[Paul Kersey]

Originally Posted by Will1999

He starts rambling on about stuff that has nothing to do with it.

Wanna kill him? Hang him?

[Jason.]

It's because he's a politician. Most of them do the same thing. Having irrelevant answers to questions so they don't look as bad.

[MrWong]

Originally Posted by ThriceShy

Because you are deliberately, with forethought, putting a child in a home without a mother.

How the **** can that be a good thing?

Would you rather they stay in a childrens home with no mother or father?

[ThriceShy]

Originally Posted by Mitchell

Its certainly not unhealthy? What about all those hundreds of people who have abusive mothers who beat up their children? Two dads and two mums can do just as good as a job as a man and a woman, its the person inside not the persons identity.

Its not a selfish view at all, providing people have one loving parent, that is fine for me.

Children need a mother. That is why nature has seen women giving birth to children and nursing them for the last 100,000 years.

[cheapbbfan]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Its polite to answer a questions when asked. Especially as when asked if he stood by what he said. he said as I recall 'Hell Yes' If he's that adamant he should be able to explain why he takes this stance.

he explained himself in the house. If Emma wanted answers, she should watch the tapes. He was being goaded into saying more controversial stuff so this show would have further material to attack him with. If you give an idiot a rope, they'll hang themselves. He did his best not to let them put him in a position to do that bc anything he would have said would have been met with scrutiny. Opposers of him may want to deny that but you know its true

[Will.]

I'd love to have gay parents, they always seem to bring there children up in such a pleasant manner and go the extra mile.

ALL YOU NEED IS 2 LOVING PARENTS! IT DOESN'T ****ING MATTER ABOUT THEIR GODAMN SEXUALITY, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Shaun

For someone so against the gays he sure can't give a straight answer

[Mitchell]

Originally Posted by ThriceShy

Children need a mother. That is why nature has seen women giving birth to children and nursing them for the last 100,000 years.

Children need a mother to be born congratulations, doesn't mean that they need a mother and a father does it? I've never felt appreciated with my Dad, I've coped extremely well with one loving parent, so why should a child be denied of loving parents just because they didn't squeeze them out of their fanny? (Obviously lesbians want to adopt too and should be allowed to, more loving parents are what we should be encouraging.)

[ThriceShy]

Originally Posted by MrWong

Would you rather they stay in a childrens home with no mother or father?

No. I would rather they went to a mother and father.

[Vicky.]

Its not just this, he doesn't give a straight answer to anything from what I have seen, always rambly. Very...politician like

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by cheapbbfan

he explained himself in the house. If Emma wanted answers, she should watch the tapes. He was being goaded into saying more controversial stuff so this show would have further material to attack him with. If you give an idiot a rope, they'll hang themselves. He did his best not to let them put him in a position to do that bc anything he would have said would have been met with scrutiny. Opposers of him may want to deny that but you know its true

No. HE started waffling on about boxing, his support for the homeless, all Emma did was get him back on track.

As for giving him enough rope to hang himself? No one forced him into saying what he said so I dont get that he was lead in any way or baited. He made his comment with little provocation and failed to stand by them.,

[reece(:]

Originally Posted by ThriceShy

Because you are deliberately, with forethought, putting a child in a home without a mother.

How the **** can that be a good thing?

If a mother was deceased or couldn't handle children and the dad was on his own it would be child abuse?

[LukeB]

Originally Posted by cheapbbfan

his view on gay adoption is irrelevant to this show so thats quite fitting

it's only fair since Tila got removed over her comments.

[Mitchell]

Originally Posted by ThriceShy

No. I would rather they went to a mother and father.

Its not even worth trying to explain something to you, its obvious you are stuck in your ancient discriminating ways and seem to pride yourself on deciding that gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt, you're probably one of those imbeciles who think gays shouldn't be allowed to donate blood incase they spread gayness

[joeysteele]

He won't give a straight answer because likely the real truth and real answer is he does hold the view that gay adoption is child abuse.
Also that he stands firmly by his distorted and prejudiced comments which by the fact he will not retract any part of it, shows the quote is in fact totally his.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by LukeB

it's only fair since Tila got removed over her comments.

Which was also quite stupid, as offensive as their views are...they were said/done before BB, and as such producers knew about it before casting them.

[ThriceShy]

Originally Posted by Mitchell

Its not even worth trying to explain something to you, its obvious you are stuck in your ancient discriminating ways and seem to pride yourself on deciding that gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt, you're probably one of those imbeciles who think gays shouldn't be allowed to donate blood incase they spread gayness

Nice strawman.

If you are going to make up arguments I have never said then I think we will leave it there.

You said this would be fun so I had high hopes for a decent debate with you. Boy, was I disappointed.

[Mitchell]

Originally Posted by ThriceShy

Nice strawman.

If you are going to make up arguments I have never said then I think we will leave it there.

You said this would be fun so I had high hopes for a decent debate with you. Boy, was I disappointed.

I did have fun actually, it was a right laugh reading you clutching at straws trying to prove to me why adoption by homosexual couples was child abuse, maybe we should meet next week for more fabby fun

[ThriceShy]

Originally Posted by Mitchell

I did have fun actually, it was a right laugh reading you clutching at straws trying to prove to me why adoption by homosexual couples was child abuse, maybe we should meet next week for more fabby fun

You are a glutton for punishment I will give you that.

If you think that resorting to "I bet you think all gays have AIDS", like you just did, is winning then I have news for you I'm afraid.

[Mitchell]

Originally Posted by ThriceShy

You are a glutton for punishment I will give you that.

If you think that resorting to "I bet you think all gays have AIDS", like you just did, is winning then I have news for you I'm afraid.

Did the words "I bet you think all gays have AIDS" come out of my mouth honey? Did I insinuate that in any way what so ever?

If so, you need to get your eyes tested love because you are seeing things that aren't there x

[smudgie]

I want to know why nobody asked him the correct question.he had already answered that he does believe it's wrong and that it could cause child abuse.
Surely the question that should have been asked is what exactly does he mean by abuse?
Is he of the old fashioned opinion that such children would face ridicule and bullying at school and from their peers.
If so, then he needs to understand that the only way to stop this happening is to make it more normal for same sex parenting.
Children are cruel, if a child loses one of its parents due to bereavement they can end up being bullied as well, it is purely down to the ignorance of the other children, they don't like anything different or out of the ordinary that they don't understand, so surely the more they see that it is quite normal and ok for same sex parents the better.
If he is on about any other kind of abuse then I don't have a clue where he gets that skewered idea.
I can understand his Christian upbringing saying its not allowed for man to lay with man etc. in the bible, but I have never heard anything about child abuse in the bible.

[ThriceShy]

Originally Posted by smudgie

I want to know why nobody asked him the correct question.he had already answered that he does believe it's wrong and that it could cause child abuse.
Surely the question that should have been asked is what exactly does he mean by abuse?
Is he of the old fashioned opinion that such children would face ridicule and bullying at school and from their peers.
If so, then he needs to understand that the only way to stop this happening is to make it more normal for same sex parenting.
Children are cruel, if a child loses one of its parents due to bereavement they can end up being bullied as well, it is purely down to the ignorance of the other children, they don't like anything different or out of the ordinary that they don't understand, so surely the more they see that it is quite normal and ok for same sex parents the better.
If he is on about any other kind of abuse then I don't have a clue where he gets that skewered idea.
I can understand his Christian upbringing saying its not allowed for man to lay with man etc. in the bible, but I have never heard anything about child abuse in the bible.

Why should he have to justify his views to anyone?

I certainly wouldn't. I would have said "Its my opinion." And those would have been my last 3 words on the subject.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by smudgie

I want to know why nobody asked him the correct question.he had already answered that he does believe it's wrong and that it could cause child abuse.
Surely the question that should have been asked is what exactly does he mean by abuse?
Is he of the old fashioned opinion that such children would face ridicule and bullying at school and from their peers.
If so, then he needs to understand that the only way to stop this happening is to make it more normal for same sex parenting.
Children are cruel, if a child loses one of its parents due to bereavement they can end up being bullied as well, it is purely down to the ignorance of the other children, they don't like anything different or out of the ordinary that they don't understand, so surely the more they see that it is quite normal and ok for same sex parents the better.
If he is on about any other kind of abuse then I don't have a clue where he gets that skewered idea.
I can understand his Christian upbringing saying its not allowed for man to lay with man etc. in the bible, but I have never heard anything about child abuse in the bible.

They did ask that, multiple times

[cheapbbfan]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

No. HE started waffling on about boxing, his support for the homeless, all Emma did was get him back on track.

As for giving him enough rope to hang himself? No one forced him into saying what he said so I dont get that he was lead in any way or baited. He made his comment with little provocation and failed to stand by them.,

Because he didnt want to answer and he should have been straight forward with that. If I were him, Id have told Emma straight up that I no longer wanted to talk about that subject. We can discuss my time in the house. Next.

he never said that in the house. It was completely irrelevant to the game and should have never been brought into this. He has NO reason to justify anything he said or did outside of this house. Had he been going around telling that comment to others in the house, it would have been a different story but he chose to keep his opinions to himself till BB forced this upon him. He doesnt need to respond to that

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

They did ask that, multiple times

I must have missed it, multiple times.
All I could hear was did he say it, why did he say it, not what he actually meant by abuse.