You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Tom Daley announces baby
March 19 2024 7.09am

Tom Daley announces baby

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 3 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

 

View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 14 Feb 18 7.12pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

Bollocks. Family values are not exclusive to a male female relationship, or the ‘model’ societal interpretation of what a family should be.

A single parent family can still abide by ‘family values’, much like a same sex parental family can.

To build on what someone else has already said, I’d rather the child went to a loving family/parents than stayed unloved, rejected in a broken system, even if there are potential theoretical nature/nurture negatives.

It’s better for society, as the alternative statistically will cause the child and society more damage.

Edited by SW19 CPFC (14 Feb 2018 7.06pm)

Well...yeah but this isn't an adoption of a child that's here and not being loved.

This is a child specifically created for this couple....because neither of them want to accept the practical reality that not fcuking a woman means no children.

They want their cake and eat it too.....and society allows it because...'feels'.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Harry Beever's Profile Harry Beever Flag Newbury 14 Feb 18 7.16pm Send a Private Message to Harry Beever Add Harry Beever as a friend

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

Being raised by one parent (ie without a father) is not the same thing, so I think that's a difficult conclusion to draw.

Children are born into all sorts of f***ed up families, so I think it's very difficult for society to claim a particularly strict moral code when it comes to this sort of thing - it's easy to dismiss it as 'touchy feely' but there are countless kids born every day who will be considerably worst off than those raised by homosexual couples, you have to question why society would object to one, and not the rest.

Out of interest, is there any evidence to support your claim, in terms of kids raised by same sex couples? I can't pretend I've seen a lot of studies on it.

Sure there are many studies saying children with 2 parents find life easier than with one (not the same as saying one parent families can’t raise great kids) but don’t think anyone has looked into the difference between same sex and different sex parents. Imagine they’d get a prickly reception if they did. I think access to a both a female and male loving influence is important for balance but personally think that can be a granny, aunt etc. Without science it’s all opinion and guess work. The ideal is clearly 2 loving parents in a happy and stable relationship which trumps all the fine print in my book.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 14 Feb 18 7.18pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

What outrage? I haven't seen any.


Yeah, more venting really.

I guess I don't like how the BBC website just sticks up articles which are basically supportive of these situations with no......and I mean no opposite viewpoint.

But that's your BBC.....totally impartial. Oh look...is that a pink elephant....no it's the BBC...so it's another feminist lying about the realities of the pay gap or trying to sack models.

I guess I have a lot to vent about.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Flag Addiscombe West 14 Feb 18 7.21pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Well...yeah but this isn't an adoption of a child that's here and not being loved.

This is a child specifically created for this couple....because neither of them want to accept the practical reality that not fcuking a woman means no children.

They want their cake and eat it too.....and society allows it because...'feels'.

Fair enough re. Adoption. My first point around family values still stands.

As for surrogates, it’s not about society allowing it, you’d clearly shut it down for one. It’s simply about choice and equality not imposing limitations based on predjudice on people simply because of their sexual orientation.

And also not because of any unfounded but socially prevelant falsehoods and archetypes that persist around (in this case) gay people - e.g gays are promiscuous/wear skin tight clothes/speak funny.

Essentially check yourself, because it’s a very closed minded, persecutory, groupthink narrative with no basis in fact, other than the usual ‘they’re different to me - Brian, get the pitchforks, we’re going hunting’

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 14 Feb 18 7.21pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays


Yeah, more venting really.

I guess I don't like how the BBC website just sticks up articles which are basically supportive of these situations with no......and I mean no opposite viewpoint.

But that's your BBC.....totally impartial. Oh look...is that a pink elephant....no it's the BBC...so it's another feminist lying about the realities of the pay gap or trying to sack models.

I guess I have a lot to vent about.

I think there are serious questions to be asked about the creation of a child just to satisfy the lifestyle choices of a gay couple. As I said, an adoption would be a different matter as long as there were no hetrosexual couples available. The child's interests must come first.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 14 Feb 18 7.27pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

To again touch on the single parent point you closed with; there are many other factors as to why kids from single parent families are disproportionately involved in crime etc., primarily that the majority of single parent families are low income, poorly educated, and probably the least 'fit' parental figures to begin with. The sorts of people you or I would consider to make 'good parents' are generally the same sorts of people who could maintain a successful career and healthy relationship, so it's not surprising their children perform better, irrespective of marital status.

Interestingly, I came from a single parent family, but a reasonably middle class one, and I never experienced any of the behavioural issues usually associated with that - not to say I'm anything special, but simply to make the point that a good family is a good family, irrespective of whether it's one mum, two dads, or whatever other combinations will follow.

I was mainly raised by a stepfather.....it isn't something I'd recommend personally but I'm sure there are good ones out there doing a great job.

You had a bit of money involved in your raising while I had Norton house council estate (not your nor my fault)....there are undoubtedly factors involved in every upbringing which explain why A led to B happening.

Genetic disposition, environment...which of course involves the family culture....which is the aspect we are debating.

The question is probably.....by allowing a wider form of families....is the state firstly damaging the traditional.....Plus....in the situations where this form of part adoption goes wrong.....are the state implicated?

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View coulsdoneagle's Profile coulsdoneagle Flag London 14 Feb 18 7.31pm Send a Private Message to coulsdoneagle Add coulsdoneagle as a friend

Should a same sex couple who can’t have kids not use surrogate mothers?

Either you have a problem with surrogacy on the whole, or you have a problem with gay people having kids.

I said it before and I will say it again, the fact is, it’s much harder to get kids, both by adopting and other means as a same sex couple. Any child that a same sec couple have is planned for and wanted. You can’t say the same about ‘traditional’ parents.

I’d imagine the children of this couple will have a pretty cushty ride compared to a lot of us on here. Can’t see them having a bad education or wanting for much. That’s about all you can wish on a child being born.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 14 Feb 18 7.39pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

Fair enough re. Adoption. My first point around family values still stands.

As for surrogates, it’s not about society allowing it, you’d clearly shut it down for one. It’s simply about choice and equality not imposing limitations based on predjudice on people simply because of their sexual orientation.

And also not because of any unfounded but socially prevelant falsehoods and archetypes that persist around (in this case) gay people - e.g gays are promiscuous/wear skin tight clothes/speak funny.

Essentially check yourself, because it’s a very closed minded, persecutory, groupthink narrative with no basis in fact, other than the usual ‘they’re different to me - Brian, get the pitchforks, we’re going hunting’

'Check yourself'?

Your last paragraph is total waffle. The idea that not allowing adoption via surrogates as persecution and pitchfork hunting.....You are just talking hyperbolic nonsense.

Talking for myself, instead of you talking for me. If I had control over how the law was framed I wouldn't totally ban it....gay adoption that is....surrogacy...is a position I'm even more doubtful on as a concept...it is far far from ideal....but lets just stick with the concept of gay adoption in general.

I would instead have it decided in court with a judge charged with ensuring that this child was being brought into a family that involved opposite sex day to day influence.

In many cases I'm sure that would be satisfied....but not all.

This is the state allowing a family type that didn't commonly exist before. The state is implicated if it goes wrong.

Edited by Stirlingsays (14 Feb 2018 7.43pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 14 Feb 18 7.41pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by coulsdoneagle

Should a same sex couple who can’t have kids not use surrogate mothers?

Either you have a problem with surrogacy on the whole, or you have a problem with gay people having kids.

I said it before and I will say it again, the fact is, it’s much harder to get kids, both by adopting and other means as a same sex couple. Any child that a same sec couple have is planned for and wanted. You can’t say the same about ‘traditional’ parents.

I’d imagine the children of this couple will have a pretty cushty ride compared to a lot of us on here. Can’t see them having a bad education or wanting for much. That’s about all you can wish on a child being born.

But they won't have a mother. Money is far less important.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Flag Addiscombe West 14 Feb 18 7.52pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

I’d agree it’s hyperbolic, mainly because I couldn’t resist it on this occasion. But it’s certianly not nonsense.

You have a prejudiced opinion, and you are making decision on ‘feel’ as you so put it, rather than fact.

Unless you can put forward a credible piece of scientific research that states same sex parenting is bad for society and or children, you’re simply saying you don’t like anything that deviates from the standard model (whatever the hell that is), and by extension, gay couples.

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Flag Addiscombe West 14 Feb 18 7.54pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

But they won't have a mother. Money is far less important.

So? If you can explain that rationally, with qualifiers to backup your implication we’ll have a proper debate going.

 


Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 14 Feb 18 7.59pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

I’d agree it’s hyperbolic, mainly because I couldn’t resist it on this occasion. But it’s certianly not nonsense.

You have a prejudiced opinion, and you are making decision on ‘feel’ as you so put it, rather than fact.

Unless you can put forward a credible piece of scientific research that states same sex parenting is bad for society and or children, you’re simply saying you don’t like anything that deviates from the standard model (whatever the hell that is), and by extension, gay couples.

Do you have any that says it isn't?
The trouble with research is that is often suppressed or interpreted in order to pander to current trends of 'morality'. Right now equality is the buzz word and the gay lobby is noisy.
My concern is that the child's welfare is lost in all that politics.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (14 Feb 2018 8.00pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 3 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Tom Daley announces baby