Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There have been many studies that concluded that children raised by homosexual parents turn out just as healthy as children raised by heterosexual couples.
I looked at the cpa and the psychology.org links that you offered. I find it to be interesting but also highly biased and questionable because they basically conclude that same sex parenting is far superior to heterosexual parenting. That depends on what result you are seeking. A girly boy and a masculine little girl is not a good result in my opinion. Men and women are different, we have unique roles to play in this society and in role-modeling for children. I think it is a mistake to pretend females can take the place of males and visa versa, a dangerous one. Women have breasts for providing nurishment for babies - that is their purpose. The purpose of a mans penis is to fertilize a womans eggs. That is as nature intended. The pleasure derived from these organs is not the primary purpose. That would be hedonistic.
Quote:
The new study by two University of Southern California sociologists says children with lesbian or gay parents show more empathy for social diversity, are less confined by gender stereotypes, and are probably more likely to explore homosexual activity themselves. Writing in recent issue of the American Sociological Review, the authors say that the emotional health of the two sets of children is essentially the same.
"These studies find no significant differences between children of lesbian and heterosexual mothers in anxiety, depression, self-esteem and numerous other measures of social and psychological adjustment," said the authors.
NARTH"s Joseph Nicolosi offered the following comments: "This paper was authored by a professor of gender studies, so it is not surprisingly that the differences on which she focused have to do with a rejection of gender conformity. Indeed, what she found makes sense -- lesbian mothers tend to have a feminizing effect on their sons, and a masculinizing effect on their daughters.
"But the question is, are these differences healthy? More research is needed to understand how a rejection of conventional gender roles can have not just a healthy and expansive, but also a constricting and negative effect on identity and psychological health.
"And despite what many gender researchers claim, research tells us that the absence of a father in the home is not, on balance, good for families."
I looked at the cpa and the psychology.org links that you offered. I find it to be interesting but also highly biased and questionable because they basically conclude that same sex parenting is far superior to heterosexual parenting. That depends on what result you are seeking. A girly boy and a masculine little girl is not a good result in my opinion. Men and women are different, we have unique roles to play in this society and in role-modeling for children. I think it is a mistake to pretend females can take the place of males and visa versa, a dangerous one. Women have breasts for providing nurishment for babies - that is their purpose. The purpose of a mans penis is to fertilize a womans eggs. That is as nature intended. The pleasure derived from these organs is not the primary purpose. That would be hedonistic.
The child will not get any maternal love , but that does not matter.
and you conveniently ignore that single fathers also do not have maternal love if they choose not to remarry.
So your argument fails right from the get go.
Quote:
WTF! - of course it matters.
and in some families, it doesn't. The mother died; or went to jail, or just disappeared. Yet children with single fathers grow up fine.
You obviously think we all live in a vacuum where the child will not come into contact with any maternal figure, whether it be an aunt, a cousin of the father, grandmothers, great-grandmothers, older cousins who are of maternal age, teachers, counselors, coaches and so forth.
Quote:
babies come from the womb - the womb is the provider of life, hence maternal love is
key.
Being born of the "womb" guarantees no maternal love. there are many unfit mothers who neglect their children. The most dangerous time for a mother is when she goes through depression, and this happens usually within the first 6 months after birth. This is where you hear all about those mother's who drown their babies in the tub.
I looked at the cpa and the psychology.org links that you offered. I find it to be interesting but also highly biased and questionable because they basically conclude that same sex parenting is far superior to heterosexual parenting. That depends on what result you are seeking. A girly boy and a masculine little girl is not a good result in my opinion. Men and women are different, we have unique roles to play in this society and in role-modeling for children. I think it is a mistake to pretend females can take the place of males and visa versa, a dangerous one. Women have breasts for providing nurishment for babies - that is their purpose. The purpose of a mans penis is to fertilize a womans eggs. That is as nature intended. The pleasure derived from these organs is not the primary purpose. That would be hedonistic.
NARTH"s Joseph Nicolosi offered the following comments: "This paper was authored by a professor of gender studies, so it is not surprisingly that the differences on which she focused have to do with a rejection of gender conformity. Indeed, what she found makes sense -- lesbian mothers tend to have a feminizing effect on their sons, and a masculinizing effect on their daughters.
Do you have any idea who Joseph Nicolosi and NARTH are?
When it comes to anything to do with gay people, using NARTH is kind of the equivalent of using the KKK or Stormfront for their views on blacks.
Nicolosi is a devout conservative Catholic who thinks he can 'cure' gayness with his antiquated quack ideas. He is a joke in the mental health community.
So much anti-gay nonsense around the net originates from NARTH. For a group with 'research' in their title, you'd think they'd actually DO research. They don't. All they do is misrepresent and lie about the work of real researchers to push their 'ex-gay' quackery.
And let's not forget who NARTH's 'clinical advisor' was - at least until he got caught hiring a young male prostitute to accompany him on a european holiday.
George 'rentboy' Rekers'. He was also professionally discredited when it was exposed that his PhD and following 'work' was based on fraudulent claims.
Two couples are interested, one hetero the other gay (everything else being equal)
which one should get the kid?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
