The Gaybys

swiss

A few days ago, the story broke that two Gay partners are legal custodians of triplets (the children in question have been dubbed 'The Gaybys') Legally, they are entitled to this guardianship, but that hasn't stopped people from questioning the moral implications of gay couples having custodial rights over children.

Is society right to say that these people are any less capable of looking after, caring for, or indeed loving their children? Does the fact that they are gay make them less suited to parents?

Without wishing to attract comment from the homophobes among us - I would say that these men do have a right to raise children, as do normal heterosexual couples who adopt children.

I acknowledge that many people question the morality of homosexuals, and hence question how people, who, in their view engage in 'immoral' behaviour should be given the responsibility of giving moral guidance to 'their' children. Others will say that, without a female role model in their lives, the development of these children is regressed, and for this reason alone, they should not be allowed in the care of homosexuals. More will point to the fact that these children will face the stigma of having being raised in such a culture. People who believe that 'being gay' arises through circumstance - rather than as a result of genetic factors will also react with dismay to this development.

It is certainly true to say that these children will face some social isolation and abuse because of their circumstance. Material wealth does not always guarantee happiness, particularly in this case. However, I believe that they will demonstrate as well as other children that they are capable of integrating into society with minimal negative repercussions (which will always arise through anti-homosexual sentiment expressed by others). I also feel that it benefits society as a whole to confront these issues, rather than allow them to fester in willing ignorance. Only by facing these issues can we finally come with a fair and balanced view, as a whole, towards such a contentious issue.

Paladin

Personally I think that 2 men are just as capabale as 1 man/1 woman. Some children have only 1 parent or worse.

Of course the kid could get some serious teasing during school.....

chernobyl

i certainly dont think i am in a position to question the morality of gay ppl as i am for sure a sinner.

I always wonder why ppl argue that gay is wrong, jesus if these ppl had a choice they would hardly wanna be gay, and i doubt they chose to be gay (or openly gay) just for the fun of it.

I keep my nose in my business.


But the arrangment is fine by me.

---

Ashley Lyn

Ashley Lyn Cafagna

Karl Hungus

Personaly, I don't see anything wrong with it at all.
I mean, why shouldn't the kids get on as well with this gay couple, as with a normal family?

I personaly know a few gay people, and I would say that they are decent people, even more so than some heterosexual people I could make light of.

But... Homosexuality has only been legalised in britan in the last few years, so... Can you really blame people for being so alienated?

Lucutus

The one thing I do have concern about tho, is the surrogate(sp?) mother thing.

There are plenty of children who need to be adopted, who need parents, and a loving stable home/family life. I beleive that this is where ANYONE who is unable to bear children themselves should go, should they feel the need to raise kids... a legal adoption 'agency'.

And yes, I do see the point that a gay couple would probably be refused, but that's a problem for society to sort out about itself, not a gay couple.

Asking the 'services' of a woman to bear a child for you and your partner is wrong imho, especially if there's money involved,(dunno if there was in this particular case, anyone put me right on this?).

Money for Babies? Think about it.

BlitzKrieg

Isint Gay marraige legel in Germany now?


gonna be very interesting when that gets brought up here.

chernobyl

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by BlitzKrieg:
Isint Gay marraige legel in Germany now?
</font>

legel

whats that??, some new "until the end of time", marriage adhesive.

---

Ashley Lyn

Ashley Lyn Cafagna

BlitzKrieg

I was watching CNN in skopj airport and it said that gay couples getting married have legel support and all the rights of a normal couple in the eyes of the state. It showed first lesbian and gay marraige.

azezil

2 men raising a child doesn't seem wrong to me at all, the only reason (if i was judging the case) that i would have any hesitation would be because of the way society would treat them.

Childhood teasing is hard on any child in this situation it could be particularly bad, we all know emotional scars take far longer to heal than the physical.

So maybe some ppl would think it unfair to put a child tru that, but hey maybe they'll be lucky n the kidz they go to school will be more understanding than we give them credit for...

---

"just because you're not paraniod, doesn't mean they're not after you!"



[This message has been edited by azezil (edited 13-08-2001).]

entropi

Post nitpicking spelling deleted.

[This message has been edited by Castor Troy (edited 13-08-2001).]

Shinji

I don't see it as a problem. If the kids are being raised by two people in a loving relationship who are committed to each other and to the children, that's what counts... Matters of gender and sexuality are inconsequential.

Given what a diabolical job many heterosexual couples and single parents do of childraising...

As for the teasing in school, everyone gets teased in school for something. If you're weak, kids will find things to tease you about - be it having red hair, living in a single parent family... Anything is a target. If you're not weak, even the biggest "flaws" in your lifestyle get overlooked. And lets face it, a kid from a loving family - any loving family, no matter how far from the ideal of the nuclear family - is going to deal with childish taunts a hell of a lot better, right?

the fnj

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by chernobyl:

if these ppl had a choice they would hardly wanna be gay, and i doubt they chose to be gay (or openly gay) just for the fun of it.
</font>

Thats a terrible thing to say!


Could a homosexual couple raise a child?

Here are my thoughts.

My major concern is the screening process. I do feel they would have to be very careful when picking a couple. It's going to be tougher for two homosexuals to raise a child due to societies way of stigmatising them.

At the end of the day a child needs love, care, strong moral guidance. A strong male and female influence does not necessarily have to be a parent/guardian. A friend of the family close to the child can do this just as well.

There are so many children being mistreated and abused. Walk down Grafton Street and look at the kids being forced to sing, or the children who beg on the street to feed parents addiction. There are so many heterosexual and homosexual couples out there willing to help raise a child in a safe and loving environment.

Shinji

Er yes, that is a rather terrible thing to say. I hadn't noticed that post before.

You think, chernobyl, that there aren't gay people out there who are perfectly happy with their sexuality and perfecly well-adjusted in their lives?

Obviously your sexuality isn't something you get to choose, but assuming that someone, given a choice, wouldn't want to be gay... Well, is a bit stupid really.

azezil

all this talk of "if they had a choice" reminded me of something i heard recently...

some, somebody or other believes that all ppl are born bi-sexual and during puberty they make a choice, one way or the other and over a period of time convince themself that that's their sexual preference...

Shinji

Er, rubbish. I do agree that humans are born fundamentally asexual/bisexual (nurture over nature) but it's been fairly conclusively proven that the decision of sexuality is set at a very early age - probably before a child is five or six. It's not an absolute value anyway, there's a sliding scale and I very much doubt anyone is really at either extreme. In fact, if you remove social factors, I'd say we're all a lot closer to the middle than we'd like to admit...

swiss

Phew! Perhaps that was just the paranoia in me, but I half expected a barrage of 'gays are scum'.

Y'see, I am gay. Despite what people said about chernobyl's comment that people would not choose to be gay (and I realise I can't speak for all gays), I'm in complete aggreement. There is no way, that given the choice I would want to alienate & marginalise myself in such a way from society, to prompt detractors to scorn and deride my very existence. I know that, as I become more comfortable with my sexuality, I would feel that I would not wish to change the way I am, as I would be denying my true self. However, I believe some tinge of regret/sadness will always remain. As for not being 'open' about it - sometimes when I go into a pub I like to leave with my teeth intact. Those who I feel should know - already know. As for the rest of the world, I should wait until it is ready.

Anyway, back to the point. It is of course fair to say that many homosexual couples would be far better guardians of children than many we see in society today, for example, those that abuse/deprive their children. Given the conservative views of many in society (remember homosexuality was illegal in Ireland too until a few years ago) I'm glad that so many are in aggreement that they should be allowed to keep these children.

Oh, BTW Lucutus the surrogate Woman in question was paid to have the children. I can't remember the exact figure, but I think it was somewhere in the region of $200,000. Morally speaking, I think it would have been better if the men had adopted children who were given up for adoption, who the could give a better life than their biological parents - however legal circumstances forced them to take this option.


Yup, and same sex marraiges are legal in Germany, as it is in Holland It's a step closer to more civic rights for gays. In Germany, the bill that gave these rights had stiff competition in more conservative areas of Germany however, reminding us that there is still a long way to go.

Doctúir

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by swiss:

Yup, and same sex marraiges are legal in Germany, as it is in Holland </font>

More like 'civil unions' in Germany i.e. a same sex couple do not have the same rights as a heterosexual couple (e.g. adoption and tax).
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2001/0802/wor5.htm

The Dutch, however, have granted full equal status so it's fair to call it 'marriage'.

Lucutus

Aha! Our cunning plan has worked! Lynch Him! lol Burn him first, then the witches!I'm surpised too that we haven't seen a loads of gh3y and fag0t on this thread!

So they did pay cash...I beleive that is wrong, I also beleive that they were trapped legally and left with little choice. This should change eventually. However, I'd say there's probably other ways to 'buy' a baby and I think that this surrogate mother thing is only driven by the need to "raise on of our own".
It's a shame, but what's done is done. I agree they should be left alone @ this stage. In the short term, before we have complete,(at least legal), acceptance of homosexuality, I beleive gay and lesbian couples should think twice before purchasing 'little strangers'.

Lucutus

TwoShedsJackson

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Lucutus:
Aha! Our cunning plan has worked! Lynch Him! lol Burn him first, then the witches!I'm surpised too that we haven't seen a loads of gh3y and fag0t on this thread!
</font>

If anything like that was posted I would delete it forthwith. People can argue against letting gay couples adopt children if they like, if they keep it civil.

My own opinion is that there is no reason not to let gay couple adopt and/or raise children. There's no reason why, on an indivdual couple basis, that they aren't just as well able to bring children up properly as a 'traditional' couple.

The main reason some are opposed to it is they the think the child will 'catch the gay' from it's parents or some ignorant $hit like that. I agree in this particular case the couple might have considered it a little longer, but on the other hand progress will never be made unless someone moves first.

Xterminator

If the gay couple pass a screening process, (as all couples should have to pass a screening test) that assures qualifed social workers that they are provide stable suitable envionrment for a child, and there is a child that needs such care, then I would have no problem with it.

On a not entirely unconnected issue. It has not been conclusively proved 1 way or another
if the trait of homosexuality is a 'genetic' pre programmed response, or a learned response, caused by reaction to the enviornment in which the child is raised.

Recent research which i saw an article on, suggests that genetics are responsible for far less of an individuals traits that previously thought. (Apparntly now the genome is mapped, they are trying to identify what all the different combinations mean etc.)

I think personally it is unlikely to be genetic, because such a commonality should be easily noticeable to researchers that 10% of the population say they are gay, and the same 10% have a 'gay gene' combination.

---

"Man, you go through life, you try to be nice to people, you struggle against the urge to punch ‘em in the face, and for what?! For some pimply little puke to treat you like dirt unless you're on a team. Well I'm better than dirt ... well most kinds of dirt. I mean, not that fancy, store-bought dirt. That stuff’s loaded with nutrients. I …I can't compete with that stuff."
-Moe Szyslak

Doctúir

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Xterminator:
I think personally it is unlikely to be genetic, because such a commonality should be easily noticeable to researchers that 10% of the population say they are gay, and the same 10% have a 'gay gene' combination.
</font>

That depends on how many researchers are actively searching for a 'gay gene' . I would think that they have more pressing issues on their minds (leukaemia, alzheimer's etc.).You're also assuming that it's a single gene. Considering that you're dealing with something as complex as human behaviour, it could well be spread across an array of genes and therefore much more difficult to pin down.

In any case, trying to tie it to either nature *or* nurture misses the point IMHO. If, for example, I have a genetic predispostion for lung cancer when exposed over prolonged periods to the chemicals in cigarette smoke, then those genes only come into play if I actually inhale (unlike Bill Clinton).

It's the combination of both genes and environment that matters. Separating the two leads to this genetic determinism nonsense e.g. my genes made me an alcoholic/rapist/bank manager.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by The FANJ:
I really think the concern of some people to the child “catching gay” could be well founded if a badly screen couple was selected. </font>

PLEASE READ ALL OF THIS BEFORE GETTING OPFFENDED

This is what it boils down to, isnt it. Society in general still sees being gay as an affliction. It is, however, an affliction which we have to accomodate in our society.

So, much like people in wheelchairs get wider doors, ramps and so on, so that they are not excluded from aspects of normal life, socirty sees itself as "permitting" gays to be legal, to have legally-recognised relationships (state marriages even) and so on.

However, I still feel that under all that, society in general still sees being gay as "wrong", which is exactly where the "catching gay" idea comes from. If there was nothing wrong with being gay, then there would be no problem with a gay couple raising a child, who in turn ended up being gay.

Which is how it should be, IMHO. There should be no problem. Being homosexual is not an affliction, an illness, or indeed an aberration. It should not be viewed nor treated as one. It should not be an issue in anything where it cannot be shown to be a problem.

Regarding the screening process idea - its fair enough and not discriminatory as hetero couples get screened if they try and adopt. On a side issue, I wonder how long it will be before you will be screened in order to *have* a child, rather than adopt someone elses?

I do, however, have a major with anyone willing to sell a child for cash, and a society that is willing to permit it - regardless of the circumstances.

jc

the fnj

That may be so but bringing a child up to be gay, straight, a bus driver, whatever is wrong. Trying to force somthing onto a child or heavily trying to influence a child into doing somthing that they may not find natural is not fair to them.

[This message has been edited by The FANJ (edited 14-08-2001).]

swiss

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Lucutus:
Aha! Our cunning plan has worked! Lynch Him! lol Burn him first, then the witches!I'm surpised too that we haven't seen a loads of gh3y and fag0t on this thread!</font>

lol. Reminds me of a quote of another boards poster (his/her signature quote) that goes something along the lines of ... People of the boards, I have a cunning plan...etc.

Hmm... I know why Castor Troy said that he would have deleted this post. However, I sometimes wonder at how people can get offended on behalf of other people. I (for one) don't detect any sign of malice in that post, if I did then I would be (rightly) offended.

I totally agree with vetting prospective adoptive couples though (w/o reference to their sexuality). Whatever about biological parents, who have (in most cases) a natural affinity with their children, I feel that putting children in the hands of strangers is a responsibility that lies chiefly with the couple in question, but partly with the society that would put these children in their hands.

As an aside (and maybe going off-topic a little, but I've done that already) an example of how things can become legally and morally 'confused' in relation to surrogacy was highlighted by the case of a British surrogate mother that refused to abort one of her twins for a prospective American couple who wanted just one child. I thought that was disgusting. Who were that couple to dictate to that woman whether or not she could keep their child. Ahem, anyway..

About the 'born gay thing'.. I've done a little (but not a lot) of research in this matter and...

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Posted by me on another board

Nobody knows conclusively what causes gayness. One possible explanation is that one is 'born gay'. Many believe that homosexual tendencies have their basis in genetics, and though no studies definitively pinpoint a cause, or even link, I am reliably informed that one study suggests that it has to do with "the elongation of androgens present in the telencephalon and rhombencephalon of the foetus", which basically refers to a steroid hormone in the posterior of the brain which relates to the development of masculine features.
Other theories are pretty psychological in nature.
Freud (and I really don't want to get into him) suggests that inadequete sexual development in early infancy (sounds sick I know, but this is what the man says) particularly in the 'phallic' and 'anal' stages is to blame for sexual disorders, including homosexuality, but then if you actually read what he has to say you'll realise that he relates practically *every* psychological condition to inadequete early (more often than not) sexual development. He says as well that normal behaviourisms arise from very questionable emotions about our own families, so don't take his theories without a pinch of salt.
</font>

Circumstances may have changed since I posted that... maybe more is now known, though I doubt it.
Personally, I didn't have any 'gay' influences in my life. *Thinks hard* No, I doubt it very much. So go figure.

Anyway, thanks Shinji. I wouldn't now try to change who I am, since I've already spent the best part of my adolescent life doing that - and failed (making myself very unhappy/confused in the process)

Shinji

Depends what you mean by "gay influences" really. It's chaos theory isn't it; a butterfly flaps its wings in Tokyo, you get a hurricane in Florida. Same thing applies to people's personalities.

It's really a shame that our society does force people to try and change themeselves to "fit in". Gay people try to repress their personalities and lead unhappy lives. Overweight people become anorexic people...

It's not like there isn't enough room for everyone to get along with their own lives without passing judgement on what everyone else gets up to...

popinfresh

Well, personally I'm seriously opposed to gay couples adopting children. Not because I'm a big homophobic Nazi, but because we have to face the fact that children being adopted are not going to have a nice life. I agree that this shouldn't be the case but it's true. That is gonna be 1 confused child. Imagine the slaggings his friends will give him(if he does have any friends)

Chaos-Engine

2 Homosexual man adopting a child is fine by me. At least they r lucky to have 2 parents unlike myself and a growing number of my generation and the new borns today.

Aslong as Lesbians who have undergone artifical insemination don't go about picking which sex they want their child i don't mind homosexual couples raising children...
Schools need to change their attitudes to sexuality... they should teach children that u can find love in Men and Women... not Usually the opposite sex or like your parents... But anyone....

Life and let live
Love and be loved

---

"Information is Ammunition"
Choas Engine
Email: choas@netshop.ie
ICQ: 34896460

the fnj

For the benifit of Lucutus and Swiss.

Those people are ****ing sick in their heads their nothing but beelden scumbags if I got my hands on them I'd bloodly tear them to shreds feicing queers. But then again I don't mind watching those lesbo's at it on my video collection but thats completely differne to two blokes going at it sick ****ers! Gwan Celtic, up the RA.

Sorry couldn't resist.

I really think the concern of some people to the child “catching gay” could be well founded if a badly screen couple was selected. I have come across gay people who are as ignorant as mud and also seem to have a major problem towards women. There’s going to be idiots in every walk of life and there are also so many “straight” couples out there already that should not be allowed to have kids and nothing is done about it.

So leave the “Gaybys” alone as long. As their child is happy and feels loved and secure I really don’t have a problem with it.

Shinji

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Despite what people said about chernobyl's comment that people would not choose to be gay (and I realise I can't speak for all gays), I'm in complete aggreement. There is no way, that given the choice I would want to alienate & marginalise myself in such a way from society, to prompt detractors to scorn and deride my very existence.</font>

You find your own place and you make yourself comfortable there. I don't mean in terms of where you live obviously; I mean the people you're comfortable with, etc.

The point is that you don't want to change your sexuality, you want to change how people see and react to your sexuality - which is understandable. But finding your place with people who like you for being, well, you, is a far better way to lead your life than trying to convince the stupid homophobics of this world otherwise, or trying to change who you are... And allowing the attitudes of the ignorant to make you unhappy is foolish. After all, they're the ones that will undoubtedly die stupid and lonely.

chernobyl

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by popinfresh:
Well, personally I'm seriously opposed to gay couples adopting children. Not because I'm a big homophobic Nazi, but because we have to face the fact that children being adopted are not going to have a nice life. I agree that this shouldn't be the case but it's true. That is gonna be 1 confused child. Imagine the slaggings his friends will give him(if he does have any friends)</font>

Life is not nice, regardless of who your parents are.

---

Ashley Lyn

Ashley Lyn Cafagna

popinfresh

But usually life is just fuked up, this child's life is gonna be seriously fuked up.

swiss

Seriously f*cked up? Hmm, it would be fair to say that the kids would be teased & bullied at school. Kid's (as well as some adults) can be very cruel in this regard. A child can get teased/bullied for a plethora of reasons (i.e being too short/skinny/fat etc, coming from a certain locality etc) while we don't condone this behaviour it is generally accepted that we can't protect kids all the time from this without seriously adversely affecting their social interaction. Granted, having homosexual guardians is, one can imagine, a pretty big reason why a child can get picked on, but there are many children out there who have difficult lives. Does that mean, for example, that we should take the children from couples who are incapable of supporting them? One can imagine the furore if such a decision was adopted (excuse the pun).

As an aside, do you believe that homosexual behaviour is morally wrong? Does that make homosexuals and/or those that engage in homosexual activity morally defunct?

There are some that hold this viewpoint. I was reading in the 'letters to the Editor' section of the Irish Independant yesterday a letter that expressed grave disappointment and disgust at the 'depravation of morals' that allowed this to take place.

I've tried to hold a neutral viewpoint on this, but given my circumstances I find that I cannot. Who knows if I may find myself in the same position as these men who now face the glare of media attention for their desire to bring up children - an epitome of happiness for many couples.

swiss

Oooh I've just realised that that last post was reply number 31.
This is now a hot topic.
My first.. woo - hoo.

Kolodny

I agree with the view that the important thing is that these babies grow up in a loving family environment. The sexuality of their parents is not important. The fact that they have parents at all is. As for getting a hard time at school, a lot of kids do for a variety of reasons, as long as these kids grow up knowing they are teased because their situation is not understood by all of society and not because it is wrong, they'll grow up to be more open minded than most of the planet's population.

_CreeD_

...Or they would grow up resenting those they believed put them in the position of being picked on when they were kids. On one side you have remorseless kiddies, on the other loving parents, kids (and most adults) will take the path of least resistance and hate the parents just to fit in with the idiots they should be ignoring. I think the character of the child will decide if they survive as open-minded or deliberately ignorant, not the situation - it's just the testing ground.

I have no problems with straight/gay/lesbian couples adopting/birthing kids so long as their own sexuality is never deliberately imprinted onto the child. There are many gay, and moreso lesbian in my experience, people out there who have an instinctive hate for people of the opposite sex (usually due to botched relationships, where of course the other sex was to blame...not the fact that they were unknowingly of the wrong gender...but thats a whole other topic). Anyway, they have about as much right to adopt a child as any homophobe...Nil imho.

I dont think you can 'catch gay', no more than you can 'catch straight', as Shinji pointed out the latency is always there to some degree. If there is a higher proportion of gay adults arising from being adopted by a gay couple It'd be more due to them having greater freedom to express their natural tendency than anything else I think.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by _CreeD_:
I have no problems with straight/gay/lesbian couples adopting/birthing kids so long as their own sexuality is never deliberately imprinted onto the child. </font>

Why not? Hetero people will generally deliberately imprint their sexuality onto a child. Is this also wrong?

On the other hand, if you acknowledge that we dont know exactly why people turn out hetero or homo, then how can you imprint sexuality on the child at all???

If you mean the "man hating" lesbians (there are some out there) rearing a child to hate men...then fair enough, I take your point.

On the other hand, surely its a moot point, because I dont think anyone here would never condone any parent teaching a child to hate any group (be it political, sexual, racial, or whatever).

jc

Shinji

Well quite. I do agree with the idea that people should have to be licensed to raise children, be they adopted or their own kids; and I'm fairly sure than man-hating lesbians or whatever, are pretty unlikely to pass any kind of parenting test...

(Oddly, I've met a few man-hating lesbians, but not that many... I've never met any woman-hating gays. Weird?)

_CreeD_

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bonkey:
Why not? Hetero people will generally deliberately imprint their sexuality onto a child. Is this also wrong?

On the other hand, if you acknowledge that we dont know exactly why people turn out hetero or homo, then how can you imprint sexuality on the child at all???

If you mean the "man hating" lesbians (there are some out there) rearing a child to hate men...then fair enough, I take your point.

jc</font>

I said Straight/gay/lesbian...Everyone.
I don't think any parent should try and force any sexual preference on a child. Simple as that.
It's not really hyprocitical saying this, and then that I don't think people 'catch' a sexual preference - kids/teens can be pressured into complying with a parent's/society's ideal, while it is not actually the right path for them.
All bar one of the gay/lesbian people I know had many hetero relationships due to social pressure, confusion and the fear of dealing with the problems they will face if they are really homosexual.

Basically it is not possible to change someone's sexuality, but it is possible to force them into denying it. And that's what I meant should be avoided at all costs.

popinfresh

Wells all i knows is that I am not a homophobic, but I would personally (as a 14yr old)hate if my parents were two men. I would rather not living. Not to offend gay ppl, but people generally want to be viewed as normal, and having 2 da's is just too big an obsticle.

Vorosha

Having two dads would be really cool, I think. You'd get to watch the footy all the time and no Ali McBeal and no-one would complain about the water on the bathroom floor and we could all drink beers and just have a laugh. Loads of lads nights in etc.etc.

popinfresh

As far as I know, gay people watch Ally mc'Beal..

chernobyl

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by popinfresh:
As far as I know, gay people watch Ally mc'Beal..</font>

[also to add]and no doubt straight ppl do too[/also to add]

---

Ashley Lyn

Ashley Lyn Cafagna

[This message has been edited by chernobyl (edited 17-08-2001).]