Mid Atlantic: "Since its likely the child of the gay couple will be heterosexual, it's beneficial for the child to see a man and woman interacting as romantic partners. I'm aware of studies claiming "no difference at all", yet there's adults raised by gays who say otherwise: A recent example - http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2015/02/06/behold-the-quartet-of-truth/ " Darron: "Anecdotal evidence does not trump scientific research." Come on Darron. From a social scientific perspective, the unfavorable testimony of persons who were raised by homosexual "parents" is entirely valid as a scientific means of measuring the effect of gay parenting on them. It is certainly as valid as would be a favorable testimony by such persons.Which is to say that neither of them are valid. For every individual that you can present with a negative story about being raised in a gay home I can come up with dozens of horror stories about being raised in a heterosexual home. You need objective evidence in the form of large well done unbiased cohort studies Anecdotal evidence serves no function in this discussion.
Mid Atlantic: "I'm suspicious of gay couples raising kids in general." Darron: "Yes, we all see your bigotry." I don't. Please explain how Mid-Atlantic's views are bigoted. To me, it comes across that you are simply trying to deflect from the points that he is making by attacking his character.Bigotry:a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group. To make a statement about a group of people ("I'm suspicious of gay couples raising kids in general.") without any facts or data to support your point of view is by definition bigotry
The major error in anecdotal evidence or “research” regarding children raised by same sex parents is the fact that LEGAL same sex marriage (with all the benefits of living and navigating the social terrain that opposite sex families enjoy) has JUST started in the past few years as same sex marriage is so new in the states. Of course if you back to the 1990s or some other time to assess the dynamics and social situations of a same sex household the milieu will not be the same as it is now and will be in the future. So how can you assess a groups suitability when that group was held down and cast in a very unfavorable place by the rest of society??? For example from a social ecological model, LGBT persons (households) were often ostracized by the community; not afforded the same health benefits; and general views were that they “can never be a valid family” thus setting them up for failure and then saying, “well, you’ve failed.” You cannot rightfully push a group out of society and treat them poorly and then when they perform poorly (if you want to call it that), then say, “look you did poorly” that doesn’t hold up to any “social science study” or “research” anyone who conducts research in this manner doesn’t understand research, methodological errors or variables and factors influencing the case in my opinion. To be able to present any valid “research” on the topic would first require the same sex headed family and hetero family elevated to the same treatment by society and same access first and this is all quite a few years down the road. This is all tied back to matters of privilege…comparing privilege to disadvantaged and then wondering why they’re not exactly the same. This is actually an old argument by a professor in TX who tried this “research” and it was torn apart by the APA and anyone with basic understanding of research. It’s comparable to trying to “study” African american families in 1960 and compare them to the ubiquitous white family of the time and then saying “they’re not the same.” As for the professor in Tx who presented discredited an unacceptable work, it makes me wonder whether he purposefully presented such a careless study to appeal to his own conservative agenda (and crowd), otherwise I do not know how he obtained a PhD.
But society "does" have a vested interest in marriage equality for homosexuals. It stabilizes gay relationships and their families the same way it does for heterosexual families. The same way that stable heterosexual families contribute to a stable society, stable gay families will contribute to a stable society. It's a win win.This is wrong, though. Gay relationships can't be on the same level as straight relationships because the dynamic of same-sex partners is very different from that of different-sex partners. How do you know this? Have you had a homosexual relationship to make the comparison? If not, you know nothing about homosexual relationships.. You are simply bringing your prejudices into the discussion. You know no more about homosexual relationships than anyone except homosexuals. Lois
How do you know this? Have you had a homosexual relationship to make the comparison? If not, you know nothing about homosexual relationships..Does a monogamous person need to have an affair in order to determine that there is something wrong with doing so?
You need objective evidence in the form of large well done unbiased cohort studiesDarron has written with the pretense that he has the exclusive support of science for his claims. Mid-Atlantic has merely illustrated that, in the absence of physical (or hard) science, there is only anecdote that can be equally suggestive in either direction.
Anecdotal evidence serves no function in this discussion.Do you have scientific evidence to support that claim, or is your statement just anecdote?
You need objective evidence in the form of large well done unbiased cohort studiesDarron has written with the pretense that he has the exclusive support of science for his claims. Mid-Atlantic has merely illustrated that, in the absence of physical (or hard) science, there is only anecdote that can be equally suggestive in either direction. I'm not writing with any pretense at all, I am writing from the perspective of someone who surveyed the relevant available literature two years ago for an upper division college ethics class. I found none that supports Mid Atlantic's view, and plenty that concluded there is no difference between heterosexual and gay couple's parenting abilities on average. What counts is having a committed relationship and being involved in the child's upbringing.
Anecdotal evidence serves no function in this discussion.
Do you have scientific evidence to support that claim, or is your statement just anecdote?This attempted rejoinder to MacGyver is idiocy, nothing more.
You need objective evidence in the form of large well done unbiased cohort studiesI'm not writing with any pretense at all, I am writing from the perspective of someone who surveyed the relevant available literature two years ago for an upper division college ethics class. I found none that supports Mid Atlantic's view, and plenty that concluded there is no difference between heterosexual and gay couple's parenting abilities on average. What counts is having a committed relationship and being involved in the child's upbringing. You offer nothing in support of your claims but an assertion of expertise by boasting that you "surveyed the relevant available literature two years ago for an upper division college ethics class." That's less then Mid-Atlantic has offered.
Anecdotal evidence serves no function in this discussion.This attempted rejoinder to MacGyver is idiocy, nothing more. Lots of insults and lots of bravado.
You offer nothing in support of your claims but an assertion of expertise by boasting that you "surveyed the relevant available literature two years ago for an upper division college ethics class." That's less then Mid-Atlantic has offered.Biblarz, Timothy J., and Judith Stacey. "How Does The Gender Of Parents Matter?." Journal Of Marriage & Family 72.1 (2010): 3-22.
Claims that children need both a mother and father presume that women and men parent differently in ways crucial to development but generally rely on studies that conflate gender with other family structure variables. We analyze findings from studies with designs that mitigate these problems by comparing 2-parent families with same or different sex coparents and single-mother with single-father families. Strengths typically associated with married mother-father families appear to the same extent in families with 2 mothers and potentially in those with 2 fathers. Average differences favor women over men, but parenting skills are not dichotomous or exclusive. The gender of parents correlates in novel ways with parent- child relationships but has minor significance for children’s psychological adjustment and social success.This is just one of the many studies I found that reached the same conclusion. If you have any peer reviewed academic studies concluding gay couples cannot be good parents feel free to share them.
How do you know this? Have you had a homosexual relationship to make the comparison? If not, you know nothing about homosexual relationships..Does a monogamous person need to have an affair in order to determine that there is something wrong with doing so? He needs to know where his idea of of "wrong" comes from. Incidentally your analogy falls flat. A monogamous person can be gay You said you don't like to see gay people kissing. That is your own bigotry showing. I don't like to see some straight people kissing either. I know a lot of gay people. i have never seen them kissing in public. Where do you see all this gay kissing going on? Are you seeking it out? Whether you like something or not, has no bearing on people's rights. I don't like to have to see or hear from bigots. Should I be able to discriminate against you in business or social encounters? Lois
Mid Atlantic: "Since its likely the child of the gay couple will be heterosexual, it's beneficial for the child to see a man and woman interacting as romantic partners. I'm aware of studies claiming "no difference at all", yet there's adults raised by gays who say otherwise: A recent example - http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2015/02/06/behold-the-quartet-of-truth/ " Darron: "Anecdotal evidence does not trump scientific research." Come on Darron. From a social scientific perspective, the unfavorable testimony of persons who were raised by homosexual "parents" is entirely valid as a scientific means of measuring the effect of gay parenting on them. It is certainly as valid as would be a favorable testimony by such persons.Which is to say that neither of them are valid. For every individual that you can present with a negative story about being raised in a gay home I can come up with dozens of horror stories about being raised in a heterosexual home. You need objective evidence in the form of large well done unbiased cohort studies Anecdotal evidence serves no function in this discussion. That's right. The vast majority of people have been raised in heterosexual homes. That means the vast majority of people in prisons or who have been diagnosed with mental disease or who are violent or otherwise anitsocial have been raised in heterosexual households. It's hardly a sign of good upbringing. Lois
Does a monogamous person need to have an affair in order to determine that there is something wrong with doing so?Incidentally your analogy falls flat. A momogamous person can be gay My analogy works fine regardless of whether you want it to involve monogamous straight or gay couples. A monogamous straight person can determine not to have an affair without having to experience one. A monogamous gay person can determine not to have an affair without having to experience one. My point was that you don't have to experience something to make a thoughtful and informed choice about it. Conversely, experiencing something does nothing whatsoever to ensure that a person will make a thoughtful and informed choice about it.
You said you don't like to see gay people kissing.No I didn't. I really don't mind it at all. Actually, when it is tasteful I find it to be quite endearing. And there are also a lot of straight people that disgust me when they kiss. :lol: Lois, you have me confused with someone else.
You need objective evidence in the form of large well done unbiased cohort studiesDarron has written with the pretense that he has the exclusive support of science for his claims. Mid-Atlantic has merely illustrated that, in the absence of physical (or hard) science, there is only anecdote that can be equally suggestive in either direction. Hence making it unreliable and mostly useless and answering the second part of your question
Anecdotal evidence serves no function in this discussion.Do you have scientific evidence to support that claim, or is your statement just anecdote? see above
Does a monogamous person need to have an affair in order to determine that there is something wrong with doing so?Incidentally your analogy falls flat. A momogamous person can be gay My analogy works fine regardless of whether you want it to involve monogamous straight or gay couples. A monogamous straight person can determine not to have an affair without having to experience one. A monogamous gay person can determine not to have an affair without having to experience one. My point was that you don't have to experience something to make a thoughtful and informed choice about it. Conversely, experiencing something does nothing whatsoever to ensure that a person will make a thoughtful and informed choice about it.
You said you don't like to see gay people kissing.No I didn't. I really don't mind it at all. Actually, when it is tasteful I find it to be quite endearing. And there are also a lot of straight people that disgust me when they kiss. :lol: Lois, you have me confused with someone else. Ok, if you didn't say it, I apologize for misattributing it. Someone said it, I thought in this thread, but now I can't find it. Maybe someone else can find it. Lois
Even though it sounds callous to assign social relevance, the fact of potential reproduction makes a scale of relevance necessary.Please explain that. I recognize the words you are using but the way you put them together makes no sense. It means straight couples reproduce, most people are straight, therefore straight relationships are socially more important.
Even though it sounds callous to assign social relevance, the fact of potential reproduction makes a scale of relevance necessary.Please explain that. I recognize the words you are using but the way you put them together makes no sense. It means straight couples reproduce, most people are straight, therefore straight relationships are socially more important. So straight people who remain childless are less socially important than those who reproduce?
To start with, many gay men are known for extreme hedonism. Gay women are known for hating men.Stereotypes prove nothing. Do you have any peer reviewed research backing your opinion? I posted some of these months ago: http://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/substance-abuse.htm http://www.cdc.gov/std/life-stages-populations/STDFact-MSM.htm http://www.bilerico.com/2010/03/us_gay_mens_astonishing_hivstd_rates.php http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html
I asked for peer reviewed research. As much as I respect the CDC, “Studies have shown…” is not convincing. Even if it were, what is wrong with hedonism? And you posted nothing backing your assertion that gay women hate men. I’ll ask my lesbian friends about that one.
No, it's not guaranteed an adoption it will turn out "great" for the child, but then again it is not guaranteed to turn out "great" if adopted by a hetero couple either.I see "great" was the wrong term to use, "bearable" is a better term.
Sure there can be extreme hedonism among gays, but those will not likely be the ones starting a family in the suburbs either. Do you really believe the "hedonist" types will be adopting??? And that goes for any hedonist, regardless of orientation.I think the hedonist types of gays are probably not too different from suburban-couple types. Maybe I'm wrong. http://www.smh.com.au/national/named-the-australian-paedophile-jailed-for-40-years-20130630-2p5da.html
I asked for peer reviewed research. As much as I respect the CDC, "Studies have shown..." is not convincing. Even if it were, what is wrong with hedonism?WTF? The CDC is an esteemed scientific organization. Who else is a better monitor of disease rates? And, hedonism kills.
And you posted nothing backing your assertion that gay women hate men. I'll ask my lesbian friends about that one.Theres only anecdotal evidence online, but that doesn't count. Except when you ask your lez friends, then anecdote counts. :lol: