Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14
Send Topic Print
The case against homosexual parents (Read 22456 times)
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 122972
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #75 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 8:13am
 
test
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
JC Denton
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 5520
Gender: female
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #76 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 8:15am
 
Mate your buddy Lisa is a bible thumper.
What do you reckon about that?
She hates science mate.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
buzzanddidj
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 14248
Eganstown, via Daylesford, VIC
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #77 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 8:38am
 
Christianity
-
"The Religion of Convenience"




Feel free to
"come out"
on matters of
sexual orientation


But it's back "
in the closet"
at the sight of a
refugee






Back to top
 

'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.
Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.'


- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
 
IP Logged
 
culldav
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2020
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #78 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 9:23am
 
Cods, you hit the hail on the head again.  Courts have to start putting the rights and wellbeing of the child over the emotions turmoil of relationship separations when making their decisions.

Some gay people make brilliant parents and some heterosexual people make brilliant parents. 

Religion; the weapon of nut jobs.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 122972
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #79 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 9:32am
 
JC Denton wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 8:15am:
Mate your buddy Lisa is a bible thumper.
What do you reckon about that?
She hates science mate.



Lisa is not a Bible thumper - I am - when it suits my arguments.
Lisa loves science.
I am a scientist.

The Bible clearly states that all, homosexuals should be killed.
Read back in this thread for the proof.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #80 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 9:41am
 
Bobby. wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 7:45am:
Any thoughts?


Yes, you have just as strong a grasp of theology as you have of planetary science.

- and you really have a strong fascination with religion. I recommend the priesthood for you.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 42489
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #81 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 10:08am
 

bobby - yes, my thoughts are the same as last time.

the torah is still relevant . It applies to jews.

the law was still valid to jesus. he fulfilled all the laws.
the penalties for sins for everyone is paid.

it's as though you get fined by a judge, then someone else pays the fine.
By the judge, that's ok.

we need not be held to the spriitual death that sins bind us to.
jesus cleared that debt.

Thanks mate.
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 122972
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #82 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 10:47am
 
Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 10:08am:
bobby - yes, my thoughts are the same as last time.

the torah is still relevant . It applies to jews.

the law was still valid to jesus. he fulfilled all the laws.
the penalties for sins for everyone is paid.

it's as though you get fined by a judge, then someone else pays the fine.
By the judge, that's ok.

we need not be held to the spriitual death that sins bind us to.
jesus cleared that debt.

Thanks mate.



That might be true  but it still means that the old laws in the Torah are still binding!
The punishments still stand!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Verge
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6329
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #83 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 11:06am
 
I dont see how the bible is relevant to the law, when there is clearly a separation between the commonwealth and christanity.

Its irrelevant.  The bible is so contridictory for a start that in itself is enough to know it isnt the be-all end all.

I found it fasinating that even father Bob came out and said he would perform civil unions happily, just not in the Church itself since they still have rules on it.  I say good on him, he has enough respect for the Church to not perform it in their house, yet enough self  respect to stand by his convictions and support equality.
Back to top
 

And why not, if you will permit me; why shouldn’t I, if you will permit me; spend my first week as prime minister, should that happen, on this, on your, country - Abbott with the Garma People Aug 13
 
IP Logged
 
Vanessa
Senior Member
****
Offline


Ranga Rock Chick

Posts: 301
Somewhere In The Real World
Gender: female
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #84 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 2:30pm
 
Where is the issue? Two parents are raising a child, they split up and the court has granted them both access to the child.

It is irrelevant that they both happen to be females, if you ask me.
Back to top
 

I don't care if I'm fat, or if you think my clothes are bad. I can go to sleep at night I'm a good person and I'll get by...
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 122972
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #85 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 2:50pm
 
Vanessa wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 2:30pm:
Where is the issue? Two parents are raising a child, they split up and the court has granted them both access to the child.

It is irrelevant that they both happen to be females, if you ask me.



Not according to the principles of christians & muslims.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #86 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 3:04pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 2:50pm:
Vanessa wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 2:30pm:
Where is the issue? Two parents are raising a child, they split up and the court has granted them both access to the child.

It is irrelevant that they both happen to be females, if you ask me.



Not according to the principles of christians & muslims.



So who actually 'cares' about the principles of christians & muslims.......apart FROM christians & muslims, of course???
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 42489
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #87 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 3:09pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 10:47am:
Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 10:08am:
bobby - yes, my thoughts are the same as last time.

the torah is still relevant . It applies to jews.

the law was still valid to jesus. he fulfilled all the laws.
the penalties for sins for everyone is paid.

it's as though you get fined by a judge, then someone else pays the fine.
By the judge, that's ok.

we need not be held to the spriitual death that sins bind us to.
jesus cleared that debt.

Thanks mate.



That might be true  but it still means that the old laws in the Torah are still binding!
The punishments still stand!


they are binding - to jews.
they are not binding to non-jews
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 53486
At my desk.
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #88 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 7:33pm
 
Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 17th, 2011 at 9:43am:
Apart from "Homosexual" and "parents" being a contradiction in terms , it's wrong.


Quote:
A LESBIAN mother was stopped from moving her daughter interstate after a court ruled her ex-partner had the same rights as other parents, despite no biological link.

The 41-year-old mother had asked the Family Court to grant her sole parental responsibility for the four-year-old girl, conceived via an anonymous sperm donor, noting that her ex-partner was not listed as a parent on the child's birth certificate.

But Family Court Justice Paul Cronin disagreed ruling that the women "had equal shared responsibility" for the child.

In deciding whether to let the mother relocate the child from Queensland to NSW, Justice Cronin also took into account the girl's relationship as a sister to the second woman's eight-year-old daughter.

It was decided the move would not be in the girl's best interests until she was old enough to understand and maintain a long-distance relationship with her non-biological mother and sister.

The complex case highlighted the difficulties in dealing with separation of homosexual couples who have one or more children with differing biological relationships.
"Much of the judicial history about "relocation" cases has focussed on heterosexual parents where biological connection was clear," Justice Cronin said in his judgement.

"This case highlights the reality rather than the abstract of a breakdown of a same-sex relationship into which had been born children by artificial conception procedures to two different mothers."

The court heard the mother and her 39-year-old former partner, who cannot be named for legal reasons, were in a committed relationship from January 2002 until early 2008 and lived together in Queensland.

During that time the 39-year-old gave birth to a daughter, now aged 8, via IVF using a friend's sperm.

Four years later, the 41-year-old woman gave birth to the four-year-old girl, conceived via an anonymous sperm donor.

In ruling the women had shared responsibility for both children, Justice Cronin referred to a November 2008 amendment to the Family Law Act which states that if a woman becomes pregnant through artificial insemination and she has a spouse or defacto partner at the time of conception, then they are legally considered to be the second parent of the child regardless of biology.

The law is applicable to both heterosexual and lesbian relationships is only considered not relevant if the woman's partner actively objected to his or her partner becoming pregnant.

While they lived together as a family, the women both acted as parents to the girls with the children calling one mummy and the other mumma, the court heard.

"There is no doubt that to the extent that they can understand the concept, the children not only love each other but also consider themselves to be sisters," Justice Cronin said.

"Each child shows love and affection towards their non-biological mother."

When the couple separated in 2008 each woman took custody of her own biological child, but the girls continued seeing the other parent on alternate weekends and during school holidays.

Almost immediately after the separation, the 41-year-old woman told her former partner of her plan to move with the four-year-old girl to NSW for work and family reasons.

But, following Justice Cronin's decision, she will be unable to do that until next year.

Justice Cronin ruled that that is when girl, who will then be five-and-a-half, will be old enough to understand her parents separation and be capable of maintaining a relationship with her non-biological mother and sister who she will speak to weekly and visit several times a year.

University of Sydney Law Professor Patrick Parkinson said the case was an example of "biology being irrelevant" when it comes to Family Law.

"Emotional reality is very different to the legal situation," he said.

"Where there isn't a biological connection (between the child and the other parent) it's very easy to say this is my child, not ours.

"There are no easy answers to these issues."

Professor Parkinson said there were more cases of homosexual couples with children separating coming before the court system.

"But overall there are still only a small number of children living in families with same sex parents," he said.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/historic-parental-win-for-lesbian/...


This is no different to heterosexual couples. Cuddy adopted a kid that House is getting attached to, even though he claims he isn't and is just acknowledging her skill in lying.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: The case against homosexual parents
Reply #89 - Feb 18th, 2011 at 9:51pm
 
Homosexual parents? To be a parent requires the heterosexual 'congress of the antelope'. Homosexuals can't be parents unless they have first performed it. The homosexual 'congress of the (your image of degradation here)' is no substitute. It don't work, parenting-wise.



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14
Send Topic Print