Kthebean Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Benefit to child being with parents who love and care for the child, regardless of whether the parent smokes or not. Risk to child if parent does not smoke anywhere near child - negligable. Simple. Oh you wily word twisting thing you We are not talking about the benefit of children being with loving parents. We are talking about the benefit of the parents smoking. There is no benefit. And there is risk to the child. People are saying 'isn't it better for them to be with loving parents' -being a smoker is not like being black or gay. You can give up smoking - easily, if it is for something you really want, like to adopt a child. I smoke myself, but if I was told I had to give up if I really wanted to adopt a child, I would. Simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Oh you wily word twisting thing you We are not talking about the benefit of children being with loving parents. We are talking about the benefit of the parents smoking. There is no benefit. And there is risk to the child. People are saying 'isn't it better for them to be with loving parents' -being a smoker is not like being black or gay. You can give up smoking - easily, if it is for something you really want, like to adopt a child. I smoke myself, but if I was told I had to give up if I really wanted to adopt a child, I would. Simple Hark at you. Pot and kettle eh? If a one of those wanting to adopt happens to smoke and is therefore not elligable to adopt, then the child does not get the opportunity to possibly live with loving parents who can provide for the childs needs. If those who make the rules would prefer to keep the child in care until it reaches whatever age - then that is their decision, but the child then loses out on being with a loving family - regardless of whether there are smokers or not present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kthebean Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Smoking has no benefit to you. Smokers think differently. Drinking until you are drunk is dumb. Eating garlic or indian meals makes you smell. Being a couch potato who does not smoke is really really bad for your health. I am doubtful that there is nothing in your life that can be classed as unhealthy. I doubt that everything you do is beneficial to everyone. Welcome to the world where everyone is not as perfect as you. Hey, we might have different opinons about this but theres no need to be rude to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Hey, we might have different opinons about this but theres no need to be rude to me. Sorry. Which bit was the rude bit. Sometimes my fingers type ahead of my brain cell. Appologies for any rudeness. Was unintentional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kthebean Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Hark at you. Pot and kettle eh? If a one of those wanting to adopt happens to smoke and is therefore not elligable to adopt, then the child does not get the opportunity to possibly live with loving parents who can provide for the childs needs. If those who make the rules would prefer to keep the child in care until it reaches whatever age - then that is their decision, but the child then loses out on being with a loving family - regardless of whether there are smokers or not present. Unless the prospective parents gave up smoking. Why is it pot/kettle? I would give up smoking if I was going to have a child - if I was pregnant, or planning to adopt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Unless the prospective parents gave up smoking. Why is it pot/kettle? I would give up smoking if I was going to have a child - if I was pregnant, or planning to adopt. Then you agree that there are instances where a child would be refused a caring, loving family simply because one of the parents happens to smoke? You also agree that this refusal is unlikely to be in the child's best interests? Let me put it simply - 50 children in a care home or 50 children with loving caring families, regardless of whether there are smokers involved or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kthebean Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Or the third way, where 35 couples give up smoking, in order to be able to adopt, and live happily ever after. And the other 15 refuse, on the grounds that they see their right to smoke as more important than wanting adopting a child. There is enough help and support there to give up smoking if people really want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Or the third way, where 35 couples give up smoking, in order to be able to adopt, and live happily ever after. And the other 15 refuse, on the grounds that they see their right to smoke as more important than wanting adopting a child. There is enough help and support there to give up smoking if people really want to. I did not give that as an option though did I? The question is - would you prefer to have 50 children in a care home, or 60 children with caring loving parents who may or may not smoke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 When I was a lad you could cut smog with a blunt knife and eat it for yer tea - and a proper treat it was too. Back in them days smoking was the done thing by a big majority of addicts. Just added to the flavour of the smog brew. Nowt wrong with a bit of fag smoke to help you choke up the rubbish you've been inhaling all day whilst cycling behind one of them mucky buses. I blame Humphrey Bogart for my smoking from the age of thirteen, Bogie was never without a Camel in his gob, which probably contributed to that famous lisp in his voice. I was scandalized by the fact that he'd chuck it away after two drags then light another, while I had to finish my Woodbine with a pin in it so I could get two more puffs:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonofAna Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 I blame Humphrey Bogart for my smoking from the age of thirteen, Bogie was never without a Camel in his gob, which probably contributed to that famous lisp in his voice. I was scandalized by the fact that he'd chuck it away after two drags then light another, while I had to finish my Woodbine with a pin in it so I could get two more puffs:) When I were a lad everyone smoked. Not everyone smoked tobacco though. It were weird seeing young uns in their prams without a parkdrive shoved in their gobs to keep em quiet. And listening to them coughs you could easily tell when someone was going to snuff it. Ah for the good old days :hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts