POFUsers.com - Plenty of Fish Users Forum

Never mind the "necessity" of two parents depserate for a child, it's the social engineering, the politically corect social engineering that is going on that disturbs me...

My statement is:
So the fruits of our politically correct social engineering is hitting back... I feel this is just gonna be the tip of the disastrous iceberg, but as usual the PC brigade will bury their denying heads in the sand for you to discuss:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... ds-newsxml

Are there teabaggers in the UK too?

'I was conceived in a petri dish by artificial insemination at a Harley Street Clinic in London,' she says,

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... z0twe8bECU

AaaH! "Inquisitive inquiring mind, a stubborn streak, and a deep-seated resentment...
A typical 'Pyrexian'"





I don't understand what we're supposed to be arguing about....
Are you saying that wanking is a "sin"...?

I don't understand what we're supposed to be arguing about....
Are you saying that wanking is a "sin"...?

Maybe read the article and make your mind up if you need to debate the topic..

I would be worried about the psychological affect it will have on our generation, not knowing your true identity. That part/void will never be filled.

Also I have something to throw in the pot! so to speak

It is a scientific fact that relatives can sometimes get their biological attachment mixed up with feelings of want/need and attraction.. Hence the amount of cousin marriages..
What happens if these children meet up with their blood relatives, fall in love have children?..
Is this one of the reasons the rise in disabled children are on the increase?.. Just a thought

Storm wrote:Also I have something to throw in the pot! so to speak

(dubbbull tayke) I THOUGHT YE SAID Also I have something to GROW in the pot! so to speak ... I'm needing that bike ride...

Jo, wots a pie... I mean pyrexian (answers on a tisue, in crayon )?

Maybe read the article and make your mind up if you need to debate the topic..

Can you tell me where you saw the parts about "social engineering" in the article?

Humphrey Osmond wrote:

Maybe read the article and make your mind up if you need to debate the topic..

Can you tell me where you saw the parts about "social engineering" in the article?

Something about "thinking for oneself" is missed somewhere?

All the dots are there to join up, but I'll leave this for now (as indeed I believe the article does) as I am going out and have work to do:

"The last word goes to ethics expert Josephine Quintavalle: 'All the time legislation is moving to accommodate the interests of the adult who wants a child, but the child's interests are most important.
'In the interests of political correctness, our society has decided that a father can be anyone or nobody. But did anyone ask the child how they feel about this?'

Often the child's interests and well being in the pursuit of selfish politically correct interests, are not considered...

saddle-tramp wrote:

Humphrey Osmond wrote:

Maybe read the article and make your mind up if you need to debate the topic..

Can you tell me where you saw the parts about "social engineering" in the article?

Something about "thinking for oneself" is missed somewhere?

And this has to do with the article, ...how?

Are the parents not thinking for themselves, the children, the health care component?

Which?

Original thought:

Maybe if you parted your hair differently I could see your point...

Under the definition (the real one) of what political correctness actually means, ...where is the connect here?

Or, does making up definitions for things to suit an agenda fall under "thinking for yourself"?

saddle-tramp wrote:'In the interests of political correctness, our society has decided that a father can be anyone or nobody. But did anyone ask the child how they feel about this?'

So "IVF" was a "PC" Idea...?
Have you or Josephine any evidence of this..?
I don't think most people know what "PC" is, or who the elusive "Brigade" are...

Where does Political Correctness come into this particular advance in medical science...?

BTW I actually think that all children have the right to know who their parents were, for obvious reasons.

But there are an awful lot of orphans in places like Haiti, or Thailand, who were rescued from the rubble, and no-one left alive knows who their parents were.
And there must be many cases of women being unsure who the actual father was, from two or more possibilities...?

So it's not the end of the world.....
NOT BEST, agreed, but we don't all have that 'luxury'....

Storm in a Tea-cup really... IMO

.
This thread is where i had hoped this thread:

parenting-f30/right-children-t1310.html

would go.

If it is deemed a right - nay, even an abrogation of civil liberties to deny it - for women to have children and for same sex female couples to have children then IVF has to be acceptable. What seems to be unacceptable in my view is the way it is dealt with in the family.

With adoption, it is stressed that the child should be told as early as possible of their status. Guidelines for IVF families seem to be required too. i am not sure if records exist - but with adopted children the law was changed retrospectively to allow adoptees to find information on their birth families with the proviso that counselling had to be given before the info was handed over. Perhaps if this is really becoming a problem for more than just a few then those affected should commence a campaign to get such a law change.

Mind you, there is some evidence to suggest that between 15% and 25% of children are not the children of the man they believe to be their father. Should the law insist that mothers who have conceived extra-maritally should also be forced to admit to the fact and "confess" the name of the father to allow their child to find their biological father? With DNA testing becoming more readily available will this ever become not just desirable but necessary?



As an aside, i believe that birth defects seldom manifest in the first generation of first-cousin "breeding", only after a second such inter-familial liaison. And i also believe that although incest is taboo because of such problems, there is something about pheremones that usually tend to dissuade us from falling for those with the same pedigree - we tend to go for those whose genetic make-up is complementary, not similar, to our own to increase the likelihood of a child of the union having a greater chance of immunity to disease.

.