You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Tom Daley announces baby
March 19 2024 3.26am

Tom Daley announces baby

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 4 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

 

View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Flag Addiscombe West 14 Feb 18 8.08pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

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)

Cheers.

Alright, if I have to I’ll go first then.

Note Im coming from an objective standpoint, something a lot of you with emotive, subjective and unsubstantiated opinions (pro tip: an opinion is different from fact) would do well to grasp.

Rather than link you to one article, I simply entered a non biased search term into google and hey presto. Many articles and journals that proclaim no evidence to suggest it is in any way more harmful than same sex parenting.

[Link]

Whether there needs to be more research done is another matter, but you can only have a proper debate on this if you actually bother to read around the subject first.

Misinformation and unsubstantiated opinion masquerading as fact is one of my pet hates.

Your move

 


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 8.09pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

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

My experiences of life tells me that having both parents, mother and father, is more likely to produce a child who will grow up with fewer insecurities and hang ups.
Ask any psychologist about the effect of parents on a child.
Let's be clear. We are talking about a manufactured situation to satisfy the desire of a same sex couple.
Even if there is a small chance that the situation will damage the child, is that not reason enough to put selfish needs aside? Adoption is available with a bit of patience.

 

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 8.12pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

Cheers.

Alright, if I have to I’ll go first then.

Note Im coming from an objective standpoint, something a lot of you with emotive, subjective and unsubstantiated opinions (pro tip: an opinion is different from fact) would do well to grasp.

Rather than link you to one article, I simply entered a non biased search term into google and hey presto. Many articles and journals that proclaim no evidence to suggest it is in any way more harmful than same sex parenting.

[Link]

Whether there needs to be more research done is another matter, but you can only have a proper debate on this if you actually bother to read around the subject first.

Misinformation and unsubstantiated opinion masquerading as fact is one of my pet hates.

Your move


But you have ignored the main point of my post which was that research cannot be relied on. I'd rather trust experience.


Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (14 Feb 2018 8.12pm)

 

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 8.12pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

My experiences of life tells me that having both parents, mother and father, is more likely to produce a child who will grow up with fewer insecurities and hang ups.
Ask any psychologist about the effect of parents on a child.
Let's be clear. We are talking about a manufactured situation to satisfy the desire of a same sex couple.
Even if there is a small chance that the situation will damage the child, is that not reason enough to put selfish needs aside? Adoption is available with a bit of patience.

See above research. ‘My experiences of life’. Cheers

 


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 8.16pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger


But you have ignored the main point of my post which was that research cannot be relied on. I'd rather trust experience.


Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (14 Feb 2018 8.12pm)

And that sir, is complete and utter nonsense.

Research is better than the completely unscientific ‘life experiences’ of a heterosexual male with a sample of 1. Or at least a sample of less than is scientifically credible.

While we’re at it, let’s ban all research. Useless. You can’t rely on it.

What a statement.

 


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 8.19pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

See above research. ‘My experiences of life’. Cheers

Sometimes you find what you want to find.

I really hope the children in this situation are not adversely affected. I have found that the effects of upbringing only dawn on people when they are middle aged.
I would very much like to know the criteria used to determine the effects on people when the probably haven't figured it out themselves.

 

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 8.25pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

And that sir, is complete and utter nonsense.

Research is better than the completely unscientific ‘life experiences’ of a heterosexual male with a sample of 1. Or at least a sample of less than is scientifically credible.

While we’re at it, let’s ban all research. Useless. You can’t rely on it.

What a statement.


But none the less, it is interesting that you just accept research finding without any knowledge of the process used or the criteria just because it suits your way of thinking.
It's also interesting that you feel so strongly about it. I am unbiased on the subject myself aside from being a strong supporter of gay rights but putting the welfare of children above all else.

 

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 8.25pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Sometimes you find what you want to find.

I really hope the children in this situation are not adversely affected. I have found that the effects of upbringing only dawn on people when they are middle aged.
I would very much like to know the criteria used to determine the effects on people when the probably haven't figured it out themselves.

No. Science is objective. Science loves to prove itself wrong. I try to be objective at all times.

By all means interrogate the research. That’s great. That’s what I’d do in your position.

Note again my search was in no way biased, so your point does not stand.

If you can present me with an equal stream of research that counters my objectively obtained learnings, I’ll be forced to change my mind. Through evidence.

I also share your hope, but I feel that I’m in a position to feel more optimistic that this will be the case from what I’ve read, so far. Not because of preconception or bias.

 


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 8.29pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger


But none the less, it is interesting that you just accept research finding without any knowledge of the process used or the criteria just because it suits your way of thinking.
It's also interesting that you feel so strongly about it. I am unbiased on the subject myself aside from being a strong supporter of gay rights but putting the welfare of children above all else.

I’m not in a position to read every article in 5 minutes. I am in a position to make a qualified decision based on the overwhelming initial volume of different research that I’ve found that seems to be reaching the same conclusion.

I’m not accepting it in totality, just making the case based on the constraints of this exchange, which I think is fair, and carries more weight than a hunch or opinion.

I feel strongly about any issues that involve minorities, especially when people start to debate on emotive opinion rather than objective fact. Pretty simple really.

 


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 8.32pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

No. Science is objective. Science loves to prove itself wrong. I try to be objective at all times.

By all means interrogate the research. That’s great. That’s what I’d do in your position.

Note again my search was in no way biased, so your point does not stand.

If you can present me with an equal stream of research that counters my objectively obtained learnings, I’ll be forced to change my mind. Through evidence.

I also share your hope, but I feel that I’m in a position to feel more optimistic that this will be the case from what I’ve read, so far. Not because of preconception or bias.

All science is biased by the scientist. Believe it.
I'd like to know more about the research.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View EverybodyDannsNow's Profile EverybodyDannsNow Flag SE19 14 Feb 18 8.32pm Send a Private Message to EverybodyDannsNow Add EverybodyDannsNow as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

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?


I think the 'traditional' family model is already hugely problematic, so alternatives should be encouraged, at least until we could definitively say it doesn't work - the point on family planning is a strong one to suggest the standard of parenting should be better in single sex families.

In terms of when it goes wrong; I wouldn't consider the state implicated in faulty same-sex families any more than I would in a 'traditional' one - ie. Only really if there is a failure to act from the relevant social services, as we have seen previously, or something of that sort.

As you elude to in your post, there are a hundred and one things which influence a child's upbringing - I haven't seen anything convincing that suggests same sex parents is consistently a harming factor in that process. I certainly don't consider the likelihood of a single sex family raising a bad egg to be any higher, which ultimately should be the deciding point.

Edited by EverybodyDannsNow (14 Feb 2018 8.33pm)

 

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 8.34pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays 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.

Ok, let me 'unpack' this....as you have a love of annoying trendy words.

Your contention that my opinion is 'prejudiced' is subjective and there is nothing against me stating that your opinion is also 'prejudiced' towards believing these situations can cause no issues.

My opinion isn't based on 'feel' as it's based upon thousands of years of human family structure. Your contention is based upon 'feel' as there are no studies with large enough sample sizes that have run for enough time that can make definite summaries without the smell of social constructionists with agenda behind them.

Don't suggest that studies are available to prove anything on this. All you can point to are activists and activist organisations with opinions.

Like I have said, when society decides to create its own form of families.....then...when it goes wrong society itself is implicated.....or more accurately social constructionists are.

Edited by Stirlingsays (14 Feb 2018 8.38pm)

 


'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

 

Page 4 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

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