Wonder what the new Pope thinks of this!!

[NitroNutter]

Originally Posted by andyl

Where did I say that? I don't think parents can determine their child's sexuality.

Grammar please! Are you saying if there are gay men/women about then they are going to make a pass at people of the same sex? People of the opposite sex do that to each other all the time, especially on a Friday night after a few WKDs. What's your point

I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what you are on about!
__________________

Ah so gays do try to have some sexuall influence on others or they dont. which is it ?
You cannot have it both ways

As for parents determining sexuality you seem to fail to grasp that, im not saying the gay parents are going to force the child deliberatly into such sexuality but the enviroment the child is brought up in is very relevant to it.

As for OB's statement all gays are born that way, believe what you will, in my experience that most certainly is not the case for all gay people.
__________________

Originally Posted by punky

<snip>Erm, you seem to be forgetting the fact that gay relationships are of mutual consent,

Ah really ?

well I beg to differ. I knew a few gays in my past who would never try to make any kind of move on me sexually, but what do you know I also know gays who did try to influence my sexuallity, no I was never curious, man and man makes me feel seriously ill, but still they tried. I also knew at a time in my past gays who are regularly commit date rape with alcohol and other drugs to full on rapists, who just so happen to blame their desires on their alcohol problems etc.
The date rapers also often go for under age people just not so young that it would be classed as full paedophile but underage sex. And the attitude of some gay men is a very bias opinion. ie all men are gay they just dont admit it, and all bikers are gay, they just use the biker image to appear not gay, etc etc etc.

[Flubflow]

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

Ah so gays do try to have some sexuall influence on others or they dont. which is it ?
You cannot have it both ways

As for parents determining sexuality you seem to fail to grasp that, im not saying the gay parents are going to force the child deliberatly into such sexuality but the enviroment the child is brought up in is very relevant to it.

As for OB's statement all gays are born that way, believe what you will, in my experience that most certainly is not the case for all gay people.

What precisely are the specifics of this environment of which you speak. What particular events in a gay parental relationship would trigger your steam valve.

I am truly suprised by this because of that fact that it's Spain we're talking about here.

I mean, just a couple of decades ago in Spain under Franco's regime, Spain was a very conservative country. The Catholic Church had an extremely strong influence there and was responsible for the education in the country. At one point, no other religions could even be advertised and the catholic church had control over all the books that were published there. Even nowadays 80% of the country are practicing catholics.

A good decision IMO but surprising one from Spain.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Chris T

You just snippetty-snipped two examples I gave of how Christians lobbied and pushed for changes to society - an end to slavery and universal education.

Just because "The Church" has been involved in some good social changes doesn't mean that it will automatically continue. Personally I believe that it's currently doing a lot of harm to the world and its population. Do you honestly think if religion wasnââ‚ ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t involved in the changing of the legislation you mentioned weââ‚ ¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢d still be shoving kids up chimneys? Canââ‚Âà ‚¬ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚¢t see it myself.

I believe that in a democracy, every person has a right to try to influence the society they live in. That includes religious people who have a religious take on how their society should operate.

This is where we differ, yes everyone has the right to try and influence society, however I don't believe that those changes should be sent down from "on high", dictated either from a Pope or a book. If people have genuine concerns about something then thatâ₠¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s great let them lobby on the issue. However just to state that their religion condones it then its wrong to allow that to affect others lives.

So yes, I believe I have the right, through the ballot box and through direct lobbying of those with the power to effect change, to attempt to influence society in the direction I wish to see it move. Of course, you also have that right. It is not something that is the special preserve of 'religious people'.

Thatâ₠¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s not my point Chris and you know it. My point is that I personally feel it unacceptable that religious views are being forced on people who don't have the same convictions. In lobbying to keep the law the same (which I assume from your posts you want) then you are imposing your (religious) beliefs on me any many others, not just on this issue but also on others.

Like I have said before, I have no religious convictions and believe religion (in all its guises) to be a fraud, why should something I believe to be fundamentally wrong stop me from doing something?

[NitroNutter]

Originally Posted by Flubflow

What precisely are the specifics of this environment of which you speak. What particular events in a gay parental relationship would trigger your steam valve.

Well start with academcally at school, children are the meanest of beings at times and if something is different about the odd child here and there it leads to bullying, verbal and physical.

6 out of 10 have opposite sex parents
3 out of 10 have a single parent
1 out of 10 has same sex parents

That in itself is a disaster waiting to happen

Financially in the future, the bullied child leaves school because they cannot take the bullying any more, on the streets, mix with the wrong groups, get into alcohol and drugs early and become a lout, etc

In the home
Mummy and Daddy sleep in the same bed, they show certain affections towards each other through the day etc seems normal to me

mummy and mummy sleep in the same bed, they show affections to each other through the day would most likely seem normal to the girl adopted

Also with other social interests that a young girl or boy would be served far better by having a parent of each sex than that of same sex.

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

Ah so gays do try to have some sexuall influence on others or they dont. which is it ?
You cannot have it both ways

That's bisexuality you're talking about . Still don't know what you're on about though.

As for parents determining sexuality you seem to fail to grasp that, im not saying the gay parents are going to force the child deliberatly into such sexuality but the enviroment the child is brought up in is very relevant to it.

Well they might be brought up not to be prejudiced against gay people but their sexuality is not going to be determined by environment.

As for OB's statement all gays are born that way, believe what you will, in my experience that most certainly is not the case for all gay people.

Could you explain?
__________________

I knew a few gays in my past who would never try to make any kind of move on me sexually, but what do you know I also know gays who did try to influence my sexuallity, no I was never curious, man and man makes me feel seriously ill, but still they tried. I also knew at a time in my past gays who are regularly commit date rape with alcohol and other drugs to full on rapists, who just so happen to blame their desires on their alcohol problems etc.
The date rapers also often go for under age people just not so young that it would be classed as full paedophile but underage sex. And the attitude of some gay men is a very bias opinion. ie all men are gay they just dont admit it, and all bikers are gay, they just use the biker image to appear not gay, etc etc etc.

This is just nonsense isn't it? Some heterosexuals commit rape, sexual assault, predatory Friday night WKD fuelled unwanted approaches... and so? Gay people are just as heterosexual people; good, bad, dull, exciting, ugly, pretty. Better dressed maybe

[NitroNutter]

Originally Posted by andyl

That's bisexuality you're talking about . Still don't know what you're on about though.

Well they might be brought up not to be prejudiced against gay people but their sexuality is not going to be determined by environment.

Could you explain?
__________________





This is just nonsense isn't it? Some heterosexuals commit rape, sexual assault, predatory Friday night WKD fuelled unwanted approaches... and so? Gay people are just as heterosexual people; good, bad, dull, exciting, ugly, pretty. Better dressed maybe

And did I say all hetrosexualls are squeaky clean, however many gays and their supporters proffess to be as such and really believe it. The evidence of such is in this thread.

As for the bisexual notion, I really do not know where you arrived at that conclusion, I suggest you keep your lurid fantasies to yourself there.

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

Well start with academcally at school, children are the meanest of beings at times and if something is different about the odd child here and there it leads to bullying, verbal and physical.

6 out of 10 have opposite sex parents
3 out of 10 have a single parent
1 out of 10 has same sex parents

That in itself is a disaster waiting to happen

Financially in the future, the bullied child leaves school because they cannot take the bullying any more, on the streets, mix with the wrong groups, get into alcohol and drugs early and become a lout, etc

If that were a reasonable piece of logic then all children who are bullied would end up with your melodramatically foretold future. But they don`t, so I`m not sure that this is a valid argument here.

I`ll agree that there is the potential for this situation to result in bullying, but how much of that bullying is the result of prejudice instilled by the parents? By treating homosexual couples differently you only reinforce prejudices. You are essentially arguing that it is too difficult to confront those prejudices so we may as well reinforce them. If the school took a pro-active and thorough approach to bullying then the issue becomes moot. If you can tackle the problem via two different routes, then surely it is better the tackle the problem of bullying itself rather than the arbitrary differences that "inspire" someone to bully.

[Flubflow]

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

Well start with academcally at school, children are the meanest of beings at times and if something is different about the odd child here and there it leads to bullying, verbal and physical.

6 out of 10 have opposite sex parents
3 out of 10 have a single parent
1 out of 10 has same sex parents

That in itself is a disaster waiting to happen

Financially in the future, the bullied child leaves school because they cannot take the bullying any more, on the streets, mix with the wrong groups, get into alcohol and drugs early and become a lout, etc

In the home
Mummy and Daddy sleep in the same bed, they show certain affections towards each other through the day etc seems normal to me

mummy and mummy sleep in the same bed, they show affections to each other through the day would most likely seem normal to the girl adopted

Also with other social interests that a young girl or boy would be served far better by having a parent of each sex than that of same sex.

That's a pretty specific scenario you predicted in order to fit your opinion. You proved nothing except that there may be a slight risk that any bullied child may have a chance of becoming an alcoholic drug addicted lout (although you offered no statistics on that).
Many years ago a child would be bullied/teased in school for simply having only one parent or for not being able to run very fast or for wearing glasses or for being black. It still happens but not as much. Attitudes change but sometimes they have to be coerced with the help of laws.

You used the word "normal". That's the crux. You think it is not normal but others do. It is also not normal for a mother and father to beat each other up in front of the kids but it happens. I'd rather a child be adopted into a loving gay parental relationship than a violent abusive hetrosexual one. The former child is more likely to grow up into a respectful person whereas the latter is more likely to be as mean as their abusive parents. This scenario is more likely compared to the doom and gloom one you predict.

You mention "other social interests". What precisely? Basically it comes down the fact that you are misguided, you can't argue seriously on a point by point basis and you are using excuses rather than reasons to support your mere opinion.

Originally Posted by Russ D

No but I know that to produce children you need a man and a woman.

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)

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.

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.

But as your first point alludes to, times have changed. It is difficult enough being a parent and wondering how to explain a great many things in the world to your child without this sort of thing

Ah, so it's not *YOU* that has a problem, but you don't want *others* to have a problem???

What about if one parent is black and the other is white? How do they explain that to their child?

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?

[BBKing]

the bullied child leaves school because they cannot take the bullying any more, on the streets, mix with the wrong groups, get into alcohol and drugs early and become a lout, etc

I was bullied a lot - I didn't leave school, I stayed on, got A-levels, degree, good job and drugs make me sick. I'll admit to the alcohol, though. I had excellent parental support, of course.

Better two parents comfortable with their sexuality than two at each others throats or one parent harassed and unable to give enough time to their children. The actual sexuality is immaterial to the quality of the parenting.

Spain deserve great credit for this, but of course they have a progressive socialist government that I'm beginning to like the look of. Benedict XVI doesn't like it much, but he's the head of the Church that gave solid support to Franco and I think we'd all agree that gay parents are a bit less threatening than totalitarian fascist dictators.

I'm coming in a bit late on this, but let's pick up some points:

I have no doubt that a same-sex couple could provide love for their adopted child, what they cannot provide is the full range of adult role models a child needs. We have already covered this point: studies show that children are relatively disadvantaged where they do not have both their male and female parents living at home with them.

"Relatively disadvantaged"? What exactly does that mean? And what studies?

And what about the children who are "disadvantaged" if their parents aren't wealthy or if one's black and the other white or if one dies when they're young or if the child is disabled or "different looking" etc etc

There's lots of "disadvantages" in life, to try to eliminate them because it's "better for the child" would be nonsensical political correctness of the worst order!
__________________

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

Still they are only children and we really need to use them akin to laborotory guinea pigs so we can discover in a decade or 2 that its good or bad thing ?

And whilst we're at it, let's not let the same thing happen to children who have parents of different colours, or those who are disabled or...
__________________

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

Please enlighten us all on how a gay couple with an adopted child could prepare that child for a hetrosexual adult life, just the mere fact that the child is in a gay family enviroment is without any doubt imo going to influence that childs mind.

Do you seriously think that this putative child is somehow going to grow up in a box without *any* outside contact? Not meeting any children who have two straight parents? Not watching TV? Not seeing that there's all sorts of different ways in which people behave...???

The behaviour of *every* child's parents, be they straight or gay, will affect the child, but I'd rather them be brought up by a loving gay couple than by the (straight) couple who used to live upstairs from me who used to have regular screaming rows, saying pointless, vicious, hurtful things. How do you think that would have affected *their* child?

IMO if you want to stop anyone getting married, it's people like that!!
__________________

Originally Posted by Chris T

two examples I gave of how Christians lobbied and pushed for changes to society - an end to slavery and universal education. I believe that in a democracy, every person has a right to try to influence the society they live in. That includes religious people who have a religious take on how their society should operate.

Fine, but there is a big difference between saying "I think everyone should have the right to be free" or "I think everyone should have the right to education" and "I think that those people should *not* be able to express their sexuality because *I* don't like it".

Two are positive, the other is entirely negative.
__________________

Originally Posted by Incognitas

I think the simplest way to sort this out is to have marriage for religious reasons and a civil union to allow gay people to have all the same civil rights as hetrosexual civil unions.

So what you are saying is that "everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others"...?

It's ok to be gay, you can even have a "civil union" but you're still *different* to everyone else, because we're not going to let you be married.

Would you say the same thing if marriage was a "whites only" institution?
__________________

Originally Posted by Russ D

A straight child is surely going to be asking questions why they are not attracted to someone of the same sex just like "mummy and mummy"/"daddy and daddy" are?

Sure they are, just like they ask questions about any/ every other subject under the sun. If you feel you're incapable of answering such questions don't have a child in such a relationship, but don't try to tell others that because *you* can't answer those questions *they* shouldn't have such a relationship.

Perhaps they may get confused in to actually trying a same-sex relationship out of feeling compelled to?

Oh dear, this is utter nonsense and it's very disappointing that you're repeating this sort of ridiculous "scare story".

Why should someone feel *compelled* to or "confused" enough to engage in a relationship which they have no interest in?

And, more to the point, *even if* you do try such a thing out of curiousity or whatever, it *DOES NOT* mean you are forever condemned to be a "queer" because of it!
__________________

Originally Posted by Salu

How far do you go with legalising/promoting devience?

Oh dear, more nonsense.

What is "deviance"? Two men together? A black man and a white woman (or vice versa)? Oral sex? Dressing up in clothes more generally accepted to be appropriate for the opposite sex?

And what is this "promoting" business? You mind your own business and let others mind theirs. Provided nobody gets hurt and everyone is consenting, it's nothing to do with *ANYONE* else.

There are people into bestiality. If they wanted to marry a sheep should this be allowed because they want it?

Can you get consent from the sheep? No? Then stop making stupid comparisons.
__________________

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

well I beg to differ. I knew a few gays in my past who would never try to make any kind of move on me sexually, but what do you know I also know gays who did try to influence my sexuallity, [...]I also knew at a time in my past gays who are regularly commit date rape with alcohol and other drugs to full on rapists,

Phew! That's it for gays, then!

Good job no *heterosexual* would ever try anything like that...!
__________________

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

6 out of 10 have opposite sex parents
3 out of 10 have a single parent
1 out of 10 has same sex parents

That in itself is a disaster waiting to happen

In case you hadn't noticed, children can be nasty little b*ds. Some will *always* find something to exploit to make themselves feel better, whether it's someone wearing glasses or being black or being short or whatever.

There is no way to avoid this, the question is simply what you *do* about it.

Trying to eliminate it is the wrong way to go.

Financially in the future, the bullied child leaves school because they cannot take the bullying any more, on the streets, mix with the wrong groups, get into alcohol and drugs early and become a lout, etc

Damn, and here's me, got seriously bullied at school, running my own very successful business, having just bought a new house and not drinking or taking drugs or being a lout...

Maybe I just got the wrong sort of bullying...???

In the home Mummy and Daddy sleep in the same bed, they show certain affections towards each other through the day etc seems normal to me

As I mentioned, the people above me had screaming rows and I'm pretty sure that some times he ended up sleeping on the sofa. I'm sure that's regrettably "normal" for quite a few other families too.

mummy and mummy sleep in the same bed, they show affections to each other through the day would most likely seem normal to the girl adopted

"Oh look, mummy and mummy sleep together, so I should find a girlfriend to sleep with too and ignore those boys I fancy". Yeah, sure.

Also with other social interests that a young girl or boy would be served far better by having a parent of each sex than that of same sex.

Prove it.

[NitroNutter]

<div>

Originally Posted by Flubflow

You used the word "normal". That's the crux. You think it is not normal but others do.

</div>
You took the word I used "normal" from the context i used and put it as how I think. The context I used it in clearly shows its my opinion on what the child will percieve as normal behavior

Originally Posted by Flubflow

You mention "other social interests". What precisely? Basically it comes down the fact that you are misguided, you can't argue seriously on a point by point basis and you are using excuses rather than reasons to support your mere opinion.

While most social interests are unisex theres many social interests that are very predominent in one sex or the other. You really want a full list because you have no clue yourself ?
Further to that men and women are different mentally in many ways. A balanced child can only develop normally mentally if it is reared and recieves a balanced mental attitude from the obvious differences between the 2 sexes.

Now onto the rearing enviroment position yet again.
I really cannot believe that so many people here can categorically state that a reared enviroment would bear absolutely no relevance on how a child develops and really believe it.
Yet the country is and has been for some time suffering increased, binge drinking and yob culture, major drugs problems are rife. All the children that start smoking, why ?? purely because they are curious??? if you really think that then you major in naivety.
The majority of the countries current youth problems are in the main down to following bad Adult and older generation role models including their parents and some is peer pressures from friends to.

Now to the morality of this, we as humans pretend to be civilised, a dog will hump anything thats going, including your leg. Why? because its down to its animal instinct, so is our society to be civilised human beings or is it to become a tribe of animals living on the most basic of instincts.

It is my most sincere opinion that rearing children in a gay enviroment is almost as bad as paedophilia itself, it certainly is not civil behaviour and like someone mentioned its not civil to rear children in a violent enviroment, both amount to abuse in a very gravest of manor.

any country that adopts this law is not moving their country forwards but moving very much closer to a future dark ages.

and just so you know i have absolutely know cult for my religion so no church of any description has instilled this opinion into me.

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

The context I used it in clearly shows its my opinion on what the child will percieve as normal behavior

Again, only if that child is raised in a box with *not* other influences or experiences at all.

While most social interests are unisex theres many social interests that are very predominent in one sex or the other. You really want a full list because you have no clue yourself ?

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.

Further to that men and women are different mentally in many ways. A balanced child can only develop normally mentally if it is reared and recieves a balanced mental attitude from the obvious differences between the 2 sexes.

Got any proof of this?

I really cannot believe that so many people here can categorically state that a reared enviroment would bear absolutely no relevance on how a child develops and really believe it.

Well I don't think that anyone except you *has* actually said that such an environment "would bear absolutely no relevance on how a child develops".

You set up a straw man, you have then knocked it down. Not impressive.

Yet the country is and has been for some time suffering increased, binge drinking and yob culture, major drugs problems are rife. All the children that start smoking, why ?? purely because they are curious??? if you really think that then you major in naivety.

The majority of the countries current youth problems are in the main down to following bad Adult and older generation role models including their parents and some is peer pressures from friends to.

So what, exactly, does that have to do with gay marriages and adoption?

Why are gay parents going to be more irresponsible than straight ones who allow their children to get into such a situation or who fail to bring them up in a way that means they will avoid such behaviour?

Now to the morality of this, we as humans pretend to be civilised, a dog will hump anything thats going, including your leg. Why? because its down to its animal instinct, so is our society to be civilised human beings or is it to become a tribe of animals living on the most basic of instincts.

What on *earth* are you talking about? This is not even verging on a coherent argument.

It is my most sincere opinion that rearing children in a gay enviroment is almost as bad as paedophilia itself,

It is my most sincere opinion that you have now *COMPLETELY* lost the plot and the argument if you are going to compare gay parenting to paedophilia!

This smacks of the sort of desperation that in other threads leads to a Godwin.

it certainly is not civil behaviour and like someone mentioned its not civil to rear children in a violent enviroment, both amount to abuse in a very gravest of manor.

This is utter prejudiced balderdash and I challenge you to provide *ANY* proof to back this ludicrous claim up.

any country that adopts this law is not moving their country forwards but moving very much closer to a future dark ages.

Oh gods, here we go again! Somehow allowing gay marriages will cause society to collapse into barbarism!

It's strange, because similar things were claimed by bigots for allowing women to be educated, to vote, to allow blacks education or voting rights and many many more besides.

Yet, somehow, we've managed to weather those and still survive, just as we will survive gay marriages.

Now if you want to argue this further, please come up with something a *little* more credible.

[NitroNutter]

Originally Posted by Graham

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
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.