Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NitroNutter
Quote:
|
I want a full list because I want to see what social you think are purely male or purely female and which are going to have such a dramatic effect on a child's development.
|
did I say "purely" i belive not, but thats nothing unusual for you Graham to take words and then change them to suit yourself, its not the first time youve done this as several others will agree. The word I used was predominent |
If you're going to accuse someone of mis-quoting, it's generally a good idea to make sure *you* quote accurately.
The words you actually used were "very predominent" which, whilst not exactly meaning "purely" is certainly closer to it than merely "predominant".
Quote:
Now I suggest you take a visit to the nail bar and get those nice long pink finger nails re done they are looking tattered. Then you can pop along to Gala bingo with your cronies.
Mean while Im of to the snooker club gonna get myself a game or two and then Ill go play some poker.
|
Sorry, I'm not really certain I've seen many mothers taking their young daughters along to nail bars, let alone men taking young boys to snooker clubs and then going to play poker.
Perhaps you grew up in a different family environment??
ADDENDUM - Clearly you did.
But, even so, I don't think many nail bars would turn away a male customer (be they a goth who wants black nails or a "metro-sexual" man who wants to improve his personal grooming) and I don't think many snooker clubs are "men only" these days, it being somewhat illegal I believe.
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Russ D
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
No, you need a sperm and an ovum (at the moment, anyway, it may well be possible for two women to have a child using two X chromosomes, but it wouldn't work for men with two Y chromosomes)
|
Semantics - you need a man and a woman. |
Not semantics, genetic engineering.
But however you create the child, you have not proven by any means that a man and a woman are required to bring up a child.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
But does your statement mean that anyone who isn't fertile shouldn't be allowed to have children or even adopt them? I don't think so.
|
Of course not - a child's upbringing should be kept as close to natural as possible.
|
Again with this word "natural".
Unfortunately what "natural" tends to mean in this sort of case is "what I am familiar with" or "what I approve of".
I suggest you look at the prevalence of homosexual (older male, younger male) relationship in societies such as the Ancient Greeks and Spartans.
For them such behaviour was considered entirely "natural". Just because it's not something that happens today (or that you don't like it) doesn't make it less valid.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
So your only objection appears to be that it's those who can't have children because they're a male/ male or female/ female couple shouldn't be allowed to adopt.
|
As above
|
So, once again, because Russ D doesn't like it, it's "unnatural".
Quote:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
What about if one parent is black and the other is white? How do they explain that to their child?
|
As above.
|
Sorry, how exactly is that *unnatural*? Just because mummy and daddy are different colours??
Quote:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
Why not leave that up to the couple who decides to have or adopt children instead of objecting because, seemingly, you would find it difficult?
|
If we left it up to the couple to make the decision we'd have a lot of unhappy children, that's why we have agencies to assess the suitablilty of potentional adopters first.
|
Of course, but your objections seem to be that because *you* would have trouble *they* shouldn't be allowed to do this.
If a couple, be they straight, gay, mixed race or whatever are capable of bringing up a child in a loving and caring relationship, why should they *not* be allowed to adopt just because someone thinks it's "unnatural" according to their personal beliefs?
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NitroNutter
ummm well my basic instinct if some bloke makes any sexual advances towards me as they so often fail to understand 2 simple letters or 2 simple words, is to teach them a damn hard lesson,
|
And what if it was a woman? Would you give the bitch a good slapping to "teach her a damn hard lesson"???
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Incognitas
The only issue that would worry me for children adopted by gay couples would be the way in which it was percieved by society and the classmates of the child.
|
Again, though, I mention children who have mixed race parents or only one parent or who are disabled or just "different".
Children will bully no matter what, the trick is to stop the *bullying* instead of trying to eliminate all possible reasons for someone to be bullied which is utterly impossible.
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NitroNutter
How about turning westminster into one big assylum
|
I thought it already was...!
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NitroNutter
So how do you feel knowing that in the future some children with no choice may be forced into a gay adoption scheme and when he/she reached adult hood feels as I would now if had been done to me.
|
The answer is you can't know that, but it's also not a reason *not* to allow gay adoption.
The people who determine which family a child will be placed with will take into account the child's family background (if any) and all the other details as well before they make a decision, they won't simply pick a name out of the hat.
Quote:
|
I would not trust my father alone with my children and I really dont like my mother with them that often either. But I would put my kids in the trust of either of my parents than ever wish upon them to get adopted by any gay family.
|
So you consider a loving gay couple would be a worse choice to look after your children then a potentially violent and abusive straight couple?
I hope you're not inculcating your children with this level of blind prejudice.
Quote:
|
So you politically correct do gooders enjoy what you may be supporting as a campaign in the future, you will most likely be causing as much serious misery as any good that could come of it
|
This from someone who would prefer violent and abusive people to look after his children.
I pity you.
I certainly pity your children.
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Russ D
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Xaccers
PPS For those who believe homosexuallity is not natural, why does it occur so much in nature? Many animals do it.
|
There are quirks of nature all around us. But it's not nature's intended way as we'd have died out a long time ago if it was. You should know that. |
This is a typically fallacious argument because it fails to note that if homosexuality was such a negative "quirk of nature" *it* would have been eliminated from the gene pool a long time ago.
I suggest you look at
http://www.answers.com/topic/genetic...al-orientation this article, especially the section about the "gay uncle" theory which argues there's a potential benefit to the uncle since their genes have a better chance of being passed on because they are protecting/ providing for their nephews/ neices instead of competing against them for resources etc.
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Russ D
I wouldn't used the word 'unnatural' to describe homosexuality
|
Yet you object to gay adoption because you want children to be brought up in a "natural"(!) environment.
I sense a slight contradiction here...!
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NitroNutter
It is this mix of tight knit and loose knit circles that in are in similar way to Al Qaeda networks and other such organistaions that make it hugely difficult for it to be legally countered in a really succesful way.
|
I think this comment is the most telling of all.
Fear, uncertainty, doubt...
