Comments on: Peer collapses during gay parents debate

By: dave

dave — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 21:25:00 +0000

the hetties have tried and failed, so let us have ago. Becuase society is breaking down fast, and the blame this time dont lie at the gay door. We can only improve parenting, that is so sadly dying in its present form.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Rob Neal

Rob Neal — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 16:15:00 +0000

Robert, if it's a woman's right to choose to bear a child, let her get on with it on her own.As far as I know there has only allegedly been one case, about 2000 years ago, of this ever being successful.For the rest of us, a man is required.Hmm, man + woman = baby. Has a kind of natural symmetry to it, don't you think?

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Zeke

Zeke — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 15:22:00 +0000

Jerry, Rather than respond directly to your over the top, angry, aggressive and insulting rant, I'll let your words speak for themselves.I don't think you're in any position to lecture anyone on how to properly engage in debate. I don't know how things work in Iowa but in the rest of the world civility is paramount in thoughtful and effective debate.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: jerry in iowa

jerry in iowa — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:09:00 +0000

ok first things first- what the f*** would "365gay" know about UK legislation compared to PinkNews? Are you calling the BBC WRONG Zeke? I am embarassed for you to be honest. Just to show you how retarded your embarassing argument is, lets quote from the goverment mininster in the debate on Monday: "The Bill includes clear recognition of same-sex couples as legal parents of children conceived through the use of donated sperm, eggs or embryos. This will mean, for example, that the woman who gives birth and her civil partner will both be recognised as the parents of a child conceived via assisted reproduction. At present, the partner would have to apply to adopt the child. "Similarly, two men will be able to apply for a parental order to become parents of a child conceived through a surrogacy arrangement. At present, parental orders are open only to married couples." IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU?? Just because you seem to know what an ad hominem attack is does not mean you should be spared them – coming on here ranting about surrogacy arrangements and accusing Pink News of supporting or not supporting legislation. There is nothing more depressing than stupid ill informed people trying to contribute to a debate they clearly know nothing about.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Zeke

Zeke — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 20:28:00 +0000

Well Jerry in Iowa, someone is lying or misinformed here. I've read a number of articles on this issue that have specifically said that this law will not apply to gay men. I'm not sure which side of this argument is accurate.Here is the report on 365gay.com. As you can see, by their accounts, this Bill will not apply to gay men.(London) The British government will bring in legislation in the current session of Parliament to give equal legal status to the same-sex partners of lesbians who have children using in vitro fertilization.The announcement was made Tuesday in the Queen's speech to Parliament outlining the agenda of Prime Minister Brown's government.The Human Tissues and Embryos Bill will enshrine in law for the first time the concept of a two-mother family.Under the legislation when one woman in a lesbian relationship gives birth using artificial fertility, the partner – even if the women are not in a civil partnership – will be granted all of the rights, privileges and responsibilities of parenthood.The bill would also say that the sperm donor would have no rights or obligations. The legislation would bring lesbian couples in line with current laws covering opposite-sex relationships. It does not, however, include partners of gay men who have children through a surrogate mother.The announcement has been condemned by conservative family groups."We are embarking on a dangerous social experiment with serious consequences for individual children and for society as a whole when we start tampering with the natural order and deny to children something as fundamental as having a parent of each sex," Norman Wells, of the Family Education Trust, told the Daily Telegraph.The government also announced that it would expand hate crime law to include gays, lesbians and transsexuals.The proposed legislation must still be filed in the House of Commons and withstand a vote in committee before going before the House of Commons and the Lords.©365Gay.com 2007 Regardless of which way this law is written the fact of the matter remains that surogacy for gay male couples is illegal in England.Oh, and Jerry, drop the rude and unnecessary ad hominem attacks on me. I am no moron. My comment was based on research of published accounts. Those accounts may or may not be accurate but I'm pretty sure they are. Either way I don't appreciate your rude and unwarranted name calling.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Robert, ex-pat Brit

Robert, ex-pat Brit — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:34:00 +0000

Stewart, similar studies have been replicated in the U.S. too. Many child psychiatrists here in the U.S. are in agreement that gay parents make excellent parents and their children usuallly grow up straight anyway. So much of the homophobia aimed at gay parenting is not so much about having one mother and one father, its about the perception that we're all predators and sexual deviants whose goal it is to corrupt or recruit children into a gay orientation. We all know how absurd that is, but that is the mindset of many straight people on the issue of gay parenting and one that the religious right uses with impunity. The other excuse is that it would cause children to have problems in school, being bullied, made fun of because they have two same-sex parents which is hogwash. I'm not saying that kind of problem doesn't exist, but its blown up out of proportion by the right wing and religious organisations. Witness the reaction by Catholic adoption agencies when gay couples were given permission to adopt. Classic!

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Stewart

Stewart — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:29:00 +0000

The largest ever study of same-sex couples and parenting asserts that it is just as good — if not slightly advantageous — for children when compared to heterosexual families (report details here:http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=38cc20ce-7f14-44ea-b4d9-d4cd16d7a269k=937. This fits other studies that conclude women generally spend more time with their children than men, which shoots down the criticism of fatherless families.What children need is a loving home and that attribute is not the sole domain of heterosexuals. The concern of "traditional families" would be better focused on a whole generation of latchkey kids brought on by the economic demands of two working parents. Critics of this bill do a huge injustice to not only loving gay families but single parents too.I am tired and angry, as a gay man, of having my humanity insulted and denied by scurrolous false claims around my ability to parent and show a child love when their is so little of it in this world. As a group, gay men and women can demonstrate the highest overall standards of education, disposable income, in group caring, lowest crime on crime and all of this is achieved against the kind of hostility shown by Ms. Phillips and her like. Children understand love and compassion, not gender politics.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: jerry in iowa

jerry in iowa — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:36:00 +0000

"Proposals to make it easier for lesbian and gay couples to have IVF babies have been heavily criticised in the Lords""The Bill includes clear recognition of same-sex couples as legal parents of children conceived through use of donated sperm, eggs or embryos."Hey Zeke – those quotes are from the BBC and as even a moron such as yourself can see, the proposed new law would allow a gay male couple to become the legal parents of a child conceived by one of them or indeed neither of them. This is a right heterosexual couples already have. It clearly applies to gay couples as well as lesbians, which MUST be why the BBC refer to "lesbian and gay couples."

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Robert, ex-pat Brit

Robert, ex-pat Brit — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:31:00 +0000

McCormack, IDS and all the religious bigots and hypocrites need a reality check and butt out of people's personal lives and get their own houses in order. Next they'll be forcing widowed mothers or unwed mothers to marry against their will just because in their narrow view of the world, every child must have two parents of the opposite sex. Its a woman's right to choose if she wishes to bring a child or not into the world by whatever method she chooses, that decision rests alone with her, not the father. If men could bare childen, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Enough of the hypocritical patriarchy who are out of touch with reality. They should mind their own business and get a life.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Zeke

Zeke — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:13:00 +0000

Mr. Leng, you have made and repeated a categorically incorrect statement in this report. You have first stated that this Bill would make "gay and lesbian parenting easier in the future", then you stated that "the new rules that will allow the gay and lesbian couples to become the legal parents of a child conceived through donated sperm, eggs or embryos."In fact this legislation does no such thing for gay male couples. It ONLY applies to lesbian couples. That in and of itself seems blatantly discriminatory based on gender. I don't understand why this only applies to lesbians couple and I CERTAINLY don't understand why gay publications are supporting it by misrepresenting what it actually does.Does PINK NEWS support legislation with such blatant discrimination and bias against gay male couples who are fathers through surogacy and artificial insemination?Of course, to take a position on this you would have to acknowledge that English law already discriminates against gay male couples because they are legally barred from having children through surogacy. The law is already biased against gay men.Why do people not consider biases against men problematic? Where is the onrage over legally supported anti-male gender biases? Surogacy laws are full of gender biases. Pension laws are terribly gender biased against men. Yet no one seems to notice. I believe that the reason there is no outrage is precisely because people who are quite sensitive to anti-female gender biases and scream bloody murder over the slightest infraction, are the same people who ignore or even support, through misinformation, biases against men.Please correct this story to properly reflect the purpose and intent of this Bill. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with improving the parenting rights of coupled gay men.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:39:00 +0000

Ryan, seems the only thing you will understand about IVF is this – F*** off, and thats only if you can figure what's suppose to be in the place of the stars! jason

(Report comment to the moderator)