This is disgusting!

[MrBurns]

My point being that your comment about children's rights has nothing to do with the child but your own prejudices. Kids that are put up for adoption have NO PARENTS!!!

Its far better for a child to have a home and family to grow up with than to suffer a terrible life as a orphan. Or to grow up in a family where the parents are not fit to look after themselves let alone another human.

My prejudices ?
I think yours are showing very clearly.

Kids put up for adoption will get parents, a married heterosexual couple.

You'll never weed out the unfit parents in any society but you can weed out the unfit parent role models which are gays. Like it or not.

It's legal in SA anyway I think so argument over.

 

[CanOz]

I can't speak for the gay community, but as a former homophobic i can say that there is an assumption associated with being gay that you are automatically considered a pedophile. Perhaps there is as much chance for adopted children to be abused by straight parents as there is by gay parents...yes?

CanOz

 

[MrBurns]

I can't speak for the gay community, but as a former homophobic i can say that there is an assumption associated with being gay that you are automatically considered a pedophile. Perhaps there is as much chance for adopted children to be abused by straight parents as there is by gay parents...yes?

CanOz

I'm not thinking about that side of it, I'm more concerned with children growing up in a gay household and what effect it may have on them.

 

[McLovin]

I'm not thinking about that side of it, I'm more concerned with children growing up in a gay household and what effect it may have on them.

None...

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/tick-for-samesex-families-20130605-2npxf.html

Which is the conclusion most studies on the issue have reached.

 

[pavilion103]

I'm not thinking about that side of it, I'm more concerned with children growing up in a gay household and what effect it may have on them.

+1

For me it's nothing about prejudice, I just disagree that it is a healthy lifestyle choice and environment for a child to be raised in. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Society today just accepts everything without even thinking about it. "If people want it then it must be ok" is the attitude.

Nothing to do with tolerance or prejudice, just a differing of opinion.

 

[Knobby22]

I can't speak for the gay community, but as a former homophobic i can say that there is an assumption associated with being gay that you are automatically considered a pedophile. Perhaps there is as much chance for adopted children to be abused by straight parents as there is by gay parents...yes?

CanOz

Good question>

According to the Family research council:

The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=is02e3

 

[CanOz]

I'm not thinking about that side of it, I'm more concerned with children growing up in a gay household and what effect it may have on them.

There is no doubt that it is something that many people worry about, but what is the research that is available? Is there a lasting psychological effect from not having spent time with a straight couple? What is the effect vs. say not having parents at all?

This is a tough question for a society to answer, its not easy for everyone to accept....especially the more conservative, less open minded amongst us.

While i do consider myself to be very liberal, i still have a lot of questions that remain unanswered on this subject...before i could say that i totally accept this.

One thing for sure....Pedophilia is disgusting and the penalties are never harsh enough in my mind.

CanOz

 

[MrBurns]

None...

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/tick-for-samesex-families-20130605-2npxf.html

Which is the conclusion most studies on the issue have reached.

I'm sceptical about studies like that, the gay lobby and equal rights groups can produce results to suit themselves, I certainly hope they're right, the more that can adopt the better but I'd like to see an honest unbiased expert study by people who know their stuff.

added - the study seems legit but can you imagine the uproar if the conclusions were different ?

 

[Julia]

My point being that your comment about children's rights has nothing to do with the child but your own prejudices. Kids that are put up for adoption have NO PARENTS!!!

Its far better for a child to have a home and family to grow up with than to suffer a terrible life as a orphan. Or to grow up in a family where the parents are not fit to look after themselves let alone another human.

I might be misinterpreting both you and Mr Burns, but it's my understanding that there are many, many couples wanting to adopt children and happy to take them from pretty much any country, but the bureaucratic barriers placed in their way are extraordinarily daunting.
It might even be that if international adoption were simpler, many couples would not put themselves through the long and often unsuccessful process of IVF.

Much has changed in what's considered acceptable now. Single people can use surrogates to produce a child for them, as can couples, in many jurisdictions. Women in their 60's are becoming first time mothers.
I suppose this is considered positive progress. I'm not so sure.

I can't speak for the gay community, but as a former homophobic i can say that there is an assumption associated with being gay that you are automatically considered a pedophile. Perhaps there is as much chance for adopted children to be abused by straight parents as there is by gay parents...yes?

CanOz

I agree that there has long been a quite incorrect assumption that homosexuality has a connection with paedophilia. As far as I'm aware, no such connection has ever been shown.
And yes, plenty of examples of horrible abuse by straight parents.

I'm with pixel on the stupidity of the Costello baby bonus. I was volunteering in a community agency at the time it was introduced and for several years thereafter, and was just incredulous at the number of young women, most of whom had never worked in their lives, who regarded it as incentive to get pregnant.
Asking them about how they would use the $5000 (hoping there was a plan for baby needs), not once was that the case. Instead, it was stuff like they'd take the other kids (usually several) to Dreamworld, buy new bikes for everyone with all the latest features, bigger TV, etc etc. These young women were regular 'customers' wanting help with rent or electricity etc.

Back on the hideous topic of the homosexual couple with their made to order toy child, you have to wonder where are the limits of human depravity.

 

[McLovin]

Good question>

According to the Family research council:

The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=is02e3

Sometimes taking the first link on Google isn't the best idea. The FRC is openly anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-divorce, anti-stem cell research and anti-pornography.

In February 2010 the Family Research Council's Senior Researcher for Policy Studies, Peter Sprigg, stated on NBC's Hardball that gay behavior should be outlawed and that "criminal sanctions against homosexual behavior" should be enforced.[81] In May that same year, Sprigg publicly suggested that repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy would encourage molestation of heterosexual service members.[82] In November FRC President Tony Perkins was asked about Sprigg's comments regarding the criminalization of same-sex behavior: he responded that criminalizing homosexuality is not a goal of the Family Research Council.[83][84] Perkins repeated the FRC’s association of gay men with pedophilia, saying that "If you look at the American College of Pediatricians, they say the research is overwhelming that homosexuality poses a danger to children."[83][84] The opinions expressed by Perkins are contradicted by mainstream social science research on same-sex parenting,[85] and on the likelihood of child molestation by homosexuals and bisexuals, which has been found to be no higher than child molestation by heterosexuals.[85][86]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._anti-gay_hate_groups#Family_Research_Council

Biased much?

And, just in case you're wondering about the American College of Pediatricians...

The American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) is a socially conservative association of pediatricians and other healthcare professionals in the United States. The College was founded in 2002 by a group of pediatricians including Joseph Zanga, a past president of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), as a protest against the AAP's support for adoption by gay couples.[1][2]

 

[boofis]

Good question>

According to the Family research council:

The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=is02e3

As much as it's terrible to think about, I'd like to see stats on no. of homosexual males that were themselves molested at a young age. Personally I only know three, and all three were

 

[pavilion103]

It's so pathetic that people who don't agree with homosexual marriage or adoption are automatically labelled gay haters. Now calling people that is intolerant and ridiculous.
People can't disagree? Come on people.

I disagree with it yet I am friends with a few gay people. I care about the person but just don't agree with gay marriage or adoption. I am a Christian and I worked with one of them. He said that he was apprehensive about me at first because of this but was surprised by the way I treated him. He then said that if he ever had a faith he would want it to be like mine.

People can disagree with each other and not be haters.

A little off topic... But just wanted to add that.

 

[skc]

Good question>

According to the Family research council:

The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=is02e3

That conclusion is plain wrong. They have created a definition that "Any man who abuse boy = gay" to suit their story.

Here's a different point of view.

Boys can be sexually abused by both straight men and gay men. Sexual abuse is the result of abusive behavior that takes advantage of a child’s vulnerability and is in no way related to the sexual orientation of the abusive person.

http://1in6.org/therapists-and-other-professionals/myths-facts/

 

[boofis]

http://1in6.org/therapists-and-other-professionals/myths-facts/

no. 5 seems to answer my query.

 

[Trembling Hand]

My prejudices ?
I think yours are showing very clearly.

Yeah I sure are. As someone who grew up in a utterly crap family I know why its important to have something thats stable no matter how unusual it is, even if it offends those that wish just exclude based on no experience.

Kids put up for adoption will get parents, a married heterosexual couple.

utter nonsense. Once kids are parent-less they spend there whole childhood going from one unstable and temporary foster care situation to the next. Once they are in their middle teens they are pretty much rooted. Have a look at the stats yourself,


http://www.anglicarevic.org.au/inde...d=806&doc_id=13319&pageID=6102&sectionID=5948

 

[MrBurns]

utter nonsense. Once kids are parent-less they spend there whole childhood going from one unstable and temporary foster care situation to the next. Once they are in their middle teens they are pretty much rooted. Have a look at the stats yourself,
http://www.anglicarevic.org.au/inde...d=806&doc_id=13319&pageID=6102&sectionID=5948

I don't know why it's so hard to adopt, like most things run by Govt, it just doesn't work properly.

 

[johenmo]

A stable life is paramount for a child. I was orphaned at 9 and with a foster family at 10. Been with them ever since (40 years) - I was very, very, very (ad infinitum) lucky. My sister didn't get a good foster family & it affected her life. Stable loving gay parents would probably be better than what my sister put up with. I say probably because I don't know anyone who was raised in such an environment so I can't be definitive on it.

We don't know what percentage of the population is gay - because many people still hide. Personally... , men and women are different & this difference is important as part of a child's development. And the data won't be representative of the population of all child molesters. So whilst the ratio of hetero:homo molesters is weighed heavily towards the hetero, the under-reporting of homosexuality will bias the figures.

Here's a read (skim read it).
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

 

[basilio]

And just for a change.

I think its disgusting totally disgusting how retail clothing stores expect/demand their staff to buy the stores clothes in effect acting as models out of their own pockets. Wages for retail staff particularly juniors is already at rock bottom levels. being forced to continually buy company products you can't afford seems criminal.

Retail workers must file claims in order to get their wages back

Sarah Michael
news.com.au
July 02, 2013 10:44AM

More than 200 frustrated workers contact news.com.au
Workers must report behaviour to Fair Work Ombudsman
Retail workers forced to spend wages on employer clothing
Contact sarah.michael@news.com.au | @sarahmichael24


A screenshot from the Diva employee intranet shows that staff must wear Diva jewellery, despite the company CEO's denial it is store policy. Picture: Supplied


RETAIL staff as young as 15 are being forced to spend their wages on employer-brand clothes when working on the shop floor, and the onus is on them to fix the problem.

As reported last week by news.com.au, employees at Australian chain stores are spending a significant portion of their earnings keeping up to date with current stock.

Under law, employers must reimburse the cost of purchasing the clothing to the employee.

However, news.com.au has received more than 200 emails and comments from frustrated employees who have not been compensated. And both Workplace Relations Minister Bill Shorten and the retail union say if workers want their money refunded they need to take their claims to the Fair Work Ombudsman.

Joe de Bruyn, national secretary of the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employee's Union, told news.com.au the only way to fix the problem was for retail workers to be educated on their entitlements.

"Because knowledge about what you are entitled to in the workplace is usually not anything you learn about at school or university and unless a person has a special interest in this they just are ignorant," he said.

"And it's always a difficulty that people are reluctant to put their hand up for what they may know to be their entitlements because they're worried they will be victimised."

Another issue is that some retailers have an official policy that "encourages" staff to wear its brand clothing, but in practice workers are forced to do so.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/wor...ck/story-e6frfm9r-1226673076927#ixzz2XqzlH4Cl

 

[skc]

And just for a change.

I think its disgusting totally disgusting how retail clothing stores expect/demand their staff to buy the stores clothes in effect acting as models out of their own pockets. Wages for retail staff particularly juniors is already at rock bottom levels. being forced to continually buy company products you can't afford seems criminal.

It'd be a really tough gig if you are working at Tiffany or LV...