Org Mobile Site
Thread: Gay Parenting
Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
WHY DOES NO ONE LISTEN TO ME
Whatever I have to get offline, time to feed francios
WHY DONT YOU LISTEN TO MEWHY DOES NO ONE LISTEN TO ME
Whatever I have to get offline, time to feed francios
"Your argument" was obviously referring to ACIN, who kept going on about how homosexual couples must have equal rights, before suddenly changing his position to the one you gave where you said it didn't matter because there were more orphans than foster parents anyway.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
Not that it makes much difference, but this does not constitute an actual argument. It is neither based on factual support nor does it follow a logical path.
Well one argument is that those kids will have a messed up understanding of gender roles that will damage their development.Not that it makes much difference, but this does not constitute an actual argument. It is neither based on factual support nor does it follow a logical path.
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr:
Well one argument is that those kids will have a messed up understanding of gender roles that will damage their development.
... which not supported by any factual evidence.Well one argument is that those kids will have a messed up understanding of gender roles that will damage their development.
Originally Posted by American Psychological Association:
Can lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals be good parents?
Yes. Studies comparing groups of children raised by homosexual and by heterosexual parents find no developmental differences between the two groups of children in four critical areas: their intelligence, psychological adjustment, social adjustment, and popularity with friends. It is also important to realize that a parent's sexual orientation does not indicate their children's.
Can lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals be good parents?
Yes. Studies comparing groups of children raised by homosexual and by heterosexual parents find no developmental differences between the two groups of children in four critical areas: their intelligence, psychological adjustment, social adjustment, and popularity with friends. It is also important to realize that a parent's sexual orientation does not indicate their children's.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
... which not supported by any factual evidence.
And yet it is a logical and sensible conclusion. Have they even studied it, I have no idea...... which not supported by any factual evidence.
You're right, parenting IS gay!
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr:
And yet it is a logical and sensible conclusion. Have they even studied it, I have no idea...
And yet it is a logical and sensible conclusion. Have they even studied it, I have no idea...
Any parent worth there weight in salt can explain why there are 2 mommies or daddies in the house
Once again its not like any god fearing easy on the eyes hetero couple is having a beautifual white baby torn from there hands as homosexuals beat them with giant black dildos, only to then run to the nearest gay club where they sacrafice there infant to the "minority cause Gods"
Freaking blood pressure
And single mums can explain why daddie isn't there but it still would have been better if he was in the first place.
Once again its not like we're the frickin KKK Christian extremist Taliban that want to round up teh gays and shoot them in the kneecaps because we think they're icky, so we can steal the little babies off of loving homosexual couples and indoctrinate them with our Young Earth Creatonism and free market values.
Freaking blood pressure
etc
Once again its not like we're the frickin KKK Christian extremist Taliban that want to round up teh gays and shoot them in the kneecaps because we think they're icky, so we can steal the little babies off of loving homosexual couples and indoctrinate them with our Young Earth Creatonism and free market values.
Freaking blood pressure
etc
Good, as they will also have to explain why school is that more cruel for them
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr:
And single mums can explain why daddie isn't there but it still would have been better if he was in the first place.
Once again its not like we're the frickin KKK Christian extremist Taliban that want to round up teh gays and shoot them in the kneecaps because we think they're icky, so we can steal the little babies off of loving homosexual couples and indoctrinate them with our Young Earth Creatonism and free market values.
Freaking blood pressure
etc
Not if daddy what jacked up on opiates and beating the tom out of mumAnd single mums can explain why daddie isn't there but it still would have been better if he was in the first place.
Once again its not like we're the frickin KKK Christian extremist Taliban that want to round up teh gays and shoot them in the kneecaps because we think they're icky, so we can steal the little babies off of loving homosexual couples and indoctrinate them with our Young Earth Creatonism and free market values.
Freaking blood pressure
etc
Ok it's good to know no one is doing this for ulterior motives
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Good, as they will also have to explain why school is that more cruel for them
That is of no fault of the parents. Fat and ugly kids get made fun of to, we shouldn't pander to some LCDGood, as they will also have to explain why school is that more cruel for them
Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
Not if daddy what jacked up on opiates and beating the tom out of mum
Well picking the worst examples from heterosexual couples doesn't prove anything, I never said some homosexual parents can't do a better job than some hetero ones.Not if daddy what jacked up on opiates and beating the tom out of mum
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr:
Well picking the worst examples from heterosexual couples doesn't prove anything, I never said some homosexual parents can't do a better job than some hetero ones.
Well then why should hetero ones get prefrence? Because it adheres to your completley arbitary definition of normal? I can pull 8 African tribes out of my backside they do communal female raising, clearly we are doing it wrongWell picking the worst examples from heterosexual couples doesn't prove anything, I never said some homosexual parents can't do a better job than some hetero ones.
Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
Well then why should hetero ones get prefrence? Because it adheres to your completley arbitary definition of normal? I can pull 8 African tribes out of my backside they do communal female raising, clearly we are doing it wrong
Well like it or not, we have to come up with some idea of what is best for the child. You say I'm being arbitrary but even you put boundaries somewhere, they're implied in this whole debate when we talk about homo/hetero couples raising children. So why couples?Well then why should hetero ones get prefrence? Because it adheres to your completley arbitary definition of normal? I can pull 8 African tribes out of my backside they do communal female raising, clearly we are doing it wrong
I've been part of some twisted debates in my time, but never one as demented as this.
Having to defend the concept of a child being raised by a mother and father... good God. We might might as well cash our chips in right now and hope the next species does better.
Having to defend the concept of a child being raised by a mother and father... good God. We might might as well cash our chips in right now and hope the next species does better.
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr:
And yet it is a logical and sensible conclusion. Have they even studied it, I have no idea...
Yes. And yet it is a logical and sensible conclusion. Have they even studied it, I have no idea...
Originally Posted by :
"We found that despite the ‘no differences’ mantra, many studies do report evidence of some intriguing differences, and even of some potential advantages of lesbian parenthood," said Stacey, holder of the Streisand Professorship in Contemporary Gender Studies. "A difference is not necessarily a deficit."
Stacey and Biblarz found some evidence that children in gay households are more likely to buck stereotypical male-female behavior. For example, boys raised by lesbians appear to be less aggressive and more nurturing than boys raised in heterosexual families. Daughters of lesbians are more likely to aspire to become doctors, lawyers, engineers and astronauts.
In addition, heterosexual mothers tend to encourage sons to participate in historically "masculine" games and activities – such as Little League – and daughters in more "feminine" pursuits – such as ballet. In contrast, lesbian mothers had no such interest – their preferences for their children's play were gender neutral.
...
One area the researchers found no differences in was the mental health of children or their quality of relationship with parents. Children brought up by lesbians and gay men are well-adjusted, have good levels of self-esteem and are as likely to have high educational attainments as children raised in more traditional heterosexual families.
"Levels of anxiety, depression, self-esteem and other measures of social and psychological behaviors were generally similar," Biblarz said. "While all children probably get teased for one thing or another, children with gay parents may experience a higher degree of teasing and ridicule. It is impressive then that their psychological well-being and social adjustment does not significantly differ, on average, from that of children in comparable heterosexual-parent families. Exploring how lesbian and gay parent families help children cope with stigma could prove helpful to all kinds of families."
"We found that despite the ‘no differences’ mantra, many studies do report evidence of some intriguing differences, and even of some potential advantages of lesbian parenthood," said Stacey, holder of the Streisand Professorship in Contemporary Gender Studies. "A difference is not necessarily a deficit."
Stacey and Biblarz found some evidence that children in gay households are more likely to buck stereotypical male-female behavior. For example, boys raised by lesbians appear to be less aggressive and more nurturing than boys raised in heterosexual families. Daughters of lesbians are more likely to aspire to become doctors, lawyers, engineers and astronauts.
In addition, heterosexual mothers tend to encourage sons to participate in historically "masculine" games and activities – such as Little League – and daughters in more "feminine" pursuits – such as ballet. In contrast, lesbian mothers had no such interest – their preferences for their children's play were gender neutral.
...
One area the researchers found no differences in was the mental health of children or their quality of relationship with parents. Children brought up by lesbians and gay men are well-adjusted, have good levels of self-esteem and are as likely to have high educational attainments as children raised in more traditional heterosexual families.
"Levels of anxiety, depression, self-esteem and other measures of social and psychological behaviors were generally similar," Biblarz said. "While all children probably get teased for one thing or another, children with gay parents may experience a higher degree of teasing and ridicule. It is impressive then that their psychological well-being and social adjustment does not significantly differ, on average, from that of children in comparable heterosexual-parent families. Exploring how lesbian and gay parent families help children cope with stigma could prove helpful to all kinds of families."
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr:
Well one argument is that those kids will have a messed up understanding of gender roles that will damage their development.
I'm wondering, what are normal gender roles these days?Well one argument is that those kids will have a messed up understanding of gender roles that will damage their development.
Originally Posted by Beirut:
I've been part of some twisted debates in my time, but never one as demented as this.
Having to defend the concept of a child being raised by a mother and father... good God. We might might as well cash our chips in right now and hope the next species does better.
No one is challenging the concept of a child being raised by a mother and father, only the idea that that situation is inherently superior to same-sex parenting.I've been part of some twisted debates in my time, but never one as demented as this.
Having to defend the concept of a child being raised by a mother and father... good God. We might might as well cash our chips in right now and hope the next species does better.
Here's a New Age pretzel for you to chew on.
Originally Posted by :
Since the 1970s, it has become increasingly clear that it is family processes (such as the quality of parenting, the psychosocial well-being of parents, the quality of and satisfaction with relationships within the family, and the level of co-operation and harmony between parents) that contribute to determining children’s well-being and ‘outcomes’, rather than family structures, per se, such as the number, gender, sexuality and co-habitation status of parents.[6][12]
The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been remarkably consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[5][6][7] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[6] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[8][9][10][7][11] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union.[7][12][22][8]
Professor Judith Stacey, of New York University, stated: “Rarely is there as much consensus in any area of social science as in the case of gay parenting, which is why the American Academy of Pediatrics and all of the major professional organizations with expertise in child welfare have issued reports and resolutions in support of gay and lesbian parental rights”.[23] These organizations include the American Academy of Pediatrics,[8] the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,[24] the American Psychiatric Association,[25] the American Psychological Association,[26] the American Psychoanalytic Association,[27] the National Association of Social Workers,[28] the Child Welfare League of America,[29] the North American Council on Adoptable Children,[30] and Canadian Psychological Association.[31]
Since the 1970s, it has become increasingly clear that it is family processes (such as the quality of parenting, the psychosocial well-being of parents, the quality of and satisfaction with relationships within the family, and the level of co-operation and harmony between parents) that contribute to determining children’s well-being and ‘outcomes’, rather than family structures, per se, such as the number, gender, sexuality and co-habitation status of parents.[6][12]
The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been remarkably consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[5][6][7] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[6] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[8][9][10][7][11] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union.[7][12][22][8]
Professor Judith Stacey, of New York University, stated: “Rarely is there as much consensus in any area of social science as in the case of gay parenting, which is why the American Academy of Pediatrics and all of the major professional organizations with expertise in child welfare have issued reports and resolutions in support of gay and lesbian parental rights”.[23] These organizations include the American Academy of Pediatrics,[8] the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,[24] the American Psychiatric Association,[25] the American Psychological Association,[26] the American Psychoanalytic Association,[27] the National Association of Social Workers,[28] the Child Welfare League of America,[29] the North American Council on Adoptable Children,[30] and Canadian Psychological Association.[31]
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
No one is challenging the concept of a child being raised by a mother and father, only the idea that that situation is inherently superior to same-sex parenting.
And that is twisted. No one is challenging the concept of a child being raised by a mother and father, only the idea that that situation is inherently superior to same-sex parenting.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
Here's a New Age pretzel for you to chew on.
I don't chew on New Age pretzels: I prefer good old fashioned Common Sense pie.Here's a New Age pretzel for you to chew on.
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr:
Well now you are just making an evasion for yourself. Your argument is that homosexuals must have equal rights, not that there are more orphans than foster parents, and so we can just give them to homosexual couples anyway.
It's not an evasion when the person I am talking to refuses to even acknowledge me.Well now you are just making an evasion for yourself. Your argument is that homosexuals must have equal rights, not that there are more orphans than foster parents, and so we can just give them to homosexual couples anyway.
Originally Posted by Beirut:
And that is twisted.
I don't chew on New Age pretzels: I prefer good old fashioned Common Sense pie.
I see there is no point talking to you any more. Anyone that loves to talk about how they believe in "common sense" always seems to be the most absurd.And that is twisted.
I don't chew on New Age pretzels: I prefer good old fashioned Common Sense pie.
Originally Posted by Beirut:
I don't chew on New Age pretzels: I prefer good old fashioned Common Sense pie.
Enough with these new-fangled crackpot medical ideas! Give me a good old-fashioned, common sense leeching, or give me nothing. I don't chew on New Age pretzels: I prefer good old fashioned Common Sense pie.
Ajax
Originally Posted by Beirut:
I don't chew on New Age pretzels: I prefer good old fashioned Common Sense pie.
There have been many people throughout history who have ignored science in favor of their own conceptions of common sense. I don't chew on New Age pretzels: I prefer good old fashioned Common Sense pie.
It's not really an intellectual position I would stake out for myself, but as long as your common sense doesn't interfere with the fact based system that has allowed millions of children to avoid being passed around foster homes, group homes, and Child Protective Services and instead enjoy a supportive family, then I suppose there's no harm in it. Common sense is generational.
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name:
I see there is no point talking to you any more.
As you wish.I see there is no point talking to you any more.
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name:
Anyone that loves to talk about how they believe in "common sense" always seems to be the most absurd.
Indeed, believing little kids are better off with a mother and a father, what a horrible absurdity! I must be some kind of a monster.Anyone that loves to talk about how they believe in "common sense" always seems to be the most absurd.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
There have been many people throughout history who have ignored science in favor of their own conceptions of common sense.
Wanting a child to have a mother and father is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.There have been many people throughout history who have ignored science in favor of their own conceptions of common sense.
Well, call me old fashioned.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
Common sense is generational.
Some is, and some is for all time. Like the common sense I mentioned above.Common sense is generational.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
Yes.
Well some points from the study...Yes.
"o Teenage boys raised by lesbians are more sexually restrained, less aggressive and more nurturing then boys raised in heterosexual families."
Well clearly all that is bad, why not just castrate them?
"o Adolescent and young adult girls raised by lesbian mothers appear to be more sexually adventurous and less chaste. Sons of lesbians display the opposite – boys are choosier in their relationships and tend to have sex at a later age than boys raised by heterosexuals."
Bad again.
Kids need the one mum/dad dynamic because unless they really can catch the gayness from homosexual parents, they will need to learn the typical dynamics of a heterosexual relationship (for the love of God, don't start going on about generalisations because 1% of couples differ from the norm) for later in life. If its a boy they need the male rolemodel, if its a girl the female.
Your article already shows that changing this dynamic does have a big influence on the kids.
Originally Posted by Beirut:
It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.
Or alternatively, maybe there's actual evidence supporting the idea that working, responsible, non-criminal behavior is beneficial, and others would agree with you on this issue while at the same time disagreeing on the fitness of gay couples to raise children. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.
Ajax
Originally Posted by Beirut:
Wanting a child to have a mother and father is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.
Well, call me old fashioned.
Wanting a child to have a mother and father is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.
Well, call me old fashioned.
Denying the legitimacy of same-sex parenting also has nothing to do with 'responsibility' and 'good conduct' either, despite your ridiculous equivocation.
The truth is that it is just an outdated opinion that has been completely invalidated through scientific research. May I suggest that you bring some verifiable facts with you next time as this isn't working for you.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr:
Well some points from the study...
"o Teenage boys raised by lesbians are more sexually restrained, less aggressive and more nurturing then boys raised in heterosexual families."
Well clearly all that is bad, why not just castrate them?
"o Adolescent and young adult girls raised by lesbian mothers appear to be more sexually adventurous and less chaste. Sons of lesbians display the opposite – boys are choosier in their relationships and tend to have sex at a later age than boys raised by heterosexuals."
Bad again.
Interesting. I read both points as positives. I don't see the value in raising boys to be lecherous, aggressive, and uncaring and girls to be socially conditioned to accept the double standard. I suppose gender roles are subjective. Well some points from the study...
"o Teenage boys raised by lesbians are more sexually restrained, less aggressive and more nurturing then boys raised in heterosexual families."
Well clearly all that is bad, why not just castrate them?
"o Adolescent and young adult girls raised by lesbian mothers appear to be more sexually adventurous and less chaste. Sons of lesbians display the opposite – boys are choosier in their relationships and tend to have sex at a later age than boys raised by heterosexuals."
Bad again.
Here are some other points:
Originally Posted by :
o It is more common for both lesbian moms to be employed, to earn similar incomes and to cut back on their hours of paid work in order to nurture young children. Some research indicates that egalitarian parenting contributes to child well-being, Stacey said.
o Same-sex couples proved better at managing disagreements and anger than did comparable heterosexual married couples. Research suggests that parental conflict may be one of the most significant sources of difficulty for children, Stacey said.
Now, I could spin these two points to argue that gay parents are actually better than straight ones, but it is probably better to look at the broader conclusion. o It is more common for both lesbian moms to be employed, to earn similar incomes and to cut back on their hours of paid work in order to nurture young children. Some research indicates that egalitarian parenting contributes to child well-being, Stacey said.
o Same-sex couples proved better at managing disagreements and anger than did comparable heterosexual married couples. Research suggests that parental conflict may be one of the most significant sources of difficulty for children, Stacey said.
According to the study:
Originally Posted by :
One area the researchers found no differences in was the mental health of children or their quality of relationship with parents. Children brought up by lesbians and gay men are well-adjusted, have good levels of self-esteem and are as likely to have high educational attainments as children raised in more traditional heterosexual families.
I don't know what the 'typical dynamics' of a heterosexual relationship are, but the study suggests same-sex parenting yields well adjusted children with no noticeable relationship dysfunction.One area the researchers found no differences in was the mental health of children or their quality of relationship with parents. Children brought up by lesbians and gay men are well-adjusted, have good levels of self-esteem and are as likely to have high educational attainments as children raised in more traditional heterosexual families.
Go get 'em, Panzer! 
Both the mayor of Paris and of Berlin are very openly gay, have been for a decade now. Times have changed. This one we are winning.
(although the gay mayor of Paris is most unpopular with the you-know-who, one of whom tried to butcher him with a knife in broad daylight, loudly shouting homosexuals needed to die
)
Both the mayor of Paris and of Berlin are very openly gay, have been for a decade now. Times have changed. This one we are winning.
(although the gay mayor of Paris is most unpopular with the you-know-who, one of whom tried to butcher him with a knife in broad daylight, loudly shouting homosexuals needed to die
)There are two important points to me:
One, that there is a shortage of parents of any type adopting kids.
Two, the gender of the parents seems to matter less than the fitness of the parents.
However, I still oppose forcing any religious orphanages to allow gay couples to adopt kids.
CR
One, that there is a shortage of parents of any type adopting kids.
Two, the gender of the parents seems to matter less than the fitness of the parents.
However, I still oppose forcing any religious orphanages to allow gay couples to adopt kids.
CR
Originally Posted by Beirut:
Wanting a child to have a mother and father is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.
Well, call me old fashioned.
Wanting a child to have parents is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Unfortunately common sense doesn't teach them to argue well :(Wanting a child to have a mother and father is not alchemy. It is not a witch burning. It is not slavery, bigotry, or akin to telling Rosa to give up her seat. It is common sense. The same common sense that tells people to get a job, be responsible for their conduct, and not to be a criminal. Though I'm sure there are New Age pretzels ready to be chewed on that say, with great eloquence and perhaps even backed up by scientific study, that responsibility and good conduct are old fashioned.
Well, call me old fashioned.
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr:
Well some points from the study...
"o Teenage boys raised by lesbians are more sexually restrained, less aggressive and more nurturing then boys raised in heterosexual families."
Well clearly all that is bad, why not just castrate them?
"o Adolescent and young adult girls raised by lesbian mothers appear to be more sexually adventurous and less chaste. Sons of lesbians display the opposite – boys are choosier in their relationships and tend to have sex at a later age than boys raised by heterosexuals."
Bad again.
Kids need the one mum/dad dynamic because unless they really can catch the gayness from homosexual parents, they will need to learn the typical dynamics of a heterosexual relationship (for the love of God, don't start going on about generalisations because 1% of couples differ from the norm) for later in life. If its a boy they need the male rolemodel, if its a girl the female.
Your article already shows that changing this dynamic does have a big influence on the kids.
Yes, when I read this I thought "well, this is exactly the thing they are going to complain about". But fact is you can substitute "liberal" for lesbian and get the same result here. No duh, gay couples aren't conservative and traditional.Well some points from the study...
"o Teenage boys raised by lesbians are more sexually restrained, less aggressive and more nurturing then boys raised in heterosexual families."
Well clearly all that is bad, why not just castrate them?
"o Adolescent and young adult girls raised by lesbian mothers appear to be more sexually adventurous and less chaste. Sons of lesbians display the opposite – boys are choosier in their relationships and tend to have sex at a later age than boys raised by heterosexuals."
Bad again.
Kids need the one mum/dad dynamic because unless they really can catch the gayness from homosexual parents, they will need to learn the typical dynamics of a heterosexual relationship (for the love of God, don't start going on about generalisations because 1% of couples differ from the norm) for later in life. If its a boy they need the male rolemodel, if its a girl the female.
Your article already shows that changing this dynamic does have a big influence on the kids.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
The truth is that it is just an outdated opinion that has been completely invalidated through scientific research.
Scientific research shows that a mother and father are not best for a child?The truth is that it is just an outdated opinion that has been completely invalidated through scientific research.
This is hands down the silliest, most deranged debate I'ver ever been in. I've debated guys who thought ten-year olds should carry knives to school for protection and others who thought God was made out of spaghetti and meatballs, but never have I come across a group of people saying a human child is not best served by having a mother and father.
What's next; have Fido nurse the baby because more teats means more love?
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO