[quote]forlife wrote:
I’ve posted numerous references in other threads, but here is a primer from the American Academy of Pediatrics:
A growing body of scientific literature demonstrates that children who grow up with 1 or 2 gay and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual. Children’s optimal development seems to be influenced more by the nature of the relationships and interactions within the family unit than by the particular structural form it takes.
Most of that sounds like observational studies comparing child development of children who had divorced parents who were gay vs. not gay. I’m admittedly not reading all the studies, but that sounds like some crap for statistical comparison of what we’re talking about.
In other words, you are a better scientist than the doctors/researchers at the American Academy of Pediatrics.
No offense, but it always goes like this. People demand references, and when you provide definitive statements from every major medical and mental health organization, they immediately begin dismissing those conclusions as being “politically biased”, “bad science”, etc.
Isn’t it obvious why people do this? If you don’t like the conclusions of science, the natural response is to derogate the science itself.
In other words, no amount of objective evidence will ever make a difference to people with a political agenda to the contrary.
[quote]forlife wrote:
I’ve posted numerous references in other threads, but here is a primer from the American Academy of Pediatrics:
A growing body of scientific literature demonstrates that children who grow up with 1 or 2 gay and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual. Children’s optimal development seems to be influenced more by the nature of the relationships and interactions within the family unit than by the particular structural form it takes.
[quote]forlife wrote:
In other words, you are a better scientist than the doctors/researchers at the American Academy of Pediatrics.
No offense, but it always goes like this. People demand references, and when you provide definitive statements from every major medical and mental health organization, they immediately begin dismissing those conclusions as being “politically biased”, “bad science”, etc.
Isn’t it obvious why people do this? If you don’t like the conclusions of science, the natural response is to derogate the science itself.
In other words, no amount of objective evidence will ever make a difference to people with a political agenda to the contrary. [/quote]
No, I didn’t say the studies were bad (though they do sound that way) I was saying comparing child statistics of parents divorced who remain heterosexual and ones that come out of the closet has nothing to do with this debate. We aren’t talking about the effects of divorce on children, coming out of the closet vs remaining heterosexual. If we were, then it would apply.
It even essentially notes that children are better off if the heterosexual couple remains together. Though once again, that would be bad logic to use that to deny gays the right to adopt, because it doesn’t actually address the issue.
We were talking about children raised by gay vs. straight parents. Obviously, the vast majority of kids raised by gay parents are the product of divorce so how else would you propose doing the research?
Bottom line:
The policy statement clearly concludes that children raised by gay parents are equally healthy to children raised by straight parents.
You can try arguing the credentials or motivations of the experts, but their conclusions on this point are unequivocal.
[quote]forlife wrote:
We were talking about children raised by gay vs. straight parents. Obviously, the vast majority of kids raised by gay parents are the product of divorce so how else would you propose doing the research?
Bottom line:
The policy statement clearly concludes that children raised by gay parents are equally healthy to children raised by straight parents.
You can try arguing the credentials or motivations of the experts, but their conclusions on this point are unequivocal.[/quote]
I don’t know how to do a more effective study, however, the divorce issue clouds the study. As side note, that policy is over 5 years old and no longer active.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Apparently, the spartans weren’t your average “run of the mill male”[/quote]
The fact that you have to go back thousands of years to come up with an example really says it all. Also, there were more bisexual spartans than homosexual Spartans. But, that is not relevant in 2009 anyway is it?
I know of no heterosexual man of today that has any interest in having sex with another man. In fact, it would be impossible because of lack of arousal. But, you had no problem having sex for (how many years? 20?) with a woman.
I would say that’s odd for a homosexual man (to have sex with a woman regularly) I would have said that but I won’t now, as during my previous debate with you I found that over 85% of all “homosexual” men have regular sex with women as well.
Which begs the question, what is homosexuality really, but a preference.
You have absolutely no right to say that. There has not been any sort of long term studies done with any sort of sizeable group. How could there be for heaven sakes this is a more recent phenomenon.
I see your arguments are no better (perhaps worse) than they were a couple of years ago when we did this.
It seems your one lone example of Sparta being filled with homosexuals is nothing but a tale concocted by those (such as yourself) who need to cling to a myth in order to push their political agenda:
A particularly thorny issue today is whether or not the Hellenes were truly openly homosexual. It has long been held to be fact, especially by those who use history as means of pushing a political agenda, but modern scholarship has recently begun to call this belief into question. In truth we simply don?t know what the real answer to this issue is, but what has been commonly agreed upon is this: That Hellenic homosexuality more often then not took the form of pederasty, that is a relationship between a older man and a young boy (usually about 16).
In turn this practice was for the most part confined to the wealthy upper classes of Hellenic society. The common people disdained the practice, and used it as ammunition to criticize the wealthy. To make things even more confusing this was not even true for all of the Hellenic states. For example in Thebes pederasty was openly encouraged by all, while in Sparta all forms of homosexuality were held in high contempt.
I still don’t see how unnatural acts can be seen as a positive influence on a child, unless one wants the child to view being gay as natural. Since sex has procreation as its lietmotif, gay ‘sex’ is a misnomer. It is perversion.
Just as no sane person would juggle straight razors in front of an impressionable child, or play Russian roulette while Junior cheers it on, gayness should not be seen by children.
Thus, same-sex adoption IS child abuse. Perfectly logical.
You learn how to relate to men and women by being around men and women.
I don’t see a problem with 2 women raising children as long as there are good male role models available to the child so that the child can adequately learn to relate to men.
I mean, the average father nowdays only spends 2.5 hrs per week with their kids and 6.5 on weekends so i don’t think 2 women raising a child will negatively impact a childs development any more than modern marriages.
BUT…
I do believe 2 men raising a child will have an effect on a childs development based on this premise. Babies and children need their mothers. Name any other other animal raised by men that aint a fucking sea horse? Babies and children spend the majority of their time with their mothers until puberty when the boys spend more time with the men in their lives.
None of these studies on same sex child rearing are valid until a person’s entire life can be studied as latent issues from childhood may take decades to appear and be diagnosed.
I have gay friends and have not hesitated to express this opinion to them either. But I’ve asked them and very, very few of them even KNOW OF a gay couple raising a child so all you people thinking this is rampant need to calm down.
Here’s the bottom line forliar. You and the other twisted freaks want to remake the US under your image and if you noticed by the recent elections it’s not happening. The people DO NOT want gay marriage and certainly DO NOT want two homo’s to adopt children…what a repulsive thought.
To even speculate that children are better off living with two perverts would be comical if it were not so sick. They would almost be better off living anywhere and with anyone, short of a Manson family member.
I like having you on this site forliar you are good comic relief.
Here’s the bottom line forliar. You and the other twisted freaks want to remake the US under your image and if you noticed by the recent elections it’s not happening. The people DO NOT want gay marriage and certainly DO NOT want two homo’s to adopt children…what a repulsive thought.
To even speculate that children are better off living with two perverts would be comical if it were not so sick. They would almost be better off living anywhere and with anyone, short of a Manson family member.
I like having you on this site forliar you are good comic relief.
Cripes that was a bit strong wasn’t it ?
Try use more diplomatic language :p[/quote]
…don’t you know; only god fearin’, bible believin’ patriotic republicans are allowed to be insulting, confrontational, and be right assholes without impunity around these parts…
Here’s the bottom line forliar. You and the other twisted freaks want to remake the US under your image and if you noticed by the recent elections it’s not happening. The people DO NOT want gay marriage and certainly DO NOT want two homo’s to adopt children…what a repulsive thought.
To even speculate that children are better off living with two perverts would be comical if it were not so sick. They would almost be better off living anywhere and with anyone, short of a Manson family member.
I like having you on this site forliar you are good comic relief.
Cripes that was a bit strong wasn’t it ?
Try use more diplomatic language
…don’t you know; only god fearin’, bible believin’ patriotic republicans are allowed to be insulting, confrontational, and be right assholes without impunity around these parts…
[/quote]
Way to be an anti-discrimination progressive there. But why pray tell to you only use stereotypes against Christians and conservatives then take offense to stereotypes of others?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:Way to be an anti-discrimination progressive there. But why pray tell to you only use stereotypes against Christians and conservatives then take offense to stereotypes of others?
…you will be unsuccesfull in finding such insulting and derogatory posts, like those from Mick28, written by me on this forum. Go ahead, try it…
[/quote]
“…don’t you know; only god fearin’, bible believin’ patriotic republicans are allowed to be insulting, confrontational, and be right assholes without impunity around these parts…”
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
ephrem wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:Way to be an anti-discrimination progressive there. But why pray tell to you only use stereotypes against Christians and conservatives then take offense to stereotypes of others?
…you will be unsuccesfull in finding such insulting and derogatory posts, like those from Mick28, written by me on this forum. Go ahead, try it…
“…don’t you know; only god fearin’, bible believin’ patriotic republicans are allowed to be insulting, confrontational, and be right assholes without impunity around these parts…”[/quote]
…that’s it? One post out of app. 600 that’s moderately insulting means i’m really a nice guy (-:
