The newspapers which refer to Mr Felt Belpietro and never miss an opportunity to demonstrate cultural backwardness, immorality, professional and increasingly a real idiot (hidden behind the complacency hyperbolic, typical of those being unintelligent can not see beyond their own vision of things: in short, get there, poor things, there is little to do). We start from the case
Fini. Can a journalist blow a case just "rumors"? It is professional to write the piece and then say "now expect other (ie the judges) look for evidence?". An anonymous Pugliese was told casually Belpietro (known to be easily accessible by anyone), at a particularly appropriate in the political situation, a 'huge' and Belpietro doing? Search for evidence, any supporting evidence, as would a journalist worthy of this name? Not at all. Share magnitude as it is: Fini would be concocting a fake bomb to himself and then put the blame on Berlusconi. It is certain that Belpietro false attacks they will be enough to see the trouble that is passing her ex-boss basis in this regard. But his experience on does not, journalistically, this type of behavior. Belpietro, and Felt, should understand once and for all who are not at the bar (of course the number of newspaper readers would be the reference of the patrons of a bar in the suburbs if they did not offer the limelight from the television press releases), that we are not to do 'du' chatter between noiartri. Journalism is (was, because now in Italy ...) a serious work, the journalist has a responsibility, its subject is (or should be) the facts . Then there will be those who have the task of expressing opinions about these facts. But the facts (and by this means events that have objective evidence) are essential for this job. Otherwise you are writers, storytellers, comedians, fantasists, opinion bar, Minzolini, Vespa, but not journalists. The containers of its "invention" in this case could not be the newspapers, the newspapers (or news), but other media incornicino their utterances precisely as a story, novel, joke, joke simple, entertainment. And to think that these so-called professionals pen, they are guaranteed the same hardcore sticking his head down and Spatuzza Ciancimino (not an anonymous Puglia that has heard someone say something about someone else), when they could just go across half of the Premier (of course). "Just trust the word of repentance Spatuzza like clockwork," screaming like madmen, "Just give credit to the psychotic delusions of Ciancimino, tear their hair. "We need evidence, otherwise the words are hot air," they say. Absolutely, in fact, "Verba Volant", but "scripta manent" and you, the print reckless, superficial morality - your yes to watch or rather bribed - champions of injustice, you just "write." Do not be surprised if you then click the complaints do not make the victims because the perpetrators are, do not shout incoherently scandal when someone decides to give you back tit for tat, you are, if not daily, at least a semblance of men!
also decide to dismiss the case, "Elton John" , which is expected, observers willing to comparison (normal to journalists), intelligent and in tune with the evident needs of this new century, with the inevitable change of costume (which change much despite the die-hard reactionaries and ubiquitous) call important considerations, an open confrontation (because half of us are lives and personalities - as children - that are being built just across the relations) with a vulgarity as to define a man, "Mama," a show of superficiality worthy of the worst troglodytes, has dell'icredibile really. A homosexual is not a "uoma" dear Belpietro and Felt, or a "woman" in the same way as each of you would not be for some an "idiot" (but really an idiot!). A homosexual is a man or woman, without any confusion. So may be either a father or a mother. And in this case, both parents can be a good father or bad fathers. Obviously the relationship with the child, each will provide their own sensibility and - hopefully - will do their best to contribute to a peaceful development of the personality and character of the child. But in this case you should still think its the best way to prepare for possible openings (we hope) in future this way. The issue of the womb for rent for example, is another issue that should certainly be debated. The age of neopapà (sixty-five) is certainly a problem - at least in my opinion. In fact, the English law that allows adoption by same-sex couples the fixed limit age forty-five years. On the other hand no one raised an ethical case for example when in Italy (in a conventional marriage) was Mike Bongiorno became the father of the same age, for example by Elton John. In these cases, obviously no one would dream of challenging personal freedoms. Can you imagine a law that imposes a couple of non-proliferation after a certain age? Something similar to the taxation laws of both Chinese-style condemned by the West, but for heaven's sake! So the real question is how to reconcile the inconsistency and diversity that is created - in terms of personal freedom - including one who is free to proliferate when and how he likes best (be it an old man, a criminal, a pedophile, a serial killer a stalker), provided that within a couple of traditional and conventional, and those who can not do it (taking into account the fact that a huge number of children in desperate need of a family). Obviously I am simplifying things and I certainly answers on pre-packaged. Just try to reflect on the issue, without trivializing a vulgar neologism ("mother"). I would only point out that on issues of this magnitude we would expect stress and thoughts of thickness, we would expect someone to help us to think, and do not receive the price of one euro, newspapers, exactly what we sentire ovunque, da chiunque.
