Gay Rights

rsynnott

There've been about three outside the George in the last year. There may have been a few others elsewhere.

By the way, on your logic (physical danger) we should probably be restricting adoption to vegans with good genetics who walk everywhere and live on an island somewhere.

Freelancer

Firespinner wrote:

I was not trying to distort anything I could not find the figures for ROI.

So its a distortion. It'd be like posting the figures for sectarian beatings in belfast as proof that there is a culture of kneecapping catholics in Mullingar.

One website I found critisised the government for not keeping records of these figures, but I'm pretty sure they do.

The only article I could find re Gardaí and homopobia was the creation of Garda liason officers in towns like Athlone to help prevent the blackmail of gay men who were in the closet still.

Google "homophobic attacks statistics" and you will find that the 7% figure is repeated many times regarding homophobic assaults.

And I'm sure your friend the "guard" and your good friends "the gays" will back you up :rolleyes:

It suggests that the Gaurds may not keep these assaults classes differently than other assaults. The gay community do not compile these statistics.

No it suggests that you're making a mountain out of a molehill, earlier on this thread you guested there were loads of attacks, a scan on the web and on this site shows that aside from a couple of minor fights outside the george (again not an environment gay couples are going to bring their adopted children to) late at night this isn't the epidemic you claim it to be, and cannot be used as a reason to stop gay couples adopting.

The_Minister

Freelancer wrote:

So its a distortion. It'd be like posting the figures for sectarian beatings in belfast as proof that there is a culture of kneecapping catholics in Mullingar.

We are the same island. Most people I know have relatives up North. The figures for the ROI will be different but the cultures are similar enough that the numbers should be related. (although as you say, the North's may be higher due to a certain violent tinge to society)

Freelancer wrote:

The only article I could find re Gardaí and homopobia was the creation of Garda liason officers in towns like Athlone to help prevent the blackmail of gay men who were in the closet still.

Try google.

Freelancer wrote:

And I'm sure your friend the "guard" and your good friends "the gays" will back you up :rolleyes:

Again, try google, I even gave you what to type in.

Freelancer wrote:

No it suggests that you're making a mountain out of a molehill, earlier on this thread you guested there were loads of attacks, a scan on the web and on this site shows that aside from a couple of minor fights outside the george (again not an environment gay couples are going to bring their adopted children to) late at night this isn't the epidemic you claim it to be, and cannot be used as a reason to stop gay couples adopting.

I disagree. It is often said that the most common insult said in playgrounds is "****". No studies have been done but from what I remember of school it is probably true. Do you think that children would not get the ****e kicked out of them by other children? That they would not get picked on worse then other "fat" children.
It is like naming a boy Sue, and then abandoning him. (I love that song).

The_Minister

rsynnott wrote:

There've been about three outside the George in the last year. There may have been a few others elsewhere.

Were they serious?

rsynnott wrote:

By the way, on your logic (physical danger) we should probably be restricting adoption to vegans with good genetics who walk everywhere and live on an island somewhere.

I don't understand. Vegans don't get attacked.

Freelancer

Firespinner wrote:

We are the same island. Most people I know have relatives up North. The figures for the ROI will be different but the cultures are similar enough that the numbers should be related. (although as you say, the North's may be higher due to a certain violent tinge to society)

As I mentioned earlier most seem to be related to Unionist thugs with ties to far right extremists like combat 18. Seeing as we need to bus unionists down to Dublin to create a problem, your claims that the "cultures are different but similar" simply isn't true. This can be born out in the fact that there hasn't been an explosion of gay assaults in Dublin or anywhere else in the republic in the same time period. Nor is it such an issue for the gay community down here that they feel the problem needs highlighting and addressing.

Try google.



Again, try google, I even gave you what to type in.

Do you know how pathetically infantile your arguing strategy is? Firstly creating an elaborate group of "friends" who confirm your preconceptions, then dismissing psycholgists reports with a single sentence without substance and merit. Now you're stating something is true then saying "meh you do the research". You made a claim. The onus is on you to support it. Don't arrogantly wave me in the direction of the internet and demand that I do your research for you.

I disagree. It is often said that the most common insult said in playgrounds is "****". No studies have been done but from what I remember of school it is probably true.

Wow just wow. You're now reduced to assuring us based on your childhood experience. But no studies have been done? Studies have been done into the psychological well being of children raised by gay couples, and cited in this thread;
http://www.gayrightswatch.com/2005/10/study-children-raised-by-gay-parents.html

Based on nine studies from 1981 to 1994 of 260 children, aged three to 11 years, reared by either heterosexual mothers or same sex-mothers after divorce, the researchers found there was no difference in intelligence of the children, type or prevalence of psychiatric disorders, self-esteem, well-being, peer relationships, or parental stress.

And here;

Overall, then, results of research to date suggest that children of lesbian and gay parents have normal relationships with peers and that their relationships with adults of both sexes are also satisfactory. The picture of lesbian mothers' children that emerges from results of existing research is thus one of general engagement in social life with peers, with fathers, and with mothers' adult friends--both male and female, both heterosexual and homosexual. Studies in this area to date are few, and the data emerging from them are sketchy. On the basis of existing research findings, however, fears about children of lesbians and gay men being sexually abused by adults, ostracized by peers, or isolated in single-sex lesbian or gay communities are unfounded.

http://www.apa.org/pi/parent.html

Do you think that children would not get the ****e kicked out of them by other children? That they would not get picked on worse then other "fat" children.
It is like naming a boy Sue, and then abandoning him. (I love that song).

Again theres a dirth of evidence up there that you're scaremongering, similar to the claims you've now quietly dropped about a greater chance of these children being the victims of paedophilia.

rsynnott

Firespinner wrote:

We are the same island. Most people I know have relatives up North. The figures for the ROI will be different but the cultures are similar enough that the numbers should be related. (although as you say, the North's may be higher due to a certain violent tinge to society)

The North seems to be an intensely homophobic (and violent in general) society, or so was my experience when visiting Belfast for a few days (possibly someone gay who lives there can tell us more). One little thing which should highlight that is attitudes of universities. Trinity College CSC recognised its then-gaysoc 22 years ago. UCD's was recognised shortly afterwards. Queens Belfast's was recognised LAST YEAR. And then there were those crowds of mad people protesting gay civil union there...

Dudess

Wicknight wrote:

A paedophile male that molests a boy is not (in most cases) a homosexual, or heterosexual since a most actual paedophiles have no proper adult sexual orientation.

The problem with this perception of paedophiles in modern society is that it is based on a miss-understanding of what sexually aroses a paedophile in the first place. People think it is the same as with adult arosal. It isn't.

It is not the gender of the child that aroses the paedophile, it is the youth of a child. The male paedophile molesting a boy is not arosed by the fact that the child is a boy (or girl), they are arosed by the fact that the child is a child.

So it is incorrect to say that a male paedophile molesting a boy is a homosexual, since it isn't the gender of the child that is arosing him in the first place.

This is the point I was trying to make. Nicely put, Wicknight.

The_Minister

Freelancer wrote:

As I mentioned earlier most seem to be related to Unionist thugs with ties to far right extremists like combat 18. .

Prove it.

Freelancer wrote:

Seeing as we need to bus unionists down to Dublin to create a problem, your claims that the "cultures are different but similar" simply isn't true. This can be born out in the fact that there hasn't been an explosion of gay assaults in Dublin or anywhere else in the republic in the same time period. Nor is it such an issue for the gay community down here that they feel the problem needs highlighting and addressing. .

We do not have their sectarian violence such as the unionists, but we do have assaults, stabbings, racial attacks etc. so reasonless violence exists here as well. Just out of interest how do you know that there has been no explosion in homophobic violence down here? I could not find the figures for ROI.

Freelancer wrote:

Do you know how pathetically infantile your arguing strategy is? Firstly creating an elaborate group of "friends" who confirm your preconceptions, . .

My friends are real. Accept it or shut up. I cannot post a link to them or give you their addresses.

Freelancer wrote:

Now you're stating something is true then saying "meh you do the research". You made a claim. The onus is on you to support it. Don't arrogantly wave me in the direction of the internet and demand that I do your research for you. .

I did the research I told you what to type in.

Freelancer wrote:

Wow just wow. You're now reduced to assuring us based on your childhood experience. .

It is something that is often said. The fact that it was true in my case (followed closely by spa) does not diminish it. Can I ask what the most commen insult in your childhood was? You are older but I bet **** was up there.

Freelancer wrote:

But no studies have been done? .

Studies on playground insults.

Freelancer wrote:

http://www.gayrightswatch.com/2005/10/study-children-raised-by-gay-parents.html.

A pro-gay site.

Freelancer wrote:

http://www.apa.org/pi/parent.html.

Last time I heard of them they had said being too fat was a mental illness. Still the case you quoted was done respectably

Freelancer wrote:

Again theres a dirth of evidence up there that you're scaremongering, similar to the claims you've now quietly dropped about a greater chance of these children being the victims of paedophilia.

I have dropped nothing but I will admit that Wicknites post has made me reconsider.

Freelancer

Firespinner wrote:

Prove it.

As always happy to

Between April 2002 and July 2004 there have been 828 racist incidents most, but not all, in loyalist areas. Between April 2003 and April 2004 there were 453 racist attacks across the North, 147 or more than a quarter were in South Belfast. Between April and July of this year there were 149 racist incidents 84 of which took place in loyalist areas of South Belfast.

and

That loyalism has added a new racist string to its sectarian bow will not come as a surprise to many given its supremacist ideology and history. Links between loyalism and the British far right are long established, whether it is the articles lifted straight out of 'Spearhead', the National Front paper, into 'Combat' the UVF magazine in the 1970's or Loyalist support for the racist Rhodesian and South African regimes in the 1970's and 1980's. In 1974 a National Front member, John Gadd, was convicted for his part in a loyalist arms smuggling route from Canada.

In 1980 Jackie Irvine and Joe Bennet of the UVF met representatives of the Flemish fascist organisation VMO.Many will remember that the UFF's Johnny 'Mad Dog' Adair and many of his C Company started out as a neo Nazi skinhead band called 'offensive weapon'.
In 1983 the 200 strong Shankill based 'NF Skins' beat to death a Catholic Patrick Barkley. Many members of this fascist gang were later recruited by the youth wings of the UDA and UVF.

In May 1993 the UDA's London commander, Frank Portinari, and a neo Nazi Combat 18 member, Eddie Whicker, were arrested while trying to smuggle handguns to loyalists in the North. More recently far right groups like the BNP, Combat 18 and White Wolves have tried to establish roots in loyalist heartlands across the North and a branch of the White Nationalist Party has been established in Ballymena.

http://www.inc.ie/winter04g.html

It was a combat 18 member who blew up the Nelson gay bar in London's soho.

The main fear, of course, is that such fund-raising events help the LVF, an organisation which has been on ceasefire for the past year, generate the cash to buy weapons to assist in their stated aim of bringing down the Good Friday Agreement. But the development is not exactly surprising, given that Loyalist terrorists were, as recently as last March, secretly training neo Nazi thugs behind nail bomb attacks in London.

http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/1999/08/25/ihead_23.htm


And theres more

Northern Ireland was the last place in Britain to decriminalise homosexuality in 1982 and its most popular politician, the Rev Ian Paisley, began his Save Ulster from Sodomy campaign from the spot where the couple’s guests will arrive. Last month one of his party’s councillors said Hurricane Katrina had been sent by God to punish the New Orleans gay community for holding a gay pride festival. The Free Presbyterian minister David McIlveen told the Guardian he would lead a “formidable” protest against the “abomination” of homosexuality outside the ceremony

We do not have their sectarian violence such as the unionists, but we do have assaults, stabbings, racial attacks etc. so reasonless violence exists here as well.

Reasonless violence exists everywhere. You may as well use this logic to tell inter racial couples not to have children because their children may suffer abuse? However you've yet to provide any evidence that supports your claim that homophobic violence is a serious issue in irish society.

Just out of interest how do you know that there has been no explosion in homophobic violence down here? I could not find the figures for ROI.

Because the gay community wouldn't take it lying down. There would be articles, news stories, protests. Check the LGB section of boards, someone got their nose broken a few months ago, and they nearly held a protest march. If such an increase in violence was occuring we'd know about it.

My friends are real. Accept it or shut up. I cannot post a link to them or give you their addresses.

uh huh......

I did the research I told you what to type in.

Bollocks pure and simple. The above, the articles and the links?
Thats research. What you're suggesting, is waving me in the direction of the internet and telling me to go find it myself is laughable debating and what we've come to expect from you.

It is something that is often said. The fact that it was true in my case (followed closely by spa) does not diminish it. Can I ask what the most commen insult in your childhood was? You are older but I bet **** was up there.

yeah. so. and. what? Kids call each other names tell them they'll catch aids of each and said stupid nasty names. You've not offered any evidence that the children of gay parents are going to recieve serious bullying.

Studies on playground insults.

Why don't you run off and do one? Its be an excellent test of your clinical survey skills. What I did is I did show you there had been studies into the well being of children adopted by gay couples, and they turned out fine. A slighty better barometer of what the effects of being adopted by a gay couple is, well anything would be better than your slag-o-meter.

A pro-gay site.

So? The research wasn't done by the site. They're just pubilising it. The research was carried out by

from article wrote:

Based on nine studies from 1981 to 1994 of 260 children

long before we had y'know websites. Thats nine studies by child psychologists, not a gay website. How is it discredited, by being published on gay website?

Last time I heard of them they had said being too fat was a mental illness.

Really? Prove it. Don't wave me in the direction of the internet, don't tell me your friend said it, support something you say for change.

Still the case you quoted was done respectably

Well glad it has the firespinner seal of approval, so, you admit the case has merits and children raised by gay couples don't seem to have any psychological scars, get on well with their peer groups, and haven't been abused. So y'know pokes a massively hole in your argument. Care to comment?

I have dropped nothing but I will admit that Wicknites post has made me reconsider.

Wicknight myself and bluewolf all published an argument aganist your assertion, bluewolf and I even went to the trouble of research you just ignored.

The_Minister

Freelancer wrote:

yeah. so. and. what? Kids call each other names tell them they'll catch aids of each and said stupid nasty names. You've not offered any evidence that the children of gay parents are going to recieve serious bullying. .

It is logic. In adult society the amount of fat people who get assaulted because they are fat is probably low. There are homophobic attacks, however which occur due to a sexuality. If one takes the figure of 71 and multiplies it by 4 to compensate for population difference that leads to 284 attacks in the South. Even if half of them are disqualified by difference in culture then that leaves 142 attacks. Do you think that many adults were attacked for being fat?

Freelancer wrote:

anything would be better than your slag-o-meter. .

that sucks.

Freelancer wrote:

Well glad it has the firespinner seal of approval, so, you admit the case has merits and children raised by gay couples don't seem to have any psychological scars, get on well with their peer groups, and haven't been abused. So y'know pokes a massively hole in your argument. Care to comment?.

No it doesn't. That composite was performed by a lesbian with 3 kids (smell the bias), whose work has been labelled propeganda. These claims turn up on google before the link you gave my so I assume you saw them and still posted flawed research.http://www.narth.com/docs/patterson.html

Freelancer wrote:

Wicknight myself and bluewolf all published an argument aganist your assertion, bluewolf and I even went to the trouble of research you just ignored.

Wicknite said it better, even though I slightly disagree with him. Since the research you posted missed the fundemental point (which comes first for paedophiles: youth or gender?) or used methods which could not reasonable evaluate this, I put them aside




If you really don't believe me that people would attack homsexual's children I suggest that you visit Stormforce.

Freelancer

Firespinner wrote:

It is logic. In adult society the amount of fat people who get assaulted because they are fat is probably low. There are homophobic attacks, however which occur due to a sexuality. If one takes the figure of 71 and multiplies it by 4 to compensate for population difference that leads to 284 attacks in the South. Even if half of them are disqualified by difference in culture then that leaves 142 attacks. Do you think that many adults were attacked for being fat?

Good of you to, once again, avoid all the evidence you demanded I prove. Its tedious and wearying, if you demand I prove something, don't ignore it in the next post, Either admit you were wrong, or rebut it. You look like a coward for avoiding it.

The above is just idiocy, for starts your sampling is infantile, it ignores the culture of violence aganist gay people in the north. You cannot take the above as an accurate depication of situation in the south. You've failed utterly to back up your comment that homopobic attacks are common the south, and have been reduced to creating inane statistical models based on the north (ignoring the culture of homophobia), and then comparing it to fat attacks.

The conclusion that you come to

Do you think that many adults were attacked for being fat?

Is just inane, most gay bashing takes place late at night near and around gay establishments, you cannot use the above to prove children adopted by gay parents will face violence. You just cannot. You've basically come up with an equation which is

sectarian violence in foreign country x population size in ireland / mean population weight = possible numbers of child assaults for children adopted by "the gays". Nonsense.......

The limited number of attacks on gay people in the south is proven because it appears to be an non issue, taking the regretable instances in the north multipling them by population size and then bizarrely population weight and then coming up with some warped logic is really reaching.......

that sucks.

Says the guy who compares being the child of a couple of loving gay parents to a johnny cash song. :rolleyes:

No it doesn't. That composite was performed by a lesbian with 3 kids (smell the bias), whose work has been labelled propeganda. These claims turn up on google before the link you gave my so I assume you saw them and still posted flawed research. http://www.narth.com/docs/patterson.html

I'm sorry you accused me a few posts ago of writing from pro gay websites and it could be easily ignored. You're now quoting an article from narth.com.
Did you even look who www.narth.com are?
the national association for research and therapy of homosexuals.
These are people who believe being gay can be cured. I suggest you tell one of your "many gay and bi-sexual friends" that you agree with the findings of narth.

Narth's partisanship and bias can be easily seen.

For example look at this

Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, President of the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality and a prominent Love Won Out speaker, has a few strange ideas of his own. For instance, he postulates that "non-homosexual men who experience defeat and failure may also experience homosexual fantasies or dreams." He also encourages his clients to act more masculine by drinking Gatorade or calling friends "dude." Another leading NARTH member, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, M.D. believes that anti-depressants such as Prozac may help cure homosexuality.

With such peculiar ideas, it is no surprise that groups such as Exodus and NARTH scrupulously avoid documenting their work. When asked by Newsweek magazine why he kept no statistics, Nicolosi replied that he "didn't have time." These groups continue to exist, not to help people, but to help religious political leaders like Focus on the Family's James Dobson and former Moral Majority leader Jerry Falwell deny gay people equal rights. Their message is simple: Since gay people can "change" they do not deserve protection from discrimination.

From here
http://www.anythingbutstraight.com/author/oped1.html

Or how about from the horse's mouth

NARTH members will be familiar with the politicization of AIDS. Militant gays continue to protest that not enough research is being done, asserting that this constitutes discrimination against gays. But in fact a great deal of research is being done, and one can arguably say that AIDS is the highest-profile disease in America. Such attempts to focus on homophobia and discrimination serve to take the focus off the self-defeating sexuality of many gays, who in fact do not consistently practice safe sex themselves, yet continually warn others that we are in the midst of a mainstream epidemic.

http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/militant.html

Your author, of your rebuttal, is essentially saying AIDS is the fault of "the gays". In pseudo scientific terms he is essentially that aids is punishment for "self defeating sexuality". God where have I heard such language before.......

Also incidently in the same article he tries to downplay the rape rate in the US, claiming the figures are inflated, which would contradict your claim the like rape, homophobic attacks go mostly unreported. Hey firespinner quick tip when you're trying to do a rebuttal article, read who you're quoting as a rebuttal and get to know them better, it would also help if you checked that while an article might supporting your rebuttal, check to see if it will weaken another one of your points. No I'm not trying to suggest Dr Gerald Schoenewolf is a reliable source for er anything........

You're also frantically ignoring the other article which I'll repeat the quote again.

from the other article wrote:

Based on nine studies from 1981 to 1994 of 260 children, aged three to 11 years, reared by either heterosexual mothers or same sex-mothers after divorce, the researchers found there was no difference in intelligence of the children, type or prevalence of psychiatric disorders, self-esteem, well-being, peer relationships, or parental stress.

Wicknite said it better, even though I slightly disagree with him. Since the research you posted missed the fundemental point (which comes first for paedophiles: youth or gender?) or used methods which could not reasonable evaluate this, I put them aside

Huh? What? They used the Kinsey scale the best scale to understand human sexuality, but hey you dismissed it as "you wouldn't trust kinsey" (not that kinsey wrote the report) claiming that they "used methods which could not reasonable evaluate this" translates as; "I don't know what I am talking about, so I'm going to ignore it."

If you really don't believe me that people would attack homsexual's children I suggest that you visit Stormforce.

Yeah, if you check AH on this site, you'll see a thread about the "white wolves" a right wing white supremacist camp in the dublin mountains. Ugly looking bunch of fúckers, lots of beer bellies, right wing and republican tattoos. Bunch of skinheads. Dangerous looking lads all six of 'em You really think these morons are going to not be arrested 60ft from any school.........

Are you suggesting we oppose social progress because it will piss off a tiny bunch of thick skulled skin heads? Hey I'll go grap the middle easterns and eastern europeans, you go get the ****, and the fags while you're at it round up the boats..........

Oh and "stormforce" is ,I think, a comic book. "Stormfront" is a neo nazi website.

Zombrex

Firespinner wrote:

If you really don't believe me that people would attack homsexual's children I suggest that you visit Stormforce.

That might be true, but then people will attack anything, for anything. Its not a reason to not allow a form of adoption.

If it were a black couple would be not allowed adopt a white child (or vice versa), and that happens all the time.

Dudess

rsynnott wrote:

By the way, 'gays' is a somewhat pejorative term; please don't use it. Would you say 'blacks' or 'jews'? (Actually, a lot of people do say 'jews'; they probably shouldn't.)

Actually, rsynnott, I retract my previous statement on this. I was talking to a Jewish girl about it and she reckons that because the terms "gay" and "black" are not nouns, they shouldn't be treated as such. It's true. I wouldn't say "I'm a white". A black person wouldn't say "I'm a black", a gay person "I'm a gay" etc. She doesn't have a problem with people saying "Jews" though, because the word Jew is a noun. She would say herself "I'm a Jew". So apologies for previous post.

rsynnott

Firespinner wrote:

If you really don't believe me that people would attack homsexual's children I suggest that you visit Stormforce.

Those people are largely barking mad, and a danger to society. They would also no doubt quite happily go after adoptive children of black people, mixed race couples(!), protestants/catholics (depending on if it's the traditional nazi element or sinn-fein-influenced-nazi you're talking about), and so forth.

Annasopra

Annasopra

Annasopra

Annasopra

Annasopra

Annasopra

Annasopra

Annasopra

rsynnott

That baby frightens me.

Tar.Aldarion

Scared of commitment?

Cronus333

Firespinner wrote:

No the problem is that a larger percentage rape children, and they want to adopt children. (Remember they will likely be meeting many more gays than a normal child)

Incorrect. as a proportion more paedophiles are straight than gay.

woody

I'd say yes to them having equal human rights but no to marraige as it is simply not natural, as is the practice... That is my opinion and dont jump down my throat but we are being more and more acclimatised to the gay way and it is getting to the stage wrong is right... It is against nature,most religious beliefs and generally immoral...

God made man and woman not for two people of either sex to have sexual relations and it is against the law of the bible...

I wont hurt someone for being like that but I wont certainly condone it as it is pure and simple sick and unnatural...

BTW that is my opinion if you dont like it tough, I have no intention of changing it and know for a fact it is correct....

Freelancer

woody wrote:

I'd say yes to them having equal human rights but no to marraige as it is simply not natural, as is the practice... That is my opinion and dont jump down my throat but we are being more and more acclimatised to the gay way and it is getting to the stage wrong is right... It is against nature,most religious beliefs and generally immoral...

God made man and woman not for two people of either sex to have sexual relations and it is against the law of the bible...

I wont hurt someone for being like that but I wont certainly condone it as it is pure and simple sick and unnatural...

BTW that is my opinion if you dont like it tough, I have no intention of changing it and know for a fact it is correct....

Well done for posted such a piece of thick skulled bigotry on an internet discussion forum I particularly like the way you wont be swayed by facts argument or logic and are firmly entrenched in a position formed not by again, facts, arguments or logic, and refuse to budge.

What did you think you were going to achieve by writing the above? Gay rights campaigners are just going to realise you cannot be reasoned with and just give up?

rsynnott

woody wrote:

I'd say yes to them having equal human rights but no to marraige as it is simply not natural, as is the practice... That is my opinion and dont jump down my throat but we are being more and more acclimatised to the gay way and it is getting to the stage wrong is right... It is against nature,most religious beliefs and generally immoral...

God made man and woman not for two people of either sex to have sexual relations and it is against the law of the bible...

I wont hurt someone for being like that but I wont certainly condone it as it is pure and simple sick and unnatural...

BTW that is my opinion if you dont like it tough, I have no intention of changing it and know for a fact it is correct....

So do you have any basis for this opinion whatsoever? And, when most higher mammals indulge to some extent, how does the non-natural thing work?

Also, how do you know for a fact that your opinion is correct? Do you know what 'opinion' means?

As we are a secular state, the alleged opinions of this god person (or whichever version of him you're referring to) are really rather beside the point.

Tha Gopher

I think the fact posters here are more concerned about being seen to be tolerant and such at the expense of a childs social standing is actually quite scary. I havent read the whole thread seeing as its longer than the bible, but what I have seen beggars belief. Anyone who belives that a child raised by two men is just as likely to get picked on as the fat kid, the ginger kid, the only black kid, the English/spotty/glasses wearing/pick your unique bully target kid, is living in a dream world. You wont get any parents forbidding their children from hanging around with a ginger kid based on his hair colour. Unless the parents are crazed ra heads theyre not going to demand their kids cold shoulder the English kid. Unless theyre the Stormfront webmaster theyll have no problem with them palling around with the black kid. But in all honesty, in Ireland do you really think there are many parents who would, for example, allow their young son to sleep over with a kid whos parents are gay? Dublin is a place where goth kids are brutally beaten on a daily basis (and Ive no love for goths, but thats another point )- how the hell do you think a kid who has grown up for 15 years with two dads will get treated in that climate?

Ive said it once and Ill say it again- there are certain people on boards who, if they managed to get elected to office, would be a severe threat to the culture, traditions and freedoms of our country. Would you honestly want to be the child who is raised by gay parents, to put up with the taunts, the piss taking etc etc. To introduce both your fathers to your girlfriend/new mates? Having little/no contact with the mother, as many of the kids in this situation have. Before you get on a high horse about the whole thing ffs think about the consequences for the child.

RobEire wrote:

There is this strange misconception that all gays are paedophiles. True, quite a few paedophiles are gay......

This is another one that always made me laugh re the whole PC dimension, with one boards user on a thread years back claiming the two subjects had NOTHING to do with each other. Which is odd, as I recall a case where a man accused of abusing young girls used the defence that he was gay and would therefore have absloutely no interest in young girls. Presumably only a minority is allowed to use this defence- I somehow doubt that an adult would be allowed to take the stand in court and claim a defendant regarded by most people as straight was secretly gay, as it would prejudice the trial.

3% of priests who served in Dublin in the last 60 years have been accused of abuse, the vast majority involving boys. Of course, accusations are not proof, but considering that at the very most maybe 2-3% of males are gay (IIRC some study suggested the amount in the priesthood might be 30-40%), then a 10% rate of alledged deviancy is quite alarming. My point is not politically correct. Posting that foreign criminals are responsible for most Irish ATM scams is not PC. Neither is supporting the deportation of that Nigerian student who has managed to notch up a pretty bad arrest record in his short spell here. Nor is mandatory screening of new immigrants for potentially lethal contagious disease upon entry. Quite a few important issues arent PC, but it doesnt mean they should not be discussed. Recognise that rambling on PC nonsense is not big or clever, and in some cases is nothing short of dangerous.

Freelancer wrote:

In fact a Australian friend had a class mate who's mother was eaten by a shark. While cleaning barnacles off their boat, in front of her children; who were greeted on their first day back at school, by class mates running after them chanting the theme from Jaws.

Ah yes, but that story isnt actually true;) Sorry but ive heard more colourful stories to back up a PC arguement on boards then yiv had hot dinners

rsynnott

Tha Gopher wrote:

3% of priests who served in Dublin in the last 60 years have been accused of abuse, the vast majority involving boys. Of course, accusations are not proof, but considering that at the very most maybe 2-3% of males are gay (IIRC some study suggested the amount in the priesthood might be 30-40%), then a 10% rate of alledged deviancy is quite alarming.

Sorry, what do you think these numbers mean? What are you trying to say? The generally accepted theory is that paedophiles go for youth, not gender. Priests tended to have more access to boys, obviously. (In any case, the 'vast majority' is not at all accurate). Do you have any ACTUAL evidence of a link between homosexuality and paedophilia, of is it just something you like to imagine?