ZA

Virantovi največji podporniki zakonika>

Še malo pa se bo ugotovilo, kdo so Virantovi volivci......svoji k svojemu....

ZA

enake pravice in enako varstvo države>

Kje imate enako varstvo in pravice, pri podeljevanju štipendij za dijake 15 let -do18 leta...eno govorite...

Zopet nakladanje novinarjev, ki nimajo pojma, ker se ne poglobijo v zadeve.....

Itak da ZA. Mi je šlo na bruh, ko sem danes pokukala v Poglede Slovenije.

Nam ti razložiš?

[simonjana]
Itak da ZA. Mi je šlo na bruh, ko sem danes pokukala v Poglede Slovenije.

Kolk bo na tem forumu enih razočaranih 25.3 :)

[ahafne]
ZA

Zanimivo, da na forumu, kjer so polnih ust svobode, liberalizma, vitke države, človekovih pravic itd., dobiš minuse za stvar, ki z ostalimi nima nič. V ZDA takšne stvari funkcionirajo že desetletja (od svobodnih odločitev glede oplojevanja do posvojitev), pa nikjer drugje bolj ne cenijo družine kot tam. Pa je ameriška družba 100x bolj normalna kot slovenska.

[Skippy]
> [ahafne]
> ZA

Zanimivo, da na forumu, kjer so polnih ust svobode, liberalizma, vitke države, človekovih pravic itd., dobiš minuse za stvar, ki z ostalimi nima nič. V ZDA takšne stvari funkcionirajo že desetletja (od svobodnih odločitev glede oplojevanja do posvojitev), pa nikjer drugje bolj ne cenijo družine kot tam. Pa je ameriška družba 100x bolj normalna kot slovenska.

Slovenija je žal mentalno na nivoju hladne vojne: na eni strani naši, ki so 100% dobri in na drugi strani sovražnik, ki je 100% hudoben. In potem se bije večna bitka med odbrim in zlim...svet ni ne črn ne bel, ampak črnobel, odisni so samo odtenki. Ampak tudi če leivca ali desnica da na referendum, da je za nedeljo ponedeljek, bo tisoče ekstremistov na drugi strani glasovalo proti in kovalo teorije zarot. Žalostno..vnedar to ohranja politični razred...če bi zahteval resne vsebino bi bli danes že svetlobna leta naprej.

Ravno to je problem Slovenije. Če predloga niso pripravili "naši", bodo ljudje proti, ne glede na to, kar piše v zakonu ali kako zadeve funkcionirajo drugod. Zato je Slovenija vse bolj propadla država, saj vsi vlečejo na svoje, nikogar pa več ne zanima vsebina.

Še en ZA. Pa se mi sprva ni dalo iti ampak, ko sem videl koliko gnojnice z notoričnimi lažmi so polili razni Primci in farška zalega, me bo kar izstrelilo na volišče z raketnim pogonom.

Are Over A Third of Foster Parent Molestations Homosexual?

Summary: 50% of foster parent abuse in a general population survey and 34% of abuse as determined by the Illinois DCFS was homosexual. In news stories in the 50 largest newspapers and wire services 1980-2003, 175 foster parents sexually abused 351+ charges. For the 169 whose sex of victim could be determined: 149 (88%) were men; 76 (53%) victimized homosexually; and 85 (50%) were unmarried. Men assaulted 319 (91%) victims, homosexual practitioners 222 (63%), and the unmarried 164 (47%). From 1980-1994, 57% of the victims were girls, after 1994 56% were boys. In 21 group homes, the molestation was homosexual in 15 (71%) and 31 of the 32+ perpetrators were male and at least 334 of 349+ victims were boys.

Common opinion holds that, as with those who enjoy drugs, those pursing homosexual activity recruit the young (Levitt & Klassen, 1974). Traditional child-placement policies were therefore based on assumptions that children fostered by those who engaged in homosexuality would be more apt to be sexually molested, socially isolated, and engage in homosexuality themselves (Bigner & Bozett, 1989; Golombok & Tasker, 1996).

A new view, initially advanced by homosexual enthusiasts around the turn of the 20 th century, holds that homosexual activity should be irrelevant to social policy ñ and since it is of the same personal and social worth as any other kind of sexual entertainment, it is terribly wrong to discriminate against it in any way. This view, requiring social sacrifice on behalf of homosexuals as a downtrodden class, was appealed to by nationally syndicated New York Times columnist, Maureen Dowd. Regarding the 11 states in the U.S. 2004 Presidential election voted to ban gay marriage she complained: ì[the religious were] stirred up to object to social engineering on behalf of society's most vulnerable: the poor, the sick, the sexually differentî (2004).

The major psychological, psychiatric, and social work associations came to adopt the ëhomosexuals are merely sexually different and therefore deserve protection' view after the American Psychiatric Association's 1973 decision to consider homosexuality non-pathological. Thus, in 1975 the American Psychological Association [APA] said it ìdeplored all public and private discrimination in such areas as employment, housing, public accommodation, and licensing against those who engage in or who have engaged in homosexual activitiesî and urged discrimination in their favor, e.g. ìthe enactment of civil rights legislation at the local, state, and federal level that would offer citizens who engage in acts of homosexuality the same protections now guaranteed to others on the basis of race, creed, color, etc.î On July 28, 2004 the APA ( www.apa.org ) declared opposition to ìdiscrimination against lesbian or gay parents adoption, child custody and visitation, foster care and reproductive health services.î Since the APA cited no comparative empirical studies on fostering by those who ìengage in or have engaged in acts of homosexuality,î its stance appears ëphilosophical' rather than empirically based.

In 1995 the major professional associations told the U.S. Supreme Court ( Romer) that tradition was completely wrong about homosexuals being inclined to child molestation. The APA, the American Psychiatric Association, and the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) categorically declared ìthere is no evidence of any positive correlation between homosexual orientation and child molestation.î Likewise, the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers and the American Association of University Professors told the Court that the belief that gay teachers in the classroom would recruit ìstudents to homosexualityî because ìthey are more likely than heterosexual men to molest childrenî ìis without foundation in fact.î (quoted by Cameron, Cameron, & Landess, 1996, p. 385).

Propelled in part by the interrelated professional associations' contentions that fostering or adopting is a ëright,' children do just as well if reared by homosexuals, and past concerns about homosexuals' proclivity to molest children are mistaken, social policy has been shifting away from banning placements with homosexuals. Thus, a 2003 survey of 307 adoption agencies cross the U.S. by Adam Pertman reported that 60% of those replying accepted applications from and 40% said they had placed children with ìhomosexuals.î Pertman commented: ìwe [homosexuals] started out at near zero, and just within the last decade we're up to 60%î ( Denver Post , 10/29/03).
History of homosexual foster parenting in the U.S.

The first case of adoption to an open homosexual in the U.S. appears to have involved David Frater, 28, in 1981. While living with his mother and a male companion of 6 years in Riverside, California, Frater asked to adopt his temporary foster-boy Kevin, a 16-year-old who had lived in 14 different foster homes. When the Department of Public Social Services received an anonymous tip that Frater engaged in homosexuality it attempted to block his adoption. Judith Cummings (1983) of the New York Times , reported that Frater's cause was championed by civil rights groups, with the APA and the NASW supporting his candidacy. The lack of cited empirical evidence about the outcomes for children fostered or adopted by homosexuals does not appear to have entered the dispute nor was it noted in any of the stories that made the press. In 1982, the now 17-year-old, Kevin, lived with his adopted father, and Frater's mother (the lover had departed). Frater was heralded in press reports (Associated Press 5/29/83) as providing a temporary home to kids living on the street and lauded for his desire to adopt 4 more children including Kevin's 16-year-old brother then living in a boys' home (Associated Press 5/29/03; 5/30/83). United Press International said ìthe community sees him as a model parentî and quoted Frater: ìI date and go out as often as I have time to. Sometimes my friends spend the night here. Kevin doesn't feel it is anything out of the ordinary.î (6/14/83).

In 1987, still without citing any published systematic empirical studies as to how children do when fostered or adopted by homosexuals nor offering any empirical evidence of its own, the NASW passed a resolution decrying ìresistance to using single parents, ...including lesbian and gay parents, as potential foster care and adoption resources.î Despite the NASW endorsement, utilizing homosexuals met resistance. Laws (e.g., Florida [1977], New Hampshire [1987], and Nebraska [1995]) and regulations (e.g., Massachusetts [1985]) were passed against homosexual foster parents or adopters. Yet, civil rights suits had also been won against the policy of excluding homosexuals from adoption (e.g., David Frater in California in 1982), and more recently the use of homosexual foster or adoptive parents has been encouraged (e.g., Toronto [1994], Massachusetts [1999], District of Columbia [2003]).

Are homosexual foster parents as apt or more apt to molest their charges? About a quarter of surveyed homosexuals reported sex with the underage (Bell & Weinberg, 1978; Jay & Young, 1979). So enabling them to foster with a vulnerable child might result in molestation. Two ways to generate empirical data on whether homosexuals are more apt to molest present themselves: get foster parents or their victims to report such abuse, or examine the circumstances surrounding those who were caught. About half a million children (~0.7% of the nation's minors) are placed in foster homes every year. If every year ~1% of these are sexually abused (Branigin, 2003) we confront a rare event requiring ~1.5 million respondent random sample of the general population to interview 100 victims. More narrowly, a random sample of ~10,000 foster children would be required to ëcatch' the 100 or so that might have been molested.

Interviewing foster children proved impossible. When contacted, entities placing children with homosexuals declined to provide information about molestation by foster parents (e.g., including Seattle, District of Columbia, Colorado Springs, Vermont and a number of states contacted by a politician interested in the issue [Illinois provided some information, below]). Each stated that it had not done nor did it contemplate interview research with its charges or foster parents and would not allow examination of its confidential records as an alternative. Even were an interview study to be done, the children would have strong motives to conceal molestation (e.g., reporting would result in a different placement, might prove embarrassing, etc.) and might not produce useful results. Attempting to ask foster parents to admit molestation seemed worthless.

General population surveys : While it was not determined how many respondents had been in a foster home, nor how many of the incidents had been reported to authorities, 6 (0.02%) of a general population random sample of 3,714 adults from five metropolitan areas reported ìserious sexual advancesî against them by a foster parent [3 homosexual against girls; 3 heterosexual: 1 against a boy, 2 against girls] ñ e.g., 6 (0.59%) of 1,021 ìserious sexual advancesî reported by various caretakers. One woman also reported that the advance led to ìsexual contactî with a male foster parent ñ e.g., 0.27% of 369 ìsexual contactsî reported with various caretakers/relatives (Cameron, Proctor, Coburn, Larson, Forde, & Cameron, 1986). Of these 6 sexual interactions, all of which would have been actionable, 3 were homosexual.

Information About Those Caught

The Illinois Department of Children & Family Services provided what it considered ìsubstantiatedî records of foster-parent sexual abuse for 1997-2002. 270 parents committed sexual offenses against foster- or subsidized-adoptive children. 67 (69%) of 97 mothers and 148 (86%) of 173 fathers sexually abused girls; 30 (31%) mothers and 25 (14%) of fathers sexually abused boys (i.e., 92 [34%] of perpetrators homosexually abused their charges). 15 parents both physically and sexually abused charges: daughters by 8 mothers and 4 fathers, sons by 3 mothers (i.e., for both forms of substantiated abuse, homosexual perpetrators were involved in 53%) (reported elsewhere [Cameron, 2005]).

Perpetrator records : South Carolina provided access to records of convictions for child molestation, but they proved too biased and incomplete to be usable. Officials in charge of the database alerted that few perpetrators with competent counsel were convicted of child molestation (and the Attorney General's staff opined that men accused of molesting boys were disproportionately represented by counsel) and, of course, the records of those not convicted (but often guilty) could not be inspected. Of additional concerns, due to plea bargains the charges for which a perpetrator was sentenced and classified bore modest relationship to what he had actually done, and the database was not set up to determine the circumstances of the molestation (e.g., whether the perpetrator was a foster parent who molested his charge). As the research of Able, Becker, Mittleman, Cunningham-Rathner, Rouleau, & Murphy (1987) with the non-incarcerated demonstrated, the kinds and numbers of sexual crimes occurring in ëthe real world' may be quite different than those working with prisoners or clients might assume.

News stories : A substantial correlation between a small set of newspaper stories about foster parent molestation and substantiated foster parent sexual abuse from the Illinois DCFS dataset (above) has been reported (Cameron, 2003). Unlike a compilation of convicted perpetrators, news stories usually focus on the charges -- often the initial phase of a charge or arrest. So those found ënot guilty' as well as ëguilty' are represented at this level of social control (making the news as a possible molester is a form of punishment). As long as the stories that made the news were not biased toward or against homosexuals, examining the past 24 years of the 50 largest-circulation newspapers and wire-service stories regarding foster parent molestations as an index of foster parent molestation seemed reasonable (what actually happened is only known to the perpetrators and victims). News stories are only one index of the possible indices of foster parent misbehavior -- but if various indices were to generate much the same outcomes some confidence could be placed in the findings. The time span involved in the news reports also enables a sense as to whether the shift in child-placement policy regarding homosexuals noted in Pertman's 2003 ( Denver Post , 10/29/03) survey of U.S. adoption agencies is reflected in news stories of abuse.
Definition of ìhomosexualî

The common meaning of homosexual is ìsexual attraction toward a person of the same sex; sexual relations between persons of the same sexî (1992 New Illustrated Webster's Dictionary ). The public component is sex with the same sex, which could have an effect upon society, rather than ëattraction' which might not result in actions. The APA resolutions above indicate that ìlesbian or gayî (terms which carry diagnostic and political meanings) are essentially synonymous with ìthose who engage in or who have engaged in homosexual activitiesî (which is descriptive and potentially objective).

When ëhomosexual' is used diagnostically rather than descriptively, many assume that a ëhomosexual' neither could nor would have sex with the opposite sex (e.g., Jenny, Roesler & Poyer, 1994). But almost all homosexuals have had sex with the opposite sex and perhaps a third are or have been married (Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994; Black, Gates, Sanders, & Taylor, 2000). Some research has adopted the desire and/or behavior standard. Thus, Fergusson, Horwood, & Beautrais (1999), in studying the development of homosexuality from birth reported that at age 21, 20 of their sample of 1,008 said they ìwereî homosexual or bisexual (but 4 of those who said they ìwereî homosexual had not engaged in homosexual activity) and an additional 8 reported sex with their sex since the age of 16. The researchers considered all 28 homosexual.

As with Fergusson, et al . (1999) many studies report a minority of self-described ëhomosexuals' who hadn't acted on their desires, some call themselves ëhomosexuals' to make a political statement, and others who engage in same-sex sexual activity decline to use the term. So recent research has tended to ignore desire in favor of having engaged in homosexual behavior irrespective of age of partners or their sexual interactions with the opposite sex (e.g., the1990 British national survey of 18,876 adults [Johnson, Wadsworth, Wellings, & Field, 1994]; the 1996 Centers for Disease Control national sexuality survey of 12,381 adults [Anderson, Wilson, Barker, Doll, Jones & Holtgrave, 1999). This has not proved intellectually troubling for other than those committed to a ëdiagnostic' meaning of ëhomosexual.' Indeed, to most researchers, the understanding of ëa homosexual is one who engages in same-sex sex' is evident enough that only one team has bothered to ask a sample of men convicted of sexually abusing boys what they ëwere' -- and 86% ìdescribed themselves as homosexual or bisexualî (Erickson, Walbek & Seely, 1988, p. 80). No one, including supporters of gay rights (e.g., Cochrane & Mays, 2001; Herek, 1991) has difficulty in knowing (and arguing) about the implications of these various studies for homosexuals.

When ëhomosexual' is used as other than a behavioral descriptor, empiricism suffers. Thus, the frequently cited ìAre children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals?î by Jenny, Roesler & Poyer (1994), who declined to use sexual behavior to classify. These researchers attempted a kind of indirect ëdiagnostic' use of ëhomosexual.' Jenny, et al . examined hospital charts about molested children from Denver Children's hospital for one year. The researchers did not interview the victims, caretakers, or perpetrators; instead they assumed that unless a perpetrator was designated ëhomosexual' on the hospital chart, the perpetrator was a heterosexual (!). Because many of the perpetrators were husbands or boyfriends of the mother (and thus presumably had sex with her), Jenny, et al. naively assumed they were not ëhomosexual.' Identifying only 2 of 269 perpetrators as ìgay or lesbianî from charts, and assuming that ~1% of adults ëare' homosexual, they concluded, ìno evidence is available from this data that children are at greater risk to be molested by identifiable homosexuals than by other adultsî (p. 44). Yet, a perpetrator of the same sex had molested 60 (22%) of the 269 children and descriptively each of these perpetrators would qualify as ëhomosexual.'

While unfulfilled desire is not included by defining ëhomosexuals' as those who have engaged in sex with their sex, it has the advantage of being objective in the sense that it could be visible to observers ñ an important component of empiricism. Since the motivations of a perpetrator are much more difficult to establish than actions, using ëhomosexual' descriptively is widespread. Thus, law enforcement and public health officials often use ìhomosexualî to describe a person who engages in same-sex sexual activity. Thus, ìadult homosexuals often persuade teen-aged boys to engage in homosexual conduct by offering them moneyî (State of Maryland Commission on Criminal Law, 1972) or ìa congregation [a gay bathhouse] of consenting homosexuals does not give immunity from the criminal statute which prohibits open, lewd, and lascivious conductî (331 So.2d 289 ) -- both of which employ ìhomosexualî in a descriptive rather than in a diagnostic or political sense. Likewise, the 1975 APA resolution sought protection for all those who ìengage in or have engaged inî homosexual acts ñ ignoring considerations of motive. In a similar vein, because so many of the men infected with HIV from sex with their sex also had sex with the opposite sex, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control abandoned ìhomosexualî and ìheterosexualî for terms that describe the behavior on which the classification is based. Thus the CDC's participation in the 1996 National Household Survey of Drug Abuse, as well as many large national sex surveys (Spira, Bajos & the ACSF group, 1994; Wellings, Field, Johnson, & Wadsworth, 1994), divided respondents into those who had engaged in same-sex sex [irrespective of the ages of partners or participation in opposite-sex sex] v . if they only engaged in opposite-sex sexual activity.

To lessen ambiguity, ìhomosexualî is used as a descriptor rather than a diagnosis in the following analysis of news stories. Perpetrators who raped same-sex victim(s) were designated homosexual [some were married and a few also violated opposite-sex victims, see Table 1]; those who raped only opposite-sex victims were designated heterosexual.

Method

Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, an Internet search service, scans the whole text in over 50 regional and national newspapers, largely in the US, but also including major papers in Australia, England, Canada, and New Zealand (e.g., the Baltimore Sun , Boston Globe , Independent [England], Ottawa Citizen [Canada]). Lexis-Nexis also scans the whole text of all wire services (e.g., Associated Press, United Press International). From 1980 through 2003, every news story in the newspapers or wire services that included ìfoster parentî and ìsexî or ìchildî or ìchild molestationî was examined. Only news stories or first-person accounts were tallied, not editorials or opinion pieces, so stories of primarily contemporaneous events were examined. Only a few of the stories listed the stated ësexual preferences' or ësexual orientation' of the perpetrators. So, as noted above, the kind of sex in which perpetrators were involved classified their sexual proclivities (e.g., perpetrators who violated same-sex victim(s) were designated homosexual; perpetrators who sexually violated only opposite-sex victims designated heterosexual). Since marital status is generally provided in stories about child molestation (the reaction of the spouse is newsworthy), where it was not reported, the perpetrator was scored as unmarried. Perpetrators were scored married if they were identified as married, widowed, or divorced at the time of the offense(s) since their married status often led to their foster status. Perpetrators were considered foster parents if either the story or perpetrator said so (this is not as open and shut as it would appear since reporters covering a molestation often quoted representatives of placement agencies as saying that they could not be sure that paper work had been completed or the placement fully endorsed). Victims were counted as listed in the news stories, and accusations were scored as true (no retrial exonerated a perpetrator, though a few increased or decreased the number of victims). ìSome,î ìmany,î and other terms indicating a number of victims were scored as 2 victims.

Since the same standard was applied to all alleged perpetrators in the database, as long as there was no bias in the kind of molestations (e.g., same-sex, opposite-sex) that made the press, the legal outcome is irrelevant. If a plea agreement removed a child's molestation from the conviction, that child's molestation was not counted in the victim totals. Molested children who were fostered or adopted were counted as victims. Instances where foster-children sexually interacted with each other or the natural children in the home were not included. Molestations in group settings (e.g., shelters, orphanages) were recorded separately. When it was unclear whether the facility was a group home (some homes foster a large number of children and reporting was often unclear), it was counted as a group home.

Results

Private homes : Of the 175 perpetrators, 154 (88%) were men (the victims' sex for 5 men and 1 woman could not be determined) (Table 1). Of the 149 men whose sex of victim could be determined, 76 (51%) were homosexual, and 72 (48%) were unmarried. Of the 20 women whose sex of victim(s) could be determined, 14 (70%) were homosexual. Of the 14 female homosexuals, 7 molested children along with 4 husbands (3 of these husbands scored homosexual, 1 heterosexual) and 3 cohabiting boyfriends (2 of whom scored heterosexual, 1 homosexual); no female heterosexuals molested with a male partner. Of the 76 homosexual men, 3 molested children along with wives, 1 with a girlfriend, and 1 with a homosexual partner; 1 heterosexual man molested the same girl(s) as his wife, 2 heterosexual men molested the same girl(s) as their cohabiting girlfriends.

Male homosexuals molested 198 (62%) of the 319 children victimized by men and female homosexuals 24 (70%) of the 32 children victimized by women (i.e., 2.6/ male homosexual and 1.7/ female homosexual perpetrator). The 73 nonhomosexual males molested 121 girls and the 6 nonhomosexual females molested 8 boys (i.e., 1.7/nonhomosexual male and 1.3/nonhomosexual female perpetrator). Of the 351 victims whose sex could be determined, men assaulted 319 (91%), homosexuals 222 (63%), and the unmarried 164 (47%).

News stories about foster parent molestation increased over time. Numbers of classifiable perpetrators increased from 13 for 1980-84, to 69 in the 2000s (Table 1). This increase was particularly evident among unmarried homosexuals ñ which rose from 4 (31%) perpetrators in 1980-84 to 26 (38%) in the 2000s; unmarried homosexuals accounted for 5 (20%) of 25 victims in 1980 to 1984 and 62 (44%) of 142 in the 2000s. Homosexuals accounted for 86 (58%) of 139 victims from 1980-1994 and 136 (70%) of 194 thereafter. From 1980 through 1994 for victims whose sex was determinable, 74 (57%) of the 130 were girls; after 1994 most were boys (115 [56%] of 204).

Group homes : The findings are summarized in Table 2. 15 (71%) of the 21 events involved homosexuality, and only 5 of the 31+ male perpetrators had not molested homosexually. All but one of the perpetrators in the 21 group home stories was male (it appears that the Portuguese woman was arrested because she aided the 9 men in their homosexual victimization of the boys, not because she had sex with any of them). While there is ambiguity regarding the ìdozens of perpetratorsî in Wales, most perpetrators there appear to have been homosexual [at the time, news commentators in both print and on TV in England remarked on this aspect of the scandal frequently]. The preponderance of boy victims (334 of 345 whose sex could be determined) is also consistent with a preponderance of homosexual perpetrators. Homosexual molestations in group settings increased over time with 1 event in 1980 to 1984, 1 for 1985 to 1989, then 2 for 1990 to 194, then 3 for 1995 to 1999, and 7 for 2000 through 2003.

upam da bodoči zlorabljeni ljudje ne bodo tožili države,ampak posameznike ki so zadevo promoviral in poslance ki so jo uzakonil!konec kolektivne odgovornosti,prevzemite jo nase če se že delate tako pametne!





web.archive.org/web/...x?tabid=62

"zakonik, omogoča vsem otrokom, ne glede na obliko družine, v kateri živijo, enake pravice in enako varstvo države" In kaj je tu lahko sploh narobe ? Morda to, da cerkvi več ne pustimo, da je "pravi" le otrok, spočet v zakonski zvezi, ostali pa so manjvredni bastardi in izmečki? Kdo normalen lahko danes to še zagovarja ? Ukvarjajte se raje s svojimi pedofili, hinavci klerikalni.

[lenninmccarthy]
Are Over A Third of Foster Parent Molestations Homosexual?

web.archive.org/web/...x?tabid=62

paul cameron? resno? on je šel s svojim prirejanjem raziskav tako daleč, da ga je stroka izobčila. www.youtube.com/watc...pVXKw6VLu8

en.wikipedia.org/wik...anizations

[posavski]
> [lenninmccarthy]
> Are Over A Third of Foster Parent Molestations Homosexual?
>
...
> web.archive.org/web/...x?tabid=62

paul cameron? resno? on je šel s svojim prirejanjem raziskav tako daleč, da ga je stroka izobčila. www.youtube.com/watc...pVXKw6VLu8

en.wikipedia.org/wik...anizations

ej,resn..ti pa v najboljši maniri boljševizma kuj v diskreditacijo človeka,pa še sram te ni..

najprej linkaš ateistični tv kanal z dvema brezveznikoma ki o delu in metodah camerona nimata kje plozat,ena grda baba pač ki se dela pametno in en wannabe brezveznik

www.atheist-experien...n_peeples/

potem pa linkaš izgon iz organizacije(ki ni edina v ameriki in od boga,khm,partije posvečena kot se dogaja pri nas) iz katere je cameron že izstopil sam predga je gospod precenik okurcu..

mimgrede,razioskoval je tud pasivno kajenje..tam so bile pa medtode ok,hehehehe..

Največ neopredeljenih do zakonika - 67 odstotkov - pa je med volivci stranke Desus.

Volilci Deusa se še vedno sprašujejo kako bo to vplivalo na penzijo :)

Še par mitov o DZ:
www.semza.si/alijeres/

Samo naj mi vsi skupaj ne nakladajo, da jim gre za otroke!
Družina ni le otrok in ne more vse izvirati le iz te predpostavke. Sicer pa nekateri v debatah okrog tega zakona zdravijo svoje travme, take in drugačne.
In naj končno nekdo pove zakaj imamo uradno toliko enostarševskih družin (samohranilke), neporočenih itd. Vse skupaj je čista ekonomija (otroški dodatki, plačilo vrtca, neprofitna najemna stanovanaj ...), ne pa neko prepričanje, liberalizem in svoboda. DENAR!!!

3.odstavek 117 člena omogoča da peder/lezbika posvoji otroka.
Ker jaz ne podpiram pristopov/razprav/zakonov, ki se ukvarjajo z promilnimi procenti družbe v kateri živim, bom glasoval proti.
SI pa želim, da zakonik reši tudi moj problem: živim z 3 ženami, 4 otroki, 2 prašičema in 2 opicama. Želim, da vsi dedujejo po meni. Kako zakonik rešuje mojo situacijo?
KRETENI

Ne grem na referendum.

Ob ekonomskih problemih, se mi zdi totalno kulturno bojevniško izdrkavanje.

Ta tema je zame 0.01% pomembnosti tega, da so za TEŠ 6 zagonili in vrgli v razne žepe stotine milijonov.

[Skippy]

Pa je ameriška družba 100x bolj normalna kot slovenska.

A res? No, o tem bi se dalo debatirati...

[Skippy]
> [ahafne]
> ZA

Zanimivo, da na forumu, kjer so polnih ust svobode, liberalizma, vitke države, človekovih pravic itd., dobiš minuse za stvar, ki z ostalimi nima nič. V ZDA takšne stvari funkcionirajo že desetletja (od svobodnih odločitev glede oplojevanja do posvojitev), pa nikjer drugje bolj ne cenijo družine kot tam. Pa je ameriška družba 100x bolj normalna kot slovenska.

Moje mnenje glede tega je tako, zelo komplicirano. Sem absolutno za to, da se najvec naredi v korist otroka. Ce je druzba dovolj zrela, da otroci v homoseksualni zvezi ne bodo trpeli zaradi sikaniranja, sem za posvojitve.

Problem je - in tudi iz raziskav slovenskega javnega mnenja se to vidi - da slovenska druzba ni dovolj zrela za to, in da bodo po moje otroci v teh zvezah mocno prizadeti.

Vem, da je to mnenje, ki bo dobilo minuse z ene in druge strani, ampak se mi zdi dalec najbolj racionalen nacin odlocanja. Jebat ga principi so eno, realnost pa drugo.

Res je, da imamo garantirano enakopravnost. Ampak je treba ravno otroke zrtvovati na oltarju enakopravnosti homoseksualnih zvez?

Pa da damo en drugacen primer. V mestu je park, ki je odprt za vse. Vsak mesec tam koga oropajo, vcasih tudi ubijejo ali posilijo. Bi otroka poslal igrat se v taksen park samo zato, da bi se borili za pravico do neoviranega gibanja po parku?

I thought so.

Čeprav nerad, priznam: sem zarobljeni gorenjski konzervativec. Poročen 31 let in oče treh odraslih otrok. Jebiga, nekako mi ne sede, da me bodo osebe, ki niso sposobne živeti v klasični družini (mož + žena + otroci) učile kaj in kako je prav. Ker, jest sem večinoma kar dokazal, da znam včasih stisniti zobe, ko je hudo. Če sem pošten, še večkrat jih je soproga; hvala ji. One pa večinoma ne. Če sem pravilno razumel njihove statuse. Ravno zato, ker vem, da odgovorno starševstvo ni enostavno se zavzemam za "pozitivno diskriminacijo" (kako blesav komunistični termin!) do klasičnih družin!
P: Aja, pa še to: a v istospolnih zvezah pa ni nikogar, na celem svetu, da bi bil alkoholik in nasilen do bližnjih?!?

Ni res, da bi bili otroci enakopravni. Otroci poročenih so diskriminirani: pri vrstah in plačilih za vrtce, pri štipendijah in v drugih materialnih pogledih.
Sedanji družinski zakonik pa je le izgovor, da se istospolnim podelijo statusi, ki jim ne pripadajo.
Otroci pisce in zagovornike zakonika bolj malo brigajo, so le izgovor. Lep izgovor, a samo to.

[turkda]
3.odstavek 117 člena omogoča da peder/lezbika posvoji otroka.
Ker jaz ne podpiram pristopov/razprav/zakonov, ki se ukvarjajo z promilnimi procenti družbe v kateri živim, bom glasoval proti.

Pi..ka vam matrna, kako vas ni sram lagat???

117. člen
(oče otroka, rojenega v zakonski zvezi)

(1) Za očeta otroka, rojenega v zakonski zvezi, velja mož otrokove matere.

(2) Če preneha zakonska zveza s smrtjo moža otrokove matere, otrok pa se rodi v 300 dneh po prenehanju zakonske zveze, velja za otrokovega očeta umrli materin mož.

(3) Za otrokovega očeta, rojenega v zakonski zvezi, ki jo je mati sklenila v 300 dneh po prenehanju prejšnje zakonske zveze, velja materin mož iz nove zakonske zveze, ne glede na razlog prenehanja prejšnje zakonske zveze.

[turkda]
3.odstavek 117 člena omogoča da peder/lezbika posvoji otroka.
Ker jaz ne podpiram pristopov/razprav/zakonov, ki se ukvarjajo z promilnimi procenti družbe v kateri živim, bom glasoval proti.
SI pa želim, da zakonik reši tudi moj problem: živim z 3 ženami, 4 otroki, 2 prašičema in 2 opicama. Želim, da vsi dedujejo po meni. Kako zakonik rešuje mojo situacijo?
KRETENI

Če bi glasoval ZA, je to prvi korak k rešitvi pasjejebskih klanov, islamskega mnogoženstva(ki ga tam seveda odpravljajo!)
Sem za zakon in uresničitev, da se pomaga vsem otrokom z resnično BREZPLAČNO šolo! Bo bolj zaleglo družinam, kjer je oče pobegnil k svojemu ljubimcu, otroci pa so padli v revščino.
Ne nam kazat kot primer tistih pet bogatih gejev iz Ljubljane brez otrok in pedofilskimi nagnjenji!
naj živijo v miru in ne sprevračajo večine in žagajo veje svojih pokojnin!

Meni je vseeno, ali sprejmejo ta zakon ali ne. Mi je pa argument enakopravnosti otrok zelo bedast. Kako bo v družbi, v kateri je predsodek norma in kompletna družbena ureditev sloni na predsodkih, otrok, ki ima dva očeta enakopraven otroku, ki ima očeta in mater?

Zakaj se non stop poudarja, da se zakon sprejema zaradi otrok, ko pa je vsakemu bebcu jasno, da se zakon sprejema zaradi homoseksualcev, ki si želijo otroke. Aja, zaradi predsodkov in lažje manipulacije.

Po tvoje je potem zaradi nezrelosti družbe treba otrokom homoseksualnih parov treba odvzeti pravice. Ker je družba nezrela, se je najbolje delati, da teh otrok ni?

ABSOLUTNO PROTI!!!!!!!!
Poslabšal bo položaj otrok, postavil jih bo k istopsolnim partnerjem -ljudem z osebnostno motnjo in svoje otroške travme bodo prenašali na otroke.
Ne dovolimo ,da SPREVRŽENOST UZAKONIJO!!!

[Jackk]
Meni je vseeno, ali sprejmejo ta zakon ali ne. Mi je pa argument enakopravnosti otrok zelo bedast. Kako bo v družbi, v kateri je predsodek norma in kompletna družbena ureditev sloni na predsodkih, otrok, ki ima dva očeta enakopraven otroku, ki ima očeta in mater?

Zakaj se non stop poudarja, da se zakon sprejema zaradi otrok, ko pa je vsakemu bebcu jasno, da se zakon sprejema zaradi homoseksualcev, ki si želijo otroke. Aja, zaradi predsodkov in lažje manipulacije.

Seveda - nič o tem, da bi odpravili predsodke, ampak v imenu predsodkov pišimo zakone.

[adana]
ABSOLUTNO PROTI!!!!!!!!
Poslabšal bo položaj otrok, postavil jih bo k istopsolnim partnerjem -ljudem z osebnostno motnjo in svoje otroške travme bodo prenašali na otroke.
Ne dovolimo ,da SPREVRŽENOST UZAKONIJO!!!

Kam jih bo postavil? Omogočil bo le očetovemu partnerju (mamini partnerici), da bo posvojil otroka, če bo ta ostal brez drugega biološkega otroka ali pa se mu ta odpovedal.

Kako vas i sram oglašat se, pa nimate pojma, za kaj gre...