Would you say this is a universal right?

DaveyR

Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Posts
5,422
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
268
Location
Northumberland
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
If it was my family would I like to see the children taken into adoptive care by a gay couple? Over my cold, dead, body.

Sorry gays, but if it came to it I'd probably fight for your right to vote (although I wouldn't be that fussed if you lost it, you're all Labour voters anyway) but there's no way I'm allowing you to look after little Timmy. Not now, not ever.

Fortunately people like you are in the absolute minority in this Country and the numbers are declining rapidly. Don't bother fighting for our vote. We already have it. Besides you'd probably stab us in the back anyway.

Nuff said really because it is totally pointless engaging you. You made no effort to respond to either my or Nudeyorker's post. Why? Because you didn't have a fucking clue how to reply to them.
 

Countryguy63

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Posts
9,460
Media
36
Likes
7,867
Points
458
Location
near Monterey, Calif.
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Fortunately people like you are in the absolute minority in this Country and the numbers are declining rapidly. Don't bother fighting for our vote. We already have it. Besides you'd probably stab us in the back anyway.

Nuff said really because it is totally pointless engaging you. You made no effort to respond to either my or Nudeyorker's post. Why? Because you didn't have a fucking clue how to reply to them.

That, and he's a troll just getting off on offending as many as he can. :rolleyes:
 

Speculator

1st Like
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
375
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Location
Kent, UK
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Besides you'd probably stab us in the back anyway.

Cheeky.

Fortunately people like you are in the absolute minority in this Country and the numbers are declining rapidly. Don't bother fighting for our vote. We already have it.

Nuff said really because it is totally pointless engaging you. You made no effort to respond to either my or Nudeyorker's post. Why? Because you didn't have a fucking clue how to reply to them.

I can't respond to every poster that wants to criticise my old-school outlook on life, I'd be here all day. Tbh I'm not even that bothered about gay adoption, I thought this was a politics forum but it seems to be populated by gay men that want bleat on about their rights, I personally couldn't care less.

If posters refrain from mentioning tedious gay issues I'll quite happily avoid the subject altogether, but if you're gonna ask for my opinion you'll damn well get it. I'd prefer an atmosphere of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
 

Kotchanski

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Posts
2,850
Media
10
Likes
105
Points
193
Location
England (United Kingdom)
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Female
Not wanting to get myself banned for speaking my mind, I took a few minutes to compose myself before replying...

I have some questions Speculator:

1. Do you have the same issue with lesbians raising children?
2. Do you have the same issues with bi-sexuals raising children?
3. Do you have issues with gay teachers?
4. Do you have issues with gay babysitters?
5. Do you have issues with gay foster carers?

I'm trying to ascertain what exactly your issue is...

We've a long history of bad parenting from the straight side of the coin, and surely even you must admit that a loving gay couple would provide a far better upbringing than is provided by many a straight couple, even if we take your postulations about the social issues and "gay baggage" as fact? So it can't purely be that that makes you believe all gay men should be without families.

Are you perhaps concerned about influence? We hear all the time of children following in the parents foot steps when they have a high flying job, certain politic points of view and the likes... Are you concerned that we'd be allowing the raising of an army of gays?

Given the horror stories we hear about how gay men are treated in every day life, an issue you yourself have mentioned several times, should we be developing some form of gay test so that we can give all the gay babies to the gay people so they can properly prepare them for what's to come?

Some of the above may have been made in a somewhat joking manner, but I really would like to understand just how someone, anyone can find it acceptable to deny other loving, law abiding citizens the right to a family.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
70
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
If posters refrain from mentioning tedious gay issues I'll quite happily avoid the subject altogether, but if you're gonna ask for my opinion you'll damn well get it. I'd prefer an atmosphere of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Or you could be a grown up, start your own threads and stay the hell out of ones that you're not concerned with. Less than 15% of the threads on the front page of the Politics section have anything to do with a gay theme. And with all the other options around here, clearly someone who is "bothered" by the gayness can find other places to be where they won't have to deal with it. So stop overreacting.
 

DaveyR

Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Posts
5,422
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
268
Location
Northumberland
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I can't respond to every poster that wants to criticise my old-school outlook on life, I'd be here all day.

Bigoted seems more appropriate than old-school. I know plenty of older folks who have what some would describe as old-school values but they are loving and tolerant people. Not an ounce of bigotry in them.



I'd prefer an atmosphere of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Of that I have no doubt whatsoever.:rolleyes:
 

BadBoyCanada

1st Like
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Posts
75
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
41
Location
East Coast
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I think it's rather presumptuous to suggest gay couples want to become parents in order to make a political statement. Straight couples frequently produce children without any real forethought and/or for all the wrong reasons. If anything, I would think it's much more of a conscious thought out decision and a commitment for gay couples generally speaking, since it doesn't happen "by accident".


I'm not suggesting that is the reason for all. And believe me, a week after having a child, if parenting wasn't their main goal, they would be willing to give the child back.

The context of my statement was that same sex parents in small town (fill in the blank) would be under the spotlight more, then say in San Francisco or New York. There would be a lot of emotional stress for that family in Bible Belt America.
 

NumberTwentySix

Just Browsing
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Posts
203
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
51
Gender
Male
Adoption, or parenting for that matter, is not a right. Just because you want a child does not mean you get one.

That said, as long as a couple meets the requirements to adopt a child, I say let them. Kids need two parents. The number of gay households that would choose to adopt or do IVF would likely be tiny compared to the population as a whole, so the fear on the part of religious folks that the political argument would be won as more and more kids grow up considering gay relationships to be "normal" is pretty unlikely to be realized. And let's face it, the kid is going to be teased about something regardless of how his parents bump uglies.

I think the people who say no gay person would ever adopt for political reasons are naive, but I also think the likelihood of that person getting away with such a scheme is remote, given the scrutiny under which he or she would necessarily be operating.

I think adopting kids from other countries should be illegal while there are orphans in the US, unless the foreign kids are blood relatives or the children of friends. If gay parents can make a dent in the size of the population of US orphans, then let them do so.

...but if I see gay celebrities following their straight counterparts, bringing a designer third-world baby to red carpet event, all bets are off. :)
 
Last edited:

Speculator

1st Like
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
375
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Location
Kent, UK
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Not wanting to get myself banned for speaking my mind, I took a few minutes to compose myself before replying...

Thanks, I feel honoured.

I have some questions Speculator:

1. Do you have the same issue with lesbians raising children?
2. Do you have the same issues with bi-sexuals raising children?
3. Do you have issues with gay teachers?
4. Do you have issues with gay babysitters?
5. Do you have issues with gay foster carers?
If individuals come to a private arrangement, lets say that lesbian has a child from a previous relationship and then enters into a same sex relationship I have no issue whatsoever. It's a private matter. But, when we start talking about rights my ears prick up, because the assumption is that gay people have some sort of right to start a family, well they don't, NOBODY does. Has that cleared things up? Having a family is a privilege. But I'll answer your questions anyway;

1) Yes
2) Yes
3) No
4) No
5) Yes

Bottom line, does their sexual orientation have an impact on the job they're doing? If they're a teacher or a babysitter I'd say no, if they're putting themselves forward as potential adoptive parents I'd say it was a minor disadvantage. Why? I'll let Maxcok explain.


We've a long history of bad parenting from the straight side of the coin, and surely even you must admit that a loving gay couple would provide a far better upbringing than is provided by many a straight couple, even if we take your postulations about the social issues and "gay baggage" as fact? So it can't purely be that that makes you believe all gay men should be without families.
Yes I have admitted this, I said as much many times during the thread. Gay people may have to negotiate with third parties before they're able to start a family though, this complicates matters and I don't think the complication is dealth with adequately by referring to the civil rights of the gay community. They have as much right to start a family as I do to play for Manchester United. I.e None.



Are you perhaps concerned about influence? We hear all the time of children following in the parents foot steps when they have a high flying job, certain politic points of view and the likes... Are you concerned that we'd be allowing the raising of an army of gays?
Don't be silly.

Given the horror stories we hear about how gay men are treated in every day life, an issue you yourself have mentioned several times, should we be developing some form of gay test so that we can give all the gay babies to the gay people so they can properly prepare them for what's to come?
See above.

Some of the above may have been made in a somewhat joking manner, but I really would like to understand just how someone, anyone can find it acceptable to deny other loving, law abiding citizens the right to a family.
If they're the best person for the job then I don't mind. Do you have a problem with the concept of meritocracy or something?
 

Kotchanski

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Posts
2,850
Media
10
Likes
105
Points
193
Location
England (United Kingdom)
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Female
If they're the best person for the job then I don't mind. Do you have a problem with the concept of meritocracy or something?

Thank you for taking the time to reply to my questions.

I have no objection to meritocracy as a methodology for discerning ones suitability for x, y or z, it is however subjective.

Adoption uses a very merit based assessment, looking at your relationship, your financial status, criminal record, housing situation and many other aspects. I see no value in considering ones sexual preferences however, and there in lies our difference.

I simply can not comprehend how one man and one woman can in any way be considered better than two men or two women.

If the gay couple mentioned earlier decided they wanted a child but adoption was not an option (for reasons that in no way pose a risk to a child - let's say they can't in this mystery country they live in) and for example, I offered to carry a child for them and give them sole custody with no parental involvement... do your feelings on this matter go so deep as to require some form of action stopping me? Perhaps even calling for some form of punishment (fine, jail time...) should I continue with the plan?
 

Speculator

1st Like
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
375
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Location
Kent, UK
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
If the gay couple mentioned earlier decided they wanted a child but adoption was not an option (for reasons that in no way pose a risk to a child - let's say they can't in this mystery country they live in) and for example, I offered to carry a child for them and give them sole custody with no parental involvement... do your feelings on this matter go so deep as to require some form of action stopping me?Perhaps even calling for some form of punishment (fine, jail time...)


Absolutely, such behaviour should be punishable by death! Not really. Even though this involves the life of an unborn human I'd say it was part of civil society and as such should only be subject to contract law, not criminal law. So if somebody welches on the deal the most they could expect would be a claim for compensation.

That said I think it's perefectly acceptable to hold conflicting viewpoints on the matter. If I was a Christian politician for example although I might think the scenario is morally wrong, from a political perspective I might adopt a live and let live attitude and not seek any new laws.

As I've said in other threads, because gay people and other minorities have finally achieved equal political status they're having to delve deeper to pick a fight over the gay issue. Most people -like myself- don't really care about it all, but they keep on prodding and flaunting their "equal rights" (i.e demanding to be more equal) to get a reaction. When they finally do they accuse their opponents of being homophobic! There's a part of certain people's makeup that encourages them to seek victimisation because they can then feel all righteous and go on the offensive. It's a bit of a game.

There's nothing some gay people like more than a good homophobe, and if they'll can't find a real one they'll go for the next best thing. On here that seems to be me.
 
Last edited:

HUNGHUGE11X7

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Posts
2,351
Media
154
Likes
6,746
Points
468
Age
48
Location
Earth/USA/GA! DEEP IN YOUR THROAT,See vid TO SEE H
Verification
View
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
It's not about YOU and YOUR civil rights, it's about the kid.

Straight couples don't come with all this emotional baggage.


Ignorance is BLISS, but stupidity dangerously ENDURING !



~HH~
 

maxcok

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Posts
7,153
Media
0
Likes
126
Points
83
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Male
As I've said in other threads, because gay people and other minorities have finally achieved equal political status . . . .
Oh wow! When did that happen? You think there at least would have been a party.

Maxcok has admirably explained why straight couples may find it easier to become good parents, . . .
Maxcok would very much appreciate it if the new forum troll would not cite him, deliberately and dishonestly mischaracterizing his statements with the transparent intent of being provocative - especially when the troll is not addressing him directly.

He would also appreciate it if the troll would not attribute quotes to him that were written by other posters:
Why? I'll let Maxcok explain. . . .
We've a long history of bad parenting from the straight side of the coin, . . .
^ I have no idea who actually said that, as the forum troll failed (intentionally?) to include the poster's name along with the quote, and I can't be bothered to do the research. Though I don't object to the sentiment expressed therein, I would like to be known for my own words - accurately quoted - and not others'.

Nuff said really because it is totally pointless engaging you.
Unless of course you just want to feed the troll, or counter his lies and deliberate mischaracterizations.

That, and he's a troll just getting off on offending as many as he can. :rolleyes:
As usual, CG displays clear insight and his considerable country boy common sense.

Anyone who has any doubts about Spec's true motives should look at some of his other posts. Here's a good one to get a read on him. He makes his entrance on page three.
 
Last edited:

Tee&A

Experimental Member
Joined
May 7, 2007
Posts
345
Media
0
Likes
13
Points
163
Location
Cali
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
Good grief. If a bigoted tree falls in a forest, will anyone hear it? Or care?
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,678
Media
0
Likes
2,815
Points
333
Location
Greece
The irony of course is that the world is full of kids being parented by gay and bi people who are married to opposite sex partners.

Perhaps all parents should undergo gay screening before they are allowed to take their kids home. Would you feel safer with that, Spec?
 

Speculator

1st Like
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
375
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Location
Kent, UK
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
The irony of course is that the world is full of kids being parented by gay and bi people who are married to opposite sex partners.

Perhaps all parents should undergo gay screening before they are allowed to take their kids home. Would you feel safer with that, Spec?


Yeah but it doesn't happen very often though, does it? Thank God!
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
70
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Do you actually know what the word bigot means? Trying using the real dictionary instead of your left-wing version.

So let's use the dictionary! Bigotry | Define Bigotry at Dictionary.com
bigotry: stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

And considering your continued labeling of everything you don't like (including people) as being "left wing" or "liberal" the term does apply to you. As the definition suggests, you have displayed a stubborn and complete intolerance to those set of beliefs... even when they're not completely embodied under one political ideology.

The dictionary is not your friend. :rolleyes: