therajraj,
Aside from TB’s excellent argument regarding the institution of marriage, I maintain that no one knows how people become homosexual. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to me that before we allow gay couples to marry, or adopt children we should find out if being raised by two homosexuals causes any children that they might raise to become gay as well.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
And I explained there’s only a sampling issue with certain arrangements - Single gay fathers, non-white lesbian mothers. There isn’t a sampling issue on same-sex couples in general.[/quote]
Correct, it is a sampling issue that undercuts the claims those previous studies are bein gused to make.
The Rosenfeld study does not suffer from the same sampling error, but it is limited in that it is too short in time and does not consider data outside of primary school performance. As in…wait for it…precisely what I have said all along. The only “legitimate” study that gets closest to the apples-to-apples comparison is to immature.
Read something other than Wikipedia, and you might figure this stuff out.
You’ve made my point for me. Thanks.
No worse off than divorced parents? Ok, that’s fine. So, we can extrapolate - we know that the children of divorced parents fare worse than the children of married biological parents. So, the study doesn’t support a claim that children of a gay couple have equal results to that of a married couple - all this confirms is that they have results equal to that of a lesser arrangement, that being divorced parents. Ok. That doesn’t help you.
Already did, and you didn’t do anything - so is the study I attached wrong?
Quite obviously, you did not, and got called out on it.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Back when people lived in small tribes and were not exposed to people who were different than them.[/quote]
False. Thanks, though.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
therajraj,
Aside from TB’s excellent argument regarding the institution of marriage, I maintain that no one knows how people become homosexual. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to me that before we allow gay couples to marry, or adopt children we should find out if being raised by two homosexuals causes any children that they might raise to become gay as well.
[/quote]
So would you just clarify if you’re on the it’s an environmental/choice side of the argument?
It sure looks like that’s your position.
Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring…
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
therajraj,
Aside from TB’s excellent argument regarding the institution of marriage, I maintain that no one knows how people become homosexual. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to me that before we allow gay couples to marry, or adopt children we should find out if being raised by two homosexuals causes any children that they might raise to become gay as well.
[/quote]
So would you just clarify if you’re on the it’s an environmental/choice side of the argument?
It sure looks like that’s your position.
Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring…
[/quote]
Logical fallacy my friend. Simply because there is a possibility that two gay men are more likely to raise a gay child does not mean that a heterosexual couple cannot produce a gay offspring.
As to my point, there needs to be long-term studies done to assure that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
therajraj,
Aside from TB’s excellent argument regarding the institution of marriage, I maintain that no one knows how people become homosexual. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to me that before we allow gay couples to marry, or adopt children we should find out if being raised by two homosexuals causes any children that they might raise to become gay as well.
[/quote]
So would you just clarify if you’re on the it’s an environmental/choice side of the argument?
It sure looks like that’s your position.
Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring…
[/quote]
Logical fallacy my friend. Simply because there is a possibility that two gay men are more likely to raise a gay child does not mean that a heterosexual couple cannot produce a gay offspring.
As to my point, there needs to be long-term studies done to assure that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child. [/quote]
Nice try to skip around the question there…but no.
There is no logical fallacy there. All gay children are born from heterosexual parents,biologically speaking. Yes or no?
What you’re trying to fudge is that you believe that homosexuality could be learned or environmentally induced (as in a choice, forced or not),and not genetically determined. So therefore perhaps curable/preventable (as in it’s a disease or affliction of some sort).
At least fess up to it and don’t tiptoe around the blatantly obvious. Because it oozes out of your post. I don’t think I’ve seen you hedge your proudly non PC credentials in any other case on here. Why start now? Just sayin’
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
therajraj,
Aside from TB’s excellent argument regarding the institution of marriage, I maintain that no one knows how people become homosexual. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to me that before we allow gay couples to marry, or adopt children we should find out if being raised by two homosexuals causes any children that they might raise to become gay as well.
[/quote]
So would you just clarify if you’re on the it’s an environmental/choice side of the argument?
It sure looks like that’s your position.
Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring…
[/quote]
Logical fallacy my friend. Simply because there is a possibility that two gay men are more likely to raise a gay child does not mean that a heterosexual couple cannot produce a gay offspring.
As to my point, there needs to be long-term studies done to assure that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child. [/quote]
Nice try to skip around the question there…but no.
There is no logical fallacy there. All gay children are born from heterosexual parents,biologically speaking. Yes or no?[/quote]
You said, [quote]Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring.[/quote]
Obviously. But that does not mean that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child.
[quote]What you’re trying to fudge is that you believe that homosexuality could be learned or environmentally induced (as in a choice, forced or not),and not genetically determined. So therefore perhaps curable/preventable (as in it’s a disease or affliction of some sort).
At least fess up to it and don’t tiptoe around the blatantly obvious. Because it oozes out of your post. I don’t think I’ve seen you hedge your proudly non PC credentials in any other case on here. Why start now? Just sayin’
[/quote]
I pointed out the error of your thinking that’s not fudging anything. I’ve never read conclusive proof that homosexuality was genetic and neither have you, because that information does not exist.
However, here is a study which demonstrates my original point. And thanks for walking into it.
Now why do you suppose that two gay “parents” would be more inclined to raise gay children?
"A number of studies have examined whether the children of lesbian and gay parents are themselves more likely to identify as lesbian and gay. While reviews of the available studies agree that the vast majority of children of lesbian and gay parents are heterosexual, they differ in regards to whether there is evidence to suggest a comparatively higher rate of homosexuality when compared to the children of heterosexual parents. In a 2001 review of 21 studies, Judith Stacey and Timothy Biblarz found that researchers frequently downplay findings indicating difference regarding children’s gender, sexual preferences and behavior, suggesting that an environment of heterosexism has hampered scientific inquiry in the area. Their findings indicate that the children with lesbian or gay parents appear less traditionally gender-typed and are more likely to be open to homoerotic relationships.[34] A 2005 review by Charlotte J. Patterson for the American Psychological Association found that the available data did not suggest higher rates of homosexuality among the children of lesbian or gay parents.[32] Herek’s 2006 review describes the available data on the point as limited.[7] Stacey and Biblarz and Herek stress that the sexual orientation of children is of limited relevance to discussions of parental fitness or policies based on the same. In a 2010 review comparing single-father families with other family types, Stacey and Biblarz state, “We know very little yet about how parents influence the development of their children’s sexual identities or how these intersect with gender.”[8]
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Now why do you suppose that two gay “parents” would be more inclined to raise gay children?
[/quote]
That hasn’t been proven conclusively either.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
therajraj,
Aside from TB’s excellent argument regarding the institution of marriage, I maintain that no one knows how people become homosexual. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to me that before we allow gay couples to marry, or adopt children we should find out if being raised by two homosexuals causes any children that they might raise to become gay as well.
[/quote]
So would you just clarify if you’re on the it’s an environmental/choice side of the argument?
It sure looks like that’s your position.
Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring…
[/quote]
Logical fallacy my friend. Simply because there is a possibility that two gay men are more likely to raise a gay child does not mean that a heterosexual couple cannot produce a gay offspring.
As to my point, there needs to be long-term studies done to assure that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child. [/quote]
Nice try to skip around the question there…but no.
There is no logical fallacy there. All gay children are born from heterosexual parents,biologically speaking. Yes or no?[/quote]
You said, [quote]Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring.[/quote]
Obviously. But that does not mean that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child.
[quote]What you’re trying to fudge is that you believe that homosexuality could be learned or environmentally induced (as in a choice, forced or not),and not genetically determined. So therefore perhaps curable/preventable (as in it’s a disease or affliction of some sort).
At least fess up to it and don’t tiptoe around the blatantly obvious. Because it oozes out of your post. I don’t think I’ve seen you hedge your proudly non PC credentials in any other case on here. Why start now? Just sayin’
[/quote]
I pointed out the error of your thinking that’s not fudging anything. I’ve never read conclusive proof that homosexuality was genetic and neither have you, because that information does not exist.
However, here is a study which demonstrates my original point. And thanks for walking into it.
Now why do you suppose that two gay “parents” would be more inclined to raise gay children?
[/quote]
Walking into it? Once again, nice try…is that ‘study’ really what you want to go with? I’ll give you some time to reread and reconsider. I read the ‘methodology’.
Come on, I may not agree with all of your views, but I do give you a bit more credit than this ‘study’.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Now why do you suppose that two gay “parents” would be more inclined to raise gay children?
[/quote]
That hasn’t been proven conclusively either.
[/quote]
That’s just it, NOTHING has been proven conclusively.
So why are we in a rush to legalize same sex marriage.
Thank for proving my point.
(I always hate it when people end a post that way so I thought I’d do it. But, in a way you have proven my point so I used it.)
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
therajraj,
Aside from TB’s excellent argument regarding the institution of marriage, I maintain that no one knows how people become homosexual. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to me that before we allow gay couples to marry, or adopt children we should find out if being raised by two homosexuals causes any children that they might raise to become gay as well.
[/quote]
So would you just clarify if you’re on the it’s an environmental/choice side of the argument?
It sure looks like that’s your position.
Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring…
[/quote]
Logical fallacy my friend. Simply because there is a possibility that two gay men are more likely to raise a gay child does not mean that a heterosexual couple cannot produce a gay offspring.
As to my point, there needs to be long-term studies done to assure that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child. [/quote]
Nice try to skip around the question there…but no.
There is no logical fallacy there. All gay children are born from heterosexual parents,biologically speaking. Yes or no?[/quote]
You said, [quote]Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring.[/quote]
Obviously. But that does not mean that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child.
[quote]What you’re trying to fudge is that you believe that homosexuality could be learned or environmentally induced (as in a choice, forced or not),and not genetically determined. So therefore perhaps curable/preventable (as in it’s a disease or affliction of some sort).
At least fess up to it and don’t tiptoe around the blatantly obvious. Because it oozes out of your post. I don’t think I’ve seen you hedge your proudly non PC credentials in any other case on here. Why start now? Just sayin’
[/quote]
I pointed out the error of your thinking that’s not fudging anything. I’ve never read conclusive proof that homosexuality was genetic and neither have you, because that information does not exist.
However, here is a study which demonstrates my original point. And thanks for walking into it.
Now why do you suppose that two gay “parents” would be more inclined to raise gay children?
[/quote]
Walking into it? Once again, nice try…is that ‘study’ really what you want to go with? I’ll give you some time to reread and reconsider. I read the ‘methodology’.
Come on, I may not agree with all of your views, but I do give you a bit more credit than this ‘study’.[/quote]
That “study” is as good as the studies that other posters were using to rationalize gay couples raising children. Every bit as good! But you don’t like it because it says things that you don’t agree with. Simple.
The fact is, as I just said in the post above. No one knows what effect that two homosexuals will have on children.
AND…no one knows how someone becomes a homosexual. NO ONE!
And…I think it’s a really lousy thing to experiment on kids.
Once again why don’t we wait until there are studies that both sides will be happy with?
Because it doesn’t fit the left’s view of what “should” happen. Logic is tossed to the side when there is a PC issue to be dealt with.
You really are on the wrong side of this one buddy!
"First, Schumm extrapolated data from 10 books on gay parenting; Cameron, for what it’s worth, had only looked at three, and offered no statistical analysis in his paper. "
Um, what?
His “meta-analysis” involves lifting passages from parenting books about the experiences of homosexuals raising children? THAT’S how he “extrapolated” his statistics?
Are you serious?
“Kix tried to distance Schumm from Cameron’s more blatantly bigoted position – but in truth, Schumm sat on the board of Cameron’s Empirical Journal of Same-Sex Sexual Behavior, an online publication that never gained much traction.”
No conflict of interest disclosed?
Seems legit.
“At least one of these books, Abigail Garner’s Families Like Mine: Children of Gay Parents Tell It Like It Is, was even intentionally non-random. Burroway cites Garner’s explanation: "I deliberately aimed to have 50% of the kids interviewed to be queer. Not because it is statistically reflective of the population, but to give it balance of perspective.”
Admittedly non-randomized samples extrapolated to represent the entire population?
Again – seems legit.
http://news.change.org/stories/aol-news-airs-flawed-research-about-children-of-lgbtq-parents
Note that some of the material was gathered because Schumm was recruited as an expert witness in Florida to determine whether homosexuals can adopt children.
Note that an appeals court upheld the decision of such a ban being unconstitutional and stated:
"When reanalyzing studies on outcomes of children raised by gay parents, he [Schumm] found some differences in outcomes as a factor of parental sexual orientation where the original researchers reported no differences (the null hypothesis). He suggests that his reanalysis, mostly unpublished, should be accepted over the analyses of well respected researchers in peer reviewed journals. Dr. Schumm admitted that he applies statistical standards that depart from conventions in the field. In fact, Dr. [Susan] Cochran [of UCLA] and Dr. [Michael] Lamb [of Cambridge University] testified that Dr. Schummâ??s statistical reanalysis contained a number of fundamental errors."
Just because it’s published doesn’t mean it’s good, people.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
therajraj,
Aside from TB’s excellent argument regarding the institution of marriage, I maintain that no one knows how people become homosexual. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to me that before we allow gay couples to marry, or adopt children we should find out if being raised by two homosexuals causes any children that they might raise to become gay as well.
[/quote]
So would you just clarify if you’re on the it’s an environmental/choice side of the argument?
It sure looks like that’s your position.
Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring…
[/quote]
Logical fallacy my friend. Simply because there is a possibility that two gay men are more likely to raise a gay child does not mean that a heterosexual couple cannot produce a gay offspring.
As to my point, there needs to be long-term studies done to assure that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child. [/quote]
Nice try to skip around the question there…but no.
There is no logical fallacy there. All gay children are born from heterosexual parents,biologically speaking. Yes or no?[/quote]
You said, [quote]Because I can for sure prove to you that heterosexual couples produce gay offspring.[/quote]
Obviously. But that does not mean that two homosexuals are not more likely to raise a gay child.
[quote]What you’re trying to fudge is that you believe that homosexuality could be learned or environmentally induced (as in a choice, forced or not),and not genetically determined. So therefore perhaps curable/preventable (as in it’s a disease or affliction of some sort).
At least fess up to it and don’t tiptoe around the blatantly obvious. Because it oozes out of your post. I don’t think I’ve seen you hedge your proudly non PC credentials in any other case on here. Why start now? Just sayin’
[/quote]
I pointed out the error of your thinking that’s not fudging anything. I’ve never read conclusive proof that homosexuality was genetic and neither have you, because that information does not exist.
However, here is a study which demonstrates my original point. And thanks for walking into it.
Now why do you suppose that two gay “parents” would be more inclined to raise gay children?
[/quote]
Walking into it? Once again, nice try…is that ‘study’ really what you want to go with? I’ll give you some time to reread and reconsider. I read the ‘methodology’.
Come on, I may not agree with all of your views, but I do give you a bit more credit than this ‘study’.[/quote]
That “study” is as good as the studies that other posters were using to rationalize gay couples raising children. Every bit as good! But you don’t like it because it says things that you don’t agree with. Simple.
The fact is, as I just said in the post above. No one knows what effect that two homosexuals will have on children.
AND…no one knows how someone becomes a homosexual. NO ONE!
And…I think it’s a really lousy thing to experiment on kids.
Once again why don’t we wait until there are studies that both sides will be happy with?
Because it doesn’t fit the left’s view of what “should” happen. Logic is tossed to the side when there is a PC issue to be dealt with.
You really are on the wrong side of this one buddy!
[/quote]
I am? Please, point out to me where i have said anything about my views on same sex parents raising children that you ascribe to me above. I’ll wait.
And that study, which is what you and me are talking about, is complete and utter bullshit methodology wise, and consequently its claims cannot be taken seriously. At all. If you don’t want to see that and want to raise ‘but it’s as good as theirs’ defense, go right ahead, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s crap. Who is the one that is so ‘involved’ in a position, your beloved ‘right/left dichotomy’ that they can’t discuss past that shit?
Me, I would rather give more credence to REPUTABLE sources if i was going to claim a position as regards an issue, like…oh , i don’t know, the AAP? Or are you going to tell me they are left wing commie pinkos? I mean ,they could be, and I could just be a naive late 40s dad, and you could be the wise old owl of the right who is schooling me on all things hetero/homo/metro sexual.
But no, you’re going with some guy who appears to have done his research by aggregating anecdotal data from books he read, ie done no actual research of his own…with the ZERO validity that comes from that. 10 books on gay parenting? And he extrapolated? Are you serious?? Still can’t believe you posted that manure. Every bit as good? As what? You may need to reconsider what you consider ‘good’. You posted it to me, for my perusal, and still got all self congratulatory like you had lured me into some well crafted trap. Weak.
And for the record,again,logical fallacy does not mean quite what you think it does in the context you mentioned here. Read the exchange again, perhaps the third time is the charm.
So much for intelligent,honest debate on the issue…and I’ll wait a long time for time for you to show me where I said what you have attributed to me above, because guess what…never said anything of the sort or even close.
Oh – and from where does Schumm get his statistics about the sexual orientation of the “average” population?
A book titled “The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States”.
To spell it out for the slower ones browsing this thread: what this clown did was take a sample of people that was explicitly stated to be NON-randomized in nature (anecdotes from parenting books aimed at homosexuals chosen purposefully to show a 50/50 split) and compare those statistics to ones found in a book that “reports the complete results of the nation’s most comprehensive representative survey of sexual practices in the general adult population of the United States.”
SO representative of the national population, US Today called it, “The most comprehensive U.S. sex survey ever.”
Give me a fucking break.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Are you serious?? Still can’t believe you posted that manure. Every bit as good? As what? You may need to reconsider what you consider ‘good’. You posted it to me, for my perusal, and still got all self congratulatory like you had lured me into some well crafted trap. Weak.[/quote]
What some people don’t seem to understand is that not everyone acts like a deer getting caught in high beams when confronted with a journal paper. Some of us read them on a daily basis and have been trained on what to look for when critically evaluating their claims and methods.
http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/19806419/959920590/name/Full+Article.pdf
^In fact, some of us would rather look up the journal article, itself, than rely on an AOL journalist to spoon-feed us our opinion on it.
edit: and what kind of asshat publishes a 22 page article that includes ~5 pages of references but doesn’t show the common courtesy of including end notes for his references? Someone who is deliberately attempting to discourage people from sifting through the references he cites?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Now why do you suppose that two gay “parents” would be more inclined to raise gay children?
[/quote]
That hasn’t been proven conclusively either.
[/quote]
That’s just it, NOTHING has been proven conclusively.
So why are we in a rush to legalize same sex marriage.
Thank for proving my point.
(I always hate it when people end a post that way so I thought I’d do it. But, in a way you have proven my point so I used it.)[/quote]
How parents in general effect the sexuality of their children gay or straight hasn’t been conclusively determined. Human sexuality has studied for several decades now. Barring a scientific breakthrough we may never know what determines a person’s orientation. You’re essentially setting an unattainable standard that cannot reached.
On the topic of parenting, I’ve already gone over that. The quality of the home is not determined by biology rather the individuals who make up the household. Furthermore, conservatives continually push the criteria to which LGBT parenting must pass as more is determined.
It hasn’t been studied for very long. → It’s been studied since the 1970’s
Sample size is too small → there was a study with a large sample size done in 2010 and studies with small sample sizes should have at some point shown LGBT parents are inferior at some point but never have.
That study is limited to school performance → Many meaningful conclusions can be drawn from this study and it has been mentioned by experts that this study validates a lot of previous research. Furthermore the burden of proof on those who believe same sex-couples are inferior
The study is too short in time. Also we don’t know if these children will turn into freaks 20 years into adulthood -->…
Where is the evidence against LGBT parenting? —> This ONE study that invalidates all studies that find conclusions in favour of LGBT parenting.
This is basically how it works. As more is learned the bar continually gets pushed higher and higher by conservatives. 50 more years of research could pass and you still wouldn’t approve of gay marriage. There never ever will be enough research and you’ll always find some new angle that in your opinion needs to be studied before marriage between a same sex couple can be legalized.