Leo Varadkar opposed to gay adoption

dub_skav · 23-01-2015 03:27PM

Interesting that he actually uses himself as an example when saying that a single person should not be able to adopt. Was there more to this seemingly innocuous / simple statement? Only he knows that

Perhaps he does indeed believe that a mother and father are the best parents for an adopted child and has taken the difficult decision to accept that he will not be a parent.

So, while it's perfectly possible that he has changed his mind since then, it is also possible that he has not changed his mind and they are his true feelings.

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:28PM

Hibernosaur wrote: »

Dehumanising people you disagree with. How fascist.

Lol, that's an interesting interpretation of what I said.

ThisRegard · 23-01-2015 03:29PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Make the arguements (a child is best with a mum and dad) non entirely true, but okay...

He didn't necessarily say that, he said he thinks a child being adopted from a father and mother family is best going into the same type of family.

jobbridge4life · 23-01-2015 03:31PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

He didn't necessarily say that, he said he thinks a child being adopted from a father and mother family is best going into the same type of family.

Given the reality of reproduction the distinction you are making about what he said is really close to null value.

Baggy Trousers · 23-01-2015 03:32PM

liam24 wrote: »

This is a video of Leo Varadkar explaining why two men are incapable of raising a child. I think this really casts him in a negative light.

What's your own opinion Liam?

Baggy Trousers · 23-01-2015 03:34PM

biko wrote: »

What's all this fascination with Leo Wanker suddenly in AH?

Wanker? Really biko? I didn't expect that from you.

Hibernosaur · 23-01-2015 03:34PM

liam24 wrote: »

Lol, that's an interesting interpretation of what I said.

Calling someone a creature is dehumanising. What was the intended meaning?

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:37PM

Hibernosaur wrote: »

Calling someone a creature is dehumanising. What was the intended meaning?

If you sets your mind at ease, polly prissy pants, I acknowledge that Leo Varadkar is a human being.

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:38PM

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

What's your own opinion Liam?

I'm in favour of the equal right of gay couples to adopt children.

Baggy Trousers · 23-01-2015 03:39PM

liam24 wrote: »

I'm in favour of the equal right of gay couples to adopt children.

so you just don't like Leo Varadkar then?

Dan_Solo · 23-01-2015 03:40PM

Hibernosaur wrote: »

Calling someone a creature is dehumanising. What was the intended meaning?

I didn't even get it as much of an insult myself TBH. Humans are creatures.
(I nearly said homo sapiens there but thought better of it)

23-01-2015 03:41PM

liam24 wrote: »

Lol, that's an interesting interpretation of what I said.

Much like your own interpretation of him having said something in the video that he did not even remotely say and you simply lied about?

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:42PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Much like your own interpretation of him having said something in the video that he did not even remotely say and you simply lied about?

Ok, if you're calling me a liar then prove it - in detail.

_Brian · 23-01-2015 03:42PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

At a guess, wouldn't it be almost impossible to adopt unless you were a married couple? I can't see how gay adoption could ever happen then before the referendum, though the point of law is important.

Actually quite a few women in particular have completed adoptions within the state, I'm not aware of any single men who have done it, but I'm open to correction on that one.

Some of the women who have adopted are part of gay couples but have been assessed as an individual, their partner having no legal rights relating to the adopted child.

Soo, bringing adoption by gay couples into the arena is really just playing catch up to what is already happening here in the state, and has been happening for some time.

Its personally something I've flip/flopped on myself over time, I've finally come to the opinion that all other things being equal I feel placing children in families where the balance of both genders exists is preferable to me, for that reason - balance of experiencing both sexes as a parent, but it is far more important that children are removed from state care and bad parenting situations and brought into solid reliable family situations, be that a hetrosexual or gay coupled families.

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:43PM

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

so you just don't like Leo Varadkar then?

He might be a nice man in person. I don't really like it when gay people in prominent positions actively argue for gay people having fewer rights than straight people.

ThisRegard · 23-01-2015 03:44PM

liam24 wrote: »

He might be a nice man in person. I don't really like it when gay people in prominent positions actively argue for gay people having fewer rights than straight people.

He didn't.

23-01-2015 03:45PM

liam24 wrote: »

Ok, if you're calling me a liar then prove it - in detail.

The fact that nowhere in the video does he say what you claimed he said - that two men are incapable of raising a child.

It is simply not there anywhere. And you can not find it there either.

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:48PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The fact that nowhere in the video does he say what you claimed he said - that two men are incapable of raising a child.

It is simply not there anywhere. And you can not find it there either.

Presuming you're old enough to have done it - which you might not be judging by the maturity of your contributions - do you remember the reading comprehension section in English Leaving Cert exam? Remember they'd ask, for example, to describe how someone feels even though it doesn't say anywhere in the text how he feels. It's called inference. It's sort of like that.

23-01-2015 03:49PM

liam24 wrote: »

Presuming you're old enough to have done it - which you might not be judging by the maturity of your contributions - do you remember the reading comprehension section in English Leaving Cert exam? Remember they'd ask, for example, to describe how someone feels even though it doesn't say anywhere in the text how he feels. It's called inference. It's sort of like that.

So your petty insults aside - which you will note I am not rising to - you still have not found any words in the video that say what you claim he said have you?

Give us a direct quote of the words that match what you claim he said.

Timberrrrrrrr · 23-01-2015 03:49PM

liam24 wrote: »

He might be a nice man in person. I don't really like it when gay people in prominent positions actively argue for gay people having fewer rights than straight people.

Please show where he has done this.

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:49PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

He didn't.

He did in fact.

Timberrrrrrrr · 23-01-2015 03:49PM

liam24 wrote: »

Presuming you're old enough to have done it - which you might not be judging by the maturity of your contributions - do you remember the reading comprehension section in English Leaving Cert exam? Remember they'd ask, for example, to describe how someone feels even though it doesn't say anywhere in the text how he feels. It's called inference. It's sort of like that.

Ah so now it's not what he said but more the way he said it :rolleyes:

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:50PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Please show where he has done this.

I never knew so many people had problems with basic comprehension of a text.

Carpo II · 23-01-2015 03:51PM

I don't understand how people are supporting / excusing Leo here. He clearly says that straight couples are preferable to homosexual couple based on nothing but his own belief. How can this be construed as anything other than discrimination? If a priest or an Iona Instituter (*shudder*) came out with this same thing they would be reviled for it, and rightly so.

I also get that people can change their minds but we are hardly talking about switching preference from eggshell to magnolia for the living room here. If some one, in government, expresses an opinion that discrimination is just fine, it's going to take a lot more than 'changing their mind' to convince me they are trustworthy.

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:51PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Ah so now it's not what he said but more the way he said it :rolleyes:

No it's actually what he said. Don't worry - it's a tad complicated for people such as yourself. Just observe while others discuss it and you'll learn - slowly I'm sure.

Timberrrrrrrr · 23-01-2015 03:52PM

liam24 wrote: »

I never knew so many people had problems with basic comprehension of a text.

You're the one making wild accusations, how many people have asked you to explain where you got your op title from and you couldn't answer because the words you claim are there are actually not there. You took what he said and twisted it to suit your own little agenda and it has been thrown back in your face like a wet towel.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 23-01-2015 03:54PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

He didn't necessarily say that, he said he thinks a child being adopted from a father and mother family is best going into the same type of family.

At about 1.03: "Every child has a right to a mother and father and, as much as possile, the State should vindicate that right."

Timberrrrrrrr · 23-01-2015 03:54PM

liam24 wrote: »

No it's actually what he said. Don't worry - it's a tad complicated for people such as yourself. Just observe while others discuss it and you'll learn - slowly I'm sure.

Again you are the one making the wild claims and throwing out the insults. Won't stoop to your level will just watch you get torn apart........slowly i'm sure

liam24 · 23-01-2015 03:55PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You're the one making wild accusations, how many people have asked you to explain where you got your op title from and you couldn't answer because the words you claim are there are actually not there. You took what he said and twisted it to suit your own little agenda and it has been thrown back in your face like a wet towel.

He clearly says that he's in favour of children being adopted by straight couples rather than gay couples. Therefore a gay couple seeking to adopt would have fewer rights than a straight couple seeking to adopt. Therefore he is arguing that gay people should have fewer rights than straight people. By implication, he's suggesting there is something deficient in the way that a gay couple will raise a child. Is that crystal clear now - I hope it helps a little at least.

FunLover18 · 23-01-2015 03:57PM

My immediate reaction after having watched that without having read previous comments is that he raises an interesting point. I'm completely in favour of SS couples being allowed to adopt or have children through surrogacy but the point about taking a child who has maybe grown up to a certain point with a mother and father and put them into the loving care of a SS couple, I can understand how that sudden shift in dynamic could possibly be problematic/traumatic for the child. That said a stable familial unit would surely be preferable to an orphanage or state care or wherever orphans are placed, regardless of gender or sexuality and if the child is being adopted at an age where they can actually remember their parents then surely no adoptive parents will ever be able to truly 'replace' them.

Leo Varadkar opposed to gay adoption

Comments