Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Danielle89)
    Im gonna throw it into the mix that if the grandparents raised a daughter who was incapable of raising her own offspring, whats to say the underlying reason that the children were being put up for adoption was in case they turned out to be scum like their incapable mother?
    And the couple are clearly racist, as has just been shown by their outrage - so would the kids be better off with a bigotted couple of old bad parents or would they be better to go to a couple who clearly want a kid, have been through the adoption process, and have shown to be suitable to be parents?

    Just something to think about - I saw this article originally posted in a link to the daily mail. Could well be circumstances we're not told about but the above is certainly a possible scenario
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zakiman)
    But we don't know the true medical state of these two.
    Nor do we know that of the gays. They may be secret loonies for all we know.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Only thing that matters is that the kids are loved.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Would you like to be brought up in a household with two gay parents... I certainly wouldn't. Not out of any homophobia but simply because it is totally unfair on the child to be markedly different when growing up.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    Would you like to be brought up in a household with two gay parents... I certainly wouldn't. Not out of any homophobia but simply because it is totally unfair on the child to be markedly different when growing up.
    Aren't you Asian? Wasn't your birth therefore, by your own mode of thinking, 'totally unfair' :rolleyes: ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Devel)
    I don't recall asking for it. :eyeball:

    To add if the big deal is the sexuality of the adoptive couple then perhaps the grandparents have the same 'bigoted opinion' as yourself, then hopefully the adoption system will avoid bigotry.
    Completely agree. (Guns and Roses are still **** though :p: )
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paxdax)
    Nor do we know that of the gays. They may be secret loonies for all we know.
    Social Services would have vetted all candidates, they would have been the best.

    This Isn't positive discrimination, think of all the straight adoptions that occur that the Daily nazi Mail don't bother to report on(some of them in preference to gays probably)
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    Would you like to be brought up in a household with two gay parents... I certainly wouldn't. Not out of any homophobia but simply because it is totally unfair on the child to be markedly different when growing up.
    I guess you'll soon have a bunch people stating that they'd have nothing at all against being raised by gays, and that having another opinion would be strictly and positively racist!
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zakiman)
    Social Services would have vetted all candidates, they would have been the best.

    This Isn't positive discrimination, think of all the straight adoptions that occur that the Daily nazi Mail don't bother to report on(some of them in preference to gays probably)
    You seriously trust the Social Services to do their jobs properly? :laughing:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Surely the children's parents/grandparents have the right to decide who adopts them and who doesn't?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paxdax)
    You seriously trust the Social Services to do their jobs properly? :laughing:
    Sure.

    If only the daily mail hadn't got hold of such a small story... Oh well, they'd loose their readership without pointless, poorly written articles full of bias and bigotry.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bighairedmike)
    I didnt agree with you anyway but thats just confirmed it for me.

    You really are a stuck up, half-wit cunt aren't yu!
    What? I don't agree with Bagration's logic at all, and was pointing out that by his own line of thought he shouldn't exist.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    Aren't you Asian? Wasn't your birth therefore "totally unfair" :rolleyes:
    (Eurasian) Uh, it wasn't "totally unfair" because frankly it is not comparable for your parents to be different races and for your parents to be of the same sexuality :/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    AHHH... saw something about this today. I think it was splashed over the front pages of the daily fascist.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    (Eurasian) Uh, it wasn't "totally unfair" because frankly it is not comparable for your parents to be different races and for your parents to be of the same sexuality :/
    You said: is totally unfair on the child to be markedly different when growing up.

    As a Eurasian person you were markedly different to your peers, just as much as our hypothetical gay-adoptee, growing up.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snobpence17)
    Completely agree. (Guns and Roses are still **** though :p: )
    Where did that come from? :confused:


    You do happen to be wrong. :awesome:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Devel)
    There was no need at all to bring up the sexuality of who will adopt the couple.
    But they want the children to go to a mother and father. If they didn't bring it up, you wouldn't know that this wasn't the case. I understand fully why they would want a mother figure around and for them to be both not given custody and to not even have a basic request fulfilled is disgraceful. Would it have been that difficult to give the children to two heterosexuals so that it at least fulfills the wishes that it would be a mother and father? I'm not even against gay adoption but in this case, they should've given the children to a heterosexual couple solely on the basis that that is what the children's blood relatives wanted.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Being gay is fine because its not harming anyone. Having gay marriage is fine as long as it doesnt harm anyone. But once you bring a kid into it, its not just about the ''couple'' anymore is it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zakiman)
    Sure.

    If only the daily mail hadn't got hold of such a small story... Oh well, they'd loose their readership without pointless, poorly written articles full of bias and bigotry.

    Social Services is one of the most incapable areas funded (by us) through an incapable government. The amount of children that "slip through the net" is, quite frankly, disgusting. It isn;t just one small story is it...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bighairedmike)
    Social Services is one of the most incapable areas funded (by us) through an incapable government. The amount of children that "slip through the net" is, quite frankly, disgusting. It isn;t just one small story is it...
    You read the Mail right?
 
 
 
Poll
The new Gillette ad. Is it:
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.