Equalities minister?

18 May 2010

Quote by Bluefish2009
This was cut and paste from here; , only really to show that there are two sides to every story and not every one See's things the same way.
Dual Gender Parenting and Child-rearing:
The research supporting the importance of dual gender parenting and child-rearing is extensive and clear in its singular conclusion: all variables considered, children are best served when reared in a home with a married mother and father. Mothers and fathers contribute in gender specific and in gender-complementary ways to the healthy development of children. Children reap unique developmental benefits when reared in a home with a married, reasonably harmonious union of their own biological mother and father. A Child Trends research brief provided the following scholarly summary:
Research clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage...There is thus value for children in promoting strong, stable marriages between biological parents.
I feel I am destined to disagree the the majority here on this one and feel nothing to be gained in further input on this one from me

I would say this is the same as ten users of this site having 10 Volvos each of a different year, starting with an 01 plate and finishing with a 10 plate, where the manufacturers added a new safety feature each year. Each car has passed its MOT and servicing. Put the owners in the room and see them argue over who has the safest/unsafest car.
All the cars are safe but the 02 plate is safer than the 01, yet the 03 is safer than the 02, yet the 04 is safer than the 03, etc, etc.
The argument over who is the best to parent is a non-starter. There is no evidence to show any type of partnership harms the child in any way. It is just peoples opinions, prejudice, outlook that clouds their judgement.
The bottom line is the children should be loved and cared for unconditionally. If this can happen by one or two people then I would not care what their sexuality is.
Dave_Notts

18 May 2010

Quote by Dave__Notts
This was cut and paste from here; , only really to show that there are two sides to every story and not every one See's things the same way.
Dual Gender Parenting and Child-rearing:
The research supporting the importance of dual gender parenting and child-rearing is extensive and clear in its singular conclusion: all variables considered, children are best served when reared in a home with a married mother and father. Mothers and fathers contribute in gender specific and in gender-complementary ways to the healthy development of children. Children reap unique developmental benefits when reared in a home with a married, reasonably harmonious union of their own biological mother and father. A Child Trends research brief provided the following scholarly summary:
Research clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage...There is thus value for children in promoting strong, stable marriages between biological parents.
I feel I am destined to disagree the the majority here on this one and feel nothing to be gained in further input on this one from me

I would say this is the same as ten users of this site having 10 Volvos each of a different year, starting with an 01 plate and finishing with a 10 plate, where the manufacturers added a new safety feature each year. Each car has passed its MOT and servicing. Put the owners in the room and see them argue over who has the safest/unsafest car.
All the cars are safe but the 02 plate is safer than the 01, yet the 03 is safer than the 02, yet the 04 is safer than the 03, etc, etc.
The argument over who is the best to parent is a non-starter. There is no evidence to show any type of partnership harms the child in any way. It is just peoples opinions, prejudice, outlook that clouds their judgement.
The bottom line is the children should be loved and cared for unconditionally. If this can happen by one or two people then I would not care what their sexuality is.
Dave_Notts
have you gone nuts dave have you driven a recent vovlo few if any are safe and the yearly servicing bill would right the car off after 4 years
its actually cheaper to run a porsche than a volvo bolt

18 May 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
Am I the only one that forces the issue then? If not why are you singling me out?

Because it is your comments I personally find opinionated, ill-informed and bigoted.

Quote by kentswingers777
I do not agree with the principle of a child is better off with anyone as long as they get all the love and support.

Its not a principle, its proven fact rolleyes

Quote by kentswingers777
In my world a child needs a loving stable relationship to be surrounded with, but with two people being a man and a woman. Of course the hip hop brigade will not agree with that but that is what I was brought up to believe, before we had all this hip hop rubbish brought in.

Strange term, uncalled for. Was it for effect?

Quote by kentswingers777
I do not agree with same sex partners bringing up children as I feel it will influence the child into believing that it is the norm , sorry it is not and what has being on a swingers site got to do with anything?

The norm? The norm is what anyone else wishes it to be :doh:

18 May 2010

Quote by Dawnie

Am I the only one that forces the issue then? If not why are you singling me out?

Because it is your comments I personally find opinionated, ill-informed and bigoted.

Quote by kentswingers777
I do not agree with the principle of a child is better off with anyone as long as they get all the love and support.

Its not a principle, its proven fact rolleyes

Quote by kentswingers777
In my world a child needs a loving stable relationship to be surrounded with, but with two people being a man and a woman. Of course the hip hop brigade will not agree with that but that is what I was brought up to believe, before we had all this hip hop rubbish brought in.

Strange term, uncalled for. Was it for effect?

Quote by kentswingers777
I do not agree with same sex partners bringing up children as I feel it will influence the child into believing that it is the norm , sorry it is not and what has being on a swingers site got to do with anything?

The norm? The norm is what anyone else wishes it to be :doh:
Lets just say you have your opinion and I have mine eh?
The term " hip hop " I use a lot, and no it was not for effect at all.
You are of course entitled to your opinion that my comments are " opinionated, ill informed and that old cookie...bigoted ".
Funny that when a comment does not sit well with someone that word " bigot " is used....remember Gordon Brown recently? Was she bigoted as well?
" a proven fact "...I think from my link you will find there are two arguements to this, and it depends on what side of the fence you sit on.
Still nice to debate with you.

19 May 2010

Quote by Dawnie

Am I the only one that forces the issue then? If not why are you singling me out?

Because it is your comments I personally find opinionated, ill-informed and bigoted.

Quote by kentswingers777
I do not agree with the principle of a child is better off with anyone as long as they get all the love and support.

Its not a principle, its proven fact rolleyes

Quote by kentswingers777
In my world a child needs a loving stable relationship to be surrounded with, but with two people being a man and a woman. Of course the hip hop brigade will not agree with that but that is what I was brought up to believe, before we had all this hip hop rubbish brought in.

Strange term, uncalled for. Was it for effect?

Quote by kentswingers777
I do not agree with same sex partners bringing up children as I feel it will influence the child into believing that it is the norm , sorry it is not and what has being on a swingers site got to do with anything?

The norm? The norm is what anyone else wishes it to be :doh:
this might help

19 May 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
" a proven fact "...I think from my link you will find there are two arguements to this, and it depends on what side of the fence you sit on.

This is where your debating gets a bit confused........even for yourself. You seem to use links that "Prove" your opinion but in the next post you will say but I don't believe this or that.
The link you posted is a perfect example. The against states the bible and religion.....yet you disagree with it as you have posted on religion in the past. Instead of putting up a link as your opinion, put up your opinion and use the link to support it. So instead of refering people to the thread and saying "Guess which one I support", try telling us.
Dave_Notts

19 May 2010

Quote by Dave__Notts

" a proven fact "...I think from my link you will find there are two arguements to this, and it depends on what side of the fence you sit on.

This is where your debating gets a bit confused........even for yourself. You seem to use links that "Prove" your opinion but in the next post you will say but I don't believe this or that.
The link you posted is a perfect example. The against states the bible and religion.....yet you disagree with it as you have posted on religion in the past. Instead of putting up a link as your opinion, put up your opinion and use the link to support it. So instead of refering people to the thread and saying "Guess which one I support", try telling us.
Dave_Notts
I think I have but was then accused of being a bigot.:shock:
As I also stated....was that woman who had a little chat to Brown a bigot too?
It seems you are today after 13 years of Labour rule.
Of course I am opinionated as I am giving my opinion on a public forum.
Still in keeping with Mr. nice guy, I as always Davey take your comments on board.

19 May 2010

The "norm" or "normal" is by definition the thing that most people do. It is absolutely not "anything you want it to be".
It can be context sensitive, i.e. under certain circumstances one type of behaviour would be normal, and that can be different from what would normally be "normal" smile

It is also entirely possible to comment on what is "normal", whether one is "normal" or not. I think I have a good handle on what is normal under most common situations, even though my views and beliefs are far from "normal".

19 May 2010

'THE NORM'

19 May 2010

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
'THE NORM'

That's him! smile

19 May 2010

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
'THE NORM'

:laughabove:
Thanks, you made me smile

19 May 2010

here you go kaz i do believe this is the equality thingy in question banghead

so back to my selective statement innocent

19 May 2010

Quote by Lizaleanrob
here you go kaz i do believe this is the equality thingy in question

so back to my selective statement

The comment there that says...
" Councillor Julian Bell, leader of Ealing’s majority Labour groupsaid: “I hope that the Pink Campaign will encourage more people to come forward help fill the shortage of foster carers and adoptive parents who are desperately needed to provide homes and improve the lives of children and young people who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in care".
The title of the guy sums him up, but more importantly is the rest of it.
See this is what I do not like about minority groups, as it clearly states that there is a shortage of foster carers and adoptive parents, but deem to give a section of the community their own agenda, and I know for a fact that the councils are invited to listen and to take on parents from ethnic backgrounds, and from same sex couples,as they have to be seen to be politically correct.
Why???
There are plenty of decent hardworking people out there who want to adopt, but do people realise the obstacles they put in the way? You almost have to be an angel with wings, unless you come from that section of the community where they are a lot more ready to brush over some things, that " straight " parents would have to fulfill.
Lets just say I know that to be a fact, but for reasons I cannot go into I cannot divulge anymore than that.
What about a blue straight parents only campaign for an evening....would that be allowed?....thought not.

19 May 2010

Don't all prospective adoptive parents have to go through the same process then??

19 May 2010

Quote by Lizaleanrob
here you go kaz i do believe this is the equality thingy in question

so back to my selective statement

Looks like discrimination to me :giggle:

19 May 2010

Looks like a recruitment drive to me....no mention of different rules/criteria...where's the discrimination ??

19 May 2010

The discrimination is done in private where adoption agencies are told to go all out to recruit same sex couples.
In other words ya get more pennies if you recruit a same sex couple over a straight sex couple.....that is a fact but one as I have said is done behind closed doors.....usually in very private rooms.
Not saying they all operate this way but I know of one that does.
They have to show they have their set quotas.

19 May 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
The discrimination is done in private where adoption agencies are told to go all out to recruit same sex couples.
In other words ya get more pennies if you recruit a same sex couple over a straight sex couple.....that is a fact but one as I have said is done behind closed doors.....usually in very private rooms.
Not saying they all operate this way but I know of one that does.
They have to show they have their set quotas.

And you know this how ?

19 May 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
The discrimination is done in private where adoption agencies are told to go all out to recruit same sex couples.
In other words ya get more pennies if you recruit a same sex couple over a straight sex couple.....that is a fact but one as I have said is done behind closed doors.....usually in very private rooms.
Not saying they all operate this way but I know of one that does.
They have to show they have their set quotas.

Unfortunately things like this can and will happen. It is down to everyones professionalism and principals to prevent it from happening.
Yes, those that made the decision are wrong. But so are the people who witnessed it and did nothing to prevent it. Their inaction is the same in my eyes.
Would I stand up and shout? I have and will when I see an injustice being committed
Dave_Notts

19 May 2010

Davey very difficult for this person to say anything, as not only would they get the sack but proving it would be difficult for as I have said, it is done in a private room....but it happens.

19 May 2010

This is where principals come in I am afraid. The job is never worth going against your principals, especially if this is illegal. It speaks bad of the employer to ask the staff and also speaks bad of the employee to keep quiet.
I have been in those situations. I know I can hold my head up, as I have never bent to their will. It all goes down to personal choice if you value the money over what is right. Each has to live with their own decision.
Dave_Notts

19 May 2010

When a person is sacked from that sort of profession they funnily enough would not find another job in that field.
At the end of the day principles are one thing, paying the bills is something completely different.
Deals are done behind closed doors every day of the week, and probably even amongst Ministers...it happens.

19 May 2010

That is not an excuse in my book I am afraid. That person is putting money before the law and their pricipals or professionalism. Perhaps they need a new job.
Sounds harsh but that is my opinion. If they can't do the whole job then they need to look for a new one. Anything else is just an excuse.
As for Ministers or MPs, if they find out they are sacked, they resign or like 5 MPs they face a trial. Abso-bloody-lutely they should..........same as the employee who turns a blind eye.
Dave_Notts

20 May 2010

Quote by Kaznkev
oh and in cases of severe childhood sexual abuse social services may choose to place a child in an all male or all female household as the child is unable to cope with adults the same sex as their abuser.
For example, i know a single woman who adopted a girl aged 6 , i dont think ypu want to know why this little girl screamed for hours when left a blonde man came into the room.

i now see where this is going when a child is so bad the only couple who will adopt them is a homosexual pair of pedophiles
after all i do believe that it is true equality in your books :doh:

20 May 2010

Quote by Kaznkev
oh and in cases of severe childhood sexual abuse social services may choose to place a child in an all male or all female household as the child is unable to cope with adults the same sex as their abuser.
For example, i know a single woman who adopted a girl aged 6 , i dont think ypu want to know why this little girl screamed for hours when left a blonde man came into the room.

i now see where this is going when a child is so bad the only couple who will adopt them is a homosexual pair of pedophiles
after all i do believe that it is true equality in your books :doh:
please tell me you did not just equate homosexuality with peadophilia.
no kaz i think im clear in what i said that under equality as you put it then pedophiles will also be allowed to adopt
and im quiet sure that the looney left and ealing council will hammer the discrimination button if this was not allowed innocent

20 May 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
Davey very difficult for this person to say anything, as not only would they get the sack but proving it would be difficult for as I have said, it is done in a private room....but it happens.

who do they get the 'extra pennies' from?

20 May 2010

Quote by Kaznkev
oh and in cases of severe childhood sexual abuse social services may choose to place a child in an all male or all female household as the child is unable to cope with adults the same sex as their abuser.
For example, i know a single woman who adopted a girl aged 6 , i dont think ypu want to know why this little girl screamed for hours when left a blonde man came into the room.

i now see where this is going when a child is so bad the only couple who will adopt them is a homosexual pair of pedophiles
after all i do believe that it is true equality in your books :doh:
please tell me you did not just equate homosexuality with peadophilia.
no kaz i think im clear in what i said that under equality as you put it then pedophiles will also be allowed to adopt
and im quiet sure that the looney left and ealing council will hammer the discrimination button if this was not allowed innocent

No you said that a homosexual ,whatever that is would be allowed to adopt.
Why,my statements were explaining
1)why there is a severe shortage of foster carers and adopters for certain children/
This means that there is a need to be more inventive in finding suitable people able to offer these children a home.
It has nothing to do with equality!
2)why some children are so tramuatised that they are unable to live in a household which contains a family member the same gender as their abuser.
presumably you believe a child who is suffering must be forced to live with a man and a woman for the sake of your belief in the nuclear family,rather than whats in the best interests of that child.
no kas would it not be discrimination and a lack of equality if the pedophiles where not allowed to adopt if they was homosexual :whistling:
i do believe this is your shout on equality im just pointing out all the possibles :huh:

20 May 2010

Quote by Lizaleanrob
no kas would it not be discrimination and a lack of equality if the pedophiles where not allowed to adopt if they was homosexual
i do believe this is your shout on equality im just pointing out all the possibles :huh:

Very interesting point. Do you know of any paedophiles that have been granted adoption/foster rights after their conviction?
Not knowing much about adoption/foster rules, I believe a conviction may make the application ineligible. Has there been many cases? Or are you talking hypothetical. If you are talking hypothetical then the simple rule of protecting the kids from convicted criminals would be a sensible one if the adults were homosexual, straight, bi, etc. This would be discriminating against them, but allowed in law.
Discrimination is being bandied about as a bad word but it can also be used for good. E.g. discriminating on age: Stopping under 18's from smoking, discriminating on sex: Banning females of child bearing age working with lead/in the lead industry, etc
Dave_Notts

20 May 2010

Quote by Kaznkev
desk meet head.
Why ?
look at my posts,where have i ever said that paedohiles have equal rights,they are clearly not the best people to raise children,i have argued consistently that children should come first.
Why do u believe that paedophiles should be allowed to adopt?

i do believe your complaint was equality well is seems kas you feel by your own admission that some people are more equal than others
i state nothing of what i believe i just show you double standards are afoot you complain to kenty and blue that homosexuals must be allowed to adopt for the sake of equality
now if its a case of equality then everyone should be treated the same correct or is equlity selective as you have me some what confused to what you mean
with that i rest my case this is a selective equality thread quiet simply you are saying that not everyone can adopt in that case not all people are equal ....it is quiet simple you know

:banghead:

20 May 2010

Quote by Dave__Notts

no kas would it not be discrimination and a lack of equality if the pedophiles where not allowed to adopt if they was homosexual
i do believe this is your shout on equality im just pointing out all the possibles :huh:

Very interesting point. Do you know of any paedophiles that have been granted adoption/foster rights after their conviction?
Not knowing much about adoption/foster rules, I believe a conviction may make the application ineligible. Has there been many cases? Or are you talking hypothetical. If you are talking hypothetical then the simple rule of protecting the kids from convicted criminals would be a sensible one if the adults were homosexual, straight, bi, etc. This would be discriminating against them, but allowed in law.
Discrimination is being bandied about as a bad word but it can also be used for good. E.g. discriminating on age: Stopping under 18's from smoking, discriminating on sex: Banning females of child bearing age working with lead/in the lead industry, etc
Dave_Notts
thank you dave im not very good at putting my case across at times i am just pointing out the rules of equality
and yes all hypothetical
what about suspected pedophiles ??