Elton John and his partner David Furnish had their first child a few days ago - baby Zachary was born to a surrogate mother on Christmas Day.
A new baby who is wanted, provided for and loved is always something to celebrate, and the congratulations from Elton’s celebrity and media pals have been flooding in. But those congratulations are nothing more than a piss in the ocean of criticism and revulsion that is being fired in the direction of the new fathers.
Well, I suppose there always ethical questions… is it right to create a new child through surrogacy, when so many already existing children are without a home or a family to love and provide for them? But plenty of heterosexual couples make babies via surrogacy or IVF, so there’s not much of a problem here. ..
And Elton John is a little old, at 63… but his partner is only 48. Men can naturally make babies well beyond either of these ages, and much older women in heterosexual relationships have babies with the help of science frequently, so no problems with that…
But… THEY’RE GAY. omg.
Daily Mail columnist Bel Mooney came out with the typical no-offense-but-I’m-about-to-say-something-really-offensive response…
Let me immediately say that I don’t have any objection to a gay couple (male or female) becoming parents. Some people do — and assemble passionate and cogent arguments to make their case.
But I certainly do not believe that heterosexual couples have the monopoly on caring or being good parents. How could that be the case with so much evidence to the contrary?
…immediately followed by…
I wince to think of baby Zachary Jackson Levon Furnish-John coming home from school in four years’ time and asking David or Elton: ‘But who is my mummy?’
Um. Ok. Why is the automatic assumption that gay-parenting is made up of secrets and lies? The “who is my mummy” question is pretty similar to the “where do babies come from” question. And if a child’s questions are answered factually and with love, then no problems will occur.
The problems experienced by children of gay parents are not experienced because their parents are gay – but because of the reactions of the people around them to the fact that they have two mothers or fathers.
Zachary Furnish-John is 5 days old, and the process of fucking him up has already begun. Not by his parents. But by homophobes and people overwhelmed by hate and fear.
People like the wonderful citizens of the internet who said things like this:
Sick, sick, sick, this is ridiculous, soon the world will be taken over by gay’s
obsene
SICK
Absolute sickening the morals of the gutter from a person of proven depravity
I shudder to think how the child will be brought up! A child needs a father and motherly upbringing not by two men who are both homosexual (the word gay has been butchered from it’s original pleasant meaning).
How can a homosexual man be a woman? How is the child going to feel when he starts to grown and see other children with a mother and a father? Seems to me that some people are more interested in the rights of homosexual couples than the right of a child, male or female, to have a mother and father ( for those with a simplistic and selfish mindset, that is, father = male and mother = female, they are quite easy to tell apart).
I thought it was interesting that they made sure the child was a male. Does make you wonder what the real motive is. I know the laws of the Ukraine and I also know how you can get around those laws – Gruivna ($$$$$)
I pity this poor child in his later life. What will happen when they get him in bed with them. Will they take turns in bathing him?. It does not matter what education he receives he will end up a very backward adult. How sick these people are who support this kind of action? Very sick I should say.
disgusting
P AEDOPHILES
Very, very, very Sick !!
paedo rock, hang the sick f—–s. no child should be allowed to be within a mile of these unhealthy parasitic low life ****’s
Freaks should not be allowed to have children living with them end of
Its an absolute outrage. Shame on the person who sold them the child you are as disgraceful as those two
A disgrace. They just want something to play with in their disgusting old age, why else would they specify a boy, having failed to buy one in the Ukraine. They should keep themselves to themselves and interbreed, and discover the thing we all know, that it’s not natural. As always, too many do gooders in this world who only want to appease.
Anyone who agrees with what these two perverts have done is as sick, twisted and disgusting as they are!!!
just another, MUST HAVE accessory, for this pair of poofters.
Its just sick and un-natural, end of..
SICK SICK SICK another trainee for the gay society
I thought there were laws to protect children from freaks and weirdos.
Sick and very very wrong, what is this world coming to?
Sickening indulgent self righteous faggots -they both suck! -o sooooory no pun intended
Utter disgust at reading this. Another pair of mincers getting headlines for all the wrong reasons.
What I would like to know is why is it alright with the establishment for two perverts to rear a child but for the same child to sit on Father Christmas’s, knee is forbidden and before all the do-gooders jump up and down remember the only reason homosexuality was legalised was because of all the MP;s, Judges and Councillors who getting NAMED and SHAMED.
Forgive my ignorance but has either of these perverts had any input in the baby making process as in filling the turkey baster?
All from the comments on this article. At least they removed the one saying “he won’t need to be breastfed – he’ll be prostate milked”…
The Daily Mail comments section do remind ye of why having a cheka is a good idea.
One of my old school pals writes about his very successful and happy childhood with his lesbian maws http://conorpendergrast.wordpress.com/category/same-sex-lgbt-stuff/
Some of the comments on that MSN article make me want to facepalm. I’m sorry, but being ‘homosexuel’ is not ‘a illness’.
The fact that those minds jump to the conclusion of the child being “prostate milked” is more disturbing than most things I’ve heard. Those are ill minds.
I always kind of forget that this type of outright homophobia actually exists. I guess I’m travelling in the right circles…
Some Guardian chump nicked my idea for an article! What an outrage! http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/dec/29/national-newspapers-elton-john
“is it right to create a new child through surrogacy, when so many already existing children are without a home or a family to love and provide for them? But plenty of heterosexual couples make babies via surrogacy or IVF, so there’s not much of a problem here…”
Personally, if I wanted to become a parent and couldn’t naturally have a child, I think I would see adopting a child who would otherwise be deprived of a loving home as the best option. I don’t necessarily have a problem with surrogacy in general, but I’m not sure if I agree with “commercial” surrogacy, or “mail-order” babies. If a woman wants to carry a baby for a couple, be they heterosexual or homosexual, as an act of charity or friendship, then fair enough. But I’m not sure about a couple paying a clinic and the surrogate mother for producing a baby on their behalf. I know its not similar to buying a “mail-order bride”, in that it’s hardly going against the best wishes of the unborn child/embryo, but I think it might leave women who struggle to make ends meet open to exploitation by “surrogacy” clinics; especially in poorer places such as Ukraine and India where paid surrogate mothers tend to be from poor backgrounds.
I’m sorry for going off on a slight tangent, and I’ll admit that surrogacy and IVF are issues of which I’m ignorant of a lot of the facts and hence find it hard forming a reasoned opinion.