Posted on 02/09/2015 7:12:04 AM PST by NetAddicted
Fresh research has just tossed a grenade into the incendiary issue of same-sex parenting. Writing in the British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science, a peer-reviewed journal, American sociologist Paul Sullins concludes that children’s “Emotional problems [are] over twice as prevalent for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents”.
He says confidently: “it is no longer accurate to claim that no study has found children in same-sex families to be disadvantaged relative to those in opposite-sex families.”
This defiant rebuttal of the “no difference” hypothesis is sure to stir up a hornet’s next as the Supreme Court prepares to trawl through arguments for and against same-sex marriage. It will be impossible for critics to ignore it, as it is based on more data than any previous study -- 512 children with same-sex parents drawn from the US National Health Interview Survey. The emotional problems included misbehaviour, worrying, depression, poor relationships with peers and inability to concentrate.
After crunching the numbers, Sullins found opposite-sex parents provided a better environment. “Biological parentage uniquely and powerfully distinguishes child outcomes between children with opposite-sex parents and those with same-sex parents,” he writes.
As he points out, this has immense implications for public policy. The Elton John/David Furnish model of lavishing love and licorice on the offspring of surrogate mothers won’t do. Throwing down the gauntlet before supporters of same-sex marriage, Sullins contends that “the primary benefit of marriage for children, therefore, may not be that it tends to present them with improved parents (more stable, financially affluent, etc, although it does this), but that it presents them with their own parents.”
(Excerpt) Read more at mercatornet.com ...
Nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
Well, I know a kid raised by two gay guys. Rich ones, who gave him all the goodies Elton John provides his little toys. The kid never got over the loss of a mother in his life. He’s in jail - again. His whole life was destroyed by a crazy social experiment that is about to become the law of the land.
Good idea. I’d put that number six and make #6 into #7.
Here’s some comments to consider learning from and becoming aware of.
Homosexuals make up less than 2% of the population. Married homosexuals even less and married homosexuals raising children much less.
Juxtapose rare observations of children raised by homosexuals against children raised by biological parents and a sample size of 512 children raised by homosexuals is huge. It’s enormous statistically.
So of course when you observed ONE child raised by homosexuals against MANY raised by biological parents, IT IS CERTAIN that the numbers of ‘messes’ however defined would be much greater among children of biological parents.
Further, children who are ‘messes’ are by any definition of ‘mess’ enormously more likely to attract attention, chatter, publicity than ‘non-messes’.
So be careful. Your results which are anecdotal are skewed by the happenstance of your personal observations AND ARE NOT SCIENTIFIC.
THEREFORE, when you engage in casual conversation you should try to refrain from judgement because those who offer non-scientific judgement make up a large chunk of society and are apt to be ‘permissive’ based on skewed views.
In societies of the past, the standard was that of a moral Christian society, and not of a scientific statistical study. So the judgments of previous generations sought to contain the moral hazard because of simple natural law and Christian philosophy. Nowadays, the arena of public opinion of where your view finds itself is without morality and without scientific basis. Therefore, it is dangerous because it allows for elements of human behavior that harm people.
It’s very similar to the FDA under Clinton in the late 1990s where his administration coerced the FDA to fast track approval of certain drugs because they were too bureaucratic and politicized. The FDA in that time ended up approving 7 drugs that went on to kill a great many people and were promptly taken off the approved list when lawsuits ensued.
The social approval of homosexuals is no different. The closet and hidden behaviors of homosexuals that the rest of society do not see are just as extreme as their sexual behavior. The face they show society is different from their genuine face, They have always an ability to hide things and the reason they do is because their behavior is so taboo. For example, whipping themselves with belts when they are frustrated, smashing their faces against walls and mirrors when they are disappointed, biting their partners when they feel social disapproval and so many other behaviors that are ABNORMAL. These behaviors have been documented in police reports as well as declarations by former homosexuals seeking treatment. And these behaviors are statistically significant when compared to abnormal behaviors of heterosexuals. Homosexuals ARE ABNORMAL AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEM ARE MENTALLY ILL but they will strive to present a face that appears normal in public.
Be careful.
For what it’s worth, I know a young man raised by a lesbian couple (I worked with one of them & became friends). They did a terrific job
That's the hard thing for many people to remember. People aren't statistics, and while claims about what the "average" might have some technical truth to them, individual variation is such that their applicability to any individual family is almost zilch.
Of course, what they neglect to tell you is that in just about every case, these single parents will seek out a role model of the opposite sex to mentor the kids. For single mothers, it can be an uncle, a clergyman or a coach. For single fathers, it can be a grandmother, a nanny or a teacher. They do this almost instinctively because they understand the importance of a Mom and Dad even when one or the other is lacking.
Not so with the homo crowd. They have to prove their pet theory against nature and nature's God and the mixed up kid like you cited is a common result.
I think the issue most people have is with the scientific community positing, and the legal system codifying, the notion of sub-optimal being equal.
The vaccine mess. It’s a win-win for the fellow travelers, because it takes the focus off the real issue (letting millions of unscreened illegal aliens into the US and bussing, flying, and railing them all over the US). It also keeps people, and legislators, busy passing laws about things that won’t matter.
What I find abhorrent about the gay issue is that people who do not want to be gay are essentially cut off from attempting any kind of cure. Gay rights has morphed into some sort of revenge fantasy against the ‘breeders’. They are shuttering the businesses and ruining their careers.
What’s going on here centers on adoption. I can state for a certainty that there are many, many, many, many families consisting of a mother and a father type, who are well enough off, and can provide the support necessary to raise a child in the most optimal circumstances, and they are being passed over by fellow travelers in order to place them with people who have psychosexual disorders for which there is no cure, and such political pressure against looking for a cure that no cure will be in the offing.
History is going to judge us harshly for the crap being perpetrated across the board right now.
All of this will be looked on like the EST, TM, and commune movements of the 1970’s. It will be the ‘pet rock’ of this generation.
” Recall that it was justice Kennedy who said that not overturning CAs proposition limiting marriage to the opposite sex would hurt those same kids, forcing gay marriage on states is good for the kids of gays.”
Maybe Kennedy is a closet rump ranger......you never know.
I think #4 covers that.
Exactly. But all the incarcerated offspring of single parents have not stopped ideologues from claiming kids don’t need two parents. Likewise, seeing increasing numbers of psycho kids raised by would-be Elton Johns will not stop this latest madness.
I’m surprised any journal would even publish his findings.
Clearly the study in question used nothing but homo-phobic, patriarchal, non-inclusive, gender-biased data...
How about a poll of HS freshmen that asks how they would feel about having queer parents?
Would having queer parents effect your relationship with other students?
Kennedy was looking for an excuse not the law. He already has made up his mind and wants a fig leaf to give him cover to protect his DC homosexual acquaintances. (must receive his invitations to the “right parties” etc...)
Hey Kennedy! You get free 30 year old scotch if you will just vote for perversion.
#24. We are in very similar circumstances and think very similarly.
There is still a strong element of scientific credibility in academia. Scientific misconduct is severely punished except in the liberal bastion of AGW now known as Climate Change.
When lawmakers decide public policy, anecdotal evidence about one family or another is insufficient to provide the most justice to most people, most of the time. That's why these statistics gathered from many people over time are a more reliable indicator of what a public policy can do, or undo, regarding as the health and well-being of children.
Defenders of gay exhibitionism typically say, "But I know one and he's a nice guy!" or "My nephew is gay and I love him, so gay marriage should be legal!" While persecution of gays is problematic, gay success stories pertain to an overwhelming minority, as gay people are some 2% of the population; therefore their agenda should not get to dictate that all the 98% of straight kids have to hear about gay sex techniques starting in kindergarten, nor provide bureaucrats an excuse to jail or penalize artists who do not wish to violate their consciences by participating in gay wedding preparations. Yet those are just some of the totalitarian results of GBLT "minority rule."
As for the straight famiies messing up their kids, you have only to examine the Supreme Court cases starting in 1964 on down that have been purposefully dismantling traditional family as an institution in favor of feminism, cohabitation, homosexual militancy, sex without commitment, abortion activism and anti-Christian animus to see how we got where we are today. That's 50 years of judicial activism in the service of destroying traditional marriage, even though earlier SCOTUS decisions noted that marriage lifted people up and insured freedom, respect, virtue, personal responsibility and strong communities.
The left destroys, with nothing positive to put in its place, and then points to the wreckage and says, "Two wrongs make a right! So because traditional marriage is now a wreck, give us gay marriage!"
Ask yourself, if marriage and contemporary parenting is such a wreck, why do they want it?
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.