Is any particular parental figure a complete necessity when raising a child? No, of course not. But does it concern me that fathers and men generally seem to have fewer and fewer rights when it comes to family law? Yes, very much.

And I'm not rising to it.

In the last paragraph.

and that still goes on even till this day.

What are you even on about?

I've never experienced the situation. I do know that I would have taken the piss A LOT out of any kid at school if we'd have found out that he had two mums. It's what kids do.

are monster what variety bothers me not.

when everyone else at school has a mummy and a daddy"

Exactly. They'll end up getting into a fight with Sting's son and that could lead to all sorts of embarrassing situations.

what about male gay couples? will they be given easier access to adoption? obviously they can't grow there won but, if they want to adopt should they be given special dispensation adn bumped up the list of adoptive couples.

the child would probably be bullied at school but this has nothing to with whether it's been adopted or not.
Surely if you are worried about the child's well-being in a family with two mums neither and adoption nor IVF would be acceptable for you?

i don't see why two women can't have a child together using IVF.

why can't you use the same argument about adoption for heterosexual couples? what makes them so much more special?

so the child would have 2 mums instead of a mum and a dad. who really cares? really. wow, a kid may get teased. kids get teased for wearing the wrong pair of shoes. kids are shits. essentially.

i wouldn't mind, no. as long as both my mothers cared and loved me. and surely that's the most important thing.

that same sex couples shouldn't have children purely because kids at school would be cunts about it still baffles me beyond belief.

last night with regards to the human and embryology bill whilst watching the parliamentary debate for hours on end.

In this particular case I agree (unusually) with CG that a father figure is hugely important in a child's life.

but i would imagine that there are checks in place to make sure the people going for IVF are worthy of being parents. As such this seems no worse than allowing people to have children from a one night stand. In fact the pressence of two parents would add more stability.

on the whole i think if we can make children for infertile couples, and we can allow for homosexual couples to exist, then i have no problem. though i would like rights for gay men to fall further inline with gay women.

I agree though, but I DO think this argument can be used against heterosexual couples. If you can't have kids, you can't have kids. Adopt a kid man, adopt one.

Your hypothetical question is amusing. The IVF in-itself is unnatural. And since your post implies you don't mind lesbian couples adopting, I can't see what your problem is with homosexual couples in particular having IVF.

In any case, I don't agree with the ruling. It discriminates against men and devalues their reproductive role. As a consequence fathers are less likely to see themselves as important in children's lives. Come on people. Haven't we had enough of that? I fucking have.

Nor common sense, because that doesn't exist.

Nature? Not for us so far, but the father is a much smaller figure in other species. Nature sets a precedent for it.

This said, although I very much agree with the permission for lesbian couples to have children via IVF, there's not enough being done to safeguard the rights of fathers. These should be entirely separate issues, and I think it's pretty wrong that they're lumped together.

than be picked on at school.

What are the practical, environmental and financial costs of IVF? This would influence my opinion on the matter much more than issues regarding nature, parenting roles or sexuality

"I think this is absurd. It goes against everything: nature, common sense, logic, science"

you suck for writing that. goes against nature? are you homophobic as well?

as for the rest of them, common sense/logic/science. as far as i know science only proves that a man and a woman are needed in the reproductive process, and i imagine they still are, i was unaware it had proven every child needs a father.

maybe the point with the other two issues is that people might be okay thinking that two women having and raising a child isnt 'weird' and 'unnatural', or at least, if its made legal the general public and people like yourself might be able to come to terms with it, so 'logic/commonsense' arent so rooted in the 19th century as you seem to be suggesting they are, maybe i'm naive in thinking that, i dunno.

i dont really get why its any better or even different for a lesbian couple to adopt a child than it is for them to use ivf. im sure explaining to a child he/she is adopted would be equally if not more traumatic.

This is never the case. Children grow up with many different family units.

I am in a same-sex relationship at the moment, may be in the future and may decide to have kids. I don't know how I'll feel in the future about all this vs adoption. You can't know until you've been there.

Saying that if a gay couple can't make a baby, they should just adopt one - why don't you go say that to infertile straight couples?

Being bullied at school - kids aren't born racist and homophobic, these things are projected onto them by adults.

All of this fuss still baffles me... when a loving couple want kids why not help them? If a 13-year old/crackhead/family with 9 kids on the dole can make a baby without asking permission.