'No differences' between children of same-sex and opposite-sex parents

So, how do you get Data, when no one really wants to be outed ? at least not when I was young, are my experiences not relevant to you in your position as self appointed self annointed Srt8 God Almighty ?

 

I didn't think you could find such studies since the field is not that old and they're just not enough actual same sex families to provide data. Why do you think this study, that you are crowing about, was limited to studying lesbian couples? It's not like studying children of divorce. There millions of children of divorced, broken homes, providing quite a significant body to pull research material from. But how many same sex families? Not that many.

What am I suggesting or advocating? I've not made any suggestions or advocated any particular policy, so your frenzied worries about prohibiting adoption and mass sterilization...really...mass sterilization? Now you are starting to sound crazy. It's difficult to have a reasoned discussion when only one of us (me) is in fact reasonable. You are blithely just making up crazy positions and policies for me.

Please apologize for your insane accusations.

 

Well, you described your "own experiences, children from so called " broken homes" or alternative styled families are often better adjusted than those of privileged upbringing." Now, do you really believe that as a matter of statistics, children from broken homes and alternate families are better adjusted than those from a traditional two parent family? I don't think you would actually argue that a traditional two parent, intact family is worse for kids than a broken home is. Or maybe you are. People on this forum say a lot of nutty things, but assuming that you are not, then your personal experiences are relevant to you, but not relevant to what is the best outcome for kids most of the time.

I see this thread is turning personal and hostile, which I fully expected when I'm trying to argue from a position of science and data and everyone else is arguing from deep personal hurts and their own personal damage. Sigh...

 

"I see this thread is turning personal and hostile, which I fully expected when I'm trying to argue from a position of science and data and everyone else is arguing from deep personal hurts and their own personal damage. Sigh..."

*************************************************************************************

If I offended you and was hostile, I apologize for that, however, you lack science and data, and I am not arguing from any deep personal hurts or personal damage.
I simply affirm you are in no way qualified to understand Gay people from your narrow straight origin.
Because your great whacking studies have no relevant Data to explain how a male that grew up in a traditional straight sexually repressed religious family happened to be so radically different as far as orientation and all views without being influenced by exterior forces, so people like you tend to be dismissive and condescending and somewhat bloody offensive too in not acknowledging a differing point of origin or type of development as it relates to family types and upbringing, I grew up around similar young people, my age and observed far different aspects, than was or is reflected in your chicken and egg scientific studies.

 

I’m sounding crazy? What is crazy is that you continue to ruminate about the outcomes for children of same sex couples for no apparent reason than to stir up concerns about same sex parenting. If you are going to pursue such fear mongering you have to have a clear purpose in doing so, or it makes no sense at all. As I see it, you have to take one of two positions if, in fact you can demonstrate that children of same sex couples have problems as a result of that:

1) You can fall back on the familiar and well-worn and debunked bovine excrement that children of gays are messed up because kids need a “mommy and a daddy” – while ignoring the fact that many other children do not have a mommy and a daddy – and continue to attack gays as bad parents because they can only provide two moms or two dads

2) We can conduct additional research to determine why those kids might have problems and find ways to ameliorate that conditions and to provide the necessary supports to those kids and their families. We an do all that we can through government and society to ensure that those children and their families have optimal supports to be the best that they can be, just like we (should be) do(ing) for other families.

Your choice. Man up and take a stand. What do you want to do? Why are you pursuing this if you do not have a plan to address the “problem” if t should prove to be real? And, I’ll point out, that you have avoided my question regarding why we should be so concerned about the outcomes for children of gay people and not so much about the outcomes for children of other groups who may not provide the optimal environment for the kids.

Finally, I have nothing to apologize for because I did not accuse you of anything. I simply asked if that would be your policy position if it could be shown that children of gay people were at a disadvantage. You are rather thin skinned it seems.

 

Every argument remains valid. Our current Supreme Court is simply willing to ignore the plain meaning of the Constitution and make it mean whatever they want. And I never stated the Supreme Court wouldn't decide exactly as they did.

 

As before and as has been once again proven, your arguments are baseless and fly in the face of reality. They are proped up by nothing more than anecdotal evidence and your own determination to ignore reality and live in a delusion.

 

Too many people are obsessed with and hyped-up on what's anti-gay (often as though homosexuality were the ONLY real problem/topic in this world).

I think it comes to this:

1. Anti-gay bigotry should never be tolerated; there's no logical reason it's necessary.
2. LGBT people should ALWAYS fight back against those who fear them, hate them and discriminate against them.
3. Make it clear that if you aren't out here trying to make the lives of LGBT people worse, no one is coming for you in any way. Just understand that if you attack people, they WILL (and likely must) fight you back.

 

The lack of evidence that they aren't good parents supports my position. Which is that there is nothing suggesting that sane sex parents are any worse than opposite sex parents.

I know some people wish to believe they are, but that's just wishing.

 

Nonsense, the arguments, successful in court dozens of times, are not baseless. What the words of the constitution mean have simply changed by judicial dictates.

 

Men and women are encouraged to marry because children with their married mother and father do BETTER than children who are not. Encouraging them to do so because the children are not "any worse", wouldn't make any sense and encouraging gays to do so for that reason is absurd.

 

Ridiculous nonsense. I'll give you that the arguments of your side were successful at the ballot box, but there should never be a vote upon people basic rights. However, nearly every single court decision after the fall of DOMA has been in favor of same sex marriage. Why? Because there is no logical justification against preventing it.

 

If children do better with biological parents, you are necessarily saying they do worse with step parents.

If not, what are they doing better than?

Saying they do no worse with same sex parents is the same thing as saying they do as well as children with heterosexual parents.

Their mutually exclusive.

Further, prove children are "better off" with biological parents.

 

I'm not trying to understand gay people. Understanding gay people isn't what this thread is about. It's about kids raised in gay and straight households. That's a worthy discussion but again, you want to bring this around to your issues: "...explain how a male that grew up in a traditional straight sexually repressed religious family happened to be so radically different as far as orientation and all views without being influenced by exterior forces..."

I don't have to explain because I don't care. And it's not relevant to the topic, not matter how much it matters to you personally.

 

If you're saying that children raised by heterosexual parents are better off than children raised by homosexual parents, well nobody really should care what you think, all you have is an opinion.

Wanting to understand it deeper isn't a problem but I think a lot of people are just chasing an excuse for their feelings about it.

 

First, yes you are crazy. You were the one who brought up prohibiting adoption and mass sterilization. I realize that crazy people don't realize they're crazy, but these are all things that you brought up, not me, and not for any reason related to this conversation. I'm not sure how you even make a leap like that. But then, I guess that's the crazy part. I'm not sure what the problems are that you think those policies solve.

Secondly, I've not made a "stand" because there is no stand to be made. This thread is about a study, not about public policy. The public policy has already been decided, and that won't change regardless of the result of any study or research.

Now are you ready yet to apologize for implicating me in promoting policies of prohibiting adoption and mass sterilization?

 

There is either an astounding lack of reading comprehension on this thread, or deliberate trolling to distract from the thread topic. Your comment demonstrates that you don't understand what the conversation was that you decided to barge into. Please go back and read it again and educate yourself before looking foolish.

 

Now now now this isn't recess and calling names isn't going to get you what you want.

 

It would take a little more to convince me that they are the same...

I really don't know one way or the other, but I do know that such studies- especially when there is considerable overt push for it- tends to bend towards the political momentum and/or is cherry-picked for favorable results. As always, I wonder exactly how they are testing these results. When did they begin these studies? How long was the trial period? Who was used? How could they possibly mirror real-life analysis with the conditions they would need to control this experiment?

Just saying...while it's nice to see a study that agrees with your opinion, be careful of it.

 

The simple idea that same sex couples are some how inferior parents is strictly politically motivated.

 

Same sex couples are on average inferior to the biological parents. All parents other than the biological parents are on average inferior. Probably has everything to do with being biological parents and nothing to do with being heterosexual.
AND men and women are encouraged to marry before becoming biological parents to their children, because, the most common alternative is a single mother on he own with an absent or unknown father. Most common alternative to being born to a homosexual couple is being born to the married mother and father. No benefit to the children of avoiding the most common alternative that is most beneficial to the children.

 

What I want is for people in this thread to stop ignoring what I write and stop making up responses that have nothing to do with anything I've said.

Yeah I know, it's just a pipe dream....

 

That's why I instead pointed to arguments that you labeled baseless, that were successful in dozens of court cases. And I wouldn't consider the tax breaks and governmental entitlements of marriage to be "basic rights", and you've never had a problem with the 50 states who have voted to prohibit closely related couples of their "basic rights" to marriage.

Nope, while the words of the Constitution have remained the same, their meaning has changed. JUST as the intent of marriages limitation to men and women, as old as marriage itself, intended to improve he wellbeing of children that only men and women joining together create, unchanged for centuries, has been magically transformed, retroactively to be an intent to "disparage and injure" gays. No level of tortuous twisting of the meaning of the words of the constitution or rewrite of history is beyond their reach.

 

If you say so boss. Just a final word because quite frankly I'm bored with this thread and with you. I don't believe for a nanosecond that you do not have a position on parenting by gays and that this has just been about the studies. I been watching you for a long time now and I'm quite familiar with your anti gay attitude. I maintain that you are reluctant to state what you think should be done about gay parents because you can't defend it. We are done here. Back on ignore

 

They do.

The relevant comparison wouldn't be to "heterosexual parents" and would instead be to BIOLOGICAL parents. Biological parents aren't preferred because they are heterosexual and are instead preferred because they are the BIOLOGICAL parents.