a child.
Les
I am sure that a homosexual parent is just as likely to be a good loving parent as any other person. The problem though is that I think it is vitally important that children are brought up by a male and female parent. They need both male and female influence to have a balanced upbringing. This also shows when a child is brought up by a single parent as well as the extra difficulties that the parent faces. This is why I think it is wrong that people deliberately set out to have a child as a single parent.
Years ago people were unselfish enough to stick together for the sake of the children in a marriage and were prepared to suppress their incompatibility at least until the children had grown up. They would admit their own mistakes in respect of their relationship but accepted that they should put up with it, We are seeing the bad effects of divorce and single parenting now as well of disfunctional parents who can't be bothered to supervise their children.
The children are the important ones in a family relationship. I think it is basically wrong for a pair of homosexuals to bring up a child.
Les
21 July 2004, 11:03 AM
#70
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TelBoy
And you base that sweeping generalisation on *what*, precisely??
Are you saying that all gay people don't realise that homosexuality is the usual sexuality?
Are you saying that all gay people don't realise that homosexuality is the usual sexuality?
They are aware of it, but due to their make up, homosexuality is normal and acceptable.
They haven't chosen to be gay - they just *are*.
21 July 2004, 11:05 AM
#72
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Senior_AP
They are aware of it, but due to their make up, homosexuality is normal and acceptable.
They haven't chosen to be gay - they just *are*.
They haven't chosen to be gay - they just *are*.
True, but assuming the gay couple would FORCE their kid to accept homosexuality as the norm is just that - an assumption, and one that can't be justified, imo.
21 July 2004, 11:06 AM
#73
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The land of Daisies and Bubbles!
Posts: 5,560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Years ago people were unselfish enough to stick together for the sake of the children in a marriage and were prepared to suppress their incompatibility at least until the children had grown up. They would admit their own mistakes in respect of their relationship but accepted that they should put up with it, We are seeing the bad effects of divorce and single parenting now as well of disfunctional parents who can't be bothered to supervise their children.
Les
21 July 2004, 11:07 AM
#74
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TelBoy
True, but assuming the gay couple would FORCE their kid to accept homosexuality as the norm is just that - an assumption, and one that can't be justified, imo.
21 July 2004, 11:10 AM
#75
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TelBoy
So we'll include infertile (and all the other reasons people can't have kids) couples in this too shall we?
Sorry UB, your opinion is biased from your anti-gay stance. Fair enough - but at least admit it to yourself!!
Sorry UB, your opinion is biased from your anti-gay stance. Fair enough - but at least admit it to yourself!!
and, no it's not. I'm not 'anti-gay' (whatever that means) just anti-gay adoption - male *and* female.
21 July 2004, 11:12 AM
#76
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Class record holder at Pembrey Llandow Goodwood MIRA Hethel Blyton Curborough Lydden and Snetterton
Posts: 8,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TelBoy
But do we have enough evidence to back up your assumptions, Les? I don't think we do.
We've had children of project X, how about project XX or XY, I can't decide
21 July 2004, 11:13 AM
#77
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 11,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find your fascination with ‘gays’ rather disturbing Senior_AP, approx. 100 replies from you regarding them on various threads. 
May I ask why you felt the need to start this ‘contentious’ thread?
May I ask why you felt the need to start this ‘contentious’ thread?
21 July 2004, 11:14 AM
#78
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Redkop
I find your fascination with ‘gays’ rather disturbing Senior_AP, approx. 100 replies from you regarding them on various threads.
May I ask why you felt the need to start this ‘contentious’ thread?
May I ask why you felt the need to start this ‘contentious’ thread?
Cos there are loads of people replying....including you.
Justification justified.
21 July 2004, 11:17 AM
#80
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The biosphere
Posts: 7,824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tel,
Whether or not our assumptions prove to be correct is immaterial. Yes, the child might have a better life than one brought up by a conventional pair of parents, but then it might not. Why risk it with a childs life? The reason is purely selfish: the gay parents want a child for themselves.
Whether or not our assumptions prove to be correct is immaterial. Yes, the child might have a better life than one brought up by a conventional pair of parents, but then it might not. Why risk it with a childs life? The reason is purely selfish: the gay parents want a child for themselves.
21 July 2004, 11:18 AM
#82
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TelBoy
Aaaaanyway AP, let's hear *your* stance on it then, for what it's worth...
I stated I was not going to enter into this one - merely interested in the general concensus and the points raised.
Listen, don't have a go or write posts with a "tone". I just find it interesting seeing how different people feel and their reasoning (or lack of) to justify/backup their feelings/opinions.
P.S. Robbie Coltrane is doing "Cracker" again this year!! Woooo-Hooo!!! Superb series.
21 July 2004, 11:19 AM
#83
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Redkop
Please expand further, as I can't see that 'cos there are loads replying' is justification, as you wouldn't have known that when you started the thread.
I was very confident that it would be a very popular and busy thread.
21 July 2004, 11:19 AM
#84
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ajm
Tel,
Whether or not our assumptions prove to be correct is immaterial. Yes, the child might have a better life than one brought up by a conventional pair of parents, but then it might not. Why risk it with a childs life? The reason is purely selfish: the gay parents want a child for themselves.
Whether or not our assumptions prove to be correct is immaterial. Yes, the child might have a better life than one brought up by a conventional pair of parents, but then it might not. Why risk it with a childs life? The reason is purely selfish: the gay parents want a child for themselves.
But do we *ever* know with certainty when we go into "normal" parenthood that circumstances won't change? I just don't see that this situation is so radically "off the charts" that it shouldn't be given an opportunity to prove itself...
21 July 2004, 11:21 AM
#85
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ajm
Tel,
Whether or not our assumptions prove to be correct is immaterial. Yes, the child might have a better life than one brought up by a conventional pair of parents, but then it might not. Why risk it with a childs life? The reason is purely selfish: the gay parents want a child for themselves.
Whether or not our assumptions prove to be correct is immaterial. Yes, the child might have a better life than one brought up by a conventional pair of parents, but then it might not. Why risk it with a childs life? The reason is purely selfish: the gay parents want a child for themselves.
21 July 2004, 11:21 AM
#86
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 8,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tel,
So we'll include infertile (and all the other reasons people can't have kids) couples in this too shall we?
of course! to think anything else is discrimination.
So we'll include infertile (and all the other reasons people can't have kids) couples in this too shall we?
of course! to think anything else is discrimination.
21 July 2004, 11:22 AM
#87
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MattW
Is n't that primarily the case for straight couples too. We have children to enrich our lives.
Yes, but are children a "toy" or "tool" to be used ???
We are talking about a life here??
(note - look at the question marks, denotes a question, not a statement).
21 July 2004, 11:24 AM
#88
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ajm
The reason is purely selfish: the gay parents want a child for themselves.
As I said before, they made a lifestyle choice when they entered into a same sex relationship. For better or for worse, there are some rights they forefit by doing so. Child adoption is one of them.
UB
21 July 2004, 11:24 AM
#89
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by **************
Its my opinion and I am entitled to think what I like.
Originally Posted by **************
just because you don't like them doesn't give you the right to go and stereotype them as a homophobe for example.
Just as you are entitled to hold whatever opinion you wish, and to state it publicly, DBW is entitled to hold (and state) the opinion that *your* opinion makes you homophobic.