Fair play lads. Vouge and Spencer will have serious competition for baby related content.
I was responding to the fatuous claim that the traditional model is no way better , I accept that the mum - dad pairing isn't always in place but it should still be the aspiration for society
We do not live in an ideal world though, so fallacy called right there.
At least they will never be short of flip-flops or radio spots.
There certainly are. Ones that have been tired, tested and challenged.
Can you even imagine a law preventing people from photographing their own children and uploading? It's simply ridiculous. EVERY parent in the country breaking the law when they send a picture of their kids to a grandparent via FB, Insta or WhatsApp or whatever socials they choose?
The consequences you are happy to accept would make 90%+ of parents a law breaker? Do you think this would be a good law, that would pass scrutiny and be accepted by the people?
So you are just back to asserting the same thing again. You know asserting something without citing a shred of evidence for it - does not become evidenced just because you keep saying it over and over again?
If you have any actual support for the claim this is an "ideal" I am all ears and will change my position instantly. The exact opposite of ideologues.
But as I said - shouting it over and over with your fingers in your ears is not going to modify reality to fit your preconceptions. Ideologue indeed! You are representing the label you are throwing at others :)
A mum and dad model is the ideal, anything else is just the opinions of ideologues
Surrogacy is basically rich people buying babies off poorer people. Wasn't ok when the church did it though.
Ticks the GAA box for Diversity & inclusion…..
These 2 prize turnips are with Noel Kelly PR I think?
I don't know about social media but every so often on my google news app feed there's a story about them idk from The Sun or The Mirror that usually goes something like '…have released this photo and their fans are just luvin it'. Wft they don't have 'fans', people who follow them on Instagram maybe. So I agree with you there's a lot of fakery around the promotion of these two in the press.
but there are plenty of laws for safeguarding children whether we want them or not. I’d happily take the consequences if it helped content-tots
Did not know that. Really don't follow them so just guessed.
I 100% would do the same if I had any, far too many weirdos out there. But the issue I am taking is your call for a law to stop them. It's very possible they ARE idiots as you say, I don't live in Ireland at the moment so literally only know the lad from Big Brother, but laws affect us all. So if you take something from them, you are taking it from me, you and everyone else here.
They used AI to generate the baby. And AI for the likes on social media.
It's the circle of life !
Arthur is bizarrely an ambassador for Gaa Cul Camps despite having no connection to the GAA.
Brian said he was infertile, so it is Arthurs.
@DoctorEdgeWild I don't put my kids on SM so wouldn't bother me, no one is interested in anyone else's kids. With the amount of weirdo's out there I just wouldn't do it. Yet gobsh1tes like this pair, post them daily, their bedroom, even on holidays in swim suits. They are idiots.
Brian is a Co host on one of Virgin Media's morning shows and Arthur is a judge on RTE's Dancing with the Stars. I wouldn't expect them to be rolling in cash but I'd say they make decent money.
Donar egg one of there sperms (maybe Brian this time as last one was Arthur) and sister carrying the baby to term
I know two gay guys over in Cambridge who just had a baby via a surrogate. Their friend actually offered to be the surrogate in this case. I've no doubt they'll be excellent parents, two really good guys. I don't get the big deal, you should see the state of some of the so called parents around where I live, strung out on heroin and screaming in their toddler's faces. Give me two stand up gay guys over lousy hetero parents any day.
But yes I don't know why I have to keep seeing these two gobsh*tes and their babies in the news, no one cares.
Do these 2 fellas have real jobs? Are they employed by any company in particular, or is there income solely based on them being 'in the news'?
Because if its the latter, these their 2 kids will be pimped for as long as it continues to being money into the house.
The other odd thing about this pair and their birthing carryon is that they have spawned several click bait stories on social media. Glance down the comments of these and there are apparently dozens and dozens and dozens of fawning Irish women congratulating the new parents.
No doubt there's the odd genuine one but overall the similarity between comments smacks of fakery and use of AI to generate supportive nonsense.
Could they really be that far up their own holes?
If YOU say so. I certainly didn't :) Not even close :)
All I said was that I see no evidence for such an assertion or any basis for such confidence. There seems to be no such "ideal". What makes it any more or less "ideal" than my family for example where I live with two women - have two kids with each of them - and so my children each are being parented by three parents?
I personally do not see either as more or less ideal. What I do see is that our situation has many advantages and many complexities. The end result is not automatically better or worse. Just different. Though if I were to use us a single example we are by many metrics doing "better" than most. If I look at life achievements thus far, academic results, and other measures we are doing much better than many peers.
But even then I do not think that's specifically because of the configuration. Another three parent family are probably have a terrible time of it. Single examples tell us nothing. So I would never use a single example to evaluate anything.
Sounds to me like your points are coming from an emotive place, not a logical one. (not a criticism btw, I wish more people cared about children's welfare and safety). But the same argument could be made about child TV actors/stars - People like McAuley Culkin had terrible problems stemming from their young stardom, but then others have had great careers and happy lives.
The problem with calling for laws is that they need to apply to everyone. So a law stopping this couple putting an image of their kid on social media would also apply to you and I. This is unfair and a major over reach of law.
It's a strange world they inhabit and likely foist on their children
I'm reminded of the mathematician who turned down $1M because he didn't want to be paraded like a monkey in a zoo he said
Yeah , how presumptuous of anyone to confidently claim that a mom and dad parenting model is the ideal
I agree fully - the way this pair carry on is very unwholesome. Surrogacy is a difficult area morally as it is, there are parents/ families out there who benefit from it in a quiet way and you'd have sympathy for them. But the carry on from this pair of tossers really undermines the concept and demonstrates that surrogacy is all about the needs of 'parents' and not about the needs of the children derived from such arrangements.
She has lived with them up until now, its not an ordinary surrogate situation, its all very very blurred. She has basically helped rear the older girl the whole thing is a mess.
On the laws, I don't know how you word it, but they are monitising their children, who is getting the money for it? Is the money for sponsored ad's being put away for her, I doubt it when they are paying 5k rent a month atm. There are already influencers children (first gen) coming out with how their lives have been ruined because every single moment of their lives has been shared online, from toilet training to where they sleep. It is morally wrong and just so this pair of buffoons can grift for a living.
Oh Christ
Your first sentence however even if true is more their problem than mine. They are the ones making the claim that one man and one woman is the "ideal" or that there is a "need" and therefore they are the ones who need to provide evidence for that claim. If the sample size for that evidence is small - they have to deal with that not me. All I can say is repeat that there appears to be no evidence on offer that any such need or ideal exists. So I do not buy any claim that declares outright there is one.
Your second sentence is just an assertion and I see nothing to support it. But even if I were to grant 100% credibility to the statement anyway then all I could say at most/best is "See paragraph 1". Same issue. It is a simple move from having no evidence for a claim to inventing excuses for having no evidence for that claim. At the end of the day the result is the same. The assertion has no evidence that this need or ideal exists.
And as I keep pointing out the real world seems to support this in that the world is punctuated by any number of people with "good" or "bad" upbringings who come from any number of parental configurations. My own children are being brought up by three parents. There are advantages and disadvantages to this. I do not however go around saying this is "better" or "worse" than any other. We can leave that to your imaginary "progressives" to make such value judgements in their culture wars. For me the only question is "Is there any reason to think a child NEEDS one man and one woman to parent them - or that they are markedly disadvantaged if they have anything but this configuration" and so far the the answer to this question appears to be a firm and clear "No".
Should any credible evidence to the contrary finally surface I will as always modify my position on the matter in response.
The sample size is tiny when it comes to gay parents and more importantly, the kind of folks who carry out such research are invariably progressives who are predisposed to a particular conclusion
