Posted on 06/11/2012 8:25:46 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
In his new Social Science Journal study...Mark Regnerus set out to answer the question of whether children who have parents in a same-sex relationship experience disadvantages when compared with children raised by their biological, married parents.
The answer, contra the zeitgeist, appears to be a resounding yes. Children with a parent in a same-sex relationship “underperform” in almost every category.
Some of these differences may be relatively benign — whether one voted in the last presidential election, for example — but most are decidedly not.
One deficit is particularly worrying: Less than 2 percent of children from intact, biological families reported experiencing sexual abuse of some nature, but that figure for children of same-sex couples is 23 percent.
Similarly disturbing is that 14 percent of children from same-sex couples have spent some time in foster care, compared with around 2 percent of the American population at large. Arrest, drug experimentation, and unemployment rates were all higher among children from same-sex families.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Meaning that nearly one in five children of same-sex couples has been sexually abused.
If you presented this huge discrepancy to your avg lib, they wouldn’t believe it, it’s a tenet of their religion that there is absolutely nothing wrong with being homosexual.
Well, duh...
Bookmark for later.
Is water wet? Is the sun REALLY hot?
To a narcissist, a child is just a kind of hood ornament.
Keep an eye on this....there will be a major effort to shut this guy up. Don’t be surprised if he retracts this study and apologizes....
</MATHTEACHER>
I was thinking the same thing. The college he works for is going to find some reason to fire him for this.
In other news, study finds two arms more advantageous than one...
What would a NAMBLA “married couple” do to an adopted little boy? DUH!
No one questions the Master Race. There are FIVE fingers!
Let’s see O’Reilly spin this.
what is the common denominator of that 23% of predators?
where is the MSM? nearly 1/4 of a group of children are being targeted and the MSM is deafeningly silent.
Of course, this will do nothing to hamper the ability of gay couples to adopt kids.
“Less than 2 percent of children from intact, biological families reported experiencing sexual abuse of some nature, but that figure for children of same-sex couples is 23 percent.”
LIES!!! All LIES!!! The APA has determined that Gay is great and normal and beneficial to society! These people must be stripped of their jobs and their reputations destroyed immediately!
Our leader does not endorse this trash. He has honored the homo community properly! How dare these people let fact and reality interfere with the cause? We cannot let this spread. People will get ideas and think that gays shouldn’t have access to kids. Imagine! Worse, they might think for a change and realize that the homos are just recruiting from birth!
LIES I TELL YOU!!! LIES!!!
/s
Yep, lots of sexual abuse; but, hey, let’s just continue to allow these people to adopt. Progressive social experimentation is always bad for children, this is just the newest form.
Disadvantaged! That’s great news! Now we know that we’ll need lots of government programs to address this “disadvantage.”
See how easy it is! The left always wins!
This isn’t going to go over very well for some folks. Some things are just understood.
My experience, watching the media, is that they just won't cover it at all. It does not exist. It goes down the memory hole, because it doesn't fit the narrative/agenda.
You’re probably right. Unfortunately, looking at the responses to this thread most of the conservatives here seem content just to say “well duh.” If that apathy translates to the rest of the conservative movement, and this study (or similar ones) gets “buried,” the gay rights groups will win this one for sure.
Actually, it looks like the lib reaction to this is that it actually supports same-sex marriage (?!). Basically, the argument is that all of the problems that are highlighted in this study result from the instability of same-sex relationships, and that same-sex relationships are only unstable because they can't get "married." Here is a typical lib reaction, from Slate.
If same sex alternative lifestyle relationships are considered to be the actions of consenting adults in private, when do the CHILDREN consent to being brought into an alternative lifestyle home?
And what is the percentage preference of boy children over girl children among two-mens couples?
I would weigh in here, but I’m a homophobe, so my opinion doesn’t matter on this subject.
I think we are missing the boat on how to fight the homosexual agenda. We tend to argue morality with people who have no fear of God. Chuck Coleson recommended using purely secular arguments when confronting the Godless.
Instead, we should treat homosexuality the same way we treat smoking. It harms the physical and mental health of those involved in this behavior, and yes, like secondary smoking, it harms those non-practicing family members who are repeatedly exposed to the lifestyle. Homosexuality leads to a shortened life span, increased STDs, and increased depression and suicide.
Yes, there are other moral and social issues, but that alone should be enough for our local secular school boards and politicians.
It’s time to CORRECT the POLITICALLY CORRECT. It’s not ok to act like normal people when your not normal. You are going to screw your kid up big time when they realize what is going on.
23% is over 1 in 5 and nearly 1 in 4.
Permit these kids to carry loaded firearms to protect themselves against molestation.
Problem solved.
Paging Natural Law, modernity is calling.
I despair.
The short answer is they are a corrupt bunch of faggot.
End of story.
To expand on that explosive statement, the Sex Positive agenda (which uses the Homosexual Agenda as the battering ram to society's laws and moral restraints) seeks to end ALL moral judgments over ALL sexual pairings regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, or species of partner(s). They consider orgasm to be a birthright to be enjoyed at every age and they consider abstinence to be "unhealthy" since it supresses sexual desires.
Knowing THOSE benchmarks of what they argue and where they are taking this, moral arguments won't win the day with the faggots. You have to work on the moderates who are slouching towards Gomorrah to "get along" and not be considered unpopular or a "hater".
They hate religion. That hate is okay with the moderates.
Search the term "sex positive" eduction/training/theory.
Even the wikipedia entry makes it clear.
You will hear them say it should be "consensual" but they even support rape fantasy and seek to indoctrinate youth to experiment.
Free love ain't free.
Anyone else considering that the Pacquaio job was orchestrated my the Lavender Mafia?
The fox is in the henhouse.
Or as zero states, "a punishment".
This report is more ammunition against the tidal wave of homosexual marriage.
People could care less if someone has a religious conviction against homosexuality. Conservatives need to package their opposition to homosexual marriage based on one thing: its damage to children. Children deserve to be raised by a mother AND a father.
How can this be surprising? These so-called "same sex couples" are in reality sick, perverted sodomites. Of course, they are going to abuse children in the pursuit of their pederatistic perversion. Their goal is children.
At least one of the party is going to be genetically unrelated, possibly both via adoption. This is an ideal environment for sexual exploitation. I think 23% is unnaturally low.
“I think we are missing the boat on how to fight the homosexual agenda. We tend to argue morality with people who have no fear of God. “
Agree. See my post #37.
Used to be an O’Reilly fan, we have a signed book. Until the day that he interviewed Rosie O’Donnell and “changed his mind” about homosexuals adopting children.
MATHTEACHER
It's actually 23 in 100, it's nearly 24 in 100.
Statistician.
Gay people tend to adopt (and may adopt out of foster care), which means that many of these disadvantages may be in place before the kids are ever in the gay household. For example, maybe these kids spent time in foster care before they were adopted by gay couples. Maybe they were abused by their biological parents before being put in foster care.
A better study would compare kids raised by gay couples to adopted kids raised by straigh couples.
I'd rather see Mitt "spin it", after all he's in favor of queer adoptions.
That was my thought as well. The study should try to factor out the adoption aspect, or at least make steps to equalize the number of bio vs adopted children in the study. Otherwise, you have an indictment of any adoption.
Sure, there’s nothing wrong with being homosexual (per the libs).
I live for the day that the Homo Gene is identified, and with the lib penchant for selective abortions, most if not all infant homosexuals will be aborted.
Then what will the aged remaining homosexuals have to say as they watch homosexuals disappearing from the US, leaving them to be the dinosaurs of the homosexual community?
I bet they haven’t realized just what their support of abortion and selective abortion will do to them.
Yes, I live for that day.
Very nice. Did you read the original post I was responding to? Or note that I was using a fake Closing HTML, not presenting my credentials? Just curious.
Sure, you’ll see them flop on the issue, or make confusing statements, but to them, they’re being entirely consistent,
because abortion and homosexuality are simply a means to an end. The traditional family is the target for destruction, and even that’s a proxy attack on God Himself.
Every leftist policy can be shown to be detrimental to the family as an institution, and that’s not a coincidence.
Secular school boards and politicians have signally failed to allow the verifiable dreadful consequences to affect their support of heterosexual promiscuity. One may assume that this is because the elected officials and a significant number of their constituents find traditional sexual morality personally constricting ... so, often literally, screw the children and their well-being.
In my opinion, it is not to be expected that any research showing harmful effects of homosexuality will make any difference in the vigor with which it is promoted by society’s major institutions.
A while back two lesbians starved and beat their male child to death with electrical cords while their female children were well cared for.
http://www.armyofmom.com/2006/06/how-is-this-possible.html
Press was almost silent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.