Whether Or Not Homosexuality Is A Choice Is Irrelevant

a reply to: kaylaluv

Thanks I'll read and look for research - however:

There is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation: lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children (Patterson, 2000, 2004; Perrin, 2002; Tasker, 1999); See the full resolution on the Sexual Orientation, Parents, & Children webpage.

We need to be careful about what we're reading. This statement is stating that effectiveness is not related to sexual orientation.

That is completely true.

Both parents can show true unconditional love.

BUT....

Their actions and motivations (effectiveness as parents) is not what I'm talking about (as mentioned on page 1) - it's the overall effect of the same sex parenting, the subconscious messages relayed to the child.

I do not deny same sex parents would be VERY effective parents - probably even more so.

But it's the effects we have no control over which I'm talking about. HIerachy, father figures, mother figures, natural family dynamics.

So it's worded very politically correct but it doesn't address the issues to which I refer.

(Of course this is just one link I've read. I'll read the rest and you never know, I may have my mind changed).

a reply to: flammadraco

Don't rely on semantics when I've given a completely valid answer.

There's no difference in my eyes between gay/bi in the context of the effects of a broken family on sexuality. It's a scale not black or white. It's not an either or - it's a scale of effect.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

Do you REALLY want to debate the merits of your argument?

If so;

Stop dropping the little amateurish quips about whether others can read or reason or have a sufficient education to enter into covnersation with you.

Cite actual STUDIES that demonstrate your assertions.

Stop moving the goalposts, first you argued that homosexuality is abnormal, then you wanted to look at parenting which you compared with single-parent households until you saw that did nothing for your claim, now it's "fatherless" households, etc. etc.

Make an argument and stick to it.

originally posted by: MKMoniker
a reply to: TheJourney

Many people are born to be Hetero, and harassed and intimidated into thinking they "just must be homosexual," only because it fits someone else's selfish Agenda. Never what is spiritually right and correct for that individual.

That's the part of the equation the apologizers always leave out: the vicious predation.

www.angry.net...

Are you saying that individuals are forced to be homosexual by "predators"?

Can you back up that claim? Or at least provide examples?

a reply to: flammadraco

Sorry - to add - 8.74 million species in the world and you're claiming 1500 has a level of significance?

en.wikipedia.org...

That's 0.017162471395881007 % of species.


Actually I was wrong - it's 7.77mil which is 0.019% of these display gay behaviour.

a reply to: TheJourney

If it were not a choice it would make God a tyrant.


Forcing sexuality on something and then condemning it!


So the religious theorists have to make it a choice in order to make their God reasonable and not unjust.

a reply to: Willtell

Hmmm ... kind of like constructing a Garden centered on a particular Tree ... and then forbidding your children to eat of the Fruit of that Tree?

Honestly, how could anyone ever claim such a god is tyrannical?

A deck-stacking, bottom-dealing card shark, maybe ...



Using god is an excuse. Using religion is an excuse. Using faith, belief, or dogma is an excuse.

a reply to: and14263

How many of those 8.74 or 7.77 million use a process similar to human reproduction?

That might be a more reasonable comparison.

a reply to: WilsonWilson

I think it may be one factor. Another very important factor is that homosexual parents who adopt or go through IVF or surrogate mothers are very motivated to have children - they prepare more, and they try really hard to do it right. Homosexuals who want to be parents are usually higher educated - that helps too.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Another good point...

I'd be interested to know - even if it was only 1,000,000 we'd still be less than 1% - we'd be about 1/10th of a percent or something.

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: Gryphon66

Another good point...

I'd be interested to know - even if it was only 1,000,000 we'd still be less than 1% - we'd be about 1/10th of a percent or something.

I'll see what I can do. Even restricting to Animalia would probably be more realistic.

EDIT:

Estimated Number of Animal Species on Earth

I'm not sure off-hand of the composition of the 1500 number, but ...

Some reasonable restrictions would seem to include:

Vertebrates: 59,811 species

Mammals: 5,416 species

a reply to: Gryphon66

An excuse is only a certain reasoning, that all...whether the reasoning is reasonable is a matter of opinion


And BTW they could eat most of the fruit just not the forbidden fruit


get it right

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

Why am I so worried about gay parent... forget that flammadraco, I have now become more worried with your ablility to read and understand information. I have written many words in this thread as to why I am worried about Gay parenting, I t is truly beyond my comprehension as to how you have not come across those words.

Because you said the following;

ETA: fatherless children represent:

63% of teen suicides
70% of juveniles in state institutions
71% of high school dropouts
75% of children in chemical abuse centers
80% of rapists
85% of youths in prison
90% of homeless and runaway children

I have seen this first hand, with peoples from all walks of life.

Who’s fault is it then with your above figures? The fathers or the mothers?

The real issue is the mother? the question is why are YOU blaming the mother, I didn't bring the mother's parenting into this. I said fatherless children, and presented stats.

You were insinuating that children needed both parents as without a Father they will more than likely fall into crime. However when I merely told you that there were far more children with single mothers than children with gay parents, you don’t like it as it turned your point on its head.

As for the 20 million more kids being gay, I have no idea what you are talking about. It hurts my head just reading your dribble drabble.

Well according to both you and “and14263” in this thread you have both said the following;

I'm definitely a proponent of gay not being a choice but a result of upbringing and the environment one is brought up in - father figures, mother figures, non-nuclear family - lots of variables. “and14263”

And this

There is a definite effect on the nature of the child's psyche when the child is brought up in single sex parent family (and single parent family) “and14263”

And I said this…..

I have eleven brothers and sister and we were all bought up in the same way so if what you are saying I shouldn't be gay as my up bringing was exactly the same as my other 5 brothers. Can you explain this to me then please?

To which you replied by saying this……

It is impossible that you and your siblings grew up the same way, the variables involved are deeper than you make them out to be. All could be treated differently, in subtle or obvious ways by the parents, other members of the extended family like cousins or aunts, plus you don't know how your siblings felt inside when something was done or said directly or indirectly at them. My point is your sibling will most certainly have experienced life differently to you, despite all of you growing up together.

Now do you see where I am coming from by elaborating on your post about “fatherless Children” and how your stats were actually more to do with “Single Moms” than gay parents. And to add that if “and14623” is correct in his assumptions that any child not born into a Father and Mother family model is more likely to turn out gay and this how many of the 20 million single mom kids will grow up gay according to what has been said on the thread?

You state I don’t read your posts, its seems clear to me that you are the one that may have to go and read what has been said in this thread!

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

Now who's side stepping? I have provided you with studies and endorsements regarding children of homosexual parents.

Again, where are your studies and national endorsements?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Looks like there are 950,000 species of animalia.... wonder how many have sex?

(Animalia, believe it or not I desperately needed that word last week and could not for the life of me think of it).

Now it's time for me to leave work, fire up the BBQ and drink some well earned beers. Always good to debate with you Gryphon66, sorry you always see my bad side (I only have one side).

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: flammadraco

Don't rely on semantics

Please point out where I have relied on "Semantics" in my response to you!

a reply to: IShotMyLastMuse

That sounds good on the surface, "defining people by the totality of their being." Problem is, that homosexuality is not just a sexual-fetish. It is an entire predatory and promiscuous lifestyle, whose members seldom if ever "do it" in a bedroom.

seattletimes.com...
EDITORIAL: SWIFT ACTION OBVIOUSLY NOT COMING FROM POPE FRANCIS ON CHILD SEX ABUSE
"A week ago, Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, head of the Italian Episcopal Conference, defended the Vatican's policy of not requiring clergy to report child sex abuse to the authorities. "The Vatican requires national laws to be respected, and we know that there is no such duty (to report abuse) under Italian law," he told reporters.

"It was a disappointment because Pope Francis had just appointed a commission to advise him on sex-abuse policy. Bagnasco's comments sounded like business as usual.

"The comments also ignore the scathing report issued by a United Nations human-rights committee in February, which rebuked the Vatican for its long-standing and systematic cover-up of sexual abuse of children around the world. The report made concrete suggestions for ways to protect children in the future."

www.catholicabusesurvivorsni.com...
CATHOLIC ABUSE SURVIVORS
This article is not for the faint-of-heart, I'll warn you up front. But it spells out in gruesome detail how Catholic priests and nuns - who should never have been allowed to be in religious orders in the first place - should have at least been quickly fired upon being reported for sexual abuse.

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: flammadraco

Sorry - to add - 8.74 million species in the world and you're claiming 1500 has a level of significance?

en.wikipedia.org...

That's 0.017162471395881007 % of species.

Actually I was wrong - it's 7.77mil which is 0.019% of these display gay behaviour.

Still goes to prove its natural and not nurture as you stated!

a reply to: and14263

"Effective" means successful at producing a desired result. Saying that homosexual parents are just as effective as heterosexual parents means they are just as successful at raising well-adjusted children. It doesn't mean "they try just as hard but don't succeed". Come on.