But you didn't read about them in a national newspaper.
The issue here is the woeful quality of the reporting, not the fact that two married guys are starting a family together.
(, Wed 14 Feb 2018, 16:40, Share, Reply)
I agree there, the reporting is atrocious, "They have not revealed any more details about the pregnancy, including whether or not a surrogate is involved."
I would have wanted to see the BBC list all the other options they had whilst holding up the ultrasound.
(
Draconacticus Reject shampoo. Demand real poo!, Wed 14 Feb 2018, 16:46,
Share,
Reply)
That line wasn't in the original article.
It originally read as if they had somehow reproduced without the aid of a third party.
(, Wed 14 Feb 2018, 18:17, Share, Reply)
As reported by the BBC. As funded by a mandatory tax, enforced by criminal liability.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Wed 14 Feb 2018, 16:46,
Share,
Reply)
The first thing I say about the subject at 15:33 is that it's a news story based entirely and exclusively on a social media post.
I realise you're determined to dishonesty misrepresent as a homophobe, please don't pretend to know what I think.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Wed 14 Feb 2018, 17:07,
Share,
Reply)
no the first thing you said at 15:24 was 'this isnt normal or natural'
(, Wed 14 Feb 2018, 17:27, Share, Reply)
You're reading sarcasm into that remark. Well done Benny.
Less than 1% of parents do this, ergo it is not normal. I think we can take as read there was some kind of medical intervention, IVF or equivalent, ergo not natural. Neither is a criticism or judgment, just an observation. Stop pretending something unusual is normal.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Wed 14 Feb 2018, 19:04,
Share,
Reply)