Kids With Lesbian Parents Do Just Fine

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I'm sure the boys are more popular with their friends knowing he has lesbian parents! :clap:
 
Studies suggest that studies that are suggesting a suggestion are not often subjective

Sources:HailBlazers
 
I'm glad that those 78 kids turned out to be well-adjusted, productive members of society. I wish all kids would.

But, much as the author of the article asks, I question the conclusions. First, 78 kids isn't a terribly large sample size over 25 years, but that's overlookable. Were there differences in 2-parents-working vs. 1-parent-working households? Differences in socio-economic station? Were all these kids private-school, affluent and big-city exposed? Was it different in someplace like Omaha or Little Rock?
Is there something to be said that, while having two lesbian parents isn't "as good as or better" than 2 heterosexual parents, is also isn't worse? But why is that newsworthy? Have lesbian couples been stopped from adopting or inseminating in the last 25 years?

This seems an awful lot like another socio-progressive experiment being pushed. I don't get a warm fuzzy from this. :dunno: But if it allows more women to have children, who am I to care? If I didn't want children raised in "bad environments", I could think of a lot worse situations than two women from big cities who can afford insemination. Like, say, single-mothers addicted to crack who leave their babies in the hospital in Baltimore.
 
Sure it does, just ask HAP/DAN!
 
BrianFromWA said:
I'm glad that those 78 kids turned out to be well-adjusted, productive members of society. I wish all kids would.

But, much as the author of the article asks, I question the conclusions. First, 78 kids isn't a terribly large sample size over 25 years, but that's overlookable. Were there differences in 2-parents-working vs. 1-parent-working households? Differences in socio-economic station? Were all these kids private-school, affluent and big-city exposed? Was it different in someplace like Omaha or Little Rock?
Is there something to be said that, while having two lesbian parents isn't "as good as or better" than 2 heterosexual parents, is also isn't worse? But why is that newsworthy? Have lesbian couples been stopped from adopting or inseminating in the last 25 years?

This seems an awful lot like another socio-progressive experiment being pushed. I don't get a warm fuzzy from this. :dunno: But if it allows more women to have children, who am I to care? If I didn't want children raised in "bad environments", I could think of a lot worse situations than two women from big cities who can afford insemination. Like, say, single-mothers addicted to crack who leave their babies in the hospital in Baltimore.
Click to expand...

I think that last paragraph is what should be the standard worst case scenario thought. There are definitely people out there preaching that gay parents is an awful thing for children. I'm glad you don't think it's going to affect much. More people should agree with you :cheers:
 
Kids need love and attention and a safe and welcoming place to call home in a place where people love each other. It doesn't matter if it comes from a man and a woman, two guys, two girls or a polygamist family.
 
At least the kids won't grow up as homophobes (for the most part). That's a good head start.
 
maxiep said:
Kids need love and attention and a safe and welcoming place to call home in a place where people love each other. It doesn't matter if it comes from a man and a woman, two guys, two girls or a polygamist family.
Click to expand...

who said anything about that? Are you bragging again? :devilwink:
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
OH YEAH!

I admit to being a hypocrite. I find the idea of men together repulsive. But the idea of women together is erotic.
Click to expand...

You might be surprised how many heterosexual women agree with you completely.
 
Saw this last Sunday. Just made my day:

[video=youtube;QTvwf7EVbxs]

It's a much different America than the one I grew up in. We went from ignoring the deaths from AIDS of tens of thousands of homosexuals in the 1980's to a leading conservative calling his own party idiotic for clinging to "don't ask don't tell".
 
"evolving standards are the mark of a maturing society". That's one that I'm not sure I agree with the Supreme Court on. :dunno:

I DO know that George Will talked to us in Annapolis about stuff like this 9 years ago. Here's a transcript of part of his chat. Tell me what the difference is:
Tonight, however, I have escaped from Washington, which, as you know, is an enclave surrounded on four sides by reality, and come here to talk to you about the nature of the military and the nature of its relationship with the changing, not all together for the good, American culture. I want to read you something said by several of our leaders recently. The first is from a graduate of this fine institution, Senator John McCain.

"It is," said the Senator, "a fundamental proposition that armed services can truly serve a democracy only if they are a reflection of that society and are impacted by the same social trends." What I wish to do tonight is respectfully disagree with that. A recent Secretary of the Navy said something very similar.

"As American society changes," he said, "the naval service changes with it. That's not bad. That's the way it's supposed to be." Again, I respectfully, but emphatically, disagree.

We're told all the time that there is a large and growing problem and that there is a need to close the gap between the military and civilian society." I think that the gap is healthy and the gap is necessary, that the gap must exist in any society and, in a sense, especially in a democratic society. That is because the military must be an exemplar of certain virtues that will, at any given time, seem anachronistic and it is a function of the military to be exemplars.
Click to expand...

He follows that up with this:
As Lincoln said, "God must have loved the common man, he made so many of them, but it is uncommon men and women, uncommon men and women who, when nations get in danger, as they invariably do, must come to the fore and lead." And, again, it is hard for society to accept when society has decided that the worst possible sin is to be judgmental.

It is hard for a society to understand that when it believes that the Ten Commandments are really the "ten suggestions." It is hard for a society to believe, when it starts speaking as ours does entirely, the language of extenuation--the language that explains why people behave badly and why they should not be judged harshly for that. We are becoming a society that revels in victim hood, that practices identity politics, that we should act in politics by our ethnic or sexual group, and that our group should be grievance groups explaining why we are victims and why we are owed something. It is said that the danger we face in our society is that Americans will begin to feel that some Americans are morally superior to others. Well, I have a news bulletin for you: Some Americans are morally superior to others and, frankly, that is why you are here, on the banks of the Chesapeake Bay. Because you are training to be leaders. You are training to exercise judgment. You are training to be a hierarchy. You are training to be more than individualists. You are not here because you are materialists. And you are here to acquire a moral superiority.
Click to expand...
 
BrianFromWA said:
But, much as the author of the article asks, I question the conclusions. First, 78 kids isn't a terribly large sample size over 25 years, but that's overlookable. Were there differences in 2-parents-working vs. 1-parent-working households? Differences in socio-economic station? Were all these kids private-school, affluent and big-city exposed? Was it different in someplace like Omaha or Little Rock?
Is there something to be said that, while having two lesbian parents isn't "as good as or better" than 2 heterosexual parents, is also isn't worse? But why is that newsworthy? Have lesbian couples been stopped from adopting or inseminating in the last 25 years?

.
Click to expand...

In any peer-reviewed serious study (and you can search for the original on line) those factors (age, income, et al) would be compensated for. Otherwise the comparison is worthless.

Have lesbian couples been stopped from adopting or inseminating in the last 25 years?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, yes, some states explicitly bar lesbian and gay couples from parenting.

This seems an awful lot like another socio-progressive experiment being pushed. I don't get a warm fuzzy from this. :dunno: But if it allows more women to have children, who am I to care? If I didn't want children raised in "bad environments", I could think of a lot worse situations than two women from big cities who can afford insemination. Like, say, single-mothers addicted to crack who leave their babies in the hospital in Baltimore
Click to expand...

Professional journals are not about warm and fuzzy.

Earlier studies showed no significant difference between children raised by same sex (male or female) couples and matched groups of children in hetero households on various indicators (grades, relations with peers and adults, juvenile delinquency, unplanned pregnancy, drug/alcohol, etc.); the biggest differences were the children were, not surprisingly, less homophobic, less rigid about sex roles, and whle no more likely to be gay, were more likely to be open to experimentation with same sex partners. This new study amplifies previous conclusions.

As the article pointed out, although some gay men and lesbians have children through earlier, often unhappy, heterosexual relationships, in most cases they have carefully planned these children. The parents are more likely to be older, financially and emotionally stable, are often more educated, and absolutely unambiguous about wanting the children. These are all positive factors in child-raising.

Unfortunately news articles still feel the need to cite homophobes to make them look "fair". The homophobes claim that "other" studies show that children of gay parents have a horrible time but can't product them. And the man who was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to cite nonexistent studies showing how horrible gay and lesbian parents are just got busted taking a male escort on vacation. (no, not surprrised)
 
crandc said:
Earlier studies showed no significant difference between children raised by same sex (male or female) couples and matched groups of children in hetero households on various indicators (grades, relations with peers and adults, juvenile delinquency, unplanned pregnancy, drug/alcohol, etc.); the biggest differences were the children were, not surprisingly, less homophobic, less rigid about sex roles, and whle no more likely to be gay, were more likely to be open to experimentation with same sex partners. This new study amplifies previous conclusions.
Click to expand...

That would be my expectation. Every gay person I know says they were born that way, and I have no reason to doubt them (as much as I feel born heterosexual). If this is true, then why would the children be more likely to be gay? If it's a genetic thing (gay gene) and one of the couple has the child, then it could be passed on that way, I suppose.

Like I care, though. It's none of my business, and nobody's being harmed.
 
BrianFromWA said:
"evolving standards are the mark of a maturing society". That's one that I'm not sure I agree with the Supreme Court on. :dunno:

I DO know that George Will talked to us in Annapolis about stuff like this 9 years ago. Here's a transcript of part of his chat. Tell me what the difference is:
Click to expand...

George Will has evolved and matured?

barfo
 
maxiep said:
Kids need love and attention and a safe and welcoming place to call home in a place where people love each other. It doesn't matter if it comes from a man and a woman, two guys, two girls or a polygamist family.
Click to expand...

Who are you and what have you done with Maxie?

Joking of course, but it is weird to find myself agreeing with you on more than one occasion!
 
BrianFromWA said:
"evolving standards are the mark of a maturing society". That's one that I'm not sure I agree with the Supreme Court on. :dunno:

I DO know that George Will talked to us in Annapolis about stuff like this 9 years ago. Here's a transcript of part of his chat. Tell me what the difference is:


He follows that up with this:
Click to expand...

Yeah, wanting to be treated like humans is really wanting to be owed something.
 
I don't get what your sarcasm is referring to. Tangentially, being in the military doesn't get you "treated" like anything other than a member of the military. There are less rights (and more potential penalties) than prison.
 
Nate4Prez said:
I work with a lesbian and she says the idea of two men together, and I quote, "makes me want to gag." I find that hypocritical.
Click to expand...

In her defense, she's already grossed out by one man, why not turn down two?
 
maxiep said:
Kids need love and attention and a safe and welcoming place to call home in a place where people love each other. It doesn't matter if it comes from a man and a woman, two guys, two girls or a polygamist family.
Click to expand...

Or wolves, for that matter.
 
Nate4Prez said:
I work with a lesbian and she says the idea of two men together, and I quote, "makes me want to gag." I find that hypocritical.
Click to expand...

I've heard heterosexual women and heterosexual men make the same comment.

Face it. Regardless of orientation, chicks are hot, men are not.
 
BrianFromWA said:
I don't get what your sarcasm is referring to. Tangentially, being in the military doesn't get you "treated" like anything other than a member of the military. There are less rights (and more potential penalties) than prison.
Click to expand...

Until DADT is completely repealed this is a false statement.
 
BrianFromWA said:
I DO know that George Will talked to us in Annapolis about stuff like this 9 years ago.
Click to expand...

1. Why on Earth...?

2. Did my taxes pay him?

3. This explains a lot about what's wrong with our military.
 
One. Distinguished lecturers from academia, politics and the military are brought in to talk to midshipmen periodically about things like leadership, ethics, etc.
Two. Nope. Rest easy. Honorariums paid by the Alumni Association. Not that you could do a thing about it if your taxes did pay it. :)
Three. You don't have the first clue what's right or wrong about the military. Perhaps you should listen in to a couple of lectures. Ethics and leadership are things that most people could probably use a bit more exposure to. I'd respectfully submit that even those in the honorable business of real estate sales could learn a thing or two from people like Colin Powell, Ross Perot, George Will, John Ripley, Henry Kissinger, etc.
 
Last edited:
Well, Brian, although military and parenting are two entirely different topics, your point is echoed by GLBT service personnel. They are taught in the military to value honor, yet have to choose between living a lie and serving.

I personally don't find the idea of two men together disgusting or anything else, I know too many gay male couples who are very affectionate. (My cousin's husband keeps posting on Facebook that he has the best husband in the world and since my cousin and I have been tight since early childhood, I'm not going to argue. And their wedding was GREAT, they waited so long to be able to marry.)

I just personally don't have any desire to have sex with one man, two men, or any combination thereof.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top