So what if they touched dicks infront of you over your cereal.Bertster7 wrote:
That's a very closed minded attitude. I do think that if they want a kid with their own genes, they need to go out and fuck someone of the opposite sex. But there's nothing inherently wrong with being gay. They can do whatever they want, so long as they don't do it near me (unless it's a couple of the rare sort of lesbians (hot ones)).mr.degman wrote:
Cant u people understnd , TO be Gay is WRONG, atlest something is wrong it their head.
The way of life is that a male fucks a female and not male vs male.
No gay marriage no gays would be allowed to have children and to be honest its absolutely fucking disgusting to be gay.
No the kids would be made fun of at school
LOL, yeah we already came to that conclusion.JohnTx12 wrote:
No the kids would be made fun of at school
no we didnt. You did!..teddy..jimmy wrote:
LOL, yeah we already came to that conclusion.JohnTx12 wrote:
No the kids would be made fun of at school
Yes, WE did. If you look back through the last 6 pages you will see that it has been discussed several times.JimG wrote:
no we didnt. You did!..teddy..jimmy wrote:
LOL, yeah we already came to that conclusion.JohnTx12 wrote:
No the kids would be made fun of at school
Last edited by ..teddy..jimmy (2006-11-21 11:39:37)
Would it be any different if a mother did that to her husband in front of the kids?..teddy..jimmy wrote:
So what if they touched dicks infront of you over your cereal.
In either case that exceeds or borders the definition of child abuse.
Adoption addresses a the tragedy of a child without parents. IVF is about creating a new life specifically to be part of a parental situation that's contrary to nature. Quite a big difference.Masques wrote:
Fundamentally though it's the same situation...teddy..jimmy wrote:
IVF is different then adoption. By adopting a child you are automatically giving a child a better life if they, from before, live in terrible conditions. However, by IVF is quite different.
In either case you raise the child as you see fit, where the child comes from is incidental to the point. While true that a child may have a better life if adopted (although not a compelling argument given the numerous cases of abuse of foster/adopted children).
If you're fine with a gay couple raising an adopted child then logically you should be fine with them raising their own child speaking purely from a child welfare point of view.
It WAS discussed, never terminated with a conclusion...teddy..jimmy wrote:
Yes, WE did. If you look back through the last 6 pages you will see that it has been discussed several times.JimG wrote:
no we didnt. You did!..teddy..jimmy wrote:
LOL, yeah we already came to that conclusion.
Almost every kid is made fun of at school, having gay parents isn't going to change that. Kids with single parents get made fun of, kids with married parent get made fun of...teddy..jimmy wrote:
Yes, WE did. If you look back through the last 6 pages you will see that it has been discussed several times.JimG wrote:
no we didnt. You did!..teddy..jimmy wrote:
LOL, yeah we already came to that conclusion.
How are the people going to know at school if the kids parents are gay?
I took out my next post because I missread it..
Last edited by cpt.fass1 (2006-11-21 11:55:41)
Excellent and important point. And this is how I would describe homosexual behavior as being selfish...creating a child as a loop-hole for one of the most basic, longest lasting situation in the world...man/woman procreation.Stingray24 wrote:
Adoption addresses a the tragedy of a child without parents. IVF is about creating a new life specifically to be part of a parental situation that's contrary to nature. Quite a big difference.
That is the conclusion we have come to. I am not saying you are wrong.cpt.fass1 wrote:
Almost every kid is made fun of at school, having gay parents isn't going to change that. Kids with single parents get made fun of, kids with married parent get made fun of...teddy..jimmy wrote:
Yes, WE did. If you look back through the last 6 pages you will see that it has been discussed several times.JimG wrote:
no we didnt. You did!
How are the people going to know at school if the kids parents are gay?
I don't think its selfish for them to want to experience the joy of raising a child.IRONCHEF wrote:
Excellent and important point. And this is how I would describe homosexual behavior as being selfish...creating a child as a loop-hole for one of the most basic, longest lasting situation in the world...man/woman procreation.Stingray24 wrote:
Adoption addresses a the tragedy of a child without parents. IVF is about creating a new life specifically to be part of a parental situation that's contrary to nature. Quite a big difference.
I also agree with you guys. Nice1IRONCHEF wrote:
Excellent and important point. And this is how I would describe homosexual behavior as being selfish...creating a child as a loop-hole for one of the most basic, longest lasting situation in the world...man/woman procreation.Stingray24 wrote:
Adoption addresses a the tragedy of a child without parents. IVF is about creating a new life specifically to be part of a parental situation that's contrary to nature. Quite a big difference.
By "selfish" I mean they are depriving that child of natural parenthood. And let's face it, a child being born of parents who actually made it is the "natural" and intended way to be born.JimG wrote:
I don't think its selfish for them to want to experience the joy of raising a child.IRONCHEF wrote:
Excellent and important point. And this is how I would describe homosexual behavior as being selfish...creating a child as a loop-hole for one of the most basic, longest lasting situation in the world...man/woman procreation.Stingray24 wrote:
Adoption addresses a the tragedy of a child without parents. IVF is about creating a new life specifically to be part of a parental situation that's contrary to nature. Quite a big difference.
To begin, I do NOT have any form of religion, nor does my culture have a stand-point on homosexuality.
My opinion on homosexuals 'being allowed to have children through the use of IVF' is:
No. No they shouldn't.
This is a non-religious statement: "If homosexual couples were supposed to 'conceive', evolution would have already supplied them with the means to do so."
Homosexuality is not a 20th century phenomenon, it has probably been around since 'sexuality' existed.
However the science behind IVF has only been around in our lifetime.
I don't think it is really fair on society to pander to the needs of minorities in such a way to disrupt their own lives. Be it through taxes or other public paid services such as scientific research (as happens in some countries), or public resources such as genetic material (sperm, etc).
Also the fact that there are many children in need of adoption around the world.
As far as people using the excuse that homosexual parents shouldn't be allowed to have IVF treatment because:
Homosexual Parents will [paraphrasing] "Give their children a stigma throughout their lives"
and
"They will disease their children with the 'gayness' (i.e. make them homosexual as well)"
...please.
If that were the case then adoptive 'Heterosexual' parents all over the world would be making their children change colours (ethnicity) if different to biological parents, and passing down any hereditary diseases they may of had in past generations to them.
The only thing that a 'homosexual' parent will do to change anything different in the child's life than what the biological parents would of, is purely how the child looks at the world. (Be that good or bad as everyone has an opinion)
So basically I don't agree with IVF use on homosexuals due to scientific/social reasons.
/my opinion.
(I tried to stay as much on topic as possible, even to the point of not stating my own views on homosexuality)
(Apologies if I offended any hillbillies or rednecks or rug-munchers. No Apologies to the fags tho)
[Male homosexuals can't have IVF]
My opinion on homosexuals 'being allowed to have children through the use of IVF' is:
No. No they shouldn't.
This is a non-religious statement: "If homosexual couples were supposed to 'conceive', evolution would have already supplied them with the means to do so."
Homosexuality is not a 20th century phenomenon, it has probably been around since 'sexuality' existed.
However the science behind IVF has only been around in our lifetime.
I don't think it is really fair on society to pander to the needs of minorities in such a way to disrupt their own lives. Be it through taxes or other public paid services such as scientific research (as happens in some countries), or public resources such as genetic material (sperm, etc).
Also the fact that there are many children in need of adoption around the world.
As far as people using the excuse that homosexual parents shouldn't be allowed to have IVF treatment because:
Homosexual Parents will [paraphrasing] "Give their children a stigma throughout their lives"
and
"They will disease their children with the 'gayness' (i.e. make them homosexual as well)"
...please.
If that were the case then adoptive 'Heterosexual' parents all over the world would be making their children change colours (ethnicity) if different to biological parents, and passing down any hereditary diseases they may of had in past generations to them.
The only thing that a 'homosexual' parent will do to change anything different in the child's life than what the biological parents would of, is purely how the child looks at the world. (Be that good or bad as everyone has an opinion)
So basically I don't agree with IVF use on homosexuals due to scientific/social reasons.
/my opinion.
(I tried to stay as much on topic as possible, even to the point of not stating my own views on homosexuality)
(Apologies if I offended any hillbillies or rednecks or rug-munchers. No Apologies to the fags tho)
[Male homosexuals can't have IVF]
Last edited by stickjackal (2006-11-21 12:00:23)
But they are blessing the child with a perhaps positvely modified childhood!In the end they could come out on top!IRONCHEF wrote:
By "selfish" I mean they are depriving that child of natural parenthood. And let's face it, a child being born of parents who actually made it is the "natural" and intended way to be born.JimG wrote:
I don't think its selfish for them to want to experience the joy of raising a child.IRONCHEF wrote:
Excellent and important point. And this is how I would describe homosexual behavior as being selfish...creating a child as a loop-hole for one of the most basic, longest lasting situation in the world...man/woman procreation.
Science is a form of evolution.stickjackal wrote:
To begin, I do NOT have any form of religion, nor does my culture have a stand-point on homosexuality.
My opinion on homosexuals 'being allowed to have children through the use of IVF' is:
No. No they shouldn't.
This is a non-religious statement: "If homosexual couples were supposed to 'conceive', evolution would have already supplied them with the means to do so."
Homosexuality is not a 20th century phenomenon, it has probably been around since 'sexuality' existed.
However the science behind IVF has only been around in our lifetime.
I don't think it is really fair on society to pander to the needs of minorities in such a way to disrupt their own lives. Be it through taxes or other public paid services such as scientific research (as happens in some countries), or public resources such as genetic material (sperm, etc).
Also the fact that there are many children in need of adoption around the world.
As far as people using the excuse that homosexual parents shouldn't be allowed to have IVF treatment because:
Homosexual Parents will [paraphrasing] "Give their children a stigma throughout their lives"
and
"They will disease their children with the 'gayness' (i.e. make them homosexual as well)"
...please.
If that were the case then adoptive 'Heterosexual' parents all over the world would be making their children change colours (ethnicity) if different to biological parents, and passing down any hereditary diseases they may of had in past generations to them.
The only thing that a 'homosexual' parent will do to change anything different in the child's life than what the biological parents would of, is purely how the child looks at the world. (Be that good or bad as everyone has an opinion)
So basically I don't agree with IVF use on homosexuals due to scientific/social reasons.
/my opinion. [size=5](I tried to stay as much on topic as possible, even to the point of not stating my own views on homosexuality) [/size] [size=1] (Apologies if I offended any hillbillies or rednecks or rug-munchers. No Apologies to the fags tho [Male homosexuals can't have IVF] ) [/size]
Oh, sure they're blessing a child with loving parents. But in the context of creating..they are specifically "making" a child for their desires while not thinking of the child itself..being "made" to go with unnatural parents. Sure the child can get over that and even accept it. The point is that the child was produced, conjured, selfishly willed. There are kids to adopt if needed..why make one to use a loophole?JimG wrote:
But they are blessing the child with a perhaps positvely modified childhood!In the end they could come out on top!IRONCHEF wrote:
By "selfish" I mean they are depriving that child of natural parenthood. And let's face it, a child being born of parents who actually made it is the "natural" and intended way to be born.JimG wrote:
I don't think its selfish for them to want to experience the joy of raising a child.
Deep man, deep....JimG wrote:
Science is a form of evolution.
I have to agree. These people arent right up top. And the whole gay thing is vile.mr.degman wrote:
Cant u people understnd , TO be Gay is WRONG, atlest something is wrong it their head.
The way of life is that a male fucks a female and not male vs male.
No gay marriage no gays would be allowed to have children and to be honest its absolutely fucking disgusting to be gay.
So if you're gay you're not "right up top?" What is being "right up top" like then? Are you right up top with statements like that?UNDIESRULES wrote:
I have to agree. These people arent right up top. And the whole gay thing is vile.mr.degman wrote:
Cant u people understnd , TO be Gay is WRONG, atlest something is wrong it their head.
The way of life is that a male fucks a female and not male vs male.
No gay marriage no gays would be allowed to have children and to be honest its absolutely fucking disgusting to be gay.
Agreed. And they "Say they are" because if people knew how many priests were really gay they wouldn't let their young lad be an alter boy =XTigerXtrm wrote:
Yes, they should. As should they be allowed to get married. Homosexuals are only a minority because 'the church' says they are, which is major bull...
Because a part of them will be in the baby. It will be half their's. If they are loving parents there's no reason to think that the child will be unhappy with their decision to have the child.IRONCHEF wrote:
Oh, sure they're blessing a child with loving parents. But in the context of creating..they are specifically "making" a child for their desires while not thinking of the child itself..being "made" to go with unnatural parents. Sure the child can get over that and even accept it. The point is that the child was produced, conjured, selfishly willed. There are kids to adopt if needed..why make one to use a loophole?JimG wrote:
But they are blessing the child with a perhaps positvely modified childhood!In the end they could come out on top!IRONCHEF wrote:
By "selfish" I mean they are depriving that child of natural parenthood. And let's face it, a child being born of parents who actually made it is the "natural" and intended way to be born.
Thanks mate, I trystickjackal wrote:
Deep man, deep....JimG wrote:
Science is a form of evolution.
haha im more disgusted by you!UNDIESRULES wrote:
I have to agree. These people arent right up top. And the whole gay thing is vile.mr.degman wrote:
Cant u people understnd , TO be Gay is WRONG, atlest something is wrong it their head.
The way of life is that a male fucks a female and not male vs male.
No gay marriage no gays would be allowed to have children and to be honest its absolutely fucking disgusting to be gay.