PaulBuz
|
 posted on 30/1/09 at 08:20 PM |
|
|
Utter,UTTER, madness
Words fail me.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1130066/They-say-old-care-grandchildren-Social-workers-hand-siblings-gay-men-adoption.html
ATB
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
omega 24 v6
|
| posted on 30/1/09 at 09:12 PM |
|
|
HOW FECKING UNBELIEVABLE IS THAT
If it looks wrong it probably is wrong.
|
|
|
chris_smith
|
| posted on 30/1/09 at 09:36 PM |
|
|
to old at 46?!?!?!? thats ridiculous who on earth gives these ppl the authority to rule such decisions, surely they are better off with family, and
the bit that really annoys me is that the social know that the little girl is "wary of men" but still are going to let 2 men adopt them,
and thats supposed to be better than with there grandparents!!!!!
the world has gone mad!
The secret of success is to know something nobody else knows."
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 30/1/09 at 09:40 PM |
|
|
There must be more to it than that. More balanced and informed Mail journalism....
David
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 30/1/09 at 09:52 PM |
|
|
 OMG
Phil
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 30/1/09 at 10:22 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by omega 24 v6
HOW FECKING UNBELIEVABLE IS THAT
What? Something printed in the daily mail?
|
|
|
nasty
|
| posted on 31/1/09 at 01:59 AM |
|
|
What a sensationalist piece of right wing cr@p.
The judgement against the grandparents wasn't only based on their age but also on their health issues and there is no reason to believe that the
couple picked aren't the best couple to adopt these children. Also, it's probably best that a homophobic or otherwise similarly small
minded couple, like the grandparents, do not get custody of the children.
One would hope (and expect) that a reasonable amount of thought and research went into deciding which couple were most suited and no, being a
heterosexual couple does not automatically make you more suitable.
|
|
|
RoadkillUK
|
| posted on 31/1/09 at 12:16 PM |
|
|
I'd like to comment but I feel I'm not allowed to in this new age of equality !!
Roadkill - Lee
www.bradford7.co.uk
Latest Picture (14 Sept 2014)
|
|
|
locogeoff
|
| posted on 31/1/09 at 10:52 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by RoadkillUK
I'd like to comment but I feel I'm not allowed to in this new age of equality !!
Couldn't have put it better myself!
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 31/1/09 at 11:02 PM |
|
|
When I turn 46 my son will be 18... Maybe the wrong side to argue...
No problem in principle in gay parents but there must be something more important than being too old. For Christ's sakes they don't say
anything about 70 year old fathers!
|
|
|
handyandy
|
| posted on 1/2/09 at 12:01 AM |
|
|
hey, i,m 45 yrs old/young & i have a 19month old son, does that mean that when i turn 46 i,ll be deemed too old to be a parent of one so young???
considering the ages of those kids that this case is about,
i,m sorry but IMHO this is probably more to do with political correctness & "being aware of how social acceptance" has to be shown,
i have no negative views on same sex relationships at all, each to their own, live & let live ,
but i,d bet my last penny that this decision was based more on social attitudes of today rather than what was best for those kids. look at the threat
the grandparents were given..... shut up & accept it or you won,t see the kids again???????????
OUT BLOODY RAGOUS
[Edited on 1/2/09 by handyandy]
|
|
|
adithorp
|
| posted on 1/2/09 at 05:26 PM |
|
|
They made such a good job of bringing up thier daughter she up ended up an addict!
"A witty saying proves nothing" Voltaire
http://jpsc.org.uk/forum/
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 1/2/09 at 11:57 PM |
|
|
its a tough issue this one. In a perfect world, no kids would need adopting. And id agree that a good gay could would be as good as a good regular
couple (assuming regular is still hetro these days...).
In this instance i find myself more annoyed with kids being adopted when direct blood relatives want to help, than the fact they are gay.
I will admit i have reservations about how a child will be affected by being raised by a gay couple, and i VERY much doubt the ability of a modern day
council to judge suitability in a competent manner, especially under the watchful eye of the biggoted PC brigade.
|
|
|
carpmart
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 12:25 PM |
|
|
How can a gay couple provide the correct role models for young children?
I'm not suggesting that kids of a gay person conceived through other heterosexual relationships shouldn't be with their natural paternal
parent, but come on, why on earth when other heterosexual couples want to adopt can a gay couple be seen as the best option???
Undermines the fabric of society and is totaly wrong!
You only live once - make the most of it!
Radical Clubsport, Kwaker motor
'94 MX5 MK1, 1.8
F10 M5 - 600bhp Daily Hack 
Range Rover Sport - Wife's Car
Mercedes A class - Son's Car
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 06:19 PM |
|
|
As I said before I think there's more to the story than is written in that article. And its just a sensationalist Mail article.
It all depends whether or not you believe a persons upbringing affects their sexuality or not.
Personally I dont think that it does, I believe being LGBT is a just how someone is, you cant program it in or out. Therefore what difference does it
make if the adopting couple are homosexual or heterosexual? Would you have the same opinion if it were a lesbian couple? Why should any LGBT couple be
treated any differently to a 'traditional' couple?
Sorry closed mindedness when it come to sexuality really gets me wound up. Some of the remarks I hear at work day in day out are unbelievable!
David
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 06:23 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nasty
What a sensationalist piece of right wing cr@p.
The judgement against the grandparents wasn't only based on their age but also on their health issues and there is no reason to believe that the
couple picked aren't the best couple to adopt these children. Also, it's probably best that a homophobic or otherwise similarly small
minded couple, like the grandparents, do not get custody of the children.
Utter bollocks, family comes first. As for small minded homophobes, that's 90% of the country apparently. How can the majority view be
wrong?
Can you even imagine the abuse these kids are going to suffer at school?
[Edited on 2/2/09 by MikeRJ]
|
|
|
carpmart
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 06:35 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by flak monkey
As I said before I think there's more to the story than is written in that article. And its just a sensationalist Mail article.
It all depends whether or not you believe a persons upbringing affects their sexuality or not.
Personally I dont think that it does, I believe being LGBT is a just how someone is, you cant program it in or out. Therefore what difference does it
make if the adopting couple are homosexual or heterosexual? Would you have the same opinion if it were a lesbian couple? Why should any LGBT couple be
treated any differently to a 'traditional' couple?
Sorry closed mindedness when it come to sexuality really gets me wound up. Some of the remarks I hear at work day in day out are unbelievable!
David
What is LBGT????????
Anyway, follow Darwin's theory of evolution, humans are just highly evolved mammals. In order to reproduce we have to have opposite sex
relationships. I personally have no issue with Gay couples until they think they are the best to bring up an adopted child. Crazy! Family units are
important as by-in-large it provides a good environment for the children to learn how to live, behave and care for their children when they eventually
reproduce!
Its my opinion but gay couples adopting is not appropriate and never will be!
You only live once - make the most of it!
Radical Clubsport, Kwaker motor
'94 MX5 MK1, 1.8
F10 M5 - 600bhp Daily Hack
Range Rover Sport - Wife's Car
Mercedes A class - Son's Car
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 06:52 PM |
|
|
LGBT = Lesbian, Gay, Bi or Transex
A lot of the arguments only come about because of closed mindedness in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with being LGBT, personal choice and all that. The social hangups/opinions are still around from the victorians and bred in to
so many people.
The kids will only suffer abuse at school if the teachers are ignorant enough to ignore it.
It is written in law that if you are LGBT you are given the same rights as anyone else. Why shouldnt you be? This goes for anything you care to think
of, be it medical treatment, employment, discrimination or adoption of children.
Do you find it so hard to believe that a couple of the same sex cannot be a loving family unit?
This has nothing to do with evolution or anything like that. People are born the way they are. There is no 'gay gene' as such but it is
possible for people to be born XXY rather than XX or XY. This is only a small minority though. For others its something that cannot be explained
further than that's just the way they are.
Back in times of the Romans it was considered perfectly normal to have same sex relationships and in some cases they were even encouraged. Somewhere
along the way we took a step backward in our views of relationships and what constitutes 'love'.
There are an awful lot of people who go their whole lives living in denial and misery because of the way society treats people who are different (be
that sexuality or any other way).
David
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 06:53 PM |
|
|
Does sexuality matter more than being there? Once breast feeding is done then anyone can do the really important stuff, you know sorting out grazed
knees, taxi service, bank account, advice from your own years, attending baseball games etc... I should know I'm doing it now and to be honest
it'd be harder having one leg than a tendence toward men
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 07:07 PM |
|
|
Pretty much every study done on the subject shows that children grow up better in a family environment with a mother and father figure than any other
household type. (caveat for loving and non-violent household of all types). Single parents, same sex couples, serial changes of one partner or other
are inferior in every measure of success or happiness.
If the child were the centre of adoption policy then all children being adopted would go to heterosexual couples in stable relationships until all of
those adopters were used up, then they would go to other adopters.
As usual in family law, the children are bottom of the heap. The "rights" of the adopters to adopt over rule the best interests of the
children. The same thing goes for divorce in too many cases. The law enacted states that adopters cannot be chosen on grounds of sexuality so the
council has to place children with them if they meet the criteria applies to everyone else. Great for the adopters but less than ideal for the
children, as usual.
As for this particular case, the daily mail is full of sh*te and I would generally prefer to belive the opposite of what they say in most cases. It
seems fairly clear that the health of the grand parents is too bad to look after the child. Instead the mail prefers to rant against minorities and
government agencies than in any way try to accurately report the truth.
|
|
|
carpmart
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 07:18 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by flak monkey
LGBT = Lesbian, Gay, Bi or Transex
A lot of the arguments only come about because of closed mindedness in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with being LGBT, personal choice and all that. The social hangups/opinions are still around from the victorians and bred in to
so many people.
The kids will only suffer abuse at school if the teachers are ignorant enough to ignore it.
It is written in law that if you are LGBT you are given the same rights as anyone else. Why shouldnt you be? This goes for anything you care to think
of, be it medical treatment, employment, discrimination or adoption of children.
Do you find it so hard to believe that a couple of the same sex cannot be a loving family unit?
This has nothing to do with evolution or anything like that. People are born the way they are. There is no 'gay gene' as such but it is
possible for people to be born XXY rather than XX or XY. This is only a small minority though. For others its something that cannot be explained
further than that's just the way they are.
Back in times of the Romans it was considered perfectly normal to have same sex relationships and in some cases they were even encouraged. Somewhere
along the way we took a step backward in our views of relationships and what constitutes 'love'.
There are an awful lot of people who go their whole lives living in denial and misery because of the way society treats people who are different (be
that sexuality or any other way).
David
Listen David, my views expressed on this thread are absolutely nothing to do with love and loving relationships and I am in no way homophobic!
However, in my opinion, children from a 'normal' family background will by-in-large be better placed to 'take on the world'
when they leave the nest!
The fact is same sex relationships don't produce kids. Evolution has dictated that in order to produce kids mankind must procreate with the
opposite sex. This I know is a fact! The offspring from this procreation will be better in a environment where there are exposed to what is largely
perceived to be 'normal' family unit. I see this as fact in just the same way the other statements here are factual!
BTW, on the same premise, I also see single parent families as inappropriate for adoption!
I hope that helps to clear up my position and the rationale behind this!
You only live once - make the most of it!
Radical Clubsport, Kwaker motor
'94 MX5 MK1, 1.8
F10 M5 - 600bhp Daily Hack
Range Rover Sport - Wife's Car
Mercedes A class - Son's Car
|
|
|
carpmart
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 07:23 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
Pretty much every study done on the subject shows that children grow up better in a family environment with a mother and father figure than any other
household type. (caveat for loving and non-violent household of all types). Single parents, same sex couples, serial changes of one partner or other
are inferior in every measure of success or happiness.
If the child were the centre of adoption policy then all children being adopted would go to heterosexual couples in stable relationships until all of
those adopters were used up, then they would go to other adopters.
As usual in family law, the children are bottom of the heap. The "rights" of the adopters to adopt over rule the best interests of the
children. The same thing goes for divorce in too many cases. The law enacted states that adopters cannot be chosen on grounds of sexuality so the
council has to place children with them if they meet the criteria applies to everyone else. Great for the adopters but less than ideal for the
children, as usual.
As for this particular case, the daily mail is full of sh*te and I would generally prefer to belive the opposite of what they say in most cases. It
seems fairly clear that the health of the grand parents is too bad to look after the child. Instead the mail prefers to rant against minorities and
government agencies than in any way try
to accurately report the truth.
A very well written input. I am 100% with all the views you express!
You only live once - make the most of it!
Radical Clubsport, Kwaker motor
'94 MX5 MK1, 1.8
F10 M5 - 600bhp Daily Hack
Range Rover Sport - Wife's Car
Mercedes A class - Son's Car
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 07:26 PM |
|
|
God created Adam and Eve........ not Adam and Steve 
(hard hat on and ducking for cover........)
Phil
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 09:08 PM |
|
|
I'm not having a dig at anyone BTW. Just expressing my opinions. Each to their own....
My main point is about how the world would be a better place if people were accepted for who they are. Simple as that. I am obviously in the open
minded minority, which is a sad thing as far as I am concerned.
Whatever I say wont change anyones mind obviously, peoples opinions and thoughts are usually too deep rooted for that.
I still dont believe that a child raised by a same sex couple (male or female) is in any way going to be less 'better to cope with life in
general'.
Then I am obviously in the minority so I'll shut up now and keep my thoughts to myself.
David
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
Schrodinger
|
| posted on 2/2/09 at 09:43 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
As for this particular case, the daily mail is full of sh*te and I would generally prefer to belive the opposite of what they say in most cases. It
seems fairly clear that the health of the grand parents is too bad to look after the child. Instead the mail prefers to rant against minorities and
government agencies than in any way try to accurately report the truth.
I agree with you and what about the other 2500 or so adoptions a year that don't get a mention, presumeably the "authorities" are
doing their job in those cases.
Keith
Aviemore
|
|
|
