AWARE Sex Guide Suspended

[scroobal]

For the sake of the species, mainstream society would need to be family centred. Frankly I don't mind patriachical or matriachical as long as there is family leadership in one form or another. That then calls for changes in the women's charter etc on the basis that current discriminatory practices against the female gender are removed.

The harder chestnut to crack would be the issue of homosexual families with the noble intention of sustaining the species via surrogate and proxy means. This will certainly run in the face of liberlism where nature, conservation and one of the main building blocks of liberalism - not to tamper with nature. The argument of course would be that we see homosexulity in the animal world. The counter argument is do they raise families and help sustain the species.

Of course, somebody needs to look after the interest of the child. Is the child better off with one gender missing in order to meets the wants of the parents one whom is certainly not bilogical.

from a personal pov i find what you say abit sad and troubling...because to me the core family unit is key to any society's existence and sustainablity...it is not about a power game between the male and female...i say yes to gender equality but with the core family unit still very much intact...did you watch The Cosby Show in the 80s?...that is what i am talking about...another interesting example would be the dynamics within the late Dennis & Magaret Thatcher's marriage...or for that matter Tony & Cherie Blair's marriage as a more current example...heck i might as well throw in Harry & Choo's interesting marriage as well

btw i did not know that mohamed al fayed is an "arms dealer"?

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

now i wonder what the dear old self proclaimed 'FM' and her darling daughter would have to say about this one?:p

on a serious note...i personally do not have any problems with gay marriages...but i draw the line when it comes to offspring

The harder chestnut to crack would be the issue of homosexual families with the noble intention of sustaining the species via surrogate and proxy means. This will certainly run in the face of liberlism where nature, conservation and one of the main building blocks of liberalism - not to tamper with nature. The argument of course would be that we see homosexulity in the animal world. The counter argument is do they raise families and help sustain the species.

Of course, somebody needs to look after the interest of the child. Is the child better off with one gender missing in order to meets the wants of the parents one whom is certainly not bilogical.

 

[scroobal]

Yes, the same here. Read this and you will know the Pandora box has yet to open. This only refers to sperm donation to heterosexual couples. Can you imagine when the biological parents are not known, cannot be identified or refused to reveal.

TORY SHEPHERD, HEALTH REPORTER
October 08, 2008 01:50pm
UNREGULATED sperm donation is leading to unusual situations in which the children of lesbians in Adelaide are mixing socially - creating a risk of incest.

One of South Australia's foremost experts in reproductive technology - Reverend Dr Andrew Dutney - says that in one reported case, about 30 lesbians were impregnated by sperm from one man.

The mothers then organised picnics with all the children, raising the fear they might socialise with their half-siblings without realising they are related.

In another case, a man's sperm was used to produce 29 children, most of whom are living in Adelaide. They do not know who their half-siblings are, raising concerns that in a "big country town" like Adelaide, they could accidentally commit incest.

In South Australia it has become standard practice to identify sperm donors, which has put men off donating through reproductive clinics.

Fertility treatments do not generally cater to homosexuals, because the law says it is only for infertile couples or those at risk of transmitting a serious defect.

These factors combine to push many people wanting children to seek help elsewhere - either through "turkey basters" or casual sex with friends or willing participants found online.

Assoc Prof Dutney, the former chair of the SA Council on Reproductive Technology and Associate Professor of Theology at Flinders University, says the SA regulations are at fault and should be repealed altogether, leaving reproductive medical units to comply with the national ethical guidelines.

He uses the anecdote of the "very generous" sperm donor to emphasise that when people are excluded from access to reproductive technology, it forces them to go it alone, and have children outside the normal system.

Those children were born about a decade ago, meaning they will be reaching adolescence in the next few years.

"The effect of our regulations here in SA is that they produce unregulated donor conception, whereas a system with a lighter touch would bring a whole lot more parents and children into the light," Assoc Prof Dutney said.

"The situation at the moment is that ... by adhering to the SA legislation, clinics have to be in breach of the national code.

"Under SA's legislation, anonymity is guaranteed while under the national code of ethics, the child's access to knowledge has to be provided."

A different man's sperm was used to produce 29 children, most of whom are living in Adelaide. Again, they don't know they are related.

Leonie Hewitt is the mother of one of the children in Adelaide from the second example mentioned above. She is also the spokeswoman for the Sydney-based Donor Conception Support Group of Australia.

She says people need to recognise the "human rights" of the children in all of this.

"There needs to be consistent national legislation," she said.

"We need to protect people who are conceived through donations whether in straight or homosexual families, we need to protect those children.

"We need national harmonising legislation that protects human rights."

on a serious note...i personally do not have any problems with gay marriages...but i draw the line when it comes to offspring

 

[Boliao]

The argument that homosexuality is normal because it is observed in nature is so lame and old. Those who keeps quoting this chooses to tell you only one side of the story. The fact is

Incest and Cannibalism is also observed in nature!!

Do these make them right? If we believe that homosexuality is normal just because it is also observed in the nature; should we not also say that murders, rapers and mother fuckers are also normal?

:oIo: