not sure why I can't reply in the other thread...

but im hearing news that the father is a convicted paedophile...

anyone else hear that?

Yes, I heard that. Apparently he was served time in the late 90s for "indecently dealing wth a child."

There should be an immediate investigation. If the reports are true and dependng on the nature of the crime, the Australan government needs to intervene and remove that little grl.

True Blue... wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 6:44am:

not sure why I can't reply in the other thread... but im hearing news that the father is a convicted paedophile... anyone else hear that?

Please see: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1407060740

Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 7:44am:

Yes, I heard that. Apparently he was served time in the late 90s for "indecently dealing wth a child." There should be an immediate investigation. If the reports are true and dependng on the nature of the crime, the Australan government needs to intervene and remove that little grl.

Ummmm no they shouldn't ....... they should maybe remove the husband & investigate him.

However the child is also the biological daughter of the mother - his wife & there has been no talk of her having a criminal record or a record of child abuse/sexual abuse.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 7:44am:

Yes, I heard that. Apparently he was served time in the late 90s for "indecently dealing wth a child." There should be an immediate investigation. If the reports are true and dependng on the nature of the crime, the Australan government needs to intervene and remove that little grl.

You realise these people are allowed to have children, generally once the sentence has been served they have the same rights as anyone else.

Kytro wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 5:36pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 5th, 2014 at 7:44am: Yes, I heard that. Apparently he was served time in the late 90s for "indecently dealing wth a child." There should be an immediate investigation. If the reports are true and dependng on the nature of the crime, the Australan government needs to intervene and remove that little grl. You realise these people are allowed to have children, generally once the sentence has been served they have the same rights as anyone else.

Yeas, it raises a good point.  If anyone convicted of those sort of offences are to be denied parenthood, they should be neutered, and as well as banned from adopting....if we are fair dinkum about it.

Aussie wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 5:45pm:

Kytro wrote on Aug 5th, 2014 at 5:36pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 5th, 2014 at 7:44am: Yes, I heard that. Apparently he was served time in the late 90s for "indecently dealing wth a child." There should be an immediate investigation. If the reports are true and dependng on the nature of the crime, the Australan government needs to intervene and remove that little grl. You realise these people are allowed to have children, generally once the sentence has been served they have the same rights as anyone else. Yeas, it raises a good point.  If anyone convicted of those sort of offences are to be denied parenthood, they should be neutered, and as well as banned from adopting....if we are fair dinkum about it.

You have no clue, do you?  ;D

I WAS going to start a new thread  Nope  here we are.

I'll say UPFRONT,...   
Surrogacy should not BE AN OPTION.


IF  you are unable to conceive a child through natural measures... you are not fit parents.   It SHOULD NOT BE !

Now before you get upset..  I don't mean  .. 'not fit'  as in any moral sense..  YOU would no doubt love your offspring.... 
But  i am saying  .. your genes and your partners genes,,,SHOULD NOT combine,....a far from optimal mix ....it should never be a forced conception.. which is what it is... 

  because the outcome will be FLAWED... one way or another.

Perhaps it doesn't show early,  or perhaps it does...  but these scientists and couples .. MUST REALIZE they are denying or subverting the order of life on Earth.


We humans have such hubris....!!! Cannot conceive..??  well we will anyway..!!

Such lack of connection with the life force of the earth... such insistence of human supremacy...  I am at a loss..  :(

The sheer greed and excess of need and wealth to deny nature..
no one wins in the end.

oh yeah .. that doesn't address the criminal 'parents'  in this case.  It is important that this matter have intense scrutiny.  One can only imagine how many other new-born  'slaves'  are  out there.. or should I say.. here.... in Australia.

There are some real swine/grotesque monsters around... capable of anything.  Why should that new  GIRL child be held by these sorts of SWINE... in Australia,,,???

NO WAY   .....  that wee girl would be better off in Thailand... unquestionably.
WE might think we are the greatest people .. here in Aus...  but reality  shows otherwise.. doesn't it.?  :(

Emma wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 12:25am:

oh yeah .. that doesn't address the criminal 'parents'  in this case.  It is important that this matter have intense scrutiny.  One can only imagine how many other new-born  'slaves'  are  out there.. or should I say.. here.... in Australia. There are some real swine/grotesque monsters around... capable of anything.  Why should that new  GIRL child be held by these sorts of SWINE... in Australia,,,??? NO WAY   .....  that wee girl would be better off in Thailand... unquestionably. WE might think we are the greatest people .. here in Aus...  but reality  shows otherwise.. doesn't it.?  :(

oh yes... Girls are treated very well in Tia Land... they teach them all sorts of pingpong tricks...

Emma wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 12:17am:

I WAS going to start a new thread  Nope  here we are. I'll say UPFRONT,...    Surrogacy should not BE AN OPTION. IF  you are unable to conceive a child through natural measures... you are not fit parents.   It SHOULD NOT BE ! Now before you get upset..  I don't mean  .. 'not fit'  as in any moral sense..  YOU would no doubt love your offspring....  But  i am saying  .. your genes and your partners genes,,,SHOULD NOT combine,....a far from optimal mix ....it should never be a forced conception.. which is what it is...    because the outcome will be FLAWED... one way or another. Perhaps it doesn't show early,  or perhaps it does...  but these scientists and couples .. MUST REALIZE they are denying or subverting the order of life on Earth. We humans have such hubris....!!! Cannot conceive..??  well we will anyway..!! Such lack of connection with the life force of the earth... such insistence of human supremacy...  I am at a loss..  :( The sheer greed and excess of need and wealth to deny nature.. no one wins in the end.

tin foil hats and flat earth are ringing bells here...  ::)

Emma wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 12:17am:

I WAS going to start a new thread  Nope  here we are. I'll say UPFRONT,...    Surrogacy should not BE AN OPTION. IF  you are unable to conceive a child through natural measures... you are not fit parents.   It SHOULD NOT BE ! Now before you get upset..  I don't mean  .. 'not fit'  as in any moral sense..  YOU would no doubt love your offspring....  But  i am saying  .. your genes and your partners genes,,,SHOULD NOT combine,....a far from optimal mix ....it should never be a forced conception.. which is what it is...    because the outcome will be FLAWED... one way or another. Perhaps it doesn't show early,  or perhaps it does...  but these scientists and couples .. MUST REALIZE they are denying or subverting the order of life on Earth. We humans have such hubris....!!! Cannot conceive..??  well we will anyway..!! Such lack of connection with the life force of the earth... such insistence of human supremacy...  I am at a loss..  :( The sheer greed and excess of need and wealth to deny nature.. no one wins in the end. E

Well with that in mind then you would agree that fertile Lesbians should not be allowed access
to IVF? .... because that is not a natural conception & never
will be, it also forced.

What about a young girl was sexually attacked at a young age.  And the resulting injury made her unable to have children?  But she was able to have children prior.  Is this considered un-natural as well if she wanted to have children?

tickleandrose wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 12:57pm:

What about a young girl was sexually attacked at a young age.  And the resulting injury made her unable to have children?  But she was able to have children prior.  Is this considered un-natural as well if she wanted to have children?

Not in my view.  A totally different scenario.
Altho care would need to be taken.. to ensure that the donor sperm is compatible to the proposed mother.


 

Emma wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 6:07pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Aug 6th, 2014 at 12:57pm: What about a young girl was sexually attacked at a young age.  And the resulting injury made her unable to have children?  But she was able to have children prior.  Is this considered un-natural as well if she wanted to have children? Not in my view.  A totally different scenario. Altho care would need to be taken.. to ensure that the donor sperm is compatible to the proposed mother.

Taste test? :-/

Gnads wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 7:12am:

Emma wrote on Aug 6th, 2014 at 12:17am: I WAS going to start a new thread  Nope  here we are. I'll say UPFRONT,...    Surrogacy should not BE AN OPTION. IF  you are unable to conceive a child through natural measures... you are not fit parents.   It SHOULD NOT BE ! Now before you get upset..  I don't mean  .. 'not fit'  as in any moral sense..  YOU would no doubt love your offspring....  But  i am saying  .. your genes and your partners genes,,,SHOULD NOT combine,....a far from optimal mix ....it should never be a forced conception.. which is what it is...    because the outcome will be FLAWED... one way or another. Perhaps it doesn't show early,  or perhaps it does...  but these scientists and couples .. MUST REALIZE they are denying or subverting the order of life on Earth. We humans have such hubris....!!! Cannot conceive..??  well we will anyway..!! Such lack of connection with the life force of the earth... such insistence of human supremacy...  I am at a loss..  :( The sheer greed and excess of need and wealth to deny nature.. no one wins in the end. E Well with that in mind then you would agree that fertile Lesbians should not be allowed access to IVF? .... because that is not a natural conception & never will be, it also forced.

Yeah I find that problematical..  good question. 

My point is about incompatible heteros.. producing offspring ..  children that are really not viable.. in terms of the health of the species generally. 

Lesbians should be able to adopt.. as should infertile couples.  There are many children who need a caring home.

This sort of desperation.. requiring surrogacy  or IVF  ...  seems to me to be nothing but the extremes of ego and hubris. And very costly too, in human and economic terms. 

Emma wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 12:17am:

I WAS going to start a new thread  Nope  here we are. I'll say UPFRONT,...    Surrogacy should not BE AN OPTION. IF  you are unable to conceive a child through natural measures... you are not fit parents.   It SHOULD NOT BE ! Now before you get upset..  I don't mean  .. 'not fit'  as in any moral sense..  YOU would no doubt love your offspring....  But  i am saying  .. your genes and your partners genes,,,SHOULD NOT combine,....a far from optimal mix ....it should never be a forced conception.. which is what it is...    because the outcome will be FLAWED... one way or another. Perhaps it doesn't show early,  or perhaps it does...  but these scientists and couples .. MUST REALIZE they are denying or subverting the order of life on Earth. We humans have such hubris....!!! Cannot conceive..??  well we will anyway..!! Such lack of connection with the life force of the earth... such insistence of human supremacy...  I am at a loss..  :( The sheer greed and excess of need and wealth to deny nature.. no one wins in the end.

Congenitallly barren or defective people sure, but a lot of accidents happen. 

What about the poor front bottom who got kicked in the balls by a horse, or a shiela who gets gang raped and is left infertile as a result?

Kytro wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 5:36pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 5th, 2014 at 7:44am: Yes, I heard that. Apparently he was served time in the late 90s for "indecently dealing wth a child." There should be an immediate investigation. If the reports are true and dependng on the nature of the crime, the Australan government needs to intervene and remove that little grl. You realise these people are allowed to have children, generally once the sentence has been served they have the same rights as anyone else.

Yes, I realise that "these people" are allowed to have children. It's one of the greatest flaws in our society.

... wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 6:17pm:

Emma wrote on Aug 6th, 2014 at 12:17am: I WAS going to start a new thread  Nope  here we are. I'll say UPFRONT,...    Surrogacy should not BE AN OPTION. IF  you are unable to conceive a child through natural measures... you are not fit parents.   It SHOULD NOT BE ! Now before you get upset..  I don't mean  .. 'not fit'  as in any moral sense..  YOU would no doubt love your offspring....  But  i am saying  .. your genes and your partners genes,,,SHOULD NOT combine,....a far from optimal mix ....it should never be a forced conception.. which is what it is...    because the outcome will be FLAWED... one way or another. Perhaps it doesn't show early,  or perhaps it does...  but these scientists and couples .. MUST REALIZE they are denying or subverting the order of life on Earth. We humans have such hubris....!!! Cannot conceive..??  well we will anyway..!! Such lack of connection with the life force of the earth... such insistence of human supremacy...  I am at a loss..  :( The sheer greed and excess of need and wealth to deny nature.. no one wins in the end. Congenitallly barren or defective people sure, but a lot of accidents happen.  What about the poor nice person who got kicked in the balls by a horse, or a shiela who gets gang raped and is left infertile as a result?

Well that IS what I am saying...  people harmed thru accident or violence .., but otherwise able to conceive with their partner, are viable parents... who can produce sound children.

Farnell (the Aussie Dad) is stuffed by his grotty past.  Multiple offences involving  5 (+-) year olds.  Seems he has a clean recent record, but..........Nah.

This is gonna be a nightmare to resolve. 

more money for lawyers..

Aussie wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 7:43pm:

Farnell (the Aussie Dad) is stuffed by his grotty past.  Multiple offences involving  5 (+-) year olds.  Seems he has a clean recent record, but..........Nah. This is gonna be a nightmare to resolve.

when he was charged with paedophilia on crimes against 7 to 10 year olds. 18 charges.... the Judge gave him a lenient sentence due to what a Great Bloke he was...  :o

its like a lot of these judges are paedo's and rapists of women as they always seem to give lenient sentences in these circumstances...  >:(

Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 6:28pm:

Kytro wrote on Aug 5th, 2014 at 5:36pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 5th, 2014 at 7:44am: Yes, I heard that. Apparently he was served time in the late 90s for "indecently dealing wth a child." There should be an immediate investigation. If the reports are true and dependng on the nature of the crime, the Australan government needs to intervene and remove that little grl. You realise these people are allowed to have children, generally once the sentence has been served they have the same rights as anyone else. Yes, I realise that "these people" are allowed to have children. It's one of the greatest flaws in our society.

My point is really that if they are no longer considered a significant risk then they should have the same rights, if they are then we need to question why they are free to act without some form of oversight.

Aussie wrote on Aug 6^th, 2014 at 7:43pm:

Farnell (the Aussie Dad) is stuffed by his grotty past.  Multiple offences involving  5 (+-) year olds.  Seems he has a clean recent record, but..........Nah. This is gonna be a nightmare to resolve.

The best thing he could do is to go on some second-rate tabloid TV show and tell his story.

Nah, just kidding: he wouldn't be that stupid   ;D

http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au//stories/8887943/the-australian-parents-of-baby-gammy-to-speak-on-60-minutes

Below is a great movie I saw on a similar theme. A downs syndrome child born as a set of twins. Father tells wife the second of the twins died. Father gets nurse to take child to a home for such children but nurse decides to keep the baby and she grows into a  teenager before mother and brother reunite with her again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71g4SyDFBjk

Kytro wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 12:18am:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 6th, 2014 at 6:28pm: Kytro wrote on Aug 5th, 2014 at 5:36pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 5th, 2014 at 7:44am: Yes, I heard that. Apparently he was served time in the late 90s for "indecently dealing wth a child." There should be an immediate investigation. If the reports are true and dependng on the nature of the crime, the Australan government needs to intervene and remove that little grl. You realise these people are allowed to have children, generally once the sentence has been served they have the same rights as anyone else. Yes, I realise that "these people" are allowed to have children. It's one of the greatest flaws in our society. My point is really that if they are no longer considered a significant risk then they should have the same rights, if they are then we need to question why they are free to act without some form of oversight.

a serial pedophile offender is always a risk and is never cured. Inevitably this man will molest his own child or some one others again. I suspect the primary motive for actually having  his own children is to be able to molest them unhindered.

agree

Maybe a side issue, apologies:
People talk about "IVF" for lesbians, where the woman has no obstruction to normal conception.
Now IVF is a complex expensive and invasive  procedure.
How do I know? Two of my grandchildren were conceived that way, to a married Christian couple.
Artificial insemination with donor sperm is much easier and safer, and I see no reason to deny that to lesbians.
Maybe, as it is to cater for their own prejudice, they should pay the cost rather than getting it on Medicare.
Please, if you talk about *assisted conception*, don't use "IVF" as a convenient shorthand for a wide range of techniques of which it is only one.

jfish1936 wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 12:41pm:

Maybe a side issue, apologies: People talk about "IVF" for lesbians, where the woman has no obstruction to normal conception. Now IVF is a complex expensive and invasive  procedure. How do I know? Two of my grandchildren were conceived that way, to a married Christian couple. Artificial insemination with donor sperm is much easier and safer, and I see no reason to deny that to lesbians. Maybe, as it is to cater for their own prejudice, they should pay the cost rather than getting it on Medicare. Please, if you talk about *assisted conception*, don't use "IVF" as a convenient shorthand for a wide range of techniques of which it is only one.

 
Agree ..... they can use a gay mate & a turkey baster

not taxpayer subsidised medical procedures >:(

Okay, I admit that I was wrong in thinking that it was a white couple that was having the child, and that the child was the result of artificial insemination. Didn't even consider that it could have been an Asian/white couple.

Gnads wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 2:32pm:

jfish1936 wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 12:41pm: Maybe a side issue, apologies: People talk about "IVF" for lesbians, where the woman has no obstruction to normal conception. Now IVF is a complex expensive and invasive  procedure. How do I know? Two of my grandchildren were conceived that way, to a married Christian couple. Artificial insemination with donor sperm is much easier and safer, and I see no reason to deny that to lesbians. Maybe, as it is to cater for their own prejudice, they should pay the cost rather than getting it on Medicare. Please, if you talk about *assisted conception*, don't use "IVF" as a convenient shorthand for a wide range of techniques of which it is only one.   Agree ..... they can use a gay mate & a turkey baster not taxpayer subsidised medical procedures >:(

maybe they could add this in for the new "work for the dole".. surrogacy..

genius right.. ?  :)