Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Gay Megathread (see mod note on post #2212)

1…7879818384…218

Comments

  • #2402
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    philologos wrote: »
    I rarely read Irish news sites, or papers. This is a broader topic than just in Irish society.




    I think that the biological issues around childbearing for LGBT parents are what distinguish it as a relationship structure from heterosexual ones. In heterosexual cases they are the exception rather than the rule.


    If LGBT meant "gay", you might be right. but it doesn't.


  • #2403
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    digger58 wrote: »

    Is it? funny I was born and reared on a farm and would disagree, we never called the AI man to a BULL, we didn't milk BULLS, in case you aren't aware, 2 males or 2 females can't reproduce naturally ( since you speak of nature) Tell the hetro section of society that contracted AIDS due to deviant behavior that it's natural and poses no danger!. I don't have a problem with homosexuality per se, so long as it's within the same like minded community and not imposed on anybody, BUT don't try and tell us its natural and safe.
    What's natural about artificial insemination? And how is homosexuality imposed on anyone?


  • #2404
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    digger58 wrote: »
    Is it? funny I was born and reared on a farm and would disagree, we never called the AI man to a BULL, we didn't milk BULLS, in case you aren't aware, 2 males or 2 females can't reproduce naturally ( since you speak of nature) Tell the hetro section of society that contracted AIDS due to deviant behavior that it's natural and poses no danger!. I don't have a problem with homosexuality per se, so long as it's within the same like minded community and not imposed on anybody, BUT don't try and tell us its natural and safe.

    the hetros are grand along as the use condoms, aren't they?


  • #2405
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    digger58 wrote: »
    Is it? funny I was born and reared on a farm and would disagree, we never called the AI man to a BULL, we didn't milk BULLS, in case you aren't aware, 2 males or 2 females can't reproduce naturally ( since you speak of nature) Tell the hetro section of society that contracted AIDS due to deviant behavior that it's natural and poses no danger!. I don't have a problem with homosexuality per se, so long as it's within the same like minded community and not imposed on anybody, BUT don't try and tell us its natural and safe.

    Damn Gays giving the lovely heterosexuals AIDS! Meet my friend Miss Information...


  • #2406
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    digger58 wrote: »
    Is it? funny I was born and reared on a farm and would disagree, we never called the AI man to a BULL, we didn't milk BULLS, in case you aren't aware, 2 males or 2 females can't reproduce naturally ( since you speak of nature) Tell the hetro section of society that contracted AIDS due to deviant behavior that it's natural and poses no danger!. I don't have a problem with homosexuality per se, so long as it's within the same like minded community and not imposed on anybody, BUT don't try and tell us its natural and safe.

    you're confusing gender and sexuality.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • #2407
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    digger58 wrote: »
    Is it? funny I was born and reared on a farm and would disagree, we never called the AI man to a BULL, we didn't milk BULLS, in case you aren't aware, 2 males or 2 females can't reproduce naturally ( since you speak of nature) Tell the hetro section of society that contracted AIDS due to deviant behavior that it's natural and poses no danger!. I don't have a problem with homosexuality per se, so long as it's within the same like minded community and not imposed on anybody, BUT don't try and tell us its natural and safe.

    Two things - there is nothing natural about artificial insemination, and that is the grossest oversimplification of how HIV/AIDS has become such a major public health issue that I've read in a while.


  • #2408
    digger58
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 291 ✭✭digger58


    AI is more natural than "inseminating" one of your own!


  • #2409
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    digger58 wrote: »
    AI is more natural than "inseminating" one of your own!

    :pac:

    you do realise that the 'A' in AI stands for artificial, as in "not natural"?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #2410
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    digger58 wrote: »
    AI is more natural than "inseminating" one of your own!

    Really??? How?


  • #2411
    digger58
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 291 ✭✭digger58


    Well done, what I said was that it was MORE natural than....., I never claimed it was totally natural


  • Advertisement
  • #2412
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    lazygal wrote: »
    What's natural about artificial insemination? And how is homosexuality imposed on anyone?

    I'm trying to figure out what "the same like minded community" is!


  • #2413
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    digger58 wrote: »
    Well done, what I said was that it was MORE natural than....., I never claimed it was totally natural

    What is difference when all is said and done?

    It's just a method for delivering sperm...:confused:


  • #2414
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    How is it 'more natural' though???


  • #2415
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Dig(ger) up, methinks...


  • #2416
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    digger58 wrote: »
    Well done, what I said was that it was MORE natural than....., I never claimed it was totally natural

    It's not natural at all, so how can it be more natural than homosexual sex? :confused:

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #2417
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    digger58 wrote: »
    Well done, what I said was that it was MORE natural than....., I never claimed it was totally natural
    Homosexuality exists in animals in nature too. What's natural about domesticating animals and fertilising them artificially? If you don't want to have a man ejaculate into your bodily orifices, you don't have to do that,no matter what a persuasive homosexual tries to tell you.


  • #2418
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    philologos wrote: »
    I rarely read Irish news sites, or papers. This is a broader topic than just in Irish society.




    I think that the biological issues around childbearing for LGBT parents are what distinguish it as a relationship structure from heterosexual ones. In heterosexual cases they are the exception rather than the rule.

    I think there are a few people who might want to have a word with you. They think the family environment that nurtures the mental and physical health of the child is more important than whether or not a baby is made when two people rub genitals together.


  • #2419
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Morbert wrote: »

    I think there are a few people who might want to have a word with you. They think the family environment that nurtures the mental and physical health of the child is more important than whether or not a baby is made when two people rub genitals together.

    The non-biological family is important but I'm glad that the rights of biological parents are protected.

    I'm glad the law has ruled in their favour here.

    Bannasidhe seems to treat sperm donors with scorn despite the fact that she would have never been able to have a family without them.


  • #2420
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    philologos wrote: »
    The non-biological family is important but I'm glad that the rights of biological parents are protected.

    I'm glad the law has ruled in their favour here.

    Bannasidhe seems to treat sperm donors with scorn despite the fact that she would have never been able to have a family without them.

    And it means homosexual marriage would absolutely contribute to the health and well-being of society.


  • #2421
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    philologos wrote: »
    The non-biological family is important but I'm glad that the rights of biological parents are protected.

    What about a married couple who use donor sperm and /or eggs to conceive a child which the woman in the couple gestates, is that ok in scripture? Or is that somehow a negative influence on society? What about couples who know before they get married they cannot have or do not want to have children, should they have a civil partnership instead of a marriage ceremony?
    Suppose two children are mixed up in the maternity hospital, should the biological parents get priority in terms of custody, regardless of the wishes of the children involved? What about a married woman who gets pregnant with a child, the father of whom is not her husband, her husband is, in law, the father of that child, how would scripture resolve that issue in terms of marriage?


  • Advertisement
  • #2422
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    philologos wrote: »
    The non-biological family is important but I'm glad that the rights of biological parents are protected.

    I'm glad the law has ruled in their favour here.

    Bannasidhe seems to treat sperm donors with scorn despite the fact that she would have never been able to have a family without them.

    You might want to re-read Bannasidhe's posts again. There's only one sperm donor I can see being treated with scorn, and I don't think you're reading the post properly to understand why.


  • #2423
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    lazygal wrote: »
    What about a married couple who use donor sperm and /or eggs to conceive a child which the woman in the couple gestates, is that ok in scripture? Or is that somehow a negative influence on society? What about couples who know before they get married they cannot have or do not want to have children, should they have a civil partnership instead of a marriage ceremony?
    Suppose two children are mixed up in the maternity hospital, should the biological parents get priority in terms of custody, regardless of the wishes of the children involved? What about a married woman who gets pregnant with a child, the father of whom is not her husband, her husband is, in law, the father of that child, how would scripture resolve that issue in terms of marriage?

    You're arguing against a position I do not hold. I never said that donation of sperm or eggs was a bad thing.

    I acknowledge that in a minority of cases that heterosexual couples cannot conceive however this doesn't diminish that most can and the difference between a heterosexual couple and a homosexual one is that they can bear children of their own accord or provide children with a mother and a father. This makes the race argument irrelevant because this doesn't apply to them. Gender is an important difference. It changes the structure of the relationship entirely.

    Oh and even in heterosexual cases I think biological parents have rights.


  • #2424
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    philologos wrote: »
    You're arguing against a position I do not hold. I never said that donation of sperm or eggs was a bad thing.

    I acknowledge that in a minority of cases that heterosexual couples cannot conceive however this doesn't diminish that most can and the difference between a heterosexual couple and a homosexual one is that they can bear children of their own accord or provide children with a mother and a father. This makes the race argument irrelevant because this doesn't apply to them. Gender is an important difference. It changes the structure of the relationship entirely.

    Oh and even in heterosexual cases I think biological parents have rights.

    What's the difference between a heterosexual married couple using donor eggs and/or sperm to conceive a child and a married homosexual couple using donor eggs and/or sperm to conceive a child? What does scripture say about such medical interventions?

    I never mentioned the race argument. And I never argued against you, I'm asking you what scripture says about artificial means of procuring a pregnancy.


  • #2425
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    lazygal wrote: »

    What's the difference between a heterosexual married couple using donor eggs and/or sperm to conceive a child and a married homosexual couple using donor eggs and/or sperm to conceive a child? What does scripture say about such medical interventions?

    I never mentioned the race argument. And I never argued against you, I'm asking you what scripture says about artificial means of procuring a pregnancy.

    The Bible is silent on artificial means of pregnancy. However there is mention of surrogate motherhood and surrogate fatherhood throughout the Torah in particular (from Genesis to Deuteronomy).

    I guess the difference in that case is that the structure can still provide a child a mum and a dad.


  • #2426
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    philologos wrote: »
    The Bible is silent on artificial means of pregnancy. However there is mention of surrogate motherhood and surrogate fatherhood throughout the Torah in particular (from Genesis to Deuteronomy).

    I guess the difference in that case is that the structure can still provide a child a mum and a dad.

    If its silent on artificial means of pregnancy, how can a Christian have a view on it that comes from scripture? Do you have a view on the use of ICSI, IVF and other fertility treatments?


  • #2427
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    lazygal wrote: »
    If its silent on artificial means of pregnancy, how can a Christian have a view on it that comes from scripture? Do you have a view on the use of ICSI, IVF and other fertility treatments?

    Sorry how was this related to what I've said?

    I've not said anything to say that these procedures are wrong.

    Please read my posts first it's frustrating when you're arguing against something I never said.


  • #2428
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    philologos wrote: »
    Sorry how was this related to what I've said?

    I've not said anything to say that these procedures are wrong.

    Please read my posts first it's frustrating when you're arguing against something I never said.

    You say your whole life is based on what scripture tells you, but its silent on artificial means of getting pregnant. So why is two men or women having a child using ICSI or IVF not right when scripture has nothing to say about it?


  • #2429
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    philologos wrote: »
    You're arguing against a position I do not hold. I never said that donation of sperm or eggs was a bad thing.

    I acknowledge that in a minority of cases that heterosexual couples cannot conceive however this doesn't diminish that most can and the difference between a heterosexual couple and a homosexual one is that they can bear children of their own accord or provide children with a mother and a father. This makes the race argument irrelevant because this doesn't apply to them. Gender is an important difference. It changes the structure of the relationship entirely.

    Oh and even in heterosexual cases I think biological parents have rights.

    You're making this up as you go along.

    You were originally unable to provide anything to back up your "different structures" claim. Then you stated men and women "complement each other" (something else you were unable to explain). Then you claimed it said so in the Bible. Then you claimed it's because of the "biological issues around childbearing" (your words). And now you're changing that again.

    Is there any reason in trying to have a discussion with you when you keep changing your points to suit yourself?


  • #2430
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    lazygal wrote: »

    You say your whole life is based on what scripture tells you, but its silent on artificial means of getting pregnant. So why is two men or women having a child using ICSI or IVF not right when scripture has nothing to say about it?

    I agree. I live my life on Biblical principles.

    I never said anything about those procedures not bring right. So please clarify your point.

    It has no relevance to what I've been saying.


  • Advertisement
  • #2431
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    philologos wrote: »
    I agree. I live my life on Biblical principles.

    I never said anything about those procedures not bring right. So please clarify your point.

    It has no relevance to what I've been saying.

    Do you think gay couples with children, however they have been conceived, deserve the same protection as heterosexual couples? If couples don't have children because they can't have or don't want them, why should children be a central part of whether they can be married or only have a civil partnership?

    How can you live according to biblical principles when many areas of life are entirely untouched by what scripture says?


Advertisement