- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
1 edit
"clearly the sociology department at the University of Texas thinks differently." robbie
i post quotes from the university of texas sociology dept (and marks superiors) then....
"I dont care what someone else thinks of the report, i have my own mind and may even even be prepared to use it" robbie
why is it okay for you to mention his peers to add weight to your claim, but when i do its irrelevant?
1 edit
Originally posted by stellspalfieyou can through all the spanners that you want to, the fact is, that the study establishes, beyond doubt, that the gold standard for giving your kid the best chance in life is for them to be part of a family with faithfully married heterosexual parents. Now you can accept it or not, all else is sub optimal.
[b]"clearly the sociology department at the University of Texas thinks differently." robbie
i post quotes from the university of texas sociology dept (and marks superiors) then....
"I dont care what someone else thinks of the report, i have my own mind and may even even be prepared to use it" robbie
why is it okay for you to mention his peers to add weight to your claim, but when i do its irrelevant?[/b]
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI was looking through the thread for the report you linked and stumbled across this instead, lauding the supposed marital harmony which is to be found in India which our western secularism can't touch. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.
i used to live in that ancient and revered continent of India. Girls after they finish their careers, whether in acting in bollywoopd films or being a doctor or a lawyer, turn their attention after marriage to home making. It is an art form all of its own and it is of no surprise that India has the lowest divorce rate in the world, for guess what, ...[text shortened]... rialist façade? shame on you. If it was good enough for the son of God, its good enough for me.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by robbie carrobieit doesnt!!!! it maybe possibly be true that hetro parents make better parents (im not sure i agree and we can debate that another time), but the paper doesnt draw that conclusion.
you can through all the spanners that you want to, the fact is, that the study establishes, beyond doubt, that the gold standard for giving your kid the best chance in life is for them to be part of a family with faithfully married heterosexual parents. Now you can accept it or not, all else is sub optimal.
to find out which is better you need to compare children who have grown up in a heto family with children that have grown up in a gay family. the paper couldnt get enough examples to do that.
out of 3000 children interviewed only 2 had lived with 2 gay parents all their childhood with a further 8 living for extended periods, so a sample of 10.
and what did he say about those 10.
"For example, among the former only two respondents total said they lived with their mother and her partner nonstop from birth to age 18. Two more said they did so for 15 years, and two more for 13 years. To be sure, these 10 fared better on more outcomes than did their less-stable peers
non of this proves your own theory wrong. it just means this actual paper doesnt prove it right.
the only thing this study proves is that a stable home is better than an unstable home.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by robbie carrobieits not a spanner in the works. im interested to know why its okay for you to use the thoughts of regnerus's colleagues but when i do it becomes irrelative. its important to me, if a person is willing to use methods to win an argument that they are not prepared to accept themselves it brings us back around to honesty and character.
you can through all the spanners that you want to, the fact is, that the study establishes, beyond doubt, that the gold standard for giving your kid the best chance in life is for them to be part of a family with faithfully married heterosexual parents. Now you can accept it or not, all else is sub optimal.
Originally posted by Proper KnobI would say rejoice!
I was looking through the thread for the report you linked and stumbled across this instead, lauding the supposed marital harmony which is to be found in India which our western secularism can't touch. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.
Originally posted by stellspalfieGold standard, faithfully married heterosexual parents.
it doesnt!!!! it maybe possibly be true that hetro parents make better parents (im not sure i agree and we can debate that another time), but the paper doesnt draw that conclusion.
to find out which is better you need to compare children who have grown up in a heto family with children that have grown up in a gay family. the paper couldnt get enough ...[text shortened]... ht.
the only thing this study proves is that a stable home is better than an unstable home.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt doesn't. You were lauding the values of marriage in India, yet husbands can rape their wives without fear of prosecution. Surely that tells you something about how the rights of women are viewed within marriage in Indian society.
and how has that pretzel factory you call a mind, managed to construe the intentions of my words that marital rape is not criminal?
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobThis is not a defect of Indian marriage or culture, its a defect of the law. India is not the only country and it says nothing about how Indian women are viewed in marriage or Indian society. Indira Ghandhi was after all president and there have always been powerful and well respected women in Indian society, way before the west embraced the concept.
It doesn't. You were lauding the values of marriage in India, yet husbands can rape their wives without fear of prosecution. Surely that tells you something about how the rights of women are viewed within marriage in Indian society.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by robbie carrobiecould you point out where the study proves hetrosexual parents are better than homosexual.
Gold standard, faithfully married heterosexual parents.
before doing so, you may want to read the conclusion in the report.
"5. Conclusion
As scholars of same-sex parenting aptly note, same-sex couples have and will continue to raise children. American courts are finding arguments against gay marriage decreasingly persuasive (Rosenfeld, 2007). This study is intended to neither undermine nor affirm any legal rights concerning such. The tenor of the last 10 years of academic discourse about gay and lesbian parents suggests that there is little to nothing about them that might be negatively associated with child development, and a variety of things that might be uniquely positive" mark regensus.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThat men can rape their wives without fear of prosecution says nothing about how women are viewed within that society?
This is not a defect of Indian marriage or culture, its a defect of the law. India is not the only country and it says nothing about how Indian women are viewed in marriage or Indian society. Indira Ghandhi was after all president and there have always been powerful and well respected women in Indian society, way before the west embraced the concept.
1 edit
Originally posted by stellspalfieyes as espoused by the article that i posted,
could you point out where the study proves hetrosexual parents are better than homosexual.
before doing so, you may want to read the conclusion in the report.
"5. Conclusion
As scholars of same-sex parenting aptly note, same-sex couples have and will continue to raise children. American courts are finding arguments against gay marriage decreasing ...[text shortened]... ith child development, and a variety of things that might be uniquely positive" mark regensus.
There are eight outcome variables where differences between the children of homosexual parents and married parents were not only present, and favorable to the married parents, but where these findings were statistically significant for both children of lesbian mothers and "gay" fathers and both with and without controls. While all the findings in the study are important, these are the strongest possible ones--virtually irrefutable. Compared with children raised by their married biological parents (IBF), children of homosexual parents (LM and GF):
Are much more likely to have received welfare (IBF 17%; LM 69% GF 57%
Have lower educational attainment
Report less safety and security in their family of origin
Report more ongoing "negative impact" from their family of origin
Are more likely to suffer from depression
Have been arrested more often
If they are female, have had more sexual partners--both male and female
The high mathematical standard of "statistical significance" was more difficult to reach for the children of "gay fathers" in this study because there were fewer of them. The following, however, are some additional areas in which the children of lesbian mothers (who represented 71% of all the children with homosexual parents in this study) differed from the IBF children, in ways that were statistically significant in both a direct comparison and with controls. Children of lesbian mothers:
Are more likely to be currently cohabiting
Are almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance
Are less likely to be currently employed full-time
Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
Are nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual
Are 3 times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting
Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been "touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver."
Are nearly 4 times as likely to have been "physically forced" to have sex against their will
Are more likely to have "attachment" problems related to the ability to depend on others
Use marijuana more frequently
Smoke more frequently
Watch TV for long periods more frequently
Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense