Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Have we covered this today - Elton John, the daddy.



Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,888
West west west Sussex




The Antikythera Mechanism

The oldest known computer
NSC Patron
Aug 7, 2003
8,087
Sixty Years On

Music by Elton John
Lyrics by Bernie Taupin

Who'll walk me down to church when I'm sixty years of age
When the ragged dog they gave me has been ten years in the grave
And senorita play guitar, play it just for you
My rosary has broken and my beads have all slipped through

You've hung up your great coat and you've laid down your gun
You know the war you fought in wasn't too much fun
And the future you're giving me holds nothing for a gun
I've no wish to be living sixty years on

Yes I'll sit with you and talk let your eyes relive again
I know my vintage prayers would be very much the same
And Magdelena plays the organ, plays it just for you
Your choral lamp that burns so low when you are passing through

And the future you're giving me holds nothing for a gun
I've no wish to be living sixty years on
 


Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,921
Brighton
John is 62. They've been together for 17 years. Why do it now?

According to the report I read, they wanted to wait until Elton was willing to put a hold on his touring.

The poor kid will have to deal with the loss of one of his parents at a comparatively young age.

When is Elton or David going to die?
 


Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia


Frutos

.
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
May 3, 2006
36,304
Northumberland
He's not a first time father though and he also didnt go out and buy the baby.

So yes the age is the same, but the situation is quite in contrast.

You referred to this situation as a "selfish act" because one man has had a child at 63 and won't be around for a lot of said child's life, then make an excuse why it doesn't matter for another man to have a child at 66.

On those grounds alone, why are you defending one and condemning the other?
 




Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
You referred to this situation as a "selfish act" because one man has had a child at 63 and won't be around for a lot of said child's life, then make an excuse why it doesn't matter for another man to have a child at 66.

On those grounds alone, why are you defending one and condemning the other?

Maybe because one of them has gone out and bought a baby like a commodity?

If a baby meant that much to him he'd have gottne one long ago.

Babies shouldn't be like dogs and you just go out and buy one when you feel like it. So yes he is a selfish prick.

Especially given how many young couples want a baby yet through lack of finances have to go through hell to try and achive their dream.

So yes Stewart is being selfish also, but at least he hasn't gone out and bought his first child at 66.

One situation is far more disturbing than the other.
 


Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,921
Brighton
Maybe because one of them has gone out and bought a baby like a commodity?

If a baby meant that much to him he'd have gottne one long ago.

Babies shouldn't be like dogs and you just go out and buy one when you feel like it. So yes he is a selfish prick.

Especially given how many young couples want a baby yet through lack of finances have to go through hell to try and achive their dream.

So yes Stewart is being selfish also, but at least he hasn't gone out and bought his first child at 66.

One situation is far more disturbing than the other.

So, the gay man waits until he is at a place in his life when he can dedicate his life to raising a child, then wants one so much he pays for one. And is criticised for it.
The straight man has been popping them out regardless of his touring schedule and time available to be a part of the child's life (almost as if it was unplanned and he's simply deciding not to abort the child rather than because he wanted one)* and he is praised for it.


*No, I don't know if Rod had planned his latest child, or what his motivation for keeping the child is, but if you're putting a sinister twist on surrogacy, I don't see why I can't put a sinister twist on a natural conception, since they are not always planned ad some people are just opposed to abortions.
 
Last edited:


bhaexpress

New member
Jul 7, 2003
27,627
Kent
Maybe because one of them has gone out and bought a baby like a commodity?

If a baby meant that much to him he'd have gottne one long ago.

Babies shouldn't be like dogs and you just go out and buy one when you feel like it. So yes he is a selfish prick.

Especially given how many young couples want a baby yet through lack of finances have to go through hell to try and achive their dream.

So yes Stewart is being selfish also, but at least he hasn't gone out and bought his first child at 66.

One situation is far more disturbing than the other.

Be honest, as a Catholic does this not rather fix your opinions ? We all know the Catholic Church doesn't like gays (unless they're paedophiles of course).
 




Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
62,697
The Fatherland


Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
So, the gay man waits until he is at a place in his life when he can dedicate his life to raising a child, then wants one so much he pays for one. And is criticised for it.
The straight man has been popping them out regardless of his touring schedule and time available to be a part of the child's life (almost as if it was unplanned and he's simply deciding not to abort the child rather than because he wanted one)* and he is praised for it.


*No, I don't know if Rod had planned his latest child, or what his motivation for keeping the child is, but if you're putting a sinister twist on surrogacy, I don't see why I can't put a sinister twist on a natural conception, since they are not always planned ad some people are just opposed to abortions.

His being gay has no relevance. If his partner was a 58 year old woman it would still be ludicrous.

He could have dedicated his life to children 20 years ago, except apparently music and getting f***ed up on drugs was more important then.

Plenty of people have given up careers to start a family and done it gladly.


If mother nature had intended for humans to keep breeding and parenting children until the day they drop she'd have no bothered with menopause.
 


Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
Be honest, as a Catholic does this not rather fix your opinions ? We all know the Catholic Church doesn't like gays (unless they're paedophiles of course).

More anti-catholic rubbish that has no relevance.

The fact that you link gays to paedophiles shows you're pretty out of touch with things yourself.
 








Lady Whistledown

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 7, 2003
47,630
Not entirely.

John is 62. They've been together for 17 years. Why do it now?

The poor kid will have to deal with the loss of one of his parents at a comparatively young age.

The average life expectancy for a bloke here is about 79, 80 isn't it? Probably older still amongst the richest of society.

So if he loses one of his parents at 18 or 20....it's not quite the same as losing one at 5 or 6 is it? Besides, there have been plenty of examples of blokes fathering kids in their sixties, so I don't really see what difference it makes that they've got a child via the surrogate route.
 




Lady Whistledown

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 7, 2003
47,630
And yet in nature it's the fittest, the strongest the best looking that get the females in breeding condition.

You don't get the Jeremy Kyle Show in Australia then?
 


Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,921
Brighton
So yes the age is the same, but the situation is quite in contrast.

Really?

His sexuality has little to do with this issue.

It's the fact a 63 year old man went out and bought a baby.


Call me old fashioned but the purpose of having a child is hopefully that you'll be there for them through their life to support them, mentor them and just be there for them.

Given he'll probably be dead by the time he's 18 it does seem a rather selfish act.

Elton - 63
Rod - 65

Elton - Announced plans to stop touring to raise child
Rod - has not

His being gay has no relevance. If his partner was a 58 year old woman it would still be ludicrous.

He could have dedicated his life to children 20 years ago, except apparently music and getting f***ed up on drugs was more important then.

Elton - History of drug use (when having no kids in his life to worry about)
Rod - History of drug use (I don't know when his admitted drug use took place, but his first child was born in 1964)

Also

Elton - 1 divorce
Rod - 2 Divorces

Elton - First child
Rod - Has 7 children already (with 5 women)

Elton - Been with current partner since 1993
Rod - Been with current partner since 2007

Elton - Gay
Rod - Straight

If it's not that Elton is gay, is it that he has only had one failed marriage (due in large part to being gay and unhappy with a woman)? Or is it that only old men who already have children can have more?

And yet in nature it's the fittest, the strongest the best looking that get the females in breeding condition.

There's very few Hugh Heffners in the Animal Kingdom.

"Survival of the fittest" is an oversimplification. What the term means is "survival to the age of reproduction of the best adapted to the environment". I could be the fastest swimmer in the world, but if I live in a forest that means nothing, where fitness is measured in ability to navigate trees, find food etc. It is pretty much irrelevant to humans these days.

There are plenty of Hugh Heffners in the human kingdom, that is plenty of rich men who get women despite their age or lack of "fitness". It is about what they can provide and afford. Elton can afford the very best for his child, the best healthcare for himself and David Furnish, giving them a very good chance of being around into their son's adulthood. He is taking time off of work to raise the child.

So again, why is it you are not so opposed to Rod (65, admitted drug user, multiple kids with multiple partners, no plans to give up touring reformed drug user, straight), but are opposed to Elton (63, no kids, long term relationship, giving up touring, reformed drug user, gay)?
 
Last edited:


bhaexpress

New member
Jul 7, 2003
27,627
Kent
More anti-catholic rubbish that has no relevance.

The fact that you link gays to paedophiles shows you're pretty out of touch with things yourself.

What a sorry excuse for a reply. I know that the Catholic Church in most countries are anti gay and why notr mention the paedophile angle ? How do you explain it ? As a matter of fact I was watching a program about what happened to the Serbs and Jews in Yugoslavia during World War 2. You should have a look at it and figure out why I have such contempt for the Catholic Church.
 


Race

The Tank Rules!
Aug 28, 2004
7,822
Hampshire
I feel sorry for Elton John's new baby boy. He's gonna be at least 8 before he learns the facts about the sniggers behind his back and fully realises....








Watford are a really shit football team.
 








Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here