@BigD

Quote:

While it is a shame that there are not enough married couples to adopt older children it doesn't seem to be the solution to place them in situations that deprive them of a male AND female role model

I'd argue 2 same sex parents, that will the same people for the next decade and into the future, is a better option that tossing the kids between Foster Cares. Sure Foster Care can do a good job. But, when "Mom" and "Dad" are temporary roles I'd think that's more stressful and harder on the kid overall. Additionally, If you're falling back on research (as you said you were earlier) what it shows is no significant difference results in the child.

Perhaps it's good to ask Christians, whose God says to take care of humanity, why more Christian families aren't stepping up to the plate. At least 60%+ in the USA claim to be Christians but why aren't they all running in to say give us these kids? Instead they say 'no kids for gays' and the same time they refuse to commit to the care themselves. May God have mercy on them for they themselves failing to be merciful.

Quote:

There are distinct things we pick up and learn from both our mother AND father

Again research shows no difference. There are distinct things we learn from people, including things we learn that parents may not be good at teaching. Society is clearly not the stereotypical 50s nuclear family. In your article the first line says "Boys learn their earliest lessons about love and trust from their mothers" Which they certainly can. But, it doesn't mean they can't learn these things from their father. I'd argue a Father son loving and trusting relationship is just as important as one with their Mother. Interestingly enough your second post says that the love boys learn from their Fathers might be even more important.

Quote:

Is doesn't surprise me that some of your national institutions such as the Psychoanalytic Association and the American Psychological Association are

You wanted research and I provided you the most comprehensive studies in the world as collected and provided the American Academy of Pediatrics. You are rejecting the research due to your innate biases not because of any real reason. You are assuming that somehow this organization is in cohoots with the 1971 Gay Liberation Agenda. Why do I say this? First you've failed to demonstrate that the GLA is sustained today (40 years later) by any organization. Nor have you demonstrated that all gays are dictated to follow this. Second, you've failed to establish any ties between any of the organizations (which BTW weren't the ones I cited) to Gay organizations let alone any ties of those to the Gay Liberation Agenda. In short you've assumed your postion and rejected anyone who differs by making suprious and unsupported claims.

NOTE: This is demonstrably different from my handing of Focus on the Family. I agreed they do accept all comers. I also demonstrated the leadership's past is derived from positions of power in Christian Organizations. I never said reject them. I did state we should be questioning them deeper. (As an aside since I watched them I thought I'd let you know that their videos are weak with research and strong on posturing.)

Last edited by BrianK on 16-Oct-2012 at 02:53 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 16-Oct-2012 at 02:52 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 16-Oct-2012 at 02:51 PM.

Alas,

@BrianK

Religion is a blessing and a curse.

_________________
My personal blog - CritAnime.com

Admin at Commodore Gaming Wiki

Quote:

You don't understand that the Peter & Hazel Mary Bull B&B case tested whether marriage and civil partnerships were legally equivalent and it found that they were! You can't have it both ways. Equality already exists.

In UK the civil partnership exist. But it exist only in UK. Other countries does not automatically acknowledge it as a marriage, and UK doesn't acknowledge other country's civil partnerships as marriage (nor as UK civil partnership). So, there is no true equality.

_________________

@jaokim

You are mistaken, same sex marriages in other countries become legally equated with civil partnership when that couple resides in the UK.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

Quote:

BigD wrote: @jaokim You are mistaken, same sex marriages in other countries become legally equated with civil partnership when that couple resides in the UK.

ROFLMA

Gawd you really are ignorant BIgD, your the guy who loves to quote and link every article you find on this subject and claim it as fact and yet when someone posts a link from one of your favourite sources of info, you dismiss it out of hand and tell him he's wrong...

Yet again you've just proven your blinkered ignorance and highly selective reasoning and by your own words just proven that everything you have linked to and posted here must a wrong if not lies...

_________________

@Franko

The article he linked to at no point backs up the claim;

jaokim's quote:
Quote:

UK doesn't acknowledge other country's civil partnerships as marriage (nor as UK civil partnership)

If your happy for people to link to an article which states something different to what they're claiming then this really is all a waste of time. Same-sex marriages are not recognised here because there is no such thing in UK law as marriage is...

"The voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others."

Instead they are recognised as the nearest sensible legal equivalent i.e. a civil partnership. His statement that foreign national's civil partnerships are simply annulled once they set foot on UK soil is also preposterous!

Quote from the UK Border Agency
Quote:

Some people may have already formed a civil partnership or had a same sex marriage abroad. In certain cases this relationship will be recognised in the UK as a civil partnership and the partners will be treated as if they had formed the civil partnership in the UK. This table reflects the position as known to UK Border Agency as at January 2010.

UK Border Agency Guidance on Civil Partnerships recognised in the UK

Perhaps you should read the links and compare them to the statements before you point your finger

Last edited by BigD on 17-Oct-2012 at 12:36 AM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@Thread

In other news. Some leading Tories still have common sense and can see just how unpopular redefining marriage is;

Liam Fox: "bringing in equal marriage will not be socially acceptable"

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BrianK

Quote:

Perhaps it's good to ask Christians, whose God says to take care of humanity, why more Christian families aren't stepping up to the plate. At least 60%+ in the USA claim to be Christians but why aren't they all running in to say give us these kids? Instead they say 'no kids for gays' and the same time they refuse to commit to the care themselves. May God have mercy on them for they themselves failing to be merciful.

A fair point but am in no doubt that a lot of Christians have stepped up to the plate and adopted troubled young people despite difficulties and personal hardship in doing so.

Christians are always at the forefront of providing social care, provision and aid where there is a vacuum of provision from the state. Free education and health care for the poor has largely been championed by Christians.

The point is that there are enough heterosexual married couples in the UK (and I'm guessing in the USA too) to adopt the children in this foster care trap if the red tape removed e.g. the practise of refusing to place black babies with white parents. Depriving children of a mother or father is not the solution but opening up the adoption system to married couples whatever their race is the solution. I refute your research and point to the following articles which links to more credible research;

Culture Watch: Children need a mother and father

Telegraph: Children of single parent families are worse behaved

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

Quote:

BigD wrote: @Franko The article he linked to at no point backs up the claim

As Jaokim said...
Quote:

UK doesn't acknowledge other country's civil partnerships as marriage (nor as UK civil partnership)

In which he is correct...


and you WRONGLY replied...
Quote:

You are mistaken, same sex marriages in other countries become legally equated with civil partnership when that couple resides in the UK.

and the very article from one of your favourite sources of knowledge (The Guardian) which Jaookim linked to, claims that a Canadian couple of the same sex marriage didn't have their marriage recognised as being legal in England...

Then you tell me, who is wrong you or the article in The Guardian ???

As far as I am aware nowhere in the UK recognises most other countries same sex marriage and gives them full legal standing under any of the UK's various law systems...

So either you are correct or the laws all over the UK are wrong according to you and bizarrely you are now the the sole ruling representative of UK laws on marriage !!!

_________________

@BigD

As you insist on continuing to post links to newspaper articles I ask once again that you answer this post please...

Question To BigD...

_________________

@BigD

Quote:

A fair point but am in no doubt that a lot of Christians have stepped up to the plate and adopted troubled young people despite difficulties and personal hardship in doing so.

And non-Christians too. In a nation of an estimated 190Million (about 60ish% of the population) Christians and we have over 150K kids available for adoption? Do you realize is that for every ~1300 Christians there's one kid that's not being taken care of ?

Quote:

The point is that there are enough heterosexual married couples in the UK (and I'm guessing in the USA too) to adopt the children in this foster care

Certainly there are sufficent hetero couples. Too bad they don't step up and do it.

Quote:

Depriving children of a mother or father is not the solution

But, I think I'd agree with you is having No mother and No father is worse. And you provided the links showing having only a single parent is fairly bad. What your links don't appear to compare (or mention) is anything doing with same-sex two parent homes whatsoever. Are they lumped in with the 2 parent home count? We're left wondering.

Quote:

I refute your research

Unfortunately what you provided is woefully inadequate to provide a refutation. You proved a point of view linked to an article that claims to have a study.
* First, of all (as I mentioned above) the article lists nothing in reference to comparing gay families vs any other family type. So this work says nothing directly. * Second, in the Telegraph piece we have no mention of organization, no confirmation of validaty, or anywhere to go to find supposed article. This makes it impossible the analyze the work. Which in turn means we can neither accept nor reject. We need to put it on a pile for future review.
* Third, There's no way to ascertain what controls were in place for things like alcoholism and mental issues within the parents themselves. Perhaps not only is the child at a slight disadvantage with 1 parent but how much disadvantage are they at for their own biological impacts or poor nuturing situations. What's the rate of divorce for addicts and mentally impared? (In the USA it's higher than average.) What's the rate of divorce for parents of mentally handicapped? (In the USA it's higher than average)
* Fourth, the first article notes that living apart from Fathers bring economic disadvantages to the family. There's nothing that says how this translates to not living with Mothers. Or living with two mothers and how often the 2nd mother's income offsets the buying power of the father. (Here's a thought to scare you. If Father's income is so vastly important perhaps doubling that income, as in two fathers, may be even better.)
* Lastly, (assuming everything is Kosher about the missing research in your favor) it is but a single research piece. I linked to an analysis which is the broadest look across the world ever. We'd have to sit down with the many, many statistics and suss out the differencens and why.

The only reason you feel you can 'refute' is an emotional bond to your topic and unfortunately you haven't taken a rational approach to the body of work that exists. You're taking the writer's conclusions for fact not working with the actual study to fact check the writer.

... Interestingly your article mention kids are noteably better with a mother 30+ instead of 20. And the articles compare single families. It seems to me what your work does say (again assuming your writers are true) is that if you really truly have the kids best upbringing at heart you should be working harder at banning 29 and under women from pregnancy and eliminating divorce.

EDIT (hopefully last) -- What we know is 4 out of the 5 States that allow Gay marriage are in the bottom 10 lowest rate of divorce. We know the 25 States that banned Gay Marriage comprise the top 50% of States with the worst divorce rates. If you article is correct it appears Gay Marriage may have a positive influence and lowers divorce rates. Which in turn gives kids 2 parents and a better chance than the single parent household.

Last edited by BrianK on 17-Oct-2012 at 12:34 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 17-Oct-2012 at 05:52 AM.

Ive mentioned real life (not some hand crafted for agenda nonsense I read in papers) examples a few times, but theyre selectively ignored.

Again, my father was an evil prick. My life improved drastically once we escaped from him and it was just Mum that looked after us. School teachers commented how much happier I was, and how my focus had improved dramatically.
This is no poll, no newpaper article, but *real life*.

What a child needs is a stable, consistant environment. Be this one parent, 2 seperated parents, a heterosexual parent couple, or a homosexual parent couple. Heck, they could have a single parent with 3 gills and a horn, but so long as theyre decent people a child can still be perfectly happy.

Kids are unaware of biases and are only effected when ignorant people introduce them. If a child suffers from having 2 parents of the same sex then its because of ignorant people like you.

Another example is my nephew. My sister seperated with her partner, and I'll tell you right now he's as polite, well adjusted and well behaved child as you'll ever meet.

My best friend as a child, also raised by a single mother. Really nice lady (who flirted with bi-sexuality) and he's an amost excessively happy person. Quick to joke and laugh, and also highly intelligent (received 2 scholarships).

Another friend of mine was fairly heavily religious, both his parents were active members of their church, but he turned to drugs and alcohol at an early life becaue he was unhappy with his life.

When I was 15 I went away for the weekend with him and his church outh group. This was the 1st time I'd tried alcohol, and managed to find my way into a 3some with 2 promiscuous young girls.

I could go on and on, and Im sure everyone reading this could also provide many examples that show its down to an individual as to how they think/behave/etc., not sexual orientation.

What these hand crafted for agenda polls/articles neglect to mention is that there's other thing that are influencing (often dubious) results.

Youve woven yourself a little shell were you see/acknowledge only things that fit your agenda, and have managed to insult a lot of people youre not even aware you've dragged into things.

I have to agree with spacedruid here. Perhaps it wouldnt hurt you to seek some help outside of your comfort zone. Staying within it simply means that you'll stay with the things causing these delusions, so it wont help you. You seem to share quite a few symptoms with paranoid scizophrenics. So very convinced of your fantasy world and blind to the real truth which is being put before you time and time again.

At first it appeared you was just blind, ignorant and bigotted, but post by post it appears that's just a side effect of a greater problem. This thread isnt about trying to get people to sign a petition (its not mentioned for the last thousand posts or so), it's about your need to convince yourself of your delusions (notice how no-one has?).

Your illness will most likely make you see this as an attack as the suggestion goes against the delusions youre so intensely living by, but please consider it as it's not an attack, but rather real concern for someone who obviously needs help but is unaware of it.

Last edited by fishy_fis on 17-Oct-2012 at 09:22 AM.

@BigD

Quote:

Same-sex marriages are not recognised here because there is no such thing in UK law as marriage is... "The voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others."

Yes, We know that the current definition is exclusionary. That is what the whole idea of changing the law is about. Once the law is amended to be less discriminatory it will read something like
"The voluntary union of two people". Please note that the word "voluntary" is left in and as a result you will not be legally obligated to marry a man, so there is no threat to the nature of your own marriage despite the lie that you have been pushing.

Quote:

His statement that foreign national's civil partnerships are simply annulled once they set foot on UK soil is also preposterous!

It would be if that was what he had claimed, but once again you set up the straw man to be attacked. The claim was that these legal arrangements are not recognised in UK law, and I know of examples where this is true. For example, a 19 year old German male can have a relationship and even marry a 14 year old German female in a "The voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others." If, however they spend their honeymoon in UK, or even visit UK at any point after as a married couple, he is liable to arrest and prosecution, because the legitimacy of their relationship would not be recognised.

Quote:

Christians are always at the forefront of providing social care, provision and aid where there is a vacuum of provision from the state

This statement is so wrong on so many counts. Unless you want to classify priests sexually abusing children as providing care and aid, or the religious groups denying sexual health aid in Africa because it involves the use of condoms as helpful. Do you classify the inquisitions as showing a "loving deity" as opposed to prtraying a snotty brat throwing a temper tantrum. The entire history of christianity is one of "Do as you are told, or be tortured to death.(and then tortured some more, just for the hell of it.)
Quote:

Free education and health care for the poor has largely been championed by Christians.

Actually, education for the masses has routinely been opposed by the church, primarily because it meant that they were no longer the guardians of knowledge and people could catch them out when they used their status to alter the record.

Quote:

In other news. Some leading Tories still have common sense and can see just how unpopular redefining marriage is;

Allow me to correct your misinterpretation. This proposed change in the law is unpopular among certain minority interest groups. The majority of the population at large are either actively supportive of the changes or quite relaxed about them.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@Franko

I've LINKED already to the UK Border Agency info on the foreign civil unions that ARE recognised by the UK legal system. You can either choose to check them out or keep up with your fantasy that no foreign civil union is acknowledged by our legal system

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@fishy_fis

At least your parliament saw sense to put the brakes on this whole redefining nonsense. Lets hope you lead the way for the rest of the civilised world.

BBC: Australia's House of Representatives rejects same sex marriage by 98 to 42


Quote:

Kids are unaware of biases and are only effected when ignorant people introduce them. If a child suffers from having 2 parents of the same sex then its because of ignorant people like you.

Firstly, in the situation you describe a child will be deprived of it's biological parents (since homosexuals can't procreate) and hence will have more difficulty working out who they are, where they came from and why they are the way they are.

Secondly, you are saying that the state sanctioned deprivation of a child caused by the lack of either a mother or father figure has no bearing on a child? That is completely naive. Children raised in a far from ideal environment like yourself, find themselves in difficult situations and cope but that doesn't mean you wouldn't have been better off with a caring doting father and mother. Biased views and prejudices like your own deprive children up for adoption the chance to have what you did not. It's a scenario where you both lose.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

Quote:

BigD wrote: @Franko I've LINKED already to the UK Border Agency info on the foreign civil unions that ARE recognised by the UK legal system. You can either choose to check them out or keep up with your fantasy that no foreign civil union is acknowledged by our legal system

Sorry but after all the rubbish links you've posted in this thread then I now no longer click on any links you provide... cos they always turn out to be the same erm... rubbish...

PS: REMINDER...

As you insist on continuing to post links to newspaper articles I ask once again that you answer this post please...

Question To BigD...

_________________

@Nimrod

Quote:

Allow me to correct your misinterpretation. This proposed change in the law is unpopular among certain minority interest groups. The majority of the population at large are either actively supportive of the changes or quite relaxed about them.

You really need the stats regurgitated again?

Seven in ten people want to keep marriage as it is. Other polling which purports to show public support for gay marriage fails to tell respondents that equal rights are already available through civil partnerships. When people are told this crucial fact, most people say keep marriage as it is. MPs say their postbags have been dominated by public opposition to redefining marriage. Ordinary people want the Government to concentrate on reviving the economy and providing better public services, not meddling with marriage.

There's also the biggest public petition in years standing at 607,523 actively stating that marriage should remain the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

Again I ask you where's the counter petition? HERE?! 62,923? Is that it? Is that your majority you keep speaking of? Neither the tweets of Stephen Fry, nor the 'Out for Marriage' video of Boris Johnson has got the pro-redefinition campaign over 100,000 signatures never mind 600,000.

As for your misinformed conclusions about the formation of our education system and help for the poor, you need to look again at your history books.

You could start with THIS;

Quote:

There is', wrote John Strype in his 1720 edition of Stow's Survey of London, 'yet another sort of charity in this city, maintained by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, very singular and extraordinary. . . . And that is the erecting of schools in many parishes of London and Westminster (especially the great parishes in the suburbs) called Charity Schools for the free education of poor boys and girls and also for their maintenance in apparel and afterwards disposing of them abroad in honest callings'. This 'singular and extraordinary' occurrence was, in fact, 'the beginning of an attempt to extend elementary education among the poor'.

Thomas Bray and his charity SPCK is also worth learning about;

Quote:

Throughout the eighteenth century SPCK was also the catalyst for the spectacular growth of the charity school movement. The Society provided advice and encouragement to local groups to help them set up, finance and run many hundreds of schools. Although it had no formal authority, SPCK was widely regarded as the chief point of reference for all charity schools, producing model sets of rules, and providing a curriculum and examples of good practice for teachers and trustees establishing new schools. It was also responsible for setting up similar schools in America.

Last edited by BigD on 18-Oct-2012 at 01:45 AM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD


Firstly,
Quote:

Firstly, in the situation you describe a child will be deprived of it's biological parents (since homosexuals can't procreate) and hence will have more difficulty working out who they are, where they came from and why they are the way they are.

Honestly, do you think before you type? Clearly if a child is up for adoption theyve already had a far from ideal life up to that point, either a tragedy has occured or their biological (sometimes married heterosexual couples) werent deemed fit. These are the sorts of details all those hand crafted for agenda polls and so on omitt, and theyre hugely important. Also, I dont seem to recall anyone suggesting gay people should have the right to steal other peoples children.

Secondly, bias prejudices like mine?

Perhaps you should use a dictionary. Ive said nothing all along but its down to an individual how they think and act. Ive included all possibilities, 2 heterosexual, 2 homosexual, one of each, whatever. Heck I even mentioned a single parent with 3 gills and a horn.

You talk of things a child learns from a moter and father, but you seem unaware of the fact children will learn things from other people in their lives as well. Again, its all down to the individul(s). If a person/people is/are to be a responsible parent they need to consider all these things. This is true regarldess.

A stable, loving and warm home environment will provide a good foundation for a person. The amount of parents/guardians, or sexual orientation is nigh on inconsequential so long as the above is covered.

Life isnt black&white. There's no absolutes. There's literally millions of people out there who dont live in a mum/dad/2.1 children/white picket fence lifestyle. All a person can hope to do is the best they can. Again, this is true regardless of the individual.

So youre suggesting that my being inclusive of everyone is a bias prejudice?

Again, try consulting a dictionary.

Out of sheer curiousity, why on Earth would God make some people gay in the first place? Surely he has better things to do than to create a trait in some people and other animals just to give them a hard time? And dont try spouting nonsense about its a sin some of mankind chose, it happens in the animal world too, and they dont have the tools to think abot these things.

I'd have put it down to the fact that different people being different is a good thing. Then again, I just dont have that nasty streak some people seem to think is required to be a good Christian

Last edited by fishy_fis on 18-Oct-2012 at 06:54 AM.
Last edited by fishy_fis on 18-Oct-2012 at 06:38 AM.
Last edited by fishy_fis on 18-Oct-2012 at 06:23 AM.

@fishy_fis

Quote:

Life isnt black&white. There's no absolutes. There's literally millions of people out there who dont live in a mum/dad/2.1 children/white picket fence lifestyle. All a person can hope to do is the best they can. Again, this is true regardless of the individual.

While people do cope with 'other' family units if society is responsible for placing children in families either through adoption or IVF then it owes the child the 'best' start not simply one where the parents will simply muddle through despite being unsuitable. Since it is adoption we're talking about due to homosexual couples being unable to procreate it is up to social services to act in the best interest of the child. You should not deprive them of a basic family unit of one mother and one father from the 'get go' as that is discrimination and not doing so would certainly put them at a disadvantage especially since they are probably coming from a life of multiple foster families. We are entering a period of our history where if biological parents that are deemed unsuitable to care for their children can see their kids removed and given to unsuitable same-sex couples against their wishes. This is surely wrong. What about the children's rights not to be discriminated against and to have a family structure that resembles what they are used to?

Quote:

Then again, I just dont have that nasty streak some people seem to think is required to be a good Christian

Most people consider the proposal to redefine and destroy marriage quite a 'nasty' suggestion, I guess your nastiness radar is on the blink. Most people would think that having concern for the most vulnerable children in our society and wanting them to have a good adoptive home with a loving mother and father is a 'kind' thing.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios