HOME | DD
Nekromanda β Stamp: Straight is not automatically the best.
Published: 2013-03-29 13:18:02 +0000 UTC; Views: 10823; Favourites: 611; Downloads: 17
Redirect to original
Description
In case it goes by a bit quick: "A person's sexuality does not determine their ability to parent."One of the favored arguments of late is the "Well, gay couples could never raise a child to the same quality as a straight couple could" argument. I say that's pretty silly if you ask me.
People using that argument conveniently forget that most kids who are abused have.... wait for it.... straight parents!
Most people who turn out to be criminals had straight parents. Most people who commit murder and genocide... straight parents. Hmmmm.American Psychological Association: "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);
Texture used: 70 Icon textures - 2303 by =Missesglass
This texture made me want to watch Beetlejuice again, haha.....
Related content
Comments: 463
Views of their logic?Β I imagine they had reasons for forbidding homosexuality back when the book was still the best moral guideline around.Β Opinion of it?Β Today it's an invasive crock of shit.
Well, that's your opinion.Β I think it's bullshit.Β That's the only reason we started this conversation, remember?
The arrogant benefit you reap is an eternity in a paradise forever in the presence of this God who loves you.Β You stand to win the lottery of lotteries if you play your cards right.
Evidently.
That doesn't follow my premise, but okay.. -__-Β Yes, people can adopt more than one child.Β
Here's another idea: Suppose that you are indeed able to tell which triplet was adopted by whom with a little questioning and answering, perhaps even by some differences in viewpoints or behaviors. Β However, as stated before, the triplets are largely similar. Β Both have similar jobs and positions, career goals, capabilities, and, let's say, orientations (they're all straight) and home lives. Β All three triplets have married wonderful women (so all three of this generation is in hetero couplings).
All of the triplets had two parents and received love, support, and guidance. Β Independently, they all developed into fine young men, and all three reached a similar "end": a high-ranking position in the same field, all married to women. Β Evidently, any βbehavioralβ differences in the three men didnβt stop them from getting to the βdesired goalβ of a hetero marriage/successful career, so by end results, there is insufficient evidence to say same-sex parents are inferior to opposite-sex ones.
The love-hate relationship between the sexes is a constant thing and I don't care about using that as your justification.Β I might as well say the brains of all men are in their dicks.
I wonder if your viewpoint comes from where you live.Β I know Sweden is really progressive about this issue.Β Did that not spread to Finland or what?Β Either way, it's both obvious we're not influenced by the other's opinion and that we've stated them enough.Β I'm probably going to leave this hanging at some point.
π: 0 β©: 0
Right! And they sad same sex parrents are bad, I've been raised by a single parent and I've done well. If single parents are okay than why aren't same sex parents okay?
π: 0 β©: 0
True that. My extended family has plenty of examples of extremely dysfunctional parents, all of whom are heterosexual. You don't need to look any further to find proof that being heterosexual does not give you magical parenting abilities. And if you think about it, gay couples and heterosexual couples who can't have their own biological children make some of the best parents. They have to jump through a bunch of hoops to adopt if they want a child and they can't just accidentally have one that they aren't ready for.
And these arguments against LGBTA couples adopting are ridiculous. So are the arguments against singles, regardless of sexual orientation, adopting. What, are we supposed to believe that it's better for a kid to grow up in foster care and get chucked out on the streets once they hit their 18th birthday than to be raised by a same-sex couple or a single person?
Incidentally, I am always amused by the fact that the argument about children needing to be raised by a married heterosexual couple conveniently ignore that there are lots of single heterosexual parents and lots of divorced heterosexuals who have children.
π: 0 β©: 0
"BUTT THEE NEUD A MOMEE AND a DADEEEE!!!!1!1!"
"My father has boobs and a penis. Fuck society."
π: 0 β©: 0
To be honest, most gay/lesbian parents probably love their adoptive children more because they have to fight for the right to adopt that child
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't believe in gay marriage, but I do agree on this one. The ability to parent and sexuality are two different issues that have nothing to do with the other in my opinion.
π: 0 β©: 1
wHAT DAFUQ PICTURE IS THIS, this look like my ass and cock in side sucking dick cumming all around having baby, creampie and masturbating the picture, what da fuq am i saying, anyways fuck the duck picture in the shit fuck you
π: 0 β©: 2
Very poor effort with your critique. You didn't even tell me that I'm gay!
π: 0 β©: 1
Most of them have straight parents because the majority of parents are straight, you'd have to have more gay parents before you could run an actual test.
π: 0 β©: 0
A persons gender does effect whether they are a mother or a father.
π: 0 β©: 2
Okay, I'm not going to be rude, but my cousin was raised by 2 fathers and he is perfectly OK, he's a lawyer, and why do you think this? What is wrong with someone having 2 mothers or 2 father? It;s actually the same
π: 0 β©: 1
Just because you're able to point to one case where a child was raised by gay parents doesn't invalidate research from a wide sampling of cases. You understand that, right? There's always exceptions to the rule.
It's not the same. Men and women are fundamentally different in temperaments and the way they raise children. Both sexes bring vital and unique aspects to the family. Surely you understand there's a difference between a single parent and a married couple.
π: 0 β©: 2
And you are totally forgetting all single parents right now. And that Γs okay in your opinion? I think that's much "worse" (if having gay parents is even bad at all) than having two parents who love you dearly. Of course it will be different, but that doesn't make it bad.
π: 0 β©: 1
All other things being equal, I'd rather have a child raised by two parents than one. Don't you?
π: 0 β©: 1
.... Dude, that's what I said.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ok. Maybe I didn't understand what you were asking.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ok? You can either clarify, or just be rude.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh, I didn't see the "could you please explain" part, and only the "i guess I misunderstood" so I was like that much is obvious. The answer is written in my first post, I won't copy the exact same thing if you dnt mind
π: 0 β©: 0
Yes. I know that one case is not like "WOAH!" but one little thing can make a difference right?
I know what you mean, mothers teach you how to be careful and to be polite (just and example) and fathers teach you how to be a worker, but sometimes a woman can take the father's teaches, I'm unique daughter of a single mom, and she have showed me what a father AND a mother has to show you for life, and work and things like that
π: 0 β©: 1
Sure, but again, you're taking singular cases and trying to apply them to an entire country's established social incentive policy. Laws don't work that way.
π: 0 β©: 1
Of course I know, but yet it's possible, but I want to know, just curiosity, why do you think this way? I'm not saying it's wrong, just curiosity
π: 0 β©: 2
I am raised by a single mother.She is awesome.Ironically, my dad is the feminine one,my mom is vise-versa.
π: 0 β©: 1
And you are almost totally okay! Β (Just kidding)Β
There is nothing wrong with any kind of parent, of course all have their flaws, but that is another thingΒ
π: 0 β©: 0
Why do I think what way? That men and women are different and bring unique things to parenting? Well gee, that was common sense, up until the last 10 or so years beat it out of us.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, yeah, that's a normal form of thinking, and it's ok, thanks for letting me understand
π: 0 β©: 0
It doesn't determine whether or not they'll be a GOOD one though.
π: 0 β©: 1
It determines whether they ARE one, good OR bad. Geez. Words matter.
π: 0 β©: 1
Right. And two men can be fathers, and two women can be mothers. I don't see what you're getting at here.
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't know where you get the idea that a male father is on average the same as a female "father", but it sure as hell isn't science.
π: 0 β©: 1
What in the world are you talking about? A little clarity in your comments please?
π: 0 β©: 1
Wow. You're a slow one, aren't you? I'll give you some time to catch up.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes, I'm the slow one because you are too lazy to explain what you're getting at.
A woman + a woman = 2 mothers. A man + a man = 2 fathers. Is there something wrong with this statement or did I miss something?
A person's sexual orientation does not determine whether or not they will be good at parenting. That's all my stamp says.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ok, I'm lazy and you're slow, now let's move on.
Here's something to think about: take an average person who is raised by a single mother, and an average person raised by a single father, and they will most likely describe to you fundamentally different childhoods. By that very same reason, a person raised by two mothers and two fathers is going to have a fundamentally different childhood than a person raised by a mother and father. Why? Because mothers and fathers both bring something special and unique to parenting that, in most cases, cannot be substituted by a women who tries to be a "father figure", or a man who tries to act like a "mother figure". There are unique, fundamental differences between the sexes. Nobody argues that "straight automatically is the best", that's a straw-man you're attacking. The real issue behind the discussion is what situation is more likely to be ideal.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'd think that the ideal situation for a child would be to be raised in a family that loves and supports them. I'm sorry, but I just don't see how whether or not mom's got the hots for men or ladies could really impact the upbringing of a child. Especially when there is quite a bit of consensus between psychological and child welfare associations, who all agree that homosexual parents are just as effective at raising children in an ideal way as heterosexual parents are.
Canadian Psychological Association: "CPA's review of the psychological research led us to conclude that the children of same-sex parents do not differ from the children of heterosexual parents in terms of their psychosocial development, their gender development and their gender identity."
Australian Psychological Society: "Similarly, research has not only indicated that the outcomes of children of same-sex parents are not poorer, but that outcomes would seem to be likely to be at least as favourable."
US Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit (Brief of the American Psychological Association, the California Psychological Association, The American Psychiatric Association, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy) "Although it is sometimes asserted in policy debates that heterosexual couples are inherently better parents than same-sex couples, or that the children of lesbian or gay parents fare worse than children raised by heterosexual parents, those assertions find no support in the scientific research literature." (page 19)
"The research literature on gay, lesbian, and bisexual parents includes more than two dozen empirical studies. These studies vary in the quality of their samples, research design, measurement methods, and data analysis techniques. However,
they are impressively consistent in their failure to identify deficits in parenting abilities or in the development of children raised in a lesbian or gay household. "
π: 0 β©: 1
Right, when logic and common sense don't support your argument, you simply defer to so-called experts and bureaucrats. Here's a question, if homosexuality is not a choice and is a simply something you're born with, why is that children of homosexual parents are three times more likely to be gay themselves? Does the gayness just simply get contracted, or is being raised by gay parents actually create a form of gender and sexual confusion?
π: 0 β©: 3
Maybe because there are less children raised by homosexual parents? Inherently, the same rate in a smaller population will lead to a greater percentage of the population to be on the minor side of the scale.
π: 0 β©: 1
Is English not your first language? You just stumbled through that, and it still made no sense. A subset retains the composition of the parent set.
π: 0 β©: 1
Here, let me put it into an example:
Let's say that you have two bags with marbles in them. Bag A contains 20 marbles. Bag B contains 6 marbles.
There are four red marbles in each bag. Therefore, Bag A contains 16 blue marbles and bag B contains 2 blue marbles. Same amount of red marbles, significant effect on the amount of blue marbles in each bag.
The same logic can apply to gays with gay or straight parents.
If you surveyed an amount of gay and straight parents that is proportionate to the ratio of gay and straight couples in a certain area, then a higher percentage of gay couples will say that their kids are gay, because the amount of gay couples is very small compared to the amount of straght couples.
If you were to compare the number of gay couples who said that their kid was gay to the number of straight couples who said the same then you would likely find that they are close to equal.
That is my argument- Whether your parents are gay or straight, you're stil just as likely to be gay. Of course, this is ignoring things like people forcing their children to be straight (or gay, for that matter).
π: 0 β©: 1
Why would both bags have four red marbles? If you're taking an accurate subset from a parent set of marbles where 1 out of 5 marbles are red, Bag A would have 4 and Bag B would have 1 or 2.
Not to sound insulting, but your understanding of statistics is bonkers.
Here's a much more valid hypothesis: sexual orientation is affected by environment, as well as genetics and hormonal balances. For some reason this notion is rejected by the "gay community" (read: political activists using gays to gain power and influence), because it fundamentally separates the gay marriage argument from the racially-based civil rights struggle. If being gay is a "choice" and being black isn't, then the pro-redefining marriage crowd has to find an argument that doesn't let it coopt racial desegregation.
"Not allowing gays to marry is like not allowing blacks and whites to marry!" I'm sure you've heard that argument? It's bullshit. And lazy. And attempts to leverage white guilt in order to win a debate without actually debating. It's ignoring scientific fact for political purposes.
π: 0 β©: 1
Sorry, let me try to explain it again, this is much harder than I had thought...
-There are 100 gay children in an area. The amount of gay children with gay parents and gay children with straight parents is equally divided. So there are 50 gay-parented kids and 50 straight-parented kids.
-There are 100 gay couples and 500 straight couples in this area. Taking into account the previous data, we can determine that 50/100 (1/2 of) gay couples have a gay child, and 50/500 (1/10 of) straight couples have a gay child.
Same amount of gay children, but you can see that the fractions have very different values.
Since the ratio of gay couples to straight couples is small, it's not fair to compile a study in which one would compare the amount of gay children with gay parents to the amount of gay children with straight parents WITHOUT taking that ratio into consideration before outputting a result. If the study you cited didn't do that, then their logic is automatically invalidated.
Basically, the genetics and hormonal balances determine orientation, but there is still choice in "being" gay- that choice is whether or not you express your orientation, correct? That's got to be the most sound logic I've heard from both sides, if I'm hearing it right.
On the third part... I agree. That is bullshit. I don't see a comparison between the gay rights movement and the black civil rights movement.
Gays: fighting for marraige rights and anti-bullying laws.
Blacks: fighting for equality in the courts, in public, and fighting for the end to Jim Crow.
Much bigger things had to be dealt with during the black civil rights movement.
π: 0 β©: 0
]I like it that experts are only experts when you agree with them.
π: 0 β©: 1
"Academic studies" either confirm common sense assertions, or they're wrong.
π: 0 β©: 2
However, it makes sense that a gay or lesbian couple can have the same quality of parenting as a heterosexual couple.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes. Anything CAN happen. But what's important, and what makes it so a society should radically change its social incentives, is what's most likely to happen.
π: 0 β©: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>