Pro-Homosexual Study Authored by Lesbian

Agape Press ^ | February 9, 2005 | AFA Journal

[DBeers]

(AgapePress) - Raising questions about a conflict of interests, a pro-family leader claims that the co-author of a 2002 study of the children of homosexual couples is not a researcher but a propagandist.

Joe Glover, president of the Family Policy Network in Virginia, said that he was puzzled by the work of University of Virginia professor Charlotte J. Patterson, who co-authored a study which claimed that the children of lesbian couples are as happy and well-adjusted as children living in traditional homes. In addition, the study recommended -- as steps toward "breaking down legal barriers to maintenance of parent-child relationships in families headed by gay and lesbian parents" -- repeal of all sodomy laws, legalization of same-sex "marriage" throughout the U.S., and legalization of adoption by same-sex couples as well as "second-parent adoptions" (adoption of the children of the other same-sex partner).

Such reforms, stated the report, "would extend to gay and lesbian parents and their children the legal protections that are now generally taken for granted by other families." In that report, titled "Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents: Research, Law and Policy," Patterson cited her own research extensively.

However, Glover did some research of his own, and discovered that Patterson is a lesbian in a relationship with a female partner, and the couple has three children between them. The pro-family advocate said Patterson has an obvious agenda and is using her title as a psychologist to put forth one-sided propaganda.

"She actually writes books on how lesbians can manipulate the law in order to have double adoption processes so they can create these lesbian so-called 'families,'" he said. Patterson, he added, is a radical homosexual activist "who has a clear agenda to redefine what a family is or should be."

In addition, according to an article in The Daily Progress (Charlottesville, Virginia), Patterson admitted that the study did not deal one of the most controversial issues -- whether or not kids raised in same-sex households were more likely to become homosexual themselves.

Those in favor of legitimizing same-sex families frequently gloss over or completely ignore this area of debate. For example, in a panel discussion at Tufts University, Dr. Ellen Perrin, professor of pediatrics at the Tufts-New England Medical Center, said the matter was not even a valid question.

"One of those questions that always gets asked is, 'What are these kids [raised in same-sex families] going to be?' I'm bothered by that question," she said, adding that "it's a homophobic question, because it doesn't matter" if a child turns out to be homosexual.

Perrin was instrumental in getting the American Academy of Pediatrics to change its policy to favor same-sex families.

[AmericanArchConservative]

Patterson is naught but a pseudo-scientist who begins with a lie, wraps it in a less than half-truth, enlarges it with hyperbole and counteroffensive accusations cloaked in the chiding tones of sneering elitist scholarly dismissal.

The colossal arrogance of people so enamoured of their own (fools) wisdom just amazes and affronts me. Sodom and Gomorrah were obliterated for far less than such behaviour as these deviants practise today.

Nineveh was guilty of similar wickedness, but when Jonah, skin bleached by the digestive juices of the whale's belly, crawled ashore and preached repentence, the largest revival of the Bible occured. Every person of that reprobate city from King to stable boy was stung by their conscience and humbled themselves in sackcloth and ashes, ashamed for their great evil. God spared them in His mercy, seeing the contrition of their hearts.

These folk today are so hard-hearted and stiff-necked, that they are mostly unreachable, having become godlike in their own minds. It is not enough for them to still dissenting voices, now they seek the outright endorsement of social and political establishments. Woe be unto them! And to many of us who quietly 'tolerate' their creeping agenda.

[DirtyHarryY2K]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

If you want on/off the ping list see my profile page.

[FormerACLUmember]

Let the Internet now once again ferociously debunk yet another liberal fraud.

[N. Theknow]

There seems to be a pattern in the Lesbian community.

A number of them are in the field of Psychiatry. They therefore are in a position of authority when counseling other women. Perhaps a Psychiatrist's office is a good place for them to get hooked up.

[EdReform]

BTTT

Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)

What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda

Myth and Reality about Homosexuality--Sexual Orientation Section, Guide to Family Issues"

[EdReform]

Perrin was instrumental in getting the American Academy of Pediatrics to change its policy to favor same-sex families.

Documentation posted here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1026551/posts?page=284#284

[ReeseKev27]

Publius Scipio states:
"I believe the point is that this study was, presumably, accompanied by some evidence to support it's conclusion and that it might be more useful to examine that evidence than to make ad hominem assertions of bias."
The article posted states:
"...co-authored a study which claimed that the children of lesbian couples are as happy and well-adjusted as children living in traditional homes."

Publius Scipio: Evidence supporting the above conjecture is obviously of a subjective nature, and therefore its entirely appropriate of anyone to be questioning the source of such data. This is empirical data, nothing more, nothing less. I can think of no better way to examine data based on opinion and observation than to examine the authors of such a study. I think you're just hiding behind your PC tinted lens ignoring the obvious.
If this were the Olympics and not homosexuals, and the W. German judge gave the W. German team a perfect 10 in figure skating not child rearing would it be easier for you to join in the discussion instead of attacking those of us who are? Could you then question the motives of the...W German judges?

No one get me wrong, i have no bone ;) in this pro-gay/anti-gay debate, but don't try and snowball ;) me into believing that this is an attack on homosexuality by a bunch of "homophobes" and not an attack on a blatantly bias study.

Thats another one that gets me. Is there such a thing as Homophobes? I think it could be yet another trick of the left to shame people into accepting something they don't want to.
It seems to me that it would pretty hard to prove that someone hates homosexuals because they themselves are in fact gay yet not willing to admit it. Is there some group of gay men out there that used to be afraid of other gay men until they realized, "Hey I'm afraid of them because they're just like me".

Yup that holds water.

[SweetCaroline]

However, Glover did some research of his own, and discovered that Patterson is a lesbian in a relationship with a female partner, and the couple has three children between them.

.....Oh yea, lets let the mentally retarded critic themselves too!!!!

Hey, they wouldn't be bias either!!!!

....and we would believe them too!

NOT

[clearsight]

http://www.savethemales.ca/000168.html

[flushed with pride]

"...who is funding these studies..."
all too often--MY/YOUR TAX DOLLARS!!!!

[Publius Scipio]

Evidence supporting the above conjecture is obviously of a subjective nature, and therefore its entirely appropriate of anyone to be questioning the source of such data.

How would you know, if you haven't seen it? You can't discredit this study without discrediting the evidence and methodology.

Waving your arms around and making claims of "obviously" subjective evidence doesn't make it so. This isn't about being PC. I'm far from it. It's about intellectually honest debate.

Frankly, the above article is utterly worthless crap. A pro-family advocate claiming a pro-homo advocate is guilty of bias might be mildly comical in it's unintentional irony, but it does absolutely nothing to disprove the homosexual's conclusions.

[Dominick]

Shazam!

Surprise surprise surprise!

[DirtyHarryY2K]

Frankly, the above article is utterly worthless crap. A pro-family advocate claiming a pro-homo advocate is guilty of bias might be mildly comical in it's unintentional irony, but it does absolutely nothing to disprove the homosexual's conclusions.

You don't have to be the head cashier at Wal-mart to figure out that two homosexuals for parents are not in the best interest of a child.

No child should have to sacrifice their natural right to have a father and a mother just to satisfy two selfish perverts that place their perverted sexual preferences higher on the priority list than the spiritual and emotional needs of the child.

[ReeseKev27]

"How would you know, if you haven't seen it? You can't discredit this study without discrediting the evidence and methodology."
This is long.
I completely disagree, facts can be assembled to prove just about anything, relying on what the author decides to include is at best working half blind. There have been books written using "scientific" data that disprove Jews were gassed in Germany. The conclusion is wrong, yet they present data that says else wise. How is this possible? misrepresentation of the facts thats how.

For the sake of debate lets disregard my belief that this report is worthless before even opening it because of the authors UNDISCLOSED bias which really ends the argument.
Both terms,'happy' and 'well-adjusted', are subjective terms (i.e. open to interpretation). We can go around in circle debating what "happy" is. Supposedly there are people out there that are, "happy" to live in totalitarian regimes headed by ruthless dictators.
Some people don't want democracy or freedom when given the choice. The left has pedaled this for the past 3 or 4 decades. Whole books have been written about these mythical places, and yet if someone else visited these places, they might just find they value the freedom of speech, or the freedom to bear arms, or the checks and balances inherent in a Representative government. Cuba and Fidel are their poster children, and yet who's coming to who's country? When "the wall" fell in Germany, which way were the people running? Was it East or West?

In other words the "data" used to conclude that someone is, "well adjusted" or "happy" is, and will always be, open to debate BECUASE of its subjective nature.
Secondly, the evidence and methodology isn't as important as you'd like to make it. Its secondary in nature. Why? Because it's her study, she wrote it, she decided what evidence to use, and more importantly she decided what evidence not to use.
She is a lesbian, (not telling you she's a lesbian)making a study to say its okay for homosexuals (her) to have children. Low and behold she (a homosexual) has children. Tell me, are you going to argue that there was even a chance she'd come up with a different conclusion? I dare you to even argue that she didn't go into this study with her conclusion already written.
She could have 100 pages of "proof" and yet it doesn't matter because she didn't tell anyone she was gay and that is really all that needs to be said.

[DBeers]

Frankly, the above article is utterly worthless crap

LOL -welcome to FR we have alot of worthless crap here -the dems hate it and call it worthless crap!

[Publius Scipio]

There have been books written using "scientific" data that disprove Jews were gassed in Germany. The conclusion is wrong, yet they present data that says else wise.

Yes, and those books have been thoroughly discredited by deconstructing the evidence that was presented in them not by complaints of bias.

Attack the evidence not the author. That's all I'm trying to say.

[longtermmemmory]

Manipulation of laws is what family law lawyers specializing in homosexuals adopting children do.

For example, they will have ONE adopt the child then the sex partner is granted the adoption.

27 states eith FORBID or restrict such adoptions.

Does anyone have a link to the new zeland study which was more comprehensive?

[longtermmemmory]

THESE ARE THE GUIDES FOR CIRCUMVENTING THE LAW IN ORDER TO OBTAIN ACCESS TO CHILDREN...

Homosexuals are competing with normal couples for the same babies.


http://www.glad.org/rights/parenting.shtml

If anyone can store these documents, they are a source of such gaming the law for all to know.

Publications

Adoption - Questions & Answers

---

Second Parent Adoption in Massachusetts

---

Second Parent Adoption Law in New England

---

Protecting Families: Standards for Child Custody in Same-Sex Relationships

---

Donor-Mother and Co-Parent Custody and Visitation Cases (Case Index - Primarily for Lawyers)

---

De Facto Parenthood: Legal Foundations and Modest Proposals for Future Litigation (Primarily for Lawyers)

[longtermmemmory]

http://www.glad.org/rights/adoption.html



http://www.glad.org/rights/SecondParentAdoptionMA.pdf



http://www.glad.org/rights/SecondParentAdoptionLawNE.pdf



http://www.glad.org/rights/protectingfamilies.pdf



http://www.glad.org/rights/custodybibliography.PDF

(above is guide for lawyers)


http://www.glad.org/rights/CoParents-forlawyers.PDF


(above is guide for lawyers)

[LibertarianInExile]

Well said. I don't care if she's a Hooverheifer--if the methodology is sound, the study will be.

Now, odds are pretty good it's lousy study (since 99% of the sociological studies out are done by and for liberals), but I'd prefer to see the methodology to confirm it.