Europe to destroy traditional family and sexual identity

Originally posted by lifeform11
mother and father refers to the two people who created the child. how can that be discriminating against gay couples? gay couples cannot have children like that, they have to adopt or invite a 3rd party into the equation.

in which case the child will still have a mother and a farther even if the gay couple raise it or the sperm was donated. everybody wether they are gay or not has a mother or farther.

it sounds like family destruction to me, simply because i cannot see how gay people could even take offence.
a child even if raised by a gay couple has a mother and farther.

they want it changed to parent 1 and parent 2 so they do not have to list the biological (real mother/farther) parent on the forms, thats all this is about, erasing mention of the 'third party' when they decide to raise children.

and what about what everybody else thinks? maybe i take offence to parent 1 and would rather be called farther, i am sick of these stupid changes that pander to groups who have nothing better to do other than complain because things are not how they want them, with no thought or care about what anybody else wants or might think.

They want gay rights this and that, but at the same time, they don't want to be gay! Get over your gay insecurity issues and move on....

reply to post by FejkNick


I'm not sure what I dislike more. This law or the title of this post.

On the one hand this law is really really stupid. On the other hand you're making a big deal out of nothing. It's a insane law but the whole "FAMILY IS BEING DESTROYED BY THE EVIL LIBERALS" is really getting on my nerves.

Ok I didn't read the whole thread because 6 pages of gay vs anti-gay was enough BUT>>>>


HOW will this keep gay couples from being discriminated against?

Parent 1: (insert random MALE name here)

Parent 2: (insert 2nd random MALE name here)

Will people be too stupid to realize there are 2 MALES (or females) listed as the parents?

Does it really make a gay person feel better to be called 'parent 1' vs mother or father?

How about 'Custodial Biological Entity 1'. Is that androgynous enough?

Do people really have NOTHING better to worry about?

reply to post by Walkers


Well i hope you never have a gay child.Because you will destroy their lives one way or another.I still can not believe people like you still exist today.Another reason all religion is totally evil to the core.

its a joke. ive nothing against same sex partners raising children but this is a joke.

The phrases I use professionally are Parent With Care and Non Resident Parent, this can refer to mother, father, grandparent, auntie, uncle, indeed anyone that is the primary and secondary carer for the child, very much like parent 1 or 2 in fact.

It's disappointing, but I'm not too surprised, that people for whom everything fits into a neat little box that they can comprehend within their narrow, indoctrinated world view cannot grasp that millions of people live in circumstances are not right nor wrong, they are just what they are and what they experience on a daily basis and everyone just tries to do the best they can.

reply to post by Propulsion


you assume alot and accuse, i have nothing against gay people, i have an issue with a section of society forcing their view on others.

unbealivable the way you assume that from my post, it says alot.

reply to post by FejkNick


This is part of the Marxist agenda to destroy the family as the nucleus for society. They replace the parents with the State. Using the Parent 1 and Parent 2 model takes the father/mother aspect out of it so that the parents can be represented by the State, by same-sex partners, by guardians, by foster parents, by whatever the State wants it to be.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

A man cannot get another man pregnant, thats right there is nature telling you that same sex pairs are an abhorration.

By your "logic", couples who can't conceive and adopted, should also not be called parents, just like homosexuals. As for the abhorration part, given that it's common in nature, what the hell are you talking about?

I wonder if Anyone has given consideration to the "inverse law" effect?..

By calling them Parent 1 & Parent 2, it becomes a "further" act of compartmentalization "away" from general public, not an integration...

Any child's Passport, that has the designation of P1 & P2, indicates an available "opportunity" for rerouting, setting up separate rules and policies, in effect, causing segregation, not integration..

When the terms "Father/Mother" are used for the generalization of all atypical correspondences, it "blurs" the distinctions between the typical and the atypical (making it harder to classify an individual product (we are all after all corporate products on paper) therefore I submit, the "inverse law's" approach...

1) Classifying who is homosexual/lesbian, is a currently difficult prospect, this solves that issue, by providing a generic terminology, that designates "atypical" behavior of the product(s)

2) Once policy has been instigated, then it becomes easier to "segregate" the atypical, from the typical (the mass product supported policies that is) this makes it easier to "target" the atypical for designated extermination camps

3) Children with designations of P1 & P2, then become wards of the government/state, free to be reprocessed into any type of environment they choose (much easier and simpler then having to sort through tons of paperwork to find the atypical products) this means that child slave labor/trafficking/prostitution businesses, will be able to place in their orders, and they can be more easily filled out based on this "new" designation of the atypical vs the typical..

Their is much more, these are only three scenarios that come to mind when you consider it a "business model" (which is what it really is BTW) and by receiving this designation, it will "separate" those of atypical behavior further from the typical..

This is inverse law in application, show one hand, and strive to have focus upon it, while the second hand holds the large cleaver aimed right at the neck of those "with" this designation..

This actually "hurts" the cause that Homosexuals/Lesbians are striving for, because it completely removes the one element that Father/Mother afforded them "Anonymity"

Be careful of what you wish for.. you just might get it, and this one gives it to the atypical in "Spades"...

reply to post by Primordial


Reminds me of when waiter and waitress was replaced by "waiting person". Now it's server which is gender neutral. This whole thing seems to be in tandem with the OWS demand for gender equality. It's ERA but with a different parameter.

Originally posted by waynos
The phrases I use professionally are Parent With Care and Non Resident Parent, this can refer to mother, father, grandparent, auntie, uncle, indeed anyone that is the primary and secondary carer for the child, very much like parent 1 or 2 in fact.

It's disappointing, but I'm not too surprised, that people for whom everything fits into a neat little box that they can comprehend within their narrow, indoctrinated world view cannot grasp that millions of people live in circumstances are not right nor wrong, they are just what they are and what they experience on a daily basis and everyone just tries to do the best they can.

You mean "caregiver" don't you? I don't even do that professionally, but I know the term. I didn't know "carer" was a word.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by FejkNick

 

This is part of the Marxist agenda to destroy the family as the nucleus for society. They replace the parents with the State. Using the Parent 1 and Parent 2 model takes the father/mother aspect out of it so that the parents can be represented by the State, by same-sex partners, by guardians, by foster parents, by whatever the State wants it to be.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1f4e9ee9a17a.jpg[/atsimg]

Yes, a secret marxist-communist-socialist conspiracy to destroy families of their own country. And they're sponsored by, I'll let you pick 2, [Soros][Bill Gates][Al Gore][the evil communist Warren Buffet]. Part of the money is also used to rip baby seals out of their mothers' wombs, before grilling them alive. Sometimes human babies will do just fine too

For crying out loud!! How on earth does it affect you if they add "parent 1" and "parent 2" after "mother" and "father" on a form??? It's not giving you any rights, or taking any from you. Personally, I don't really see the point, it's a formality, nothing more, nothing less. Governments are always bureaucratic, doesn't mean it's some crazy Marxist conspiracy to *imagine me using a dark, scary voice* DESTROY FAMILIES!!

Originally posted by earthship35
reply to post by Walkers

 

Well i hope you never have a gay child.Because you will destroy their lives one way or another.I still can not believe people like you still exist today.Another reason all religion is totally evil to the core.

Being gay is evil to the core! You like it? If you expect people to respect your opinion, than you need to start respecting others as well! You need to grow-up! Very one sided mentality! AND by the way…..I am a Christian…!

Originally posted by drew1749
reply to post by FejkNick

 

I'm not sure what I dislike more. This law or the title of this post.

On the one hand this law is really really stupid. On the other hand you're making a big deal out of nothing. It's a insane law but the whole "FAMILY IS BEING DESTROYED BY THE EVIL LIBERALS" is really getting on my nerves.

Just replace "liberals" with "state" and we are good to go!

Speaking of "evil liberals", I just noticed a news headline that Democrats are labeling the current economic woes as "Tea Party recession". Talk about riding the Socialist OWS wave...

Originally posted by AnonymousFem
reply to post by Helmkat

 

Once again, ignorance shows. The mother/father will not be removed from the passports. This law is giving same sex couples to put parent 1 or parent 2 on their childs passports.

Hmm? and so what.

The title of this thread is that this change will "destroy" the "traditional family".

I disagree.

Thats my opinion and thats not ignorant.

reply to post by Walkers


Amen to that

reply to post by mamabeth


That's the problem right there.. you went to church aka brainwashing fun time.Religion has no place in today society.More people have been killed in the name of religion than for any other reason in the history of the earth.Believe in the source.aka God but don't listen to a bunch of child molesting preachers who want to control the way you live.I thought we were evolving past this garbage.Live by the golden rule and your life will be just peachy.

Originally posted by waynos
The phrases I use professionally are Parent With Care and Non Resident Parent, this can refer to mother, father, grandparent, auntie, uncle, indeed anyone that is the primary and secondary carer for the child, very much like parent 1 or 2 in fact.
.

I'll take parent 1 or 2.

I do not like your labels.

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by Propulsion

 

you assume alot and accuse, i have nothing against gay people, i have an issue with a section of society forcing their view on others.

unbealivable the way you assume that from my post, it says alot.

I wasn't against you. I was agreeing with you! Sorry for the miscommunication...