Children of Homosexuals More Apt to Be Homosexual

Christian Communication Network ^ | April 26 , 2006 | Dr. Paul Cameron

[Donald Meaker]

The good news is they don't breed much....


I home school my younger children, so they don't get the indoctrination now common in government schools.

[DBeers]

You made my point for me.

Yup -and all that necessarily follows e.g. a need to identify the scientifically bankrupt "wealth" of pro-homosexual studies and research currently being promoted as valid "knowledge" to be considered in decision making e.g. Kinsey e.g. the APA...

[DBeers]

It's basically garbage though. You won't believe the "sampling procedure" they tried to pawn off as acceptable until you see it for yourself though.

You do understand that this was a meta study? Feel free to post some details of the methods and results you have handy e.g. how was sampling done, what assumptions were made, what definitive conclusions if any were stated and what confidence was attributed to any conclusions made...

Also, I looked at FRI's web site, they are truly a single issue organization. As a group that purports to research families, they don't even pay a passing tribute to anything except homosexuality issues.

It would appear that your reporting of their purporting is actually your own purporting. I suggest you revisit their website and read closely their Mission Statement:

Family Research Institute

The Family Research Institute was founded in 1982 with one overriding mission: to generate empirical research on issues that threaten the traditional family, particularly homosexuality, AIDS, sexual social policy, and drug abuse...

Do your homework...

[mjwise]

From the study: To date, only one random sample that might pertain has been reported (Cameron & Cameron, 1996). There is no obvious way to design a random sample of adult children of homosexual parents. Such children are not enumerated by any census and how they might be contacted is obscure. No obvious sampling strategy presents itself, but a number of books touching upon gay parenting, all written from a celebratory stance, have recently appeared. While unknown biases may have led to the compilations they reported, taken together the number of adult children of homosexuals in these compilations is larger than the number studied for any other account. In the absence of a random sample, it seemed reasonable to at least examine the material available. Therefore, all books about adult children who had homosexual or transsexual parents that could be purchased on Amazon.com in April 2004 were examined. Amazon.com was employed because its selection of ‘works that pertain to the topic’ has no apparent bias regarding gay parenting, and those works that could be purchased were in print, assuring that the material was relatively ‘fresh’ to the issue. A tally of sexual preferences was made from the three that could be purchased: Garner’s (2004) interviews with ‘over 50’, Gottlieb’s (2003) interviews with eleven, and Howey & Samuels’ (2000) compilation of 20 essays by such children. All adult children mentioned in these books – the adult child, as well as any adult siblings detailed by him – were assembled.

This is the entirety of his sampling methodology - he chose books off of amazon.com of collections of essays and writings where adult children wrote about or discussed their homosexual or transsexual parents, where he then determined their sexual preferences from the writings. It is an entirely self-selected sample that relies entirely on self-report that is, at best, unrepresentative. For example, I would argue that those children most likely to talk more freely (and in an evidently positive light) about their homosexual parents would be those children that turned out to be gay themselves. And especially for a meta study, the sample size is very small - it is only actually 48 when you subtract those he could not assign a sexual orientation to. To his credit, in the paper, he does basically to the likely bias of the participants above, but all the admissions to limitations he makes doesn't make up for the fact that it's inherently flawed.

[Das Outsider]

If you would have seen the guys on 20/20, you would have raised the BS flag. It was actually pretty funny.

So they sounded or acted like homosexuals, right? How long had it been since they left the gay lifestyle? How long had they been in it?

[DBeers]

Thanks for the response. I tend to agree with you that the science was not rigorous and the samples even if they could be scientifically objectively measured and verified are too small to render anything statistically significant.

To his credit though and assuming it true, Dr. Cameron claimed that his was the "largest" study of adult children of homosexuals. Then he argued that his findings contradict the 'scientific" claims from left e.g. that "foster care and adoption by homosexuals is absolutely harmless" and that "there is no correlation between children adopting homosexual tastes and the sexual proclivities of their parents"...

To myself, it is the writing between the lines that is objectively obvious.

If Dr. Cameron's is the largest study YET still a study without adequate samples(regardless the lack of rigorous methodology) THEN one must conclude that the studies and claims published by the left in regard to homosexual parenting having no effect on children's orientation are nothing more than fabrications -voodoo science conjured up to support the homosexual agenda!

LOL

[Sun]

Not surprising. Parents teach by example.

[Arthur McGowan]

I don't remember reading about homosexual adoption in the Bible.

There's not a word in the Bible about drunk driving, or shooting one's wife with a gun, or dropping nuclear bombs on civilians, so I guess those things are all morally okay.

[sexyd]

So if i teach my kid it’s ok to kill people you hate, then he has no more chance of being a serial killer, compared to another kid, from a family that teaches murder is wrong.