Elton John, David Furnish, and baby Lev

[LucyDuke]

Who do you think brought it to the medias attention?

Probably the media.

But anyway, the stories are about the kid, not the men. Painting this as some kind of self-serving publicity drama is both wrong and completely missing the point.

 

[MobBoss]

Probably the media.

Wrong answer. Thats not how that works. I gurantee you it was someone from Elton Johns camp that notified the press in order to get it on the news.

But anyway, the stories are about the kid, not the men.

No, its about all involved. And your kidding yourself if you think this came from anywhere other than someone working for Elton John.

Painting this as some kind of self-serving publicity drama is both wrong and completely missing the point.

Actually, its not. Its precisely how people like you get manipulated into feeling sorry for someone like Elton John because the big bad old orphanage actually has rules to ensure that their kids are placed in homes with parents that arent the kids great grandparents age. The number of assumptions being drawn here - for example that the orphanage is essentially a gulag - are simply ridiculous. Its all meant to garner sympathy at the cost of any real facts being known. Why have facts when crazy assumptions are so much more fun? Why think anything through logically when emotion does such a better job of it?

Yup. There is a word for all that. Its called propaganda. And your falling for it hook, line and sinker.

 

[LucyDuke]

I'm not playing with you, Mobby, that post is a load of crap that I'd rather not go back and forth twenty times about. You want this to be about the men. Compassionate people want it to be about the boy. Yes, he'd be better off with Elton and David than in the nicest orphanage in the world. Find somebody else to bicker with, k? Love, Lucy.

 

[Left]

Exactly. The law is the law is the law, and it may not surprise ye to know I'm not really in favour of it being changed on account of someone's wealth.

Are you trying to use class conflict as an excuse to block the adoption of a terminally ill, orphaned child? At some point in your leftist career your going to have to start caring about the poor instead of just hating the rich, man.
Any law that prevents someone from extending a helping hand to the underpriviledge is a wrong one, no matter how bourgeois Elton John is.

 

[MobBoss]

I'm not playing with you, Mobby, that post is a load of crap that I'd rather not go back and forth twenty times about. You want this to be about the men. Compassionate people want it to be about the boy. Yes, he'd be better off with Elton and David than in the nicest orphanage in the world. Find somebody else to bicker with, k? Love, Lucy.

My dear, dear Lucy, you miss the point utterly. I am saying its about everyone involved...not just the men...not just the kid. Its all part of the same package. You cant simply ignore one part to justify your arguement. Thats not how it works.

You also play false in that only compassionate people want this to be about the boy? Where will that same compassion be when the kid is 16 and Elton is almost 80? Is it fair to the kid to unload that kind of emotional baggage on him in having to deal with that? In addition to him already being HIV positive? Not to mention the not-so-veiled insinuation that if you dont want Elton to adopt this kid why...your not compassionate.

Hogwash. Bottom line, I dont think you have clue one whats good for this kid and what isnt. Why? Because you allow the Joy Behars of the world to peddle their emotional crap and you gladly lap it up. Why not get past all the assumptions and find out some truth of the situation for a change? Get away from the media hype and actually find out whats up.

I also disagree with the insinuation that any household is better than an orphanage, let alone the nicest orphanage in the world. Do you think all orphanages are characitures of Little Orphan Annie and populated by uncaring and harsh people? Or is it a possibility that some people actually work at orphanages because they actually CARE about kids? Hmmmm?

You are quite into believing old sterotypes arent you? Do you have any real proof that where this kid is right now is actually a gulag? Or do you care to admit the possible hype in that description meant to pull those wittle heartstrings?

 

[MobBoss]

Are you trying to use class conflict as an excuse to block the adoption of a terminally ill, orphaned child? At some point in your leftist career your going to have to start caring about the poor instead of just hating the rich, man.
Any law that prevents someone from extending a helping hand to the underpriviledge is a wrong one, no matter how bourgeois Elton John is.

Terminally ill? How long has Magic Johnson been 'terminally ill' being HIV positive like this kid is?

I really fail to see why people think they are doing this kid such a huge favor by being adopted by Elton John. If rich and famous peoples kids are an example, its quite possible he could die from drugs/alcohol etc like so many other stars kids have long before his HIV turns to AIDs and does him in. How many messed up rich/famous kids are there in the world? Like I said, I dont know if allowing the adoption to actually happen is really doing the kid any real favors.

 

[Left]

Treatment for HIV costs $9,000 per person per year, more than the average annual income of Ukraine and it isn't a cure. Magic Johnson has the money to pursue treatment. I assume Ukrainian orphanages do not. How untreated HIV will manifest in the kid is hard to say, but its not going to be better than the treatment he can recieve living with an english millionaire.

As far as your rock-star-kid thing, thats an unaddressable non-argument.

 

[LucyDuke]

@Mobby

Any and every excuse to crap on it, huh?

I'm just curious, why haven't you voted in the poll?

 

[Rossiya]

He's constipated.

 

[downtown]

When I first read this, I was pretty against it simply on the basis of age...a 60 year old really shouldn't be adopting a baby.

But the posts in this thread have changed my mind. El_Mac said it best...these laws are put in place to serve the interests of the kid. If the interests of the kid are best served by allowing the adoption (which is appears patently obvious that they are), then let them have the kid.

 

[Ecofarm]

/shrug. I dont make assumptions either way in this case. I dont know if Elton John would be a great parent or an absolute sorry ass one.

Dude, have you heard his music? He's freaking awesome! Money be damned, he's a caring and beautifully articulate person (not to mention his world-class talent as a musician) who anyone would be lucky to know, let alone be saved by. His charity and involvement in civil and human rights, on large scales even, should be lauded. We're not talking about Paris Hilton here.

Exactly. The law is the law is the law, and it may not surprise ye to know I'm not really in favour of it being changed on account of someone's wealth.

Very well played. See argument above. What about exceptions for particularly good and amazingly talented people?


Sorry kid, instead of one of the most incredible people alive today... you will be taken care of by Guntur and Grechen and their 10 other children. Have a nice day.


Excuse me, I'm drunk on elitism; I need to go lay down.

 

[.Shane.]

I'm w/ RRW. If the law is such that its not legal for them to adopt AND there is no legal precedent of allowing exceptions that would cover EJ, then, sorry, but he's not legally entitled to do so.

That said, on a moral level, given what the likely outcome is for a child w/ AIDs in a Ukranian orphanage, I think its something that should be allowed.

I also agree w/ the sentiment that if they were allowed to adopt you'd need a legal will showing how the kid will be cared because of the more advanced age of his parents.

Has anyone called ACORN for help resolving this?

 

[MobBoss]

Treatment for HIV costs $9,000 per person per year, more than the average annual income of Ukraine and it isn't a cure. Magic Johnson has the money to pursue treatment. I assume Ukrainian orphanages do not. How untreated HIV will manifest in the kid is hard to say, but its not going to be better than the treatment he can recieve living with an english millionaire.

As far as your rock-star-kid thing, thats an unaddressable non-argument.

If Elton John wanted I am sure he could pay for HIV treatment for every kid at that orphanage if he so desired to do so.

When I first read this, I was pretty against it simply on the basis of age...a 60 year old really shouldn't be adopting a baby.

But the posts in this thread have changed my mind. El_Mac said it best...these laws are put in place to serve the interests of the kid. If the interests of the kid are best served by allowing the adoption (which is appears patently obvious that they are), then let them have the kid.

What if its determined that the best interests of the kid are in disallowing the adoption because it doesnt conform to the law?

 

[Left]

If Elton John wanted I am sure he could pay for HIV treatment for every kid at that orphanage if he so desired to do so.

And the kid would still have no parents. It seems like your arguing that not having a father is better than having Elton John as a father.

 

[MobBoss]

Dude, have you heard his music? He's freaking awesome! Money be damned, he's a caring and beautifully articulate person (not to mention his world-class talent as a musician) who anyone would be lucky to know, let alone be saved by. His charity and involvement in civil and human rights, on large scales even, should be lauded. We're not talking about Paris Hilton here.

Well, lets play a game. I will give you a few items and you tell me if that person should be considered viable to adopt a child.

1. Lifetime battle with drug and alcohol addiction.
2. Overdosed at least once on drugs.
3. Lifetime battle with bulemia.
4. Of questionable health, having to wear a pacemaker because of irregular heart beat.
5. Is 62 years old.
6. Formerly addicted to prescription morphine.
7. Widely know for this temper tantrums. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX0v_bcOHH4

Etc. Etc.

Given all that, would you think such a person ok to adopt a baby?

Sure, he is a great person, great musician, etc. All that doesnt make him necessarily a great parent however.

And the kid would still have no parents. It seems like your arguing that not having a father is better than having Elton John as a father.

Having had an abusive father, yeah, I can pretty much say there are some things better than having an ass as a father.

 

[civ_king]

they are ****ing old, no way!

 

[Lone Wolf]

The age requirement I can understand. Don't see why the adopter needs to be married, though.

 

[RedRalph]

Are you trying to use class conflict as an excuse to block the adoption of a terminally ill, orphaned child? At some point in your leftist career your going to have to start caring about the poor instead of just hating the rich, man.
Any law that prevents someone from extending a helping hand to the underpriviledge is a wrong one, no matter how bourgeois Elton John is.

It has nothing to do with class conflict. Do you or do you not agree that the law should apply to everyone equally regardless of how rich they are? If they want to help kids so much maybe they should donate half of their vast, vast fortune to all orphanages in Ukraine, instead of one kid who caught their eye. Please.

 

[Ecofarm]

And so RRW and MB agreed, and henceforth all was meaningless.

 

[Richard Cribb]

And so RRW and MB agreed, and henceforth all was meaningless.

Especially since you can count me in as well.
It so happens that this is the second time this week I agree with MobBoss.
Anyone is free to draw what conclusions they like from that.