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.
I can't give any more reps right now, but would happily rep everyone with the patience to logically and politely answer the same idiotic statements that everyone has heard for years regarding gay relationships.
Hmm, "Children need a mother and father." Nice. Many children don't have one, the other or both. Not all sexual relationships produce children. People who cannot or do not want to be parents due to age, health, lack of interest, whatever, have sexual desire (including male/female married couples, I hear!) so it would appear that sex is biologically built in for many reasons, including the closeness of the people.
Does Britney Spears' 56-hour Las Vegas marriage honor the value of marriage more than two people of same sex who love each other for years?
I live in a state with same-sex marriage. It has provided legal protection for spouses and children (many of whom are born in former marriages, by the way) and imagine, the world is still spinning properly and, one hopes, children are less likely to beaten up/bullied in school because they are perceived as possibly gay.
I say, let gay people make as much a muck of marriage as straight people have. The long-time gay couples I know (men and women) aren't exactly screwing in public view. Like many long-time couples, their relationships aren't exactly all about sex.
The Focus on Family and similar groups' fascination with sexual matters for anyone is downright creepy. Right up there with Rick Santorum's obsessions.
I know all of these things have been said and said again on this discussion, but wanted to pitch in to support those patients people who have likely been having to say the same reasonable things again and again.
We found another liberal who believes everything the left-wing propaganda machine declares to be science.
"Gartrell’s funding came in part from gay and lesbian organizations like the Gill Foundation and the Lesbian Health Fund from the Gay Lesbian Medical Association."
"According to their mothers' reports, the 17-year-old daughters and sons of lesbian mothers were rated significantly higher in social, school/academic, and total competence and significantly lower in social problems, rule-breaking, aggressive, and externalizing problem behavior than their age-matched counterparts in Achenbach's normative sample of American youth."
The "study" was funded by gay and lebian organizations, then the lesbians who volunteered to be in the "study" filled-out their own score cards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
Oh look!
Another social regressive who takes church propaganda at face value, and believes everything it shovels out as "science" even though they've been wrong on EVERY scientific issue since the beginning of time.
The OP STARTS with a link analyzed by some "focus on the family" whack job, who doesn't even know how to properly analyze the study he suggests leads to the conclusion that kids of gays are more likely to be gay:
From the study:
Of the girls, 51.4% considered themselves exclusively heterosexual, and of the boys, 78.4%. Of the girls, none considered themselves exclusively homosexual, and of the boys 2.7%. The 2.7% is actually lower than the typically agreed upon statistic of % of gays in the population of roughly 3-7%.
So of 39 boys and 39 girls raised by Lesbian mothers, there were 3 girls who identified as truly bisexual, 1 who identified as more homosexual than heterosexual, and none who identified as exclusively homosexual.
There was only one boy who could be classified as gay, and one who was “predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual.”
With respect to "self identifying as bisexual," perhaps the question is more of an acceptance of what is incidental same sex attraction. If you come from a household that doesn't shun any interation of same sex attraction, you are more likely to embrace your "kinsey scale" bisexuality, even if you're a 10%/90% "bisexual" that prefers opposite sex.
Of course, the quacks at focus on the family probably reject the notion of fluid or "spectrum" sexuality, so they will get it wrong, every. single. time.
Here's a study from the APA:
A 2005 review by Charlotte J. Patterson for the American Psychological Association found that the available data did not suggest higher rates of homosexuality among the children of lesbian or gay parents.
And, where data suggests it is manifesting, researchers suggest what should be the obvious to anyone who isn't agenda driven:
In a 2001 review of 21 studies, Judith Stacey and Timothy Biblarz found that researchers frequently downplay findings indicating difference regarding children's gender, sexual preferences and behavior, suggesting that an environment of heterosexism has hampered scientific inquiry in the area. Their findings indicate that the children with lesbian or gay parents appear less traditionally gender-typed and are more likely to be open to homoerotic relationships.
In other words, just as I stated above, where the data is actually "freer" because the participants don't bring their anti-homosexual bias, and they feel free to answer questions more honestly.
But hey! Keep spinning the data! Ultimately, the ones who seek to make life difficult and terrible in this world for children of lesbians and gays, or gay kids themselves, are SOCIAL REGRESSIVES.
The social conservatives cause the most HARM and DAMAGE to these children and familes. Religious social conservatism is PURE EVIL in that respect.
Seems when you quoted me you left this part out...
"Gartrell’s funding came in part from gay and lesbian organizations like the Gill Foundation and the Lesbian Health Fund from the Gay Lesbian Medical Association."
"According to their mothers' reports, the 17-year-old daughters and sons of lesbian mothers were rated significantly higher in social, school/academic, and total competence and significantly lower in social problems, rule-breaking, aggressive, and externalizing problem behavior than their age-matched counterparts in Achenbach's normative sample of American youth."
The "study" was funded by gay and lebian organizations, then the lesbians who volunteered to be in the "study" filled-out their own score cards.
It isn't a study.
It's propaganda.
That's why you can't defend it.
That's why you resort to name calling.
So what can you defend? Not the BS that inspired this thread. So what?
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.
