Soldato
Of course.
Why? Would having a homosexual child make you less of a father, or them less of a human being?
Surely you would love your child unconditionally regardless of who they fancied?
Of course.
Actually you did say just that:
So again, read my reply:
Now try and answer my original question honestly.
There is no law that requires someone to produce a product that endorses or supports a change in the law. A company is free to choose who it contracts to and as long as they have not broken the law in doing so (and they would have to prove that it was the fact that the buyer was homosexual rather than it simply being the nature of the product itself) and as the slogan was specifically related to Support for Same Sex Marriage and a change in the current law, I cannot see why a company should be forced to supply products that are designed to endorse that if they do not wish to. As I said, if it were a wedding cake (assuming same sex marriage was legal) and they refused that, then that would be legally discriminatory, but the opposition of Same Sex Marriage is not and in Northern Ireland at least Same Sex Marriage is still illegal and I can understand why a company would not want to be associated with such a controversial argument.
Incorrect and gross. The nature of a pair bond is that it's a male and a female. You may as well refer to a keyboard as a monitor if you want to just refer to anything as anything else you so desire.
That's your reasoning mate. You can't draw a conclusion from what I've said and then say correctly that it's my reasoning. Do you even understand how reality works?
So I didn't say that. Are you able to understand now? Why do I have to explain everything in such depth?
Sliver. I think you have a problem. I not once stated that anyone would be doing anyone a disservice. In fact adoption seems like a lovely thing.
So I didn't say that. Are you able to understand now? Why do I have to explain everything in such depth?
Why? Would having a homosexual child make you less of a father, or them less of a human being?
Surely you would love your child unconditionally regardless of who they fancied?
Of course.
I would be unhappy because that would mean no grandchildren. Who would be happy with that?
Either nearly everyone misunderstood what you said in the exact same way, or now you're backpedaling on what you meant.
It seemed pretty obvious that you were claiming that a family couldn't be as strong as a "normal" hetero family who have naturally conceived a child, just based on the virtue of it being a hetero couple who have conceived a child together, and that was it.
Wow, you're clever. In your own mind anyway.
I would be unhappy because that would mean no grandchildren. Who would be happy with that?
I didn't say anything about not loving them. That's part of your feeble attempt to trap me.
Your other two questions are even stupider.
OMG. Can you not read?
I stated that I didn't say what Sliver said. Something about a disservice. I didn't say that.
Did I?
would you still love them equally and unconditionally or would they drop below the other children?
except it doesn't, surrogacy for gay people has gone on for a long time now you would be perfectly capable of having a genetic heir if your child so wished.
So now thats cleared up youd no longer be unhappy yes?
Shameful copout. Can't answer cause you know you're trying to defend an indefensible position.
OMG. Can you not read?
I stated that I didn't say what Sliver said. Something about a disservice. I didn't say that.
Did I?
No but the implication was clear from your post. Stop wriggling around and tap dancing around the truth. Just admit that your view is homophobic and everything else you say in this topic stems from that view.
Nonsense. I've given the headline answer: it trivialises marriage. If you want a more verbose answer, you will need to wait. Not because I am incapable of answering the question, but because I don't currently have the time to write a more verbose answer.
Nonsense. I've given the headline answer: it trivialises marriage. If you want a more verbose answer, you will need to wait. Not because I am incapable of answering the question, but because I don't currently have the time to write a more verbose answer.
except it doesn't, surrogacy for gay people has gone on for a long time now you would be perfectly capable of having a genetic heir if your child so wished.
So now thats cleared up youd no longer be unhappy yes?
Another one who thinks he's clever. I wouldn't have thought it would affect my love for anyone.
It's not cleared up, I didn't say anything about a genetic heir. You internet arguers are pathetic. You'll argue anything to "win"