I am not quite sure what you mean by run away but since I am still here and obviously not throwing insipid barbs, I will explain further.
First, sexual and physical abuse occurs at the same rate in all types of households; gay, straight, atheist, Muslim, Christian, black, white, liberal and even conservative.
Therefore, you cannot make a judgment as to what type of household would a child be more likely or less likely abused.
Secondly, I am not defending the gay couple in this story. If there is strong evidence of abuse the child should be removed, an investigation conducted and if found guilty these two should be locked in a cage for the next 99 years.
I would hope you would expect same be done to like offenders gay or straight.
Last, I have a cousin that is gay and in a monogamous relationship for years. I have another cousin that is straight but has a major alcohol problem. If I had to choose between the alcoholic cousin or gay cousin to raise a child I would pick he gay one without reservations.
You are incorrect. Sexual abuse occures at an abnormaly higher rate with homosexuals than any other group.
As has been often refernce to sources posted here, most homosexuals had their first sexual encounter UNDER the age of 18. Sexual abuse is not a "same as" issue. Homosexuals are a greater danger to children. Conseder that homosexuals are defined by their chosen sex act, that alone will have detrimental effects on a child.
In this case you have a child who is being told by his "father" and his father's sex partner that they made him as one would buy a new set of shoes. The mother is saying that he was born as a result of a love relationship. It is obvious the mother's version will lead to a healther life view for the child.
The article also glosses over the fact that the surrogate argument was obviously rejected by the courts as she has custody and if the contract had been accepted the mother would have been sumarily removed from the child's life.
There is also the recent New Zeland study which observed teh children of lesbian couples. If found abnormal development was the routine result of that environment for children. girls were promiscuous, boys were sexually confused and withdrawn socially.
If anything the dangers faced by children in homosexual environments should expand prohibitions of homosexuals adopting children and even engaging in the artificial production of children. Society as a whole benefits much better when the policy is to have normal mother father environments rather than alternative sexstyles as a child rearing environment.
You said:
"First, sexual and physical abuse occurs at the same rate in all types of households; gay, straight, atheist, Muslim, Christian, black, white, liberal and even conservative."
This is a lie, and if you actually believe this, you should immediately, without stop, go to the Categorical links with hundreds of articles about homosexuality, many with facts and figures provided by homosexuals themselves, and read for hours. Until that time, you have proved yourself to be one of two things:
1. Ignorant and very ill-informed, and thereby allowing yourself to be used as a tool by the "gay" activists and the media.
or
2. A shill for the "gay" agenda.
Your actions from now on will prove whether you are (1) or (2). If you are just ill-informed, that is easily remedied - FR is a mine of information about homosexuality. If you are (2), you will continue to spew lies as though they were fact, even though anyone who has read for an hour knows them to be lies.
Which are you?