Same Sex Parenting - For it or against it?

[Hugo a Gogo]

all these dirty homosexual types having sex PURELY FOR PLEASURE!

how could they!

us normal folk get no pleasure at all from it, except for a small self-righteous glow when we succeed in impregnating something

[deeps]

Hugo a Gogo said:

all these dirty homosexual types having sex PURELY FOR PLEASURE!

how could they!

us normal folk get no pleasure at all from it, except for a small self-righteous glow when we succeed in impregnating something

There's a lot of ignorance on this thread that's for sure.

[Jasey@]

Marf said:

No need to comment, just vote.

If only you'd stuck to this

[Marf]

Jasey@ said:

Marf said:

No need to comment, just vote.

If only you'd stuck to this

Meh, tell that to the people who responded before me

[MOTORVATOR]

Marf said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Marf said:

MOTORVATOR said:

If as a gay you are not turned on by women, then you are in effect turning your back on the natural urge to evolve your line. Of course the same is true for both sexes.

Surely the very fact that homosexual men and woman want to have children flies in the face of this theory?

Of course you can try and explain it away as wanting trophy children, but that just seems a bit empty and weak to me.

The important bit there Marf is the word 'want'.

Not sure it's that important a word in this context. Having kids continues our race. Whether a childs parents are straight or gay they are both ushering in the next generation.

MOTORVATOR said:

I want a load of money so I should be allowed to rob a bank as opposed to work for it?

Gays adopting kids/using surrogates is not illegal. Robbing banks is. Your analogy is faulty.

Just because someone fancies the same sex, why should that preclude their natural need to procreate?

I'm not sure that anyone can convince anyone of that, its something that you feel, surely?

Also, and please correct me if I'm wrong here, but the way you word things seems to indicate you feel homosexuality is a choice?

MOTORVATOR said:

You cannot convince me that if you are willing to turn your back on natures manner of procreation you still have the same 'want' as a heterosexual.

Edited by Marf on Wednesday 29th December 16:04

I thought you might come back with the faulty analogy which is why I used it. It used to be illegal so my analogy stands, just because some lefties made it alright doesn't solve that one.

The reason it should preclude their natural need to procreate, if it is indeed that, is because a society could not survive in that manner.

We cannot, as much as we'd all like to, have a store of women that we just roll out when we feel the need to get the baster out.

Whether it is a choice or not is mute for me, I don't know. I know I didn't make a choice to be heterosexual it just happened.

Just so you know I'm not anti gay, if that is their choice fine.

[Jasey@]

The chances of not responding to this subject matter are one of two.

Fat & Slim.

[Marf]

MOTORVATOR said:

Marf said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Marf said:

MOTORVATOR said:

If as a gay you are not turned on by women, then you are in effect turning your back on the natural urge to evolve your line. Of course the same is true for both sexes.

Surely the very fact that homosexual men and woman want to have children flies in the face of this theory?

Of course you can try and explain it away as wanting trophy children, but that just seems a bit empty and weak to me.

The important bit there Marf is the word 'want'.

Not sure it's that important a word in this context. Having kids continues our race. Whether a childs parents are straight or gay they are both ushering in the next generation.

MOTORVATOR said:

I want a load of money so I should be allowed to rob a bank as opposed to work for it?

Gays adopting kids/using surrogates is not illegal. Robbing banks is. Your analogy is faulty.

Just because someone fancies the same sex, why should that preclude their natural need to procreate?

I'm not sure that anyone can convince anyone of that, its something that you feel, surely?

Also, and please correct me if I'm wrong here, but the way you word things seems to indicate you feel homosexuality is a choice?

MOTORVATOR said:

You cannot convince me that if you are willing to turn your back on natures manner of procreation you still have the same 'want' as a heterosexual.

Edited by Marf on Wednesday 29th December 16:04

I thought you might come back with the faulty analogy which is why I used it. It used to be illegal so my analogy stands, just because some lefties made it alright doesn't solve that one.

Say no more, its a political issue for you so not worth debating, correct?

MOTORVATOR said:

The reason it should preclude their natural need to procreate, if it is indeed that, is because a society could not survive in that manner.

True enough, but why does societies survival have any bearing on the feeling of needing to procreate, for either homo or heterosexuals??

At the moment one could argue that its not really in soceties interest to procreate, theres enough of us buggers already stripping the planet clean.

CONTENTIOUS SUPPOSITION ALERT!!: Perhaps homosexuality is natures evolutionary way of stemming the tide of humanity's population growth?

MOTORVATOR said:

Whether it is a choice or not is mute for me, I don't know. I know I didn't make a choice to be heterosexual it just happened.

Just so you know I'm not anti gay, if that is their choice fine.

It's not mute(sic. correct spelling is moot btw) then, is it. You clearly feel it's a choice, hence your last comment. Either that or you're trolling, which judging by past topics I've talked to you in is out of character for you.

[Halb]

MOTORVATOR said:

Whether it is a choice or not is mute for me, I don't know. I know I didn't make a choice to be heterosexual it just happened.

Just so you know I'm not anti gay, if that is their choice fine.

Their choice to have kids?

[rb5230]

Halb said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Whether it is a choice or not is mute for me, I don't know. I know I didn't make a choice to be heterosexual it just happened.

Just so you know I'm not anti gay, if that is their choice fine.

Their choice to have kids?

Like he said his choice to rob a bank?

You cant just choose anything u like.

[The real Apache]

rb5230 said:

Halb said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Whether it is a choice or not is mute for me, I don't know. I know I didn't make a choice to be heterosexual it just happened.

Just so you know I'm not anti gay, if that is their choice fine.

Their choice to have kids?

Like he said his choice to rob a bank?

You cant just choose anything u like.

No, but daft analogy aside, as a married gay couple they can choose to bring up a child. What their intentions may be and how it works out is anyones guess but as they have been in a stable relationship for 10 years.....it's not looking too bad is it

[Halb]

rb5230 said:

Halb said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Whether it is a choice or not is mute for me, I don't know. I know I didn't make a choice to be heterosexual it just happened.

Just so you know I'm not anti gay, if that is their choice fine.

Their choice to have kids?

Like he said his choice to rob a bank?

You cant just choose anything u like.

I wasn't sure which bit was their choice.
You can choose anything you like, so long as you can take the consequences;)

[Jasey@]

I wonder if in years to come we'll see adopted children of gay couples suing them for breach of human rights etc etc etc.

The world will have become a truly mad place.

Edited by Jasey@ on Wednesday 29th December 16:46

[rb5230]

The real Apache said:

rb5230 said:

Halb said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Whether it is a choice or not is mute for me, I don't know. I know I didn't make a choice to be heterosexual it just happened.

Just so you know I'm not anti gay, if that is their choice fine.

Their choice to have kids?

Like he said his choice to rob a bank?

You cant just choose anything u like.

No, but daft analogy aside, as a married gay couple they can choose to bring up a child. What their intentions may be and how it works out is anyones guess but as they have been in a stable relationship for 10 years.....it's not looking too bad is it

Indeed, for them it is not looking too bad, but the kid i i fear is going to end up in an odd situation.

[The real Apache]

rb5230 said:

The real Apache said:

rb5230 said:

Halb said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Whether it is a choice or not is mute for me, I don't know. I know I didn't make a choice to be heterosexual it just happened.

Just so you know I'm not anti gay, if that is their choice fine.

Their choice to have kids?

Like he said his choice to rob a bank?

You cant just choose anything u like.

No, but daft analogy aside, as a married gay couple they can choose to bring up a child. What their intentions may be and how it works out is anyones guess but as they have been in a stable relationship for 10 years.....it's not looking too bad is it

Indeed, for them it is not looking too bad, but the kid i i fear is going to end up in an odd situation.

I meant for the kid. If he's brought up in a loving environment free from the problems encountered by thousands of other kids? 'odd' isn't a bad alternative.

[Harry Flashman]

Hooli said:

P_J_R said:

sleep envy said:

I love the use of the term 'normal'

it's such a comfort blanket to those that feel the need, through their own insecurities, to distance themselves from those who don't fit into their little boxes

Ah sorry, I'm guilty of using the N word; must be a bit out of touch. Always thought children should be the result of a loving relationship between a man and a woman; not a couple of old queens using a turkey baster

You & me both, but we're not allowed to speak the truth these days as upsets the freaks.

I didn't even get any further that this beforegiving up in disbelief.

Your use of "the truth" and "the freaks" is enough to see that you are someone not worth even attempting to reason with.

[Kermit power]

okgo said:

Where's the 'against same sex relationships' option?

It's in 1953. Unfortunately you need the pen and paper version of the poll to tick that one.

[Hugo a Gogo]

and that's 'the truth' from our resident 'superfreak' (in the 70's funky sense) Harry

[rb5230]

The real Apache said:

I meant for the kid. If he's brought up in a loving environment free from the problems encountered by thousands of other kids? 'odd' isn't a bad alternative.

Depends on your definition of odd. What if having 2 gay dads makes him gay and possibly resentful because of it, or the constant pisstaking about unnaturally having 2 gay dads and being the product of a turkey baster along with celebrity lifestyle gets him on hard drugs, of course it could turn out absolutely fine, but only time can tell whatever some of the psychics on here say.

Encountering the problems encountered by thousands of kids is what makes a person a person, it is life experience.

Having 2 loving parents is great and hopefully that is what he will have, but having 2 loving parents and being born naturally to a normal family is surely going to give the kid more chance of a normal existence.

Like i said only time will tell. No-one on here can prove what will happen either way. Good luck to the child.

[The real Apache]

rb5230 said:

The real Apache said:

I meant for the kid. If he's brought up in a loving environment free from the problems encountered by thousands of other kids? 'odd' isn't a bad alternative.

Depends on your definition of odd. What if having 2 gay dads makes him gay and possibly resentful because of it, or the constant pisstaking about unnaturally having 2 gay dads and being the product of a turkey baster along with celebrity lifestyle gets him on hard drugs, of course it could turn out absolutely fine, but only time can tell whatever some of the psychics on here say.

Encountering the problems encountered by thousands of kids is what makes a person a person, it is life experience.

Having 2 loving parents is great and hopefully that is what he will have, but having 2 loving parents and being born naturally to a normal family is surely going to give the kid more chance of a normal existence.

Like i said only time will tell. No-one on here can prove what will happen either way. Good luck to the child.

amen brother

[MOTORVATOR]

Marf said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Marf said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Marf said:

MOTORVATOR said:

If as a gay you are not turned on by women, then you are in effect turning your back on the natural urge to evolve your line. Of course the same is true for both sexes.

Surely the very fact that homosexual men and woman want to have children flies in the face of this theory?

Of course you can try and explain it away as wanting trophy children, but that just seems a bit empty and weak to me.

The important bit there Marf is the word 'want'.

Not sure it's that important a word in this context. Having kids continues our race. Whether a childs parents are straight or gay they are both ushering in the next generation.

MOTORVATOR said:

I want a load of money so I should be allowed to rob a bank as opposed to work for it?

Gays adopting kids/using surrogates is not illegal. Robbing banks is. Your analogy is faulty.

Just because someone fancies the same sex, why should that preclude their natural need to procreate?

I'm not sure that anyone can convince anyone of that, its something that you feel, surely?

Also, and please correct me if I'm wrong here, but the way you word things seems to indicate you feel homosexuality is a choice?

MOTORVATOR said:

You cannot convince me that if you are willing to turn your back on natures manner of procreation you still have the same 'want' as a heterosexual.

Edited by Marf on Wednesday 29th December 16:04

I thought you might come back with the faulty analogy which is why I used it. It used to be illegal so my analogy stands, just because some lefties made it alright doesn't solve that one.

Say no more, its a political issue for you so not worth debating, correct?

No not at all, we can debate that of course, but it goes without saying that if I don't agree with it then I obviously don't agree with the legislation that allowed it in the first place.

Marf said:

MOTORVATOR said:

The reason it should preclude their natural need to procreate, if it is indeed that, is because a society could not survive in that manner.

True enough, but why does societies survival have any bearing on the feeling of needing to procreate, for either homo or heterosexuals??

At the moment one could argue that its not really in soceties interest to procreate, theres enough of us buggers already stripping the planet clean.

CONTENTIOUS SUPPOSITION ALERT!!: Perhaps homosexuality is natures evolutionary way of stemming the tide of humanity's population growth?

I guess that's a take on it but we cannot deny how evolution has worked throughout the years based on getting jiggy with opposite sexes. We could just as well argue that with our new found knowledge everything should be done by laboratory coats nowadays to create the master race free of diseases or abnormalities.

I don't agree with that one either.

Although if you were to go down that route would you include the homesexual tendency in the final model?

Marf said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Whether it is a choice or not is mute for me, I don't know. I know I didn't make a choice to be heterosexual it just happened.

Just so you know I'm not anti gay, if that is their choice fine.

It's not mute(sic. correct spelling is moot btw) then, is it. You clearly feel it's a choice, hence your last comment. Either that or you're trolling, which judging by past topics I've talked to you in is out of character for you.

Feck off with the spelling lesson, I've had a hard time of it recently involving excesses of beer, wine, spirits and port and I'm only just coming round.

No not trolling, badly worded - clearly it is a choice, but I do accept that choice may have been made for you. There will always be polar sides of an argument like that so I find it safer to sit squarely in the middle!