Jump to content

Tom Daley has announced he is having a baby with his husband


kerser
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 15/02/2018 at 11:19 PM, Toney Barton said:

Reading all the comments and thinking about it I would say the argument against gays using surrogates can essentially be used against hetero couples aswell.

Why should hetero couples use surrogates when there are plenty of children in the care system who need loving homes?

I think the answer is the same in both cases, the want for the child to be your actual blood.

It's a selfish decision either way but not one that any of us should be too judgemental on.

/

Kim K had birth problems with the 2nd child so the surrogate was medically necessary.

/

My mother is a foster carer, she's had 4 kids including a white child, you don't really get a sense of the madness that contributes to children being in the system until you are privy to it tbh.

Having been heavily involved in the process, driving my mother half way across London every Sunday for the childs contact, I would have to agree that a loving home is the most important thing for a child.

Not race, not gender, just stability.

I'm not saying what is right or wrong and it would be interesting to see what some of you think are the implications of this.

I'm just sayin I would put money on Tom Daley's child growing up to be a functional member of society because this child is planned whereas most are not.

thank you, its only when one has indepth experience of a breakdown of a family that they can understand how important good family upbringing is. i am similar to you in the fostering aspect as well as what i see from work... i couldn't care less who raises a child..just fucking raise them well, and we have plenty of straight, married, planned for, whatever adjective you choose to give to the parents who have so fucked up their kids lives... sometimes its those in care that are the lucky ones. 

however, a hetero couple using surrogates are naturally unable to have a kid after trying. trying to pick and choose what aspects of nature you adhere to doesnt sit well with me. some people see a baby as a way of completing them, which is already fucked up, and that is how is see a gay couple trying to use a surrogate mum, or dad  which may be just prejudiced i dunno. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's debatable how functioning society actually is tbh.

It's also a huge leap to simply inverse somebody saying they bet a planned child will become a functional member of society.

The point being made was related to the text above it, children who find themselves in care are generally those who were not planned.

/

You don't have to wait decades to see the results.

There are adults now who were raised in same sex families.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dub said:

I think its more about the child being wanted, than being planned.

I can see why you would think this but all the children my mum had to take were wanted.

Their parents were devastated to lose them.

They had just gotten themselves in situations where they needed external help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, JOHN DOE said:

we will seen the results (clearly negative) 20-30, etc years from now 

Why is this clearly negative to you? Granted that there needs to be more studies conducted, but so far the findings have been neutral (meaning no note-worthy difference).  If anything were to be a surprise, it would be a negative (as well as a positive) correlation.

 

/

 

2 hours ago, VENOM said:

trying to pick and choose what aspects of nature you adhere to doesnt sit well with me

 

Agreed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was responding to a post that seemed to be arguing against of a point of: being "unplanned" would mean you would end up in a bad place.

I feel you're arguing that being "unplanned" would mean you're more likely to end up in a bad place than the "planned" babies, which is fair, but I don't think we're conflicting in arguments.

We would probably both agree that being "unwanted" would be the more likely one to lead someone to end up in a bad place. 

But being unplanned doesn't mean you're going to end up in a bad place. Being unplanned doesn't mean your parents can't take care of you - emotionally, financially, with availability and otherwise - but yes, arguably if you're unplanned it could mean your parents are less likely to tick all the boxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@dub we're on the same side of the argument for sure, I'm just saying that most care cases are not your typical unwanted child scenario, even the worst cases seem to be parents who "want" the child but either don't have the family structure, met a bad partner, are poorly educated etc...

I would agree there are varying degrees of unplanned parenthood.

At one end picture 2 parents, living together for a number of years, good jobs, savings etc...

An unplanned child born into this scenario would almost never end up in care.

Then at the extreme end you might have a single parent, no access to the other parent or family, no support system, poor prospects etc...

A child born into this scenario would be much more likely to end up in the system.

Then there is everything else in between.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, dom dom bullets said:

Why is this clearly negative to you? Granted that there needs to be more studies conducted, but so far the findings have been neutral (meaning no note-worthy difference).  If anything were to be a surprise, it would be a negative (as well as a positive) correlation.

 

/

 

 

Agreed

dom are you gay 

youve def always been on the defence for the homos 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you lot (especially tony, dub etc) chatting that unplanned/single parent bullocks need to stop with the bullshit, please just stop making excuses for homos

the numbers a very very small to warrant homosexuals getting involved in raising kids of the future

ppl who have first hand experiences of certain systems tend to have a sly bias view of things (yeah u tony)

there over 11 million children in England, over 390k received support in numerous ways, only just over 70k are in the care system (50k identified as needing protection), (https://www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/child-protection-system/england/statistics/ )

if it's really all about the care of children, you need to be more worried about paedos and "unaccompanied asylum seeking children" needing help than bats rights to create life

the numbers are very very small in the grand scheme of things

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/556331/SFR41_2016_Text.pdf

imo the majority of kids are very good and safe

they ain't as broken & fucked up due to hetro/single parents as ppl think it is

/

https://www.nspcc.org.uk/globalassets/documents/research-reports/how-safe-children-2017-report.pdf

hetrosexuals ain't the main sickos fucking up children of the future

paedos are the biggest threat to children of the future, not hetro relationships/single parents/care systems

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, JOHN DOE said:

dom are you gay youve

No

 

10 hours ago, JOHN DOE said:

youve def always been on the defence for the homos 

This is true. As I'm sure you've realised yourself, there is a fair amount of ignorance on this forum, which is to be expected in a non-intellectually driven quarter of communication (youtube comments for example). This ignorance tends to manifest itself at its most obvious in topics such as this one (on this forum, other sites it might be something else like race; daily mail comments for example). Ignorance like this irks me that's all,  all we have is conversation to improve ourselves, and I definitely wouldn't be defending homos if there was clear evidence pointing to them being subpar parents, but there isn't, just a cluster of uniformed opinion driven by biased intuition.

Also I'm certainly not exempt from displaying this type of ignorance myself. However, I try to recognise and acknowledge it as best I can.

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Example of how that is ignorant please.

It seems like you believe the fact that there are two sexes that require to mate with the opposite to reproduce is ignorant. Only of the few scientific facts that cannot be argued with, you disagree because someone said it is freedom for same sex couples to use the opposite to reproduce and in some instances,  people claim to be the opposite sex and become pregnant, which is a mind fuck.

Do you believe that India Willoughby is a real woman?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you drunk? I've no idea what you're talking about, and I'm fairly certain you haven't either. It's very difficult to narrow down your point exactly.

14 hours ago, Da Luv Doc said:

Example of how that is ignorant please.

From where do you derive this proposed 'shouldn't'?

14 hours ago, Da Luv Doc said:

It seems like you believe the fact that there are two sexes that require to mate with the opposite to reproduce is ignorant.

How have you conceived this idea? Please point out where I've expressed this.

14 hours ago, Da Luv Doc said:

Only of the few scientific facts that cannot be argued with, you disagree because someone said it is freedom for same sex couples to use the opposite to reproduce and in some instances

Again, when did I disagree with the biological logistics of reproduction? Please point to it. You seem to be having a hallucinatory experience.

 

14 hours ago, Da Luv Doc said:

Do you believe that India Willoughby is a real woman?

Never heard of this person but I imagine it's either a transsexual or a hermaphrodite. I fail to see the relevance of this to anything I've said.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stopped caring about or pro actively hating gays when I stopped believing in god, what it comes down to more time is religious dogma but people find all manner of pseudo science to justify their hatred of gays  to skirt around the fact they believe in a fictional overlord judging their opinions  from the sky. 

I still find  the gay transgender movement as as something which is comical and which I will make fun of at length, but outright hatred you realise youre just wasting everyone's time when you don't have to worry about what some supposedly  illiterate barefoot arab high on DMT wrote down 1 day whilst tripping in the desert 1400 yrs ago. 

 

 

  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@dom dom bullets failed, can' even answer me.

Would you wife a person who identifies themselves as a woman although they were born a man?

Would you have sexual relations with or go into a relationship with a man?

Bare in mind your comments that you'e made, let's see if you'll be a hypocrite or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Da Luv Doc said:

@dom dom bullets failed, can' even answer me.

Would you wife a person who identifies themselves as a woman although they were born a man?

Would you have sexual relations with or go into a relationship with a man?

Bare in mind your comments that you'e made, let's see if you'll be a hypocrite or not.

You've completely digressed, but I'll play your game... My answer is no to both questions, now you may point out where I've been hypocritical (and quote my exact words).Bear mind, that using logic along with honest portrayal of what I've expressed is vital for an honest conversation. 

Edit: just realised that you're the user frequently referred to as autistic. Not sure if this is true but in any case I'd like take back my comments about drunkenness and hallucinogens, they were unnecessary and certainly not helpful for discussion (whether you are or aren't in fact autistic)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...