Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Warning: This thread is pretty gay

Warning: This thread is pretty gay (Page 29)
Thread Tools
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 5, 2015, 10:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
It's interesting to note that Carson's position on sexuality and the UKs are extreme opposites.
Are they? Officially, maybe, but his attitudes are pretty typical in the UK, at least from my experience.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2015, 07:43 AM
 
This has already happened in Canada, to a Bishop no less. While he was not arested, he was charged with a hate crime.
Conservative Activist L.Brent Bozell Predicts That Priests Will Be Arrested for Opposing Gay Marriage
45/47
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2015, 11:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Are they? Officially, maybe, but his attitudes are pretty typical in the UK, at least from my experience.
I'm saying the perspective. The logic is strangely parallel. Carson is living under the "suck one dick and you're gay forever" philosophy, UK seems to be the coming from the other direction – no matter how much you scissor, if you have kids, you're straight.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
I guess we're done talking about lay minsters?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2015, 11:37 AM
 
I'm not saying it's over, but it's over.
Here Are The 379 Companies Urging The Supreme Court To Support Same-Sex Marriage
All that's left is the wailing and gnashing of teeth.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2015, 01:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post

I guess we're done talking about lay minsters?
Yep, because teachers, according to the USCCB guidelines, are lay ministers.
45/47
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2015, 01:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I'm not saying it's over, but it's over.
Here Are The 379 Companies Urging The Supreme Court To Support Same-Sex Marriage
All that's left is the wailing and gnashing of teeth.
I see the Rainbow Shirts have been busy.
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2015, 02:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Yep, because teachers, according to the USCCB guidelines, are lay ministers.
But according to their contract, they're not. At least in San Francisco.

Contract law > Bishop's guidelines
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2015, 02:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
I see the Rainbow Shirts have been busy.
I'm sure Tim Cook needed to resort to threats to get Apple on the list.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2015, 02:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Yep, because teachers, according to the USCCB guidelines, are lay ministers.
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
And you have no problem with the Church limiting the free speech rights of people outside of work just because they're signing their checks?
---

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
I see the Rainbow Shirts have been busy.
They managed to coerce 379 companies? If that's the case they deserve it.

Look who else they coerced!
More than 300 veteran Republican lawmakers, operatives and consultants have filed a friend of the court brief at the Supreme Court in support of same-sex marriage late Thursday.
Among the signatories are 23 current and former Republicans members of the House of Representatives and Senate and seven current and former Governors. Sens. Susan Collins and Mark Kirk have signed onto the brief, as has Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman. Other notables include former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal and billionaire GOP mega-donor David Koch.
Not surprisingly most of the politicians currently aren't in office, and the ones that are look to be from blue states.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2015, 04:07 PM
 
In before the RINO comments.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2015, 04:00 PM
 
45/47
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 10:19 AM
 
50 years from now even the Catholics will think it was daft that anyone ever had a problem with homosexuality.
OK, maybe 150 years.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 12:59 PM
 
Hmm, they said the same thing about ordaining women, divorce, abortion, birth control, .....
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 01:28 PM
 
Yeah, but I can't help but notice Catholics tend to leave things at speaking their mind rather than political activism. Even on this subject, now.

It wasn't the Catholics who messed with Prop 8.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 02:33 PM
 
Except for the death penalty and abortion, they're very political on those issues.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 02:47 PM
 
Didn't they kinda give up on abortion? At least in the US?
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 03:01 PM
 
The 1100 little white crosses outside my local RC parish, accompanied by a huge sign that reads, "Each cross represents 1000 abortions in the USA each year, vote your conscience", say probably not.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 03:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Yeah, but I can't help but notice Catholics tend to leave things at speaking their mind rather than political activism. Even on this subject, now.

It wasn't the Catholics who messed with Prop 8.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Except for the death penalty and abortion, they're very political on those issues.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Didn't they kinda give up on abortion? At least in the US?
Someone needs to inform the Archbishop of San Francisco.
S.F. Archbishop's imposition of morality clause at schools outrages many - LA Times
San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone sparked a protest last summer when he ignored pleas from public officials to cancel his plans to march in Washington, D.C., against same-sex marriage.

Now Cordileone has prompted fresh outrage in the liberal Bay Area by imposing morality clauses on teachers, staff and administrators at the four high schools under his control in San Francisco, Marin and San Mateo counties.

A newly released handbook asks the nearly 500 school employees to "affirm and believe" that "adultery, masturbation, fornication, the viewing of pornography and homosexual relations" are "gravely evil." Artificial-reproductive technology, contraception and abortion are described similarly.

The "fundamental demands of justice," it continues, "require that the civil law preserve the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman."
There are 40 Days for Life events in almost every Diocese.
https://40daysforlife.com

Some how there press seems to miss nearly 1 million people gathering in DC for the last 40+ years on the anniversary of Roe V Wade.
March for Life
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 03:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
The 1100 little white crosses outside my local RC parish, accompanied by a huge sign that reads, "Each cross represents 1000 abortions in the USA each year, vote your conscience", say probably not.
Honest question:

Vote your conscience on what? Is there specific legislation in question?
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 03:23 PM
 
It's been up since before the state general election, it appears they were wanting to influence people to vote for candidates with strong pro-life positions.

Edit: Of course, the irony there is that the people who are strongly pro-life are usually very pro-execution.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 03:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
It's been up since before the state general election, it appears they were wanting to influence people to vote for candidates with strong pro-life positions.

Edit: Of course, the irony there is that the people who are strongly pro-life are usually very pro-execution.
I have been one to believe that the last person who deserved the death penalty was Ted Bundy. In reading the Catechism I found I was already in line with the Churches teaching on the death penalty. Western countries have the ability to lock people up and keep them there. In those countries the death penalty is not needed, except with the rare cases like Ted Bundy. I would never be seated on a jury where the death penalty is sought because of that belief. I understand Catholics were excused from the Boston Bomber trail for that reason.

CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 2267
2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 03:41 PM
 
I'm confused... why would you give it to Bundy? He's not really a threat in prison.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 03:52 PM
 
WRT Catholic activism, I guess the differentiation I'm thinking of is throwing money at the cause.

I can't think of the last time the RCC went "okay, we're personally taking this down" the way the LDS did with Prop 8.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 04:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'm confused... why would you give it to Bundy? He's not really a threat in prison.
Bundy managed to escape more than once and killed more women. I would also consider the death penalty for inmates who kill other inmates.
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 05:49 PM
 
Gotcha. Makes sense. Wasn't familiar with Bundy's escape.

I was going to say something similar WRT killing other inmates (or guards).
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2015, 11:42 PM
 
Yeah, that's my sticking point. Very dangerous criminals are still a danger to other prisoners, some who may simply be serving time for much lesser offenses. If it's a circumstance where there's no doubt whatsoever the person committed numerous murders, I don't have a problem with them being injected, electrocuted, gassed, shot, or hung. Society, all of it, is better off without them. There simply aren't that many cases like that, however.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2015, 10:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
I think the anti-gay angle is overplayed.
"No chemical offsprings and rented uterus: life has a natural flow, there are things that should not be changed”
“I call children of chemistry, synthetic children. Uteri [for] rent, semen chosen from a catalog.”
Nothing about that applies only to gays. Far from it. It's more anti-science.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2015, 10:21 AM
 
Other than adoption, donated eggs and surrogate mothers are the only way male SS couples can obatain children. This is an example, albiet extreme, of why the Church is agianst IVF. Lets hope this doesn't become common place.
Mother tells of giving birth to gay son's baby after surrogate pregnancy - Telegraph
The mother of a gay man has told how she gave birth to his baby after a surrogate pregnancy.
Anne-Marie Casson, 46, gave birth to a boy, Miles, who is now eight months old, after she became pregnant with a donor egg fertilised by the sperm of her son Kyle Casson.
45/47
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2015, 11:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Other than adoption, donated eggs and surrogate mothers are the only way male SS couples can obatain children.
Don't forget, they shit on the concept of sperm donors as well.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
This is an example, albiet extreme, of why the Church is agianst IVF.
I don't see the correlation. Isn't the church against IVF because unused eggs being disposed (devaluing life)? The premise of that belief has nothing to do with gays.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
I fail to see the problem, unless it's something as absurd as considering the grandmother the mother because she housed the kid for 9 months or something as mundane as the gays actually got a kid. If its neither...?

---

It's funny, I see the end of the abortion debate looming once we can house fetuses in artificial wombs, but you make me wonder if that won't cause new disapproval.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2015, 12:31 PM
 
I don't see the correlation. Isn't the church against IVF because unused eggs being disposed (devaluing life)? The premise of that belief has nothing to do with gays
It's also because it separates the martial act from the procreative act.
Begotten Not Made: A Catholic View of Reproductive Technology
Instruction on respect for human life
45/47
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2015, 01:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
It's also because it separates the martial act from the procreative act.
Begotten Not Made: A Catholic View of Reproductive Technology
Instruction on respect for human life
Right, has nothing to do with gays.

So, my point stands. D&G just parroted Catholic dogma that's anti-science. Gays are just collateral damage.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2015, 01:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Right, has nothing to do with gays.

So, my point stands. D&G just parroted Catholic dogma that's anti-science. Gays are just collateral damage.
When they use surrogates to obtain children, it does. Tell me how two men or two women can bear children without using outside means.
Anti-Science?
NaProTECHNOLOGY A Major Breakthrough In Monitoring and Maintaining a Woman's Reproductive and Gynecological Health
NaProTECHNOLOGY (Natural Procreative Technology) is a new women's health science that monitors and maintains a woman's reproductive and gynecological health. It provides medical and surgical treatments that cooperate completely with the reproductive system.

Thirty years of scientific research in the study of the normal and abnormal states of the menstrual and fertility cycles have unraveled their mysteries.
Pope Paul VI Institute for the Study of Human Reproduction
45/47
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2015, 07:32 PM
 
Elton John is calling for a boycott of D&G
45/47
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2015, 12:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Tell me how two men or two women can bear children without using outside means.
Not surprisingly, you're not listening. You're so concerned with framing this as anti-gay that you're refusing to acknowledge that it's offensive to anyone, gay or straight, that relies on medicine to get pregnant.

---

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Lets hope this doesn't become common place.
You didn't explain what 'this' is, BTW.


You never answered this question, either:
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
And you have no problem with the Church limiting the free speech rights of people outside of work just because they're signing their checks?
Here's to hoping you don't suddenly disappear for a few days again.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2015, 02:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Originally Posted by Chongo
Tell me how two men or two women can bear children without using outside means.
Not surprisingly, you're not listening. You're so concerned with framing this as anti-gay that you're refusing to acknowledge that it's offensive to anyone, gay or straight, that relies on medicine to get pregnant.
The Church takes no issue with medical technology that assists the body with fertility. It does take issue with technology that thwarts or sidesteps fertility. Using IVF or artificial insemination separates the the conjugal act from the procreative act. NaproTechnology uses methods that assists the body in achieving fertility with having to resort to going outside of the conjugal act.

Prior to the advent of IVF and surrogacy, how did same sex couples become parents?

Originally Posted by Chongo
Lets hope this doesn't become common place.
You didn't explain what 'this' is, BTW.
It was in reference to the mother being a surrogate mother for her son using his sperm and a purchased egg
You never answered this question, either:
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar
And you have no problem with the Church limiting the free speech rights of people outside of work just because they're signing their checks?
Here's to hoping you don't suddenly disappear for a few days again.
When it comes to employees of the Church advocating policies that are in direct opposition to the teaching of the Church, no.

All our free speech rights are limited by those who sign our paychecks, some more than others. I can't say or do anything that "creates a hostile work environment."

Did you have a problem with the ousting of the Mozilla CEO for using his free speech rights outside of work?

Do see anyone working for Nancy "abortion is sacred ground" Pelosi giving speeches at the annual March for Life? How long do you think, say her Chief of Staff would have a job if they were to appear and give a speech at the March for Life?
45/47
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2015, 11:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
The Church takes no issue with medical technology that assists the body with fertility. It does take issue with technology that thwarts or sidesteps fertility.
This is lawyerly talk. Which, by the way, you use a staggering amount of to defend church policy. The need to categorize how medical science gets someone pregnant is troublesome.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Prior to the advent of IVF and surrogacy, how did same sex couples become parents?
It doesn't matter with regards to D&G overall view of medical science.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
It was in reference to the mother being a surrogate mother for her son using his sperm and a purchased egg
...and why is this bad?

---

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
When it comes to employees of the Church advocating policies that are in direct opposition to the teaching of the Church, no.
Well that's pretty vile.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
All our free speech rights are limited by those who sign our paychecks, some more than others. I can't say or do anything that "creates a hostile work environment."
I don't see how not towing the line in your private time creates a 'hostile' work environment.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Did you have a problem with the ousting of the Mozilla CEO for using his free speech rights outside of work?
Oh my god yes. That entire campaign was one of the most infuriating things I've been witness to in a while. The blanket opposition didn't take anytime to consider the scope and depth of his actions and instead indicted him under some type of idealogical purity. In a position, I might add, where his belief had almost no bearing.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
How long do you think, say her Chief of Staff would have a job if they were to appear and give a speech at the March for Life?
There's a difference between large-scale speeches for the media and being able to express your thoughts outside of work. Besides the absurdity of a pro-life person working for someone who actively would work against their beliefs.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2015, 04:29 PM
 
Lawyerly? It's real easy. Getting pregnant or producing children by means other than the conjugal act is a no no. Getting medical help to concieve through the conjugal act is premissable. That's what Naprotechnology is about.

You see no problem with using your mother to bear children via IVF and purchased ovum? This what D&G are talking about, epecially paid surrogates. The news is filled with stories of people who find out one or more of the children the surrogate is carrying have problems, then either bail on the mother or try to force her to have an abortion.

Australian family refuses Down Syndrome baby from Thai surrogate | KHON2

Sherri Shepherd's Surrogate Slams Her For Acting Like 'Baby Is Non-Existent' (VIDEO)

Try working for Coke and leaving Taco Bell wrappers or Pepsi cans in you car.




You still need to answer the question: Before IVF and surrogcay, how did same sex couple become parents?
( Last edited by Chongo; Mar 18, 2015 at 10:31 PM. )
45/47
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2015, 07:49 AM
 
There's a difference between large-scale speeches for the media and being able to express your thoughts outside of work. Besides the absurdity of a pro-life person working for someone who actively would work against their beliefs
I guess not.
Celebs slam Catholic school teacher's anti-gay post
Immaculata suspends teacher for anti-gay Facebook rant
45/47
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2015, 05:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
There's a difference between large-scale speeches for the media and being able to express your thoughts outside of work. Besides the absurdity of a pro-life person working for someone who actively would work against their beliefs.
Can you tell me what that difference is? AFAIC, the Bill of Rights makes no distinction between "work-speech" and "at-home speech". Both are in the private domain, unless you work for the gov't.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2015, 07:45 AM
 
Then there is this:
Fertility doctors convene.
The issue of IVF babies' health burst into the open two years ago, when a group of researchers published a controversial study in the New England Journal of Medicine. The study found that IVF children were more than twice as likely as naturally conceived children to have been diagnosed with a major birth defect by 1-year-old. They were also more likely to be delivered by C-section, to have low birth weight, and to be born before term. Subsequent studies, including two published this year in Obstetrics & Gynecology, have confirmed the findings and added to the list of possible complications, suggesting a greater propensity among IVF babies for certain cancers, such as retinoblastoma, as well as urogenital problems. Meanwhile, pediatricians working with a group of children suffering from Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome, a condition in which they are prone to disproportionate growth and with it cancerous tumors, found—entirely by happenstance—a higher percentage of IVF children than in the ordinary population.
There are articles cropping up like these as well.
We Are Synthetic Children And We Agree With Dolce & Gabbana
45/47
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2015, 11:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Can you tell me what that difference is?
The amount of attention they attract, and by extension, the likelihood of pissing of your employer.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2015, 11:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Lawyerly? It's real easy. Getting pregnant or producing children by means other than the conjugal act is a no no. Getting medical help to concieve through the conjugal act is premissable. That's what Naprotechnology is about.
As I said, it's being very picky about the method. Both are medical science. SEX MUST HAPPEN is a crazy policy.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
You see no problem with using your mother to bear children via IVF and purchased ovum?
Do I see a problem? Let me go bold for this: Not only is not a problem, I think surrogacy might be one of the most loving acts a mother could provide for her children. She is giving her children the gift she received with their birth. The only negative is you could accuse her of being selfish because, you know, grandkids.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
This what D&G are talking about, epecially paid surrogates.
I didn't see anything so specific in their quotes, so you'll have to post that for me.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
The news is filled with stories of people who find out one or more of the children the surrogate is carrying have problems, then either bail on the mother or try to force her to have an abortion.
A. Filled? LOL
B. A few people being bad parents doesn't mean the practice should end (If this is widespread, please posts some stats). After all if we did that, non-marital sex might be outlawed because of deadbeat parents. (Go ahead, tell us you'd be ok with that)

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Try working for Coke and leaving Taco Bell wrappers or Pepsi cans in you car.
I must be losing my mind, because it seems to me you're saying that just having trash from a competing company in your private car is cause enough to get fired.


Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
You still need to answer the question: Before IVF and surrogcay, how did same sex couple become parents?
I don't see why I need to answer the question. If you have a point to make, make it.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2015, 11:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Then there is this:
Fertility doctors convene.
If the science shows that it's bad medicine (i.e., there's a lot for complications lowering the quality of life for the child), then I can support minimizing it for logical reasons. Religion can go take a hike, however.

But let's be honest here: You church gave you the conclusion, and now you're off finding reasons to back it up. If IVF kids were proven to be 100% the same as everyone else tomorrow, your stance wouldn't budge.


Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
There are articles cropping up like these as well.
We Are Synthetic Children And We Agree With Dolce & Gabbana
For a multitude of reasons—his background, my personality and beliefs, our lack of biological connection—the cards were stacked against our having a conventional, loving father-daughter relationship. And we didn’t.

One of the greatest tragedies of donor conception is the loss of belonging: to family, to a culture. Essentially, one becomes malleable like an infant. I crave a home. I see myself as I travel in many directions—doing anything in order to find one.
I don't see how this is any different than adopted kids.

Also:
Team Elton, and the media that surround them, seem to think that this discussion is about gay parents.
Team Chongo, too.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2015, 11:36 AM
 
The quote in question
In the interview, Dolce is quoted as saying that making babies “must be an act of love… You are born to a mother and a father – or at least that’s how it should be. I call children of chemistry, synthetic children. Rented uterus, semen chosen from a catalog.” And Gabbana chimed in, “The family is not a fad. In it there is a supernatural sense of belonging.”
( Last edited by Chongo; Mar 20, 2015 at 11:46 AM. )
45/47
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2015, 11:45 AM
 
I must be losing my mind, because it seems to me you're saying that just having trash from a competing company in your private car is cause enough to get fired.
The cola wars get personal - Jun. 16, 2003
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The big difference between drinking a Coke or a Pepsi could be a pink slip, as one Coke employee discovered Thursday.

The Teamsters union alleges a Coke (KO: Research, Estimates) delivery truck driver was fired for drinking a Pepsi (PEP: Research, Estimates) on the job in violation of Coke's policies intended to prevent slander against the company and its products.

"Coke's reason for getting rid of him was for drinking the competitor's product," said Jim Santangelo, a Teamsters representative.

Santangelo said Rick Bronson, a driver who had been with Coca-Cola Bottling Co. for 12 years, had just completed a delivery to a California store called Smart and Final. Bronson purchased a Pepsi at the store and headed to a back room to take a break.

Bronson was wearing his Coke uniform and was on company time when he drank the offending Pepsi.

Someone spotted Bronson and notified the company, Santangelo said.
I have been told by cowokers who have family members that work for Coca Cola that drivers shall not eat at Taco Bell, KFC, Long John Silver, Pizza Hut or any other YUM! brand restaurants during work hours.
45/47
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2015, 01:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
The quote in question
Thank you. I do have... concerns about surrogates for hire. A lot of bad stories about that. 'Designer' sperm, not so much.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
during work hours.
BOOM. A delivery truck driver. Not in his car, and not on his private time. Not the most reasonable policy, but rational enough.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2015, 12:55 PM
 
If the problem is designer babies, then let the non-designer ones through.

If the non-designer ones aren't acceptable, framing the issue in terms of designer babies is the height of intellectual dishonesty. The same goes if the issue is surrogates for hire.

If it's your belief a loving, married couple where the husband shoots blanks doesn't get to avail themselves of IVF, then man-up and eat the shit sandwich you've just made for yourself.

If no IVF for anyone is what God wants, don't you think he'll notice you pushing the plate away?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 2, 2015, 01:14 PM
 
Lemme check something here...

Yup... still don't think you should force Catholics to cater SSWs.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 2, 2015, 05:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Lemme check something here...

Yup... still don't think you should force Catholics to cater SSWs.

You may not, but that are people out there waiting to do just that.
45/47
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 2, 2015, 05:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
BOOM. A delivery truck driver. Not in his car, and not on his private time. Not the most reasonable policy, but rational enough.
Lunch breaks are considered off-the-clock. You're not acting as an agent of the company and if you're hourly, you're not getting paid.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:55 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,