Gays want to take over the rest of Society?

thebullkf

K-9 wrote: »

I know you advocate fathers rights so,

What does maternal warmth mean?

maternal bond between mother and child. the strongest bond between most if not all species, i truly believe there is a special bond between mother and child which men cannot and will not fathom until they undergo a 9 month pregnancy which is unlikely:D

women are more naturally inclined towards children (not all mind you) surely we can all agree on that.

FWIW i know of gay couples who foster nicer people you couldn't meet.

before ivf the future of our species would've depended on heterosexual relations for reproduction at the least, i'm all for equality but imho posters fear retribution from a minority on boards here for expressing dislike for gay people or anything affiliated with it, the more people vehemently oppose peoples opinions no matter how bigotted they appear the les its discussed and dealt with.

As with all things education is the key. Incidentallyin our courts mothers have all of the rights even when their child is in foster care.

Unmarried fathers on the other hand don't even have legal guardianship of their own kids.>!:rolleyes:

JamJamJamJam

Dunno if this has been posted already, but the highest rated comment under the article is as follows:

Charlotte -

"
Here, Eamon, I translated your article to make it a bit more to-the-point.

"It's okay that I'm opening with a sentence that almost always prefaces some serious homophobia, because - tee hee! - I'm AWARE of it!

For some reason, it bothers me that gay people might get close to having the same rights as me.

It really bothers me that lots of gay people today want to get married. Why, some other gay people ages ago said they DIDN'T want to get married. What's up with different people having different goals in life?

If you like to have sex with people who have the same bits as you, it's your job to be "edgy and experimental" - you're not allowed want the same things as everyone else.

ARGH! Some gay people do want to settle down and get married and have jobs and babies. Other gay people want to go to lots of parties and are less enthusiastic about settling down. These two facts together are enough to break my brain! (Thank goodness straight people aren't so confusing and variable, though.)

Society does not expect straight men to be at all interested in sex. Let us all take a moment to pity them.

I'm just going to state that gay parents are terrible for the children. We all know it's true, so I can skip the boring bit where I back up that statement with any actual facts or citations or references.

It's really upsetting that an expert in law and human rights disagrees with me. Even the conservative Catholic arguing with her is not being hardline enough. The punters in the pub think I'm bang on the money, though, so it's pretty clear that I'm in the right here.

A liberal newspaper seems to think that a column about a two father/one mother family is of interest to their readers. Of course, their only reason for doing this is to upset me and the poor unfortunate privileged people like me.

This newspaper believes that the relationship between female parent and biological child is better and more important than any other parent/child relationship. Citation: this newspaper.

There's this guy, right, and he has the gall to say he thinks gay men can be parents. Like, what about the breastfeeding? That's the most important thing you can do for an adoptive child (regardless of their age, I guess?) Heterosexual adoptive parents always breastfeed, you know.

Yikes, I've gone fourteen whole paragraphs without bashing bisexuals and transgender people. What's up with them? Do they even exist? Sheesh. Okay, prejudice on record, moving on.

Now, the Human Rights Commissioner for Northern Ireland confirms that "gay rights" issues are indeed human rights issues. You might not think this supports my position, but since I'm clearly right it must do, yes?

Lastly, let me point out that the inevitable consequence of treating gay people like people will be mandatory gay quotas. Now watch as I smooth over this lovely exercise in small-minded prejudice by namedropping a gay activist without bashing him. That's how it's done, folks." "

:P

thebullkf

woodoo wrote: »

There is alot i agree with in that post. I have been arguing that the ideal is the man woman and child and i stand by that.

Yes two gay parents would be better than an orphanage. But i'd prefer if they were adopted by a mixed sex couple or fostered by a mixed sex couple.

What would happen in full rights for same sex and mixed sex adoption. Say a child came up for adoption and there were 2 couples interested in adopting. Two gay men and a man and a woman. Who should get the child? How would it be decided.

despite other posters replies { and all things being equal eg financial status,background checks,education, etc } the courts would side with the Male/female combo as opposed to same sex couples

MrStuffins

thebullkf wrote: »

maternal bond between mother and child. the strongest bond between most if not all species, i truly believe there is a special bond between mother and child which men cannot and will not fathom until they undergo a 9 month pregnancy which is unlikely:D

women are more naturally inclined towards children (not all mind you) surely we can all agree on that.

Great.

Then 2 women being parents to a child should be awesome!

geetar

how was this published in a newspaper?

such unbelievable shíte. its one thing having opinions, but to allow such a controversial article to be published is either a publicity stunt or plain ignorance.

i fear its the later.



as for the writer, if he thinks he can say "ive a few gay friends" and then be allowed to bash them its fúckin lunacy.

he says theyve forgotten that theyre the minority... ffs.

since when has the minority become less then deserving of equal rights. he contradicts himself up his own arse. what a total scumbag.

thebullkf

If there were two couples of equal means and age electing to adopt and one was male-female and the other same sex what couple would you deem successful?

Both couples equal in every way, only difference being sexuality.

1) what decision would you make?

2)Why?

Genuinely interested in hearing peoples answers on this, dunno how to create a poll here but i wonder if Mods allow it/facilitate it perhaps

thebullkf

MrStuffins wrote: »

Great.

Then 2 women being parents to a child should be awesome!

they would both with male partners and bearing their own children.

MrStuffins

thebullkf wrote: »

they would both with male partners and bearing their own children.

Yeah that too.

I'm glad we agree.

jaffacakesyum

thebullkf wrote: »

If there were two couples of equal means and age electing to adopt and one was male-female and the other same sex what couple would you deem successful?

Both couples equal in every way, only difference being sexuality.

1) what decision would you make?

2)Why?

Genuinely interested in hearing peoples answers on this, dunno how to create a poll here but i wonder if Mods allow it/facilitate it perhaps

I'm bi (but leaning more towards the gay end of the spectrum :pac: ) and I would choose the heterosexual couple over the homosexual couple only when all other areas are equal

The simple reason being, that I think a child should have a father figure and a mother figure. That said, if the gay couple were 'better' in any other way e.g. better references, waiting longer, clearly the more loving couple etc. then of course they should be picked over the heterosexual couple.

Just my opinion

Paparazzo

thebullkf wrote: »

maternal bond between mother and child. the strongest bond between most if not all species, i truly believe there is a special bond between mother and child which men cannot and will not fathom until they undergo a 9 month pregnancy which is unlikely:D

women are more naturally inclined towards children (not all mind you) surely we can all agree on that.

FWIW i know of gay couples who foster nicer people you couldn't meet.

before ivf the future of our species would've depended on heterosexual relations for reproduction at the least, i'm all for equality but imho posters fear retribution from a minority on boards here for expressing dislike for gay people or anything affiliated with it, the more people vehemently oppose peoples opinions no matter how bigotted they appear the les its discussed and dealt with.

As with all things education is the key. Incidentallyin our courts mothers have all of the rights even when their child is in foster care.

Unmarried fathers on the other hand don't even have legal guardianship of their own kids.>!:rolleyes:

If the mother has to carry the baby for 9 months for "maternal warmth", then surely all adoption is as bad?

thebullkf

Paparazzo wrote: »

If the mother has to carry the baby for 9 months for "maternal warmth", then surely all adoption is as bad?

as bad as what

i'm not saying adoptees can't genuinely feel maternal warmth, are you trying to put words in my mouth?....if not please explain:)

strobe

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

I'm bi (but leaning more towards the gay end of the spectrum :pac: ) and I would choose the heterosexual couple over the homosexual couple only when all other areas are equal

The simple reason being, that I think a child should have a father figure and a mother figure. That said, if the gay couple were 'better' in any other way e.g. better references, waiting longer, clearly the more loving couple etc. then of course they should be picked over the heterosexual couple.

Just my opinion

Yeah, what she said.

Killer Pigeon

thebullkf wrote: »

If there were two couples of equal means and age electing to adopt and one was male-female and the other same sex what couple would you deem successful?

Both couples equal in every way, only difference being sexuality.

1) what decision would you make?

2)Why?

Genuinely interested in hearing peoples answers on this, dunno how to create a poll here but i wonder if Mods allow it/facilitate it perhaps

Let me ask you a question

If you a two married couples. Both are exactly the same in every way; both have an equally good financial base, both couple in a loving relationship, etc..
Which couple would you choose in this scenario?

Personally I'd go for a flip of the coin.

K-9

thebullkf wrote: »

maternal bond between mother and child. the strongest bond between most if not all species, i truly believe there is a special bond between mother and child which men cannot and will not fathom until they undergo a 9 month pregnancy which is unlikely:D

women are more naturally inclined towards children (not all mind you) surely we can all agree on that.

FWIW i know of gay couples who foster nicer people you couldn't meet.

before ivf the future of our species would've depended on heterosexual relations for reproduction at the least, i'm all for equality but imho posters fear retribution from a minority on boards here for expressing dislike for gay people or anything affiliated with it, the more people vehemently oppose peoples opinions no matter how bigotted they appear the les its discussed and dealt with.

As with all things education is the key. Incidentallyin our courts mothers have all of the rights even when their child is in foster care.

Unmarried fathers on the other hand don't even have legal guardianship of their own kids.>!:rolleyes:

Why would you say Maternal warmth is sooooo important and then make an issue of unmarried fathers rights?

I'm trying to figure this one out.

eightyfish

thebullkf wrote: »

If there were two couples of equal means and age electing to adopt and one was male-female and the other same sex what couple would you deem successful? Both couples equal in every way, only difference being sexuality.

Stupid question.

Two couples are identical except one couple are black and the other couple are white, which do you choose?

thebullkf

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

Let me ask you a question

If you a two married couples. Both are exactly the same in every way; both have an equally good financial base, both couple in a loving relationship, etc..
Which couple would you choose in this scenario?

Personally I'd go for a flip of the coin.

what have two heterosexual couples got to do with my scenario

this thread is based on gay couples.

i suggest you start your own thread.;)

And i certainly wouldn't decide on a childs destination on a toss of a coin, thats just stupid.

thebullkf

eightyfish wrote: »

Stupid question.

Two couples are identical except one couple are black and the other couple are white, which do you choose?

you are correct, your question is stupid, if you want to discuss race, i suggest you start your own thread, this is not about race.

MrStuffins

thebullkf wrote: »

what have two heterosexual couples got to do with my scenario

this thread is based on gay couples.

i suggest you start your own thread.;)

And i certainly wouldn't decide on a childs destination on their sexual orientation, thats just stupid.

FYP

thebullkf

MrStuffins wrote: »

FYP

my post didn't require fixing.:rolleyes:

care to answer:)

eightyfish

thebullkf wrote: »

you are correct, your question is stupid, if you want to discuss race, i suggest you start your own thread, this is not about race.

My point is that a difference in race between the couples is as relevant as a difference in sexual orientation. Making the decision based on either race or sexual orientation would be discriminatory. Singling these out as the only things on which the decision can be made is stupid.

thebullkf

eightyfish wrote: »

My point is that a difference in race between the couples is as relevant as a difference in sexual orientation. Making the decision based on either race or sexual orientation would be discriminatory. Singling these out as the only things on which the decision can be made is stupid.

so now you're saying its discrimination not racism....:rolleyes:

start your own thread about racial discrimination .

or you can answer the question....

MrStuffins

thebullkf wrote: »

so now you're saying its discrimination not racism....:rolleyes:

start your own thread about racial discrimination .

or you can answer the question....

If I understand correctly, his point was ALWAYS that is was discrimination.

Race and sexual orientation are both covered under discrimination legislation.

thebullkf

MrStuffins wrote: »

If I understand correctly, his point was ALWAYS that is was discrimination.

Race and sexual orientation are both covered under discrimination legislation.

please stop dragging it off topic and ignoring the question.

if you'd rather not answer then don't.

and yet again you're answering for other posters....

MrStuffins

thebullkf wrote: »

please stop dragging it off topic and ignoring the question.

if you'd rather not answer then don't.

and yet again you're answering for other posters....

Off topic? My post was on topic.

And if you're refering to the question about your post that I "fixed" then all you have to do is read it.

K-9

K-9 wrote: »

Why would you say Maternal warmth is sooooo important and then make an issue of unmarried fathers rights?

I'm trying to figure this one out.

thebullfk wrote:

or you can answer the question....

Can you answer that one seeing as you are demanding of others?

Killer Pigeon

thebullkf wrote: »

what have two heterosexual couples got to do with my scenario

this thread is based on gay couples.

i suggest you start your own thread.;)

And i certainly wouldn't decide on a childs destination on a toss of a coin, thats just stupid.

Oh pleeeeaaaasssse!

eightyfish

thebullkf wrote: »

so now you're saying its discrimination not racism....:rolleyes:

start your own thread about racial discrimination .

or you can answer the question....

I never mentioned racism I simply changed your question to mention something else that's an accident of birth, instead of sexuality.

You want an answer? There is no situation where the only difference between two prospective couples would be their sexuality and nothing else. But theoretically both couples should be able to adopt. So I guess the decider has to be who's higher on the waiting list.

thebullkf

MrStuffins wrote: »

Off topic? My post was on topic.

race has nothing to do with it. you know this.

And if you're refering to the question about your post that I "fixed" then all you have to do is read it.

i did read it. my was because it didn't require fixing. you're awfully good and getting things skewed to your POV.

Care to answer the question or yet more fudging:rolleyes:

thebullkf

K-9 wrote: »

Can you answer that one seeing as you are demanding of others?

i'm not demanding anything, i asked a simple question.

it was likend to racism, its not.

I will answer though.

the hetero couple all the time as balance is there and a child benefits more from having a mother and a father, all things being equal.

geetar

thebullkf wrote: »

so now you're saying its discrimination not racism....:rolleyes:

start your own thread about racial discrimination .

or you can answer the question....

you sir, are the biggest troll ever.

instead of asking people to start a new thread, why dont you answer their questoins intead of brushing them aside and sarcastically answering them with a smiley face:)

since when is a straight couple and minority discrimination not relevant to this topic?


answer the questions or gtfo.