[News] Tom Daley announces baby news

[Chicken Run]

I like this board and I think that noting how intolerant and nasty it has become is worth doing, maybe some will realize that what I am saying is true, and think about what kind of a place they want this to be. Then again, maybe not. Doesn't affect me anymore, I'm closing my account.

Debating with people who disagree with you is good. I think that's healthy and I enjoy it.

Calling someone racist/sexist/homophobic/bigoted because they don't share your opinion is nasty, and to be honest I don't want to be called those things anymore.

Goodbye NSC.

Your still logged on?

 

[Mellotron]

Not comfortable with this personally.

Not a problem at all. No one is forcing you to marry a man and have a baby together.

 

[marcos3263]

Precisely. Great post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

oh bugger, is it too late to get rid of my 4 year old? thats sounds like a lot of work

 

[The Large One]

Not comfortable with this personally.

Not fair on the kids and they will be picked on amongst other problems this creates for them.

Don't think it should be allowed but that's just my opinion.

They will only be picked on because there will be other outside considerations which would allow that sort of thing to fester. Thankfully, this isn't 1955 any more, and schools - for the most part - don't tolerate that kind of bullying. Especially when, once upon a time, single parents (for instance) were considered almost a circus sideshow.

At my ex's school, there were several same-sex parents, and not one child suffered any form of bullying or grief as a result.

We are not born homophobic; we only pick it up through any ignorance that is prevalent in society (see the OP's post) - including, in many cases sadly, the parents or the wider family.

 

[wellquickwoody]

Stop projecting snowflake 2

As the saying goes, whatever?

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

I can't believe how backward some people still are- I genuinely find it remarkable


As a bit of added input- my wife works in the adoption process and assesses couples (and some single adopters) from various walks of life.

Almost without exception the same-sex couples are far more prepared- both emotionally and practically for adoption than other couples.

Kids are up for adoption for a reason- the majority had a mummy and a daddy and it's not really worked out for them has it? There are some terrible heterosexual parents- seriously terrible- why is having two blokes who will actually give a shit about the kid and can provide them with a loving home NOT an improvement?

There is a huge national shortage of adopters in the UK- an issue which is particularly prevalent in the South East- guess what happens to kids who don't get adopted? They spend their lives in our 'brilliant' care system. When I worked in homeless services the majority of our clients came through the care system- if you spoke to prison workers or addiction workers they'd say the same- is that a better prospect for a child than growing up with two mums?

as for the "the kids will get picked on" thing- that seems to be something that homophobes project onto kids because it's what they'd do as their little brains can't comprehend that someone might grow up in a different situation to them. This is going to be less common as it's going to be a more common situation for kids to grow up with. A few kids acting like twats isn't a reason to prevent a child from growing up in a loving home is it?

 

[dingodan]

Oh come on Dan. You know that NSC is like a drug. You can't kick it. You're in too deep.

As for this thread, it's so predictable how it's going to shape up. That's largely due to the fact that people are going to take polar positions.

I'm a 50 year old bloke. I'm not homosexual and therefore not in a gay partnership. I have no idea how it feels to be in a gay partnership and still want to raise children. I can imagine it, but have no idea what it is like. I bet the yearning is strong.

I can quite understand why people don't understand this, and why they might feel threatened by something that is alien to them. The natural reaction is to say, it's not natural. Don't let it happen.

But that's just an emotional reaction. As Uncle Spielberg pointed out, as long as the children are bought up in a safe and loving relationship, who cares what the sex of the parents are.

I'm sure you'll hang around to keep debating, but equally, if there's no rational reasons why two people shouldn't raise a child, then perhaps we should just be debating why it is that people feel the way they feel.

I don't feel threatened by a homosexual couple, and I do understand how it must feel, I sympathize deeply with the desire to have children with the person you love, it's natural and I think almost all of us have that desire.

The problem is that because I don't agree that children should be raised by same sex couples, it is assumed that I am threatened by them, or don't understand how they feel, and I must have some kind of prejudice against them (and these assumptions are usually expressed in insults).

The way I see it a child needs a mother and a father. This is not to say that a child of a same sex couple won't be loved, or provided for etc, it's just to say that the two roles provided by a male and a female are necessary for the healthy development of a child, a single parent household (absent father or mother) presents problems for a child and I believe the same of same sex parenting.

Others may not agree with me, but, without any kind of malice towards any same sex partners, I believe it's in the best interests of the child to have a mother and a father.

I also believe that for all the joy and happiness that having a child can bring to a same sex couple, the interests of the child are primary. The reality is that no child being raised by a same sex couple couldn't have been raised in a family with a mother and father, and because that is, in my view, what is in the best interests of the child, I think that should be the priority.

I see this move towards providing children for same sex couples as being more in service of the needs of the couple than the needs of the child, and that bothers me.

Please don't call me homophobic, because I am not.

 

[pb21]

It seems that the main charge is that this isn't a natural way to raise children as two men can't conceive, but then not all men and women can conceive naturally, so should we not allow IVF or adoption. On that basis I didn't think you can justify not allowing same sex couples being allowed to raise children.

So then is a child raised with two same sex parents at some disadvantage compared to a child raised with opposite sex parents? I guess potentially (but I'm not necessarily sure), but no more so than a child could be disadvantaged by being raised with one set of opposite sex parents as opposed to another; we aren't going to only allow 'perfect' opposite sex couples the right to raise children.

I see no rational reason why people should have an issue with this, only irrational reasons?

 

[LlcoolJ]

At least you have had the balls to say what many have known for a long time. The so called liberal left would prefer it if no other opinions than their own were allowed to be spoken/printed or espoused. Basically, 1984 has arrived. What a sad state of affairs.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If they express that opinion then anyone who disagrees is entitled to disagree. What part of this is left/right liberal/conservative?

Funny (not really) how the same people who denounce anyone disagreeing with the Brexit car crash as "remoaners" and tell them to shut up because of the "will of the people" are the same ones clamouring for free speech when it comes to being racist, sexist or homophobic.

You can't have your bigoted cake, eat it and then cry to mummy because another kid also has a nicer cake.

Oh and you're wrong. We're moving further and further away from a 1984 scenario as people being people is more widely accepted by society and the law.

Look mods, I didn't swear. X

 

[dingodan]

Your still logged on?

I'm waiting for instructions on how to close my account, I don't know how to do it.

 

[Honky Tonx]

Not at all. You're the one with the major social issues - enough to post absolute gibberish over something you don't understand.

So what do you think that I don't understand? May I suggest that you don't seem to understand that everyone is entitled to express their own opinion? Your opinion seems to differ from mine but I listen to your"s with out becoming aggressive. You need to grasp that concept and chill. My understanding is that Children are a gift from God to hetrosexual couples and that God never intended same sex couples to have children. It's God's punishment.
May views are those of a cured homosexual.

 

[The Clamp]

You do realise that you appear to be using the word 'homosexual' as some form of insult, or to offend the person it is aimed at? Of course you did.

You really couldn't be more wrong. But I'm certain you'll give it a go.

 

[Mellotron]

it is assumed that I am threatened by them, or don't understand how they feel, and I must have some kind of prejudice against them (and these assumptions are usually expressed in insults).

Well done for sticking around - you articulate yourself well and are completely welcome to contribute to this discussion.

The fact that you don't agree that children should be raised by same sex couples, means you are judging all same sex couples as one and the same, prematurely (ie without having met each of them first). That is the definition of the word prejudice. Hence...

See [MENTION=1349]turienzo's lovechild[/MENTION] 's post for the best response to this, with genuine experience and knowledge of the topic at hand.

 

[father_and_son]

Yet they are.

Anyway, it doesn't surprise me that opinions like the OP's still exist. Unfortunately NSC has become something of a hothouse for outdated, right wing, racist, homophobic views over the last year. A trend that has accelerated over the last year with the emboldening of people who hold these views.
Luckily there are enough threads such as film, restaurant, proper football threads and stuff like Bellchesses at work to make NSC a nice place to visit.
It's my opinion that while a joke is a joke and we need a rich tapestry of opinions to keep the board interesting , Bozza does himself a disservice by providing a forum for racist and homophobic behaviour.
Some of the views expressed on here would get you prosecuted if said in public. Not necessarily this thread, the OP and his backward sympathisers may be abhorrent, but unlikely to be illegal.

Have to call you up on something... I consider myself a reasonable person... I don't feel I am sexist, racist or homophobic, in fact, I consider myself a liberal (small L),
That said, I also consider myself to be right wing. Not a raging Fascist, not a Daily Mail reader, but certainly right of centre. I don't believe in the Keynesian Economic Model, I do [generally] believe in a free-market economy [I have views on how it could be improved but I think it is generally the best to run an economy] and I believe the welfare state should exist as a safety net, not a lifestyle choice. All things that make me "right wing".

I don't think that NSC has become more racist or homophobic... what I have seen recently is that a awful lot more people are willing to put their name (or at least their screen name) to countering the sh*t that the bigots post. I think it used to be the case that most reasonably minded people just scrolled past, now they are willing to actually say "No. That's not acceptable." and so there are more arguments on these subjects.

Politics is something else though and I find in very distasteful to lumped in with the sexist, racist or homophobic bigots and, in fact, find the far-Left to be far more likely to be posting intolerance (but then I would, because I am further from their view point than I am from the Brexit/Privatisation/Free Market people).

Thanks... rant over. Return to your normal day mate.

 

[ManOfSussex]

The way I see it a child needs a mother and a father. This is not to say that a child of a same sex couple won't be loved, or provided for etc, it's just to say that the two roles provided by a male and a female are necessary for the healthy development of a child, a single parent household (absent father or mother) presents problems for a child and I believe the same of same sex parenting.

Others may not agree with me, but, without any kind of malice towards any same sex partners, I believe it's in the best interests of the child to have a mother and a father.

Would it be in the best interests of a child to be raised by a heroin addicted mother and father rather than a stable, loving same sex couple?

 

[LlcoolJ]

I don't feel threatened by a homosexual couple, and I do understand how it must feel, I sympathize deeply with the desire to have children with the person you love, it's natural and I think almost all of us have that desire.

The problem is that because I don't agree that children should be raised by same sex couples, it is assumed that I am threatened by them, or don't understand how they feel, and I must have some kind of prejudice against them (and these assumptions are usually expressed in insults).

The way I see it a child needs a mother and a father. This is not to say that a child of a same sex couple won't be loved, or provided for etc, it's just to say that the two roles provided by a male and a female are necessary for the healthy development of a child, a single parent household (absent father or mother) presents problems for a child and I believe the same of same sex parenting.

Others may not agree with me, but, without any kind of malice towards any same sex partners, I believe it's in the best interests of the child to have a mother and a father.

I also believe that for all the joy and happiness that having a child can bring to a same sex couple, the interests of the child are primary. The reality is that no child being raised by a same sex couple couldn't have been raised in a family with a mother and father, and because that is, in my view, what is in the best interests of the child, I think that should be the priority.

I see this move towards providing children for same sex couples as being more in service of the needs of the couple than the needs of the child, and that bothers me.

Please don't call me homophobic, because I am not.

Good timing seeing as the post prior to yours debunks everything you just wrote.

Poor flounce btw.

Goodbye cruel world! [emoji23]

 

[pb21]

I don't feel threatened by a homosexual couple, and I do understand how it must feel, I sympathize deeply with the desire to have children with the person you love, it's natural and I think almost all of us have that desire.

The problem is that because I don't agree that children should be raised by same sex couples, it is assumed that I am threatened by them, or don't understand how they feel, and I must have some kind of prejudice against them (and these assumptions are usually expressed in insults).

The way I see it a child needs a mother and a father. This is not to say that a child of a same sex couple won't be loved, or provided for etc, it's just to say that the two roles provided by a male and a female are necessary for the healthy development of a child, a single parent household (absent father or mother) presents problems for a child and I believe the same of same sex parenting.

Others may not agree with me, but, without any kind of malice towards any same sex partners, I believe it's in the best interests of the child to have a mother and a father.

I also believe that for all the joy and happiness that having a child can bring to a same sex couple, the interests of the child are primary. The reality is that no child being raised by a same sex couple couldn't have been raised in a family with a mother and father, and because that is, in my view, what is in the best interests of the child, I think that should be the priority.

I see this move towards providing children for same sex couples as being more in service of the needs of the couple than the needs of the child, and that bothers me.

Please don't call me homophobic, because I am not.

You seem to have reached your conclusion on the basis that a child should have a mother and a father and therefore to fathers shouldn't raise a child?

But shouldn't a child be raised by a mother and father who are good parents? If so shouldn't a mother and father, who aren't quite as good as another mother and father, not then be allowed to raise a child?

 

[wellquickwoody]

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If they express that opinion then anyone who disagrees is entitled to disagree. What part of this is left/right liberal/conservative?

Funny (not really) how the same people who denounce anyone disagreeing with the Brexit car crash as "remoaners" and tell them to shut up because of the "will of the people" are the same ones clamouring for free speech when it comes to being racist, sexist or homophobic.

You can't have your bigoted cake, eat it and then cry to mummy because another kid also has a nicer cake.

Oh and you're wrong. We're moving further and further away from a 1984 scenario as people being people is more widely accepted by society and the law.

Look mods, I didn't swear. X

Makes an ass of u & me!

 

[The Large One]

I don't feel threatened by a homosexual couple, and I do understand how it must feel, I sympathize deeply with the desire to have children with the person you love, it's natural and I think almost all of us have that desire.

The problem is that because I don't agree that children should be raised by same sex couples, it is assumed that I am threatened by them, or don't understand how they feel, and I must have some kind of prejudice against them (and these assumptions are usually expressed in insults).

The way I see it a child needs a mother and a father. This is not to say that a child of a same sex couple won't be loved, or provided for etc, it's just to say that the two roles provided by a male and a female are necessary for the healthy development of a child, a single parent household (absent father or mother) presents problems for a child and I believe the same of same sex parenting.

Others may not agree with me, but, without any kind of malice towards any same sex partners, I believe it's in the best interests of the child to have a mother and a father.

I also believe that for all the joy and happiness that having a child can bring to a same sex couple, the interests of the child are primary. The reality is that no child being raised by a same sex couple couldn't have been raised in a family with a mother and father, and because that is, in my view, what is in the best interests of the child, I think that should be the priority.

I see this move towards providing children for same sex couples as being more in service of the needs of the couple than the needs of the child, and that bothers me.

Please don't call me homophobic, because I am not.

You don't say WHY they need a mother and father - just that they do.

If it's because they need to have the role models of how society deems the gender split is supposed to function, it appears you're seeking to presume that any given child will be denied the opportunity of having a role model of their gender, if they were brought up by a same sex couple.

The point is - that's twaddle. If the same-sex parents wish to deny them that role model, then (hopefully) that would be noted before adoption by the agencies. (Not always, but by then we're getting into the macromanagement of a system which goes way beyond natural parenting). They will have other people in their family lives upon whom they could look up to.

You also fail to take into account the whole notion of single parenting, where the child still only has one gender as a role model. You can't have it both ways.

It's the last line which is most offensive. It's not always about the needs of the parents solely. The needs of the child are more important. And in same-sex parenting, the needs of the child can be met, and there is myriad demonstrable proof that this is the case. Though it does seem the needs of the regressives and homophobes would like to be holding the deciding opinion.

 

[dingodan]

Well done for sticking around - you articulate yourself well and are completely welcome to contribute to this discussion.

The fact that you don't agree that children should be raised by same sex couples, means you are judging all same sex couples as one and the same, prematurely (ie without having met each of them first). That is the definition of the word prejudice. Hence...

See [MENTION=1349]turienzo's lovechild[/MENTION] 's post for the best response to this, with genuine experience and knowledge of the topic at hand.

I am only prejudging them as having either no female or no male in the relationship. That is not prejudice, that's just a fact about same sex couples.

What I am saying has nothing to do with being good or bad parents, it's just about the need for the presence of an adult male and adult female in the raising of a healthy child.