Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[albitz]

...and David on their purchase of a new puppy at Christmas.

[Dishevelled Den]

I'm minded to agree with you son.

[Chris_H]

Yes.  I found that depressing.

[Kevin Wood]

I hope for the "puppy"'s sake that he has a thick skin. He's going to need it for the life he's got to look forward to.

Just because you can, it doesn't mean you should.

Kevin

[albitz]

Agreed, its grotesque in so many different ways. Dread to think what it will be like to be that kid in 20 years time.

[tunnie]

Have you seen the name they have chosen too? Thats not going to do him any favours to start!

[Banjax]

can't see anything wrong with it - they've got the money, they paid the mum who obviously agreed to the deal - funny how the most strident capitilists are up in arms.......or is it that the parents happen to be gay? interesting.....what year is it again? 

i for one wish the happy couple and their new addition all the best 

[Banjax]

Have you seen the name they have chosen too? Thats not going to do him any favours to start!

he's multi-millionaire Elton Johns son......living in Beverley Hills and luxury villas throughout the world, whens hes older, he'll be able to afford to do what he likes, when he likes, where he likes......I suspect he'll do just fine Tunnie, I'll pass your concerns on tho 

[Mysteryman]

can't see anything wrong with it - they've got the money, they paid the mum who obviously agreed to the deal - funny how the most strident capitilists are up in arms.......or is it that the parents happen to be gay? interesting.....what year is it again? 

i for one wish the happy couple and their new addition all the best 

I don't like that word, it doesn't convey the meaning. They are homosexuals.

[geoffr70]

can't see anything wrong with it - they've got the money, they paid the mum who obviously agreed to the deal - funny how the most strident capitilists are up in arms.......or is it that the parents happen to be gay? interesting.....what year is it again? 

i for one wish the happy couple and their new addition all the best 

I think it's peculiar to say the least.

Just my opinion, but if you want a baby you should go about it the natural way, then if that fails, let medicine lend a helping hand. Undecided about surrogacy. I certainly don't think two men should have custody of a baby in this way.

I have nothing against gay people. People are what they are, but exposing infants to certain lifetstyles isn't right IMO. Should they not have a balanced upbringing until they reach a certain age? When I say balanced I mean a parent of both sexes.

As said, just because they can doesn't necessarily mean they should. So what if they have plenty of money. Money doesn't make a person.

It seems like a selfish and vain act, with the interests of the baby second.

[albitz]

Have you seen the name they have chosen too? Thats not going to do him any favours to start!

he's multi-millionaire Elton Johns son......living in Beverley Hills and luxury villas throughout the world, whens hes older, he'll be able to afford to do what he likes, when he likes, where he likes......I suspect he'll do just fine Tunnie, I'll pass your concerns on tho 

A socialist inferring that the only thing that matters is money - how peculiar. :-/
In 20 years time Elton will either be dead or very old indeed and the child will always be the surrogate kid who Elton paid a woman to have so he could be a "dad".
He will be persued by the media every day of his life, and the only escape will be to live in a similar bubble - unconnected to the real world - that Elton lives in. And we have seen what kind of effect that has had.

[Banjax]

can't see anything wrong with it - they've got the money, they paid the mum who obviously agreed to the deal - funny how the most strident capitilists are up in arms.......or is it that the parents happen to be gay? interesting.....what year is it again? 

i for one wish the happy couple and their new addition all the best 

I think it's peculiar to say the least.

Just my opinion, but if you want a baby you should go about it the natural way, then if that fails, let medicine lend a helping hand. Undecided about surrogacy. I certainly don't think two men should have custody of a baby in this way.

I have nothing against gay people. People are what they are, but exposing infants to certain lifetstyles isn't right IMO. Should they not have a balanced upbringing until they reach a certain age? When I say balanced I mean a parent of both sexes.

As said, just because they can doesn't necessarily mean they should. So what if they have plenty of money. Money doesn't make a person.

It seems like a selfish and vain act, with the interests of the baby second.

so is a couple in a stable, long-lasting relationship and comfortably well off worse than some kid on benefits bringing up a baby with little or no idea who the father is, and absolutely no intention of contributing to society or indeed have her sprog contribute?

homophobic nonsense 

[albitz]

Two different kinds of wrong, seemples.
I hate the word "homophobic", it implies that there are only two possibilities - fear of homosexuality or fully on board with it. It doesnt allow for any other possibilities, like the fact that some people believe it to be unnatural, immoral, sinful etc.
Personally I dont give a monkeys what consenting adults to with/to each other, but I detest the pink militant tendency (Peter Tatchell and the like) who force everyone to either agree with what their version of right  is, or be pressurised and persecuted in any way they see fit.

[geoffr70]

can't see anything wrong with it - they've got the money, they paid the mum who obviously agreed to the deal - funny how the most strident capitilists are up in arms.......or is it that the parents happen to be gay? interesting.....what year is it again? 

i for one wish the happy couple and their new addition all the best 

I think it's peculiar to say the least.

Just my opinion, but if you want a baby you should go about it the natural way, then if that fails, let medicine lend a helping hand. Undecided about surrogacy. I certainly don't think two men should have custody of a baby in this way.

I have nothing against gay people. People are what they are, but exposing infants to certain lifetstyles isn't right IMO. Should they not have a balanced upbringing until they reach a certain age? When I say balanced I mean a parent of both sexes.

As said, just because they can doesn't necessarily mean they should. So what if they have plenty of money. Money doesn't make a person.

It seems like a selfish and vain act, with the interests of the baby second.

so is a couple in a stable, long-lasting relationship and comfortably well off worse than some kid on benefits bringing up a baby with little or no idea who the father is, and absolutely no intention of contributing to society or indeed have her sprog contribute?

homophobic nonsense 

It's not homophobic nonsense at all. I believe in live and let live. As Albs has said, it is not my business or concern what two consenting adults get upto behind closed doors, as long as it doesn't impact on me. I have nothing against gays.

I agree with what has been said about the word homophobic. It's like black and white, for or against and no inbetween. Which is wrong. I believe it is immoral and unnatural, and certainly shouldn't be celebrated, but as I said I have nothing against gays.

Whatever example you gave in your post is irrelevant, there's nothing to be gained in comparing to other people. (I don't really understand the point you're trying to make in your example anyway).

And I too was going to comment on your socialist views, but thought best not to. However for you to label it 'homophobic nonsense' in the typical way a socialist would abuse someone for disagreeing with them is wrong. This is the reason why the last shambles of a government was thrown out, because they're too damn bloody arrogant and can't accept other people's views without resorting to abuse.

Imagine having two middle aged men 'dads' as parents. I wouldn't like it.

There's too many sheep following this fashionable way of thinking, what's happened to traditional values, morals and ethics, politics aside?

[Banjax]

can't see anything wrong with it - they've got the money, they paid the mum who obviously agreed to the deal - funny how the most strident capitilists are up in arms.......or is it that the parents happen to be gay? interesting.....what year is it again? 

i for one wish the happy couple and their new addition all the best 

I think it's peculiar to say the least.

Just my opinion, but if you want a baby you should go about it the natural way, then if that fails, let medicine lend a helping hand. Undecided about surrogacy. I certainly don't think two men should have custody of a baby in this way.

I have nothing against gay people. People are what they are, but exposing infants to certain lifetstyles isn't right IMO. Should they not have a balanced upbringing until they reach a certain age? When I say balanced I mean a parent of both sexes.

As said, just because they can doesn't necessarily mean they should. So what if they have plenty of money. Money doesn't make a person.

It seems like a selfish and vain act, with the interests of the baby second.

so is a couple in a stable, long-lasting relationship and comfortably well off worse than some kid on benefits bringing up a baby with little or no idea who the father is, and absolutely no intention of contributing to society or indeed have her sprog contribute?

homophobic nonsense 

It's not homophobic nonsense at all. I believe in live and let live. As Albs has said, it is not my business or concern what two consenting adults get upto behind closed doors, as long as it doesn't impact on me. I have nothing against gays.

I agree with what has been said about the word homophobic. It's like black and white, for or against and no inbetween. Which is wrong. I believe it is immoral and unnatural, and certainly shouldn't be celebrated, but as I said I have nothing against gays.

Whatever example you gave in your post is irrelevant, there's nothing to be gained in comparing to other people. (I don't really understand the point you're trying to make in your example anyway).

And I too was going to comment on your socialist views, but thought best not to. However for you to label it 'homophobic nonsense' in the typical way a socialist would abuse someone for disagreeing with them is wrong. This is the reason why the last shambles of a government was thrown out, because they're too damn bloody arrogant and can't accept other people's views without resorting to abuse.

Imagine having two middle aged men 'dads' as parents. I wouldn't like it.

There's too many sheep following this fashionable way of thinking, what's happened to traditional values, morals and ethics, politics aside?

those values saw people locked up for being gay - i think some of our less learned friends might like a return to that.

what i find immoral and unnatural is a prejudice against a person for being gay


"Imagine having two middle aged men 'dads' as parents. I wouldn't like it."

who asked you if you wanted to be brought up by 2 gay men?


i find it amusing that as someone who has no problem with it I'm told that calling someone homophobic is resorting to abuse.....these are the same people who deem words such as "grotesque" "immoral" and "unnatural" to be perfectly reasonable adjectives to describe a relationship between 2 consenting adults - very odd indeed 

it's rather like assuming someone who has tolerance and believes in fairness is a loony left socialist, be real nice if the world was that simple huh?