The Student Room Group

POLL : Gay rights : what if you had two dads?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by imperial maniac
Well, for a start, you've made the assumption that all "chavs" ie "council house occupants" are bad parents, which is bull.

Yes, the straight couple would be better in my opinion.


Where was the bit to say all chavs were bad parents? Note the nasty bit in that sentence, you really think the child should go to a nasty couple rather than a couple that would look after it better?
Reply 201
Original post by imperial maniac
Well, for a start, you've made the assumption that all "chavs" ie "council house occupants" are bad parents, which is bull.

Yes, the straight couple would be better in my opinion.

I said nasty, I purposely made them out to be bad parents. Thanks for confirming your own stupidity (y)
my dads will batter your dad.
Original post by Jordenfruitbat
Where was the bit to say all chavs were bad parents? Note the nasty bit in that sentence, you really think the child should go to a nasty couple rather than a couple that would look after it better?


So your point is what exactly, that a nasty couple can't bring up a child effectively and caring couple can.

This is obvious.

The question isn't valid as it brings two factors into the equation, obviously a caring family is better, but a homosexual caring family is far inferior to a straight caring family.
Original post by Lewis :D
I said nasty, I purposely made them out to be bad parents. Thanks for confirming your own stupidity (y)


So... you pose a question asking which parents are the worse parents, and in the question already state which ones are worse.

You ****tard.
Reply 205
Original post by imperial maniac
So your point is what exactly, that a nasty couple can't bring up a child effectively and caring couple can.

This is obvious.

The question isn't valid as it brings two factors into the equation, obviously a caring family is better, but a homosexual caring family is far inferior to a straight caring family.


By nasty, I implied that the couple wouldn't treat the child properly.
Reply 206
Original post by imperial maniac
So... you pose a question asking which parents are the worse parents, and in the question already state which ones are worse.

You ****tard.


Yet you still went for the other option :confused:
Original post by imperial maniac
So your point is what exactly, that a nasty couple can't bring up a child effectively and caring couple can.

This is obvious.

The question isn't valid as it brings two factors into the equation, obviously a caring family is better, but a homosexual caring family is far inferior to a straight caring family.


You didn't answer my question I wanted to know whether you would agree with the child going to a homosexual family in the case of it staying with an abusive family or going to the gay family.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by imperial maniac
So your point is what exactly, that a nasty couple can't bring up a child effectively and caring couple can.

This is obvious.

So you are a hypocrite? congratulations.
o well...i've got my own definition of what bigoted is...everyones a bigot then...
Original post by Lewis :D
Yet you still went for the other option :confused:


I read the question as "Which parents would be better, straight from a poor background or gay from a rich background?"

Of course what you meant to ask was was "Which parents would be better, the better parents or the worse parents?"

Sorry for interpreting the question in a way that actually made some sort of sense.
Reply 211
Original post by imperial maniac
I read the question as "Which parents would be better, straight from a poor background or gay from a rich background?"

Of course what you meant to ask was was "Which parents would be better, the better parents or the worse parents?"

Sorry for interpreting the question in a way that actually made some sort of sense.


Yes, but because one was associated with homosexuality and the other was associated with heterosexuality you automatically made your choice.
Original post by Jordenfruitbat
You didn't answer my question I wanted to know whether you would agree with the child going to a homosexual family in the case of it staying with an abusive family or going to the gay family.


Yes I agree that a child would have a better upbringing in a gay caring family as opposed to a straight abusive family.

But I presume that the thread is: Gay caring family vs Straight caring family, so it's completely irrelevant point anyway.
Original post by EffKayy
farther?
Posh are we.


probably not, it's spelt wrong.
Original post by imperial maniac
Yes I agree that a child would have a better upbringing in a gay caring family as opposed to a straight abusive family.

But I presume that the thread is: Gay caring family vs Straight caring family, so it's completely irrelevant point anyway.


In the context of the thread yes the point is invalid I wanted your own opinion though as you seem to be so anti-gay.

Do you not see it as discrimination to disallow gay people to adopt? We are just as human and caring, and as capabable parents as anyone else.
Reply 215
Original post by Zoe Edwards
probably not, it's spelt wrong.


Yes I know. :s-smilie:
Reply 216
Edit: Oops, made a mess of this post. Scroll down.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by sixthformer
What if you had two Dads, rather than a farther and a mother or one parent?

How would you feel?

POLL

Is a mother not necessary? Does she make a difference? Would nature work with two males? What is the need for females ... then?

Does a child need a masculine and feminine role model?

Please be honest. don't let media put you under pressure.


"i would miss my mummmmy. but if i had never known any different, i'm sure it'd be ok i do think every girl needs a mother, who has been through the same things and can probably understand better than a dad could (especially my dad ha), and is always there to talk to, but that's not to say same-gender parents would not be good parents"

PS: my deepest sympathies go to the people effected in Japan

Murder is being commited. People are being slaughtered. Bahrain has allowed 3 different armies from neighbouring oil-rich contries to come and slaughter innocent protestors wanting democracy.

Are the USA so politically interested that they won't without a blink condem bahrains government and saudi arabia?

PS: I am surprised David Cameron actually condemed Bahrain...

Iran is the only country including lebanon and maybe a few others to condemn isreal for violating so many human rights and murdering innocent children.

Iran has the balls to stand up to the USA, which is why the USA and media tycoons tied in the USA interests try to demonise Iran

am i literally the only one who can see right through the USA?

The levels of hypocrisy are incredible.

The Libyan government faces an armed uprising and we go to war with them.

Bahrain employs foreign troops to oppress their own people and we reluctantly tell them not to do it again.


I'm really confused how Japan got brought into this thread?
Original post by IPlayThePiccolo
This! Love is love at the end of the day.
^this as well. even if you don't agree with homosexuality what makes it ok to hate on people who are?


Couldn't agree more :wink:. Pretty much sums up everything that would just make the world an easier place, and can apply to any personal views people may have: "What makes it OK to hate on people who are?".
Original post by Jordenfruitbat
In the context of the thread yes the point is invalid I wanted your own opinion though as you seem to be so anti-gay.

Do you not see it as discrimination to disallow gay people to adopt? We are just as human and caring, and as capabable parents as anyone else.


Yes, it is discrimination.

So I'll discriminate, I find there to be something fundamentally unnatural about gay people raising children.

I won't try to stop you adopting, or go on marches or spread hate against gays or even mention that I think that to anyone, but some things are just wrong.

Quick Reply

Latest