Homosexual Agenda Is Greatest Threat To Liberty

[GreenBean]

No it isn't. You can't take a covenant sign away from God.

Symbols represent what we recognize they do. When people see the rainbow, more recognize it as representing the LGBT community than your religious beliefs. Pretending otherwise doesn't change a thing.

Personally , I see a Leprechaun next to a pot of Gold - that's a Leprechaun cummy bear not a Fairy

 

[GreenBean]

Gay marriage hurts kids by stripping them of the complimentary gender as role model and one blood parent 100% of the time.

The only thing preventing gay marriage does ensure that the children of gay parents won't have married parents.

Let's talk about this sick little situation you're passing off as normal. How did the children of cohabitators come to be in that situation? Did lesbians get a sperm donor? Then that sperm donor is the child's father, not the shack up carpet muncher. And where is the father if not living in the same home as his child? Or how about an adopted child, how is it moral to deliberately impose upon a child a less than ideal home where two same sex shack ups are depriving him of a mother or a father?

Do you see what I'm getting at? There's no way to involve children in your crazy homo setup without causing harm and doing so is cruel and only serves the ego gratification of the adult homos who want to "have it all". Real, moral, loving adults place the needs of children before their own.

Let's talk about what a hateful bigot you are and how good it is that attitudes like yours are dying off fast. Let's talk about how you can't find a single reputable source that will tell you that our children are at a disadvantage to yours. Let's talk about how children have nothing to do with marriage and marriage has nothing to do with children and how we're having kids anyway and you can't stop us.

Are Children with Same-Sex Parents at a Disadvantage?
By Glenn T. Stanton, Director, Family Formation Studies

The simple answer is “yes,” but the more precise question is “disadvantaged compared to what?”

There is a wealth of solid social, medical and psychological research indicating that children who grow up without their own married mother and father in the home face significant disadvantages in all important measures of well-being: physical and mental health, educational attainment, general happiness, confidence and empathy development, as well as protection from poverty, substance abuse, domestic violence and sexual abuse and avoidance of unmarried child-bearing.

Children who grow-up in any other family form — single-parent family, divorced, step-family, or cohabiting parents – don’t do as well by up to half in these measures compared to children living with their own married mother and father.

Said another way, none of the changes to family form over the last four decades has improved any important measure of child well-being, and no evidence to date indicates that same-sex parenting would be an improvement on any of these other forms.

Three points must be considered in understanding this reality.

Research Indicates Children Do Best When Raised By Married Mom & Dad
Quotes from leading scholarly summaries of this research:

• “An extensive body of research tells us that children do best when they grow up with both biological parents. … Thus, it is not simply the presence of two parents, as some have assumed, but the presence of two biological parents that seems to support child development.” (Kristin Anderson Moore, et al., “Marriage From a Child’s Perspective: How Does Family Structure Affect Children, and What Can We Do about It?” Child Trends Research Brief (June 2002): 1.)

• “Most researchers now agree that together these studies support the notion that, on average, children do best when raised by their two married, biological parents.” (Mary Parke, “Are Married Parents Really Better for Children?” Center for Law and Social Policy, Policy Brief (May 2003): 1)

• “Overall, father love appears to be as heavily implicated as mother love in offsprings’ psychological well-being and health.” (Ronald P. Rohner and Robert A. Veneziano, “The Importance of Father Love: History and Contemporary Evidence,” Review of General Psychology 5.4 (2001): 382-405)

• Health scores are 20 to 35 percent higher for children living with both biological parents, compared with those living in single or stepfamilies. (Deborah A. Dawson, “Family Structure and Children’s Health and Well-being: Data from the National Health Interview Survey on Child Health,” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53 (1991): 573 -584)

• “When young boys have primary caretakers of both sexes, they are less likely as adults to engage in woman-devaluing activities and in self-aggrandizing, cruel or overly competitive male cults.” (Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen, My Brother’s Keeper: What the Social Sciences Do (and Don’t) Tell Us About Masculinity, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), p. 121)

• “We should disavow the notion that ‘mommies can make good daddies,’ just as we should disavow the popular notion of radical feminists that ‘daddies can make good mommies.’ …The two sexes are different to the core, and each is necessary – culturally and biologically – for the optimal development of a human being.” (David Popenoe, Life Without Father: Compelling New Evidence That Fatherhood and Marriage are Indispensable of the Good of Children and Society, (New York: The Free Press, 1996), p. 197)

Sara McLanahan of Princeton University, one of the world’s leading scholars on how family form impacts child well-being, explains from her extensive investigations:

• “If we were asked to design a system for making sure that children’s basic needs were met, we would probably come up with something quite similar to the two-parent family ideal. Such a design, in theory, would not only ensure that children had access to the time and money of two adults, it would provide a system of checks and balances that promote quality parenting. The fact that both adults have a biological connection to the child would increase the likelihood that the parents would identify with the child and be willing to sacrifice for that child and it would reduce the likelihood that either parent would abuse the child.” (Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandefur, Growing Up with a Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994), p. 38)

No Reliable Research Indicates Children in Same-Sex Homes Do As Well
Same-sex advocates are quick to explain that many professional health organizations have explained that children in same-sex homes do just as well in important health measures as children in heterosexual homes.

Their statements neglect a vital point of comparison. One must examine exactly what they have said, and what they have not said in order to understand what this actually means for child welfare.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the leading medical organization to make such a statement, and which most other organizations followed, simply said, “a growing body of scientific literature demonstrates that children who grow up with 1 or 2 gay and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual.”

So curious people must ask, do the children with two gay or lesbian parents look like children with heterosexual intact, married parents? Do they look like children with hetero-divorced parents? Single parents? Hetero stepparents? Cohabiting parents?

Nowhere in the AAP’s research, nor in any of the studies they cited, are we told. If the AAP’s statement is going to tell us anything objectively useful, then the family structure of the heterosexual homes being compared is essential because the outcomes for each is dramatically different in nearly every important measure of child AND adult well-being.

This oversight deems the AAP statement utterly meaningless in providing any kind of decisive information on how helpful or harmful same-sex families could be to children. It essentially claims, “Kids from lesbian-parented homes look like children from some kinds of heterosexual-parented home.” It says nothing specific about the quality or health-outcomes of lesbian- or gay-headed homes because some forms of heterosexual-parented homes are healthy and some are not.

Same sex parenting advocates have made no attempt in any professional literature to clarify this by specifically saying what kind of hetero-homes the same-sex homes in the studies were compared to.

It is Unethical To Subject Children To an Untested Social Experiment
No human culture anywhere, at any time, has ever raised a generation of children in same-sex homes. This is an experiment upon children to fulfill adult wishes to parent.

The family changes over the last four decades — with its baggage of no-fault divorce, cohabitation, unwed childrearing and fatherlessness – have shown beyond doubt that these changes have been a wholesale negative for child well-being.

Consider the research on just one of these previous experiments.

Similar to the same-sex family experiment, we entered our national divorce experiment with all the best of hopes and intentions. Advocates pushing the divorce experiment called forth a few authorities who assured us that children are resilient and they would adjust to living apart from their parents. “Love would see them through” we were told, much like same-sex family advocates seek to assure us today.

Well, the millions of children who were subjected to this experiment tell us a different story, as witnessed by multiple studies:

• The American Academy of Pediatrics, the same organization that tells us the same-sex family will work out just fine, now tells us that divorce “is a long, searing experience…characterized by painful loses.” (Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, “The Pediatrician’s Role in Helping Children and Families Deal with Separation and Divorce,” Pediatrics 94 (1994): 119)

• “Divorce is usually brutally painful to a child,” and 25 percent of adult children of divorce continue to have “serious social, emotional, and psychological problems.” Meanwhile, only 10 percent of adult children from intact families had such problems. (E. Mavis Hetherington, For Better or For Worse: Divorce Reconsidered, (New York: W.W. Norton, 2002), p. 7)

• “Children in post-divorce families do not, on the whole, look happier, healthier, or more well-adjusted even if one or both parents are happier. National studies show that children from divorced and remarried families are more aggressive toward their parents and teachers. They experience more depression, have more learning difficulties, and suffer from more problems with peers than children from intact families. Children from divorced and remarried families are two to three times more likely to be referred for psychological help at school than their peers from intact families. More of them end up in mental health clinics and hospital settings.” (Judith Wallerstein et al., The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: A 25 Year Landmark Study, (New York: Hyperion, 2000), xxiii)

Also, a convincing body of research shows us that children do not do as well when their mothers or fathers marry other people. And since it is biologically impossible for a child living in a same-sex home to be living with both natural parents, all same-sex homes are either literally step-families – formed after the end of a heterosexual relationship – or step-like, in that only one parent has a biological connection to the child.

• “Social scientists used to believe that, for positive child outcomes, stepfamilies were preferable to single-parent families. Today, we are not so sure. Stepfamilies typically have an economic advantage, but some recent studies indicate that the children of stepfamilies have as many behavioral and emotional problems as the children of single-parent families, and possibly more. …Stepfamily problems, in short, may be so intractable that the best strategy for dealing with them is to do everything possible to minimize their occurrence.” (David Popenoe, “The Evolution of Marriage and the Problems of Stepfamilies,” in Alan Booth and Judy Dunn, eds., Stepfamilies: Who Benefits? Who Does Not? (Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994), 5, 19.)

• Children from stepfamilies, where the biological father is missing, are 80 times more likely to have to repeat a grade and twice as likely to be expelled or suspended, compared to children living with both biological parents. (Nicholas Zill, “Understanding Why Children in Stepfamilies Have More Learning and Behavior Problems Than Children in Nuclear Families,” in Alan Booth and Judy Dunn, eds., Stepfamilies: Who Benefits? Who Does Not? (Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994), p. 100.)

Conclusion
A wise and compassionate society always comes to the aid of children in motherless or fatherless families, but a wise and compassionate society never intentionally subjects children to such families. But every single same-sex home would do exactly that, for no other reason than that a small handful of adults desire such kinds of families.

There is no research indicating such homes will be good for children. In fact the data show us that the family experimentation we have subjected children to over the past 30 years has all failed to improve human well-being in any important way. What makes us think more of it will make the situation any better? It will only make life for our children dramatically worse.

Get the Facts

 

[GreenBean]

No, actually I don't want children to be brought into the world at all unless it's in an intact mother father home. Deliberately bringing a child into anything else is wrong.

Your arbitrary value judgement don't actually describe any qualitative differences. Children raised in same sex households are just as healthy and well adjusted as those in different sex households.

I'd say there's an argument to be made that same sex households are more likely to produce good outcomes. As unlike hetero couples, there are no accidental pregnancies. All pregnancies are planned with same sex couples. And thus, there's more control over the timing, both financially and emotionally. This control over timing is more likely to produce situations in which parents are able to provide the resources that a child needs for a healthy upbringing.

All you're doing is moving a child from one less than ideal home to another. Gays don't want to wait in line behind eligible mother father families who would be better for the child, in fact they want affirmative action. This is because homosexuality in general is an exercise in selfishness. You want what you want and you don't care who it hurts.

Ah, but you forget: children in same sex households are as healthy and well adjusted as those in hetero households. So the 'less the ideal' situation you assume in a same sex household is speculative on its face and disprove by evidence. As you're using value judgments that describe no qualitative differences. It would be like saying that the color green is 'less than ideal'.

In contrast, a child in foster care or waiting for adoption is in a measurably poorer situation qualitatively. They tend to have worse outcomes educational, financially, emotionally, and in relation to the law. Meaning the transfer of a child from such a measurably poorer situation of foster care in a measurably better situation of a two parent household is a definable improvement.

So how would improving the situation of a child be immoral? Your arbitrary value judgments are not only useless.....they're pretty void of logic or reason.

This is all about self service. Gays want to live the homosexual lifestyle while still reaping the benefits of heterosexual marriage.

Depends on what you mean by the 'gay lifestyle'. If you mean that some gays want to raise families together with a loving, committed, monogamous, long term partner, then absolutely. I'd agree that many gays and lesbians want that.

So they go through unnatural processes to obtain children that by right they shouldn't have.

That's just an arbitrary value judgment again with no rational reason why they shouldn't have them. Infertility isn't a major obstacle for many straight folks that want to be parents. Its no more an impediment for gays and lesbians.

As for should, that's mere personal opinion. And in such situations, that's a judgment best left to those who are going to be raising the child, as they are the one's best informed on the situation. Your ignorance of the specifics of a given situation precludes the any particular value in your assessment.

In short, you don't know what you're talking about.

We're not talking about barren couples adopting after trying to bear children naturally, we're talking about people who, though fertile, opted for a lifestyle that precludes children but wants them anyway. This is selfish. They don't do it for the children, they do it for their own damnable gratification.

See above for you not having the slightest clue what you're talking about. You have no idea what motivates any given couple. Let alone all of them. Yet you claim to speak for every gay or lesbian couple that might ever start a family. That's silly.

You're offering us a sweeping overgeneralization based on zero evidence. And backed with nothing but your own personal opinion. Why would gays and lesbians have any different reasons for wanting a family than any one else? Or any family that adopts for the non-biological parent?

There's no logical or rational reason why there would be any difference. You're offering us your own personal prejudices rather than a reasoned argument. And your prejudices are absurd.

It's sick and it's further proof of how homosexuals incur eternal judgment. Someday you will have to answer for all this.

There's nothing sick about wanting to raise a family. That you think there is tell us far more about you than it does about any gay or lesbian.

Children raised in same sex households are just as healthy and well adjusted as those in different sex households.

Ignorant, unqualified , uninformed, bigoted, bias, opinionated statement

Homosexual Agenda Is Greatest Threat To Liberty Page 111 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Gay marriage hurts kids by stripping them of the complimentary gender as role model and one blood parent 100% of the time.

The only thing preventing gay marriage does ensure that the children of gay parents won't have married parents.

Let's talk about this sick little situation you're passing off as normal. How did the children of cohabitators come to be in that situation? Did lesbians get a sperm donor? Then that sperm donor is the child's father, not the shack up carpet muncher. And where is the father if not living in the same home as his child? Or how about an adopted child, how is it moral to deliberately impose upon a child a less than ideal home where two same sex shack ups are depriving him of a mother or a father?

Do you see what I'm getting at? There's no way to involve children in your crazy homo setup without causing harm and doing so is cruel and only serves the ego gratification of the adult homos who want to "have it all". Real, moral, loving adults place the needs of children before their own.

Let's talk about what a hateful bigot you are and how good it is that attitudes like yours are dying off fast. Let's talk about how you can't find a single reputable source that will tell you that our children are at a disadvantage to yours. Let's talk about how children have nothing to do with marriage and marriage has nothing to do with children and how we're having kids anyway and you can't stop us.

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed. But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends. Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

 

[GreenBean]

Gay marriage hurts kids by stripping them of the complimentary gender as role model and one blood parent 100% of the time.

The only thing preventing gay marriage does ensure that the children of gay parents won't have married parents.

Let's talk about this sick little situation you're passing off as normal. How did the children of cohabitators come to be in that situation? Did lesbians get a sperm donor? Then that sperm donor is the child's father, not the shack up carpet muncher. And where is the father if not living in the same home as his child? Or how about an adopted child, how is it moral to deliberately impose upon a child a less than ideal home where two same sex shack ups are depriving him of a mother or a father?

Do you see what I'm getting at? There's no way to involve children in your crazy homo setup without causing harm and doing so is cruel and only serves the ego gratification of the adult homos who want to "have it all". Real, moral, loving adults place the needs of children before their own.

Let's talk about what a hateful bigot you are and how good it is that attitudes like yours are dying off fast. Let's talk about how you can't find a single reputable source that will tell you that our children are at a disadvantage to yours. Let's talk about how children have nothing to do with marriage and marriage has nothing to do with children and how we're having kids anyway and you can't stop us.

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed. But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends. Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

...... But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories .......

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Gay marriage hurts kids by stripping them of the complimentary gender as role model and one blood parent 100% of the time.

The only thing preventing gay marriage does ensure that the children of gay parents won't have married parents.

Let's talk about this sick little situation you're passing off as normal. How did the children of cohabitators come to be in that situation? Did lesbians get a sperm donor? Then that sperm donor is the child's father, not the shack up carpet muncher. And where is the father if not living in the same home as his child? Or how about an adopted child, how is it moral to deliberately impose upon a child a less than ideal home where two same sex shack ups are depriving him of a mother or a father?

Do you see what I'm getting at? There's no way to involve children in your crazy homo setup without causing harm and doing so is cruel and only serves the ego gratification of the adult homos who want to "have it all". Real, moral, loving adults place the needs of children before their own.

Let's talk about what a hateful bigot you are and how good it is that attitudes like yours are dying off fast. Let's talk about how you can't find a single reputable source that will tell you that our children are at a disadvantage to yours. Let's talk about how children have nothing to do with marriage and marriage has nothing to do with children and how we're having kids anyway and you can't stop us.

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed. But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends. Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

...... But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories .......

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

Your numbers are crap little faggot-hater, and it doesn't fucking matter, it's not about the children.

 

[Silhouette]

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed. But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends. Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

Saintmichael will not like your reply GreenBean. He is playing the role of "stereotype homophobe" to elicit sympathy for gays and water down any points those opposed to gay marriage might be making. You are replying to the opposition, not one who actually agrees with you. Might want to make a note of the sock puppet "Saintmichaeldefendthem" for future rememberance.

 

[Silhouette]

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

Your numbers are crap little faggot-hater, and it doesn't fucking matter, it's not about the children.

He is correct. Gay males, at only 2% of the total human population, are responsible for up to 40% of all child molestation. That is a disproportionate propensity to molest children.

The Mayo Clinic explains that the phenomenon is learned and socially-transmitted.

Mayo Clinic 2007
One of the most obvious examples of an environmental factor that increases the chances of an individual becoming an offender is if he or she were sexually abused as a child. This relationship is known as the “victim-to-abuser cycle”or “abused-abusers phenomena.”5,23,24,46......
why the “abused abusers phenomena” occurs: identification with the aggressor, in which the abused child is trying to gain a new identity by becoming the abuser; an imprinted sexual arousal pattern established by early abuse; early abuse leading to hypersexual behavior; or a form of social learning took place http://www.drrichardhall.com/Articles/pedophiles.pdf

Also from the same link:

Mayo Clinic Special Article 2007

Pedophiles are usually attracted to a particular age range and/or sex of child. Research categorizes male pedophiles by whether they are attracted to only male children (homosexual pedophilia), female children (heterosexual pedophilia), or children from both sexes (bisexual pedophilia).3,6,10,29 The percentage of homosexual pedophiles ranges from 9% to 40%, which is approximately 4 to 20 times higher than the rate of adult men attracted to other adult men

A state's only interest in marraige is to incentivize the best formative environment for children to be raised in a stable/functional/well-rounded home. Besides gay marraige guaranteeing the total lack of the complimentary gender 100% of the time to any children in that home to identify with or learn to interact with socially, it also guarantees that the statistical likelihood of the "parents" to molest the kids in that home is off the charts compared to hetero homes. Especially if the "parents" are two gay men.

But lesbians are not immune..

Lesbians seem to get more...creative... with their "deviance gone-wild" child abuse:

The boys are 3 and 5 years old, and the girl is 8, authorities said, and they all exhibited bruises and signs of other physical as well as emotional abuse..The girl, who appeared to have suffered the most extreme abuse, was chained to the floor to prevent her from getting any food, they said..."It seems that the little girl was the major target of this abuse," Miller continued, adding that she looked "like a concentration camp victim."...The girl was in the hospital for about five days, he said, and seemed "traumatized."...There was evidence that she was may have been put in the closet as well as that she was sometimes shackled at the ankle and at other times by a collar around her neck, Miller said.

And...

Boy Drugged By Lesbian Parents To Be A Girl US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[GreenBean]

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed. But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends. Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

Saintmichael will not like your reply GreenBean. He is playing the role of "stereotype homophobe" to elicit sympathy for gays and water down any points those opposed to gay marriage might be making. You are replying to the opposition, not one who actually agrees with you. Might want to make a note of the sock puppet "Saintmichaeldefendthem" for future rememberance.

I have been away from this forum for a few months and had thought some of his posts were a little off - but what makes you think he's role playing ??

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed. But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends. Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

Saintmichael will not like your reply GreenBean. He is playing the role of "stereotype homophobe" to elicit sympathy for gays and water down any points those opposed to gay marriage might be making. You are replying to the opposition, not one who actually agrees with you. Might want to make a note of the sock puppet "Saintmichaeldefendthem" for future rememberance.

Still don't know what you're trying to achieve with that. Any research into "saintmichaeldefendthem" will find my posts going back at least 7 years on 5 different forums all with consistent conservative viewpoints. That means if I'm a ploy of the Left, I've sure been keeping it up a LONG time. And that has to be it, because the only alternative is that you're a complete jackass.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed. But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends. Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

Saintmichael will not like your reply GreenBean. He is playing the role of "stereotype homophobe" to elicit sympathy for gays and water down any points those opposed to gay marriage might be making. You are replying to the opposition, not one who actually agrees with you. Might want to make a note of the sock puppet "Saintmichaeldefendthem" for future rememberance.

I have been away from this forum for a few months and had thought some of his posts were a little off - but what makes you think he's role playing ??

Of course I'm a little off. My mother in law, rich white liberal that she is, constantly reminds me that I'm a little off.....like at every family gathering without fail. But this guy's on a fools errand. I've been around a long time and any research into "saintmichaeldefendthem" is going to turn up a record of impeccable consistency in my viewpoints. He's a reputation assassin and just an overall liar.

 

[Skylar]

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed.

Oh, there have been studies galore. You just ignore each and every one of them that doesn't say what you want to believe. And your willful ignorance of evidence doesn't mean that evidence doesn't exist.

But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends.

how us the evidence that gays are disproproriate in this kind of child abuse. You can't, as no such evidence exists. What you've done is cite a handful of cases, and then *assume* that its disproprortionate, because you believe it to be so. All while ignoring any instance of straights abusing their adopted children (Jerry Sandusky or Woody Allen, anyone?)

And you citing yourself isn't a standard of evidence. Show us the evidence that its disproprortionate. Or retract the claim.

Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

Actually, Russia changed their law to prevent Americans from adopting Russian children. And they already had complete control over whether or not gays and lesbians could adopt. So clearly it wasn't gays and lesbians that resulted in their decision.

But politics.

Though this is the fourth or fifth time you've cited the Russians, comrade. Are you going to ponder against at the intelligence of Putin for cracking down on the rights of gays and lesbians in his country? It seems gays and lesbians have far more to fear from you in terms of erosion of their rights, than you have to fear from them.

 

[Skylar]

He is correct. Gay males, at only 2% of the total human population, are responsible for up to 40% of all child molestation.

Laughing....even when you guys make up stats, they aren't consistent. First, its 20%. Then when nobody buys your bullshit, you up it to 30%. When that fails, you amp it to 40%. All backed by exactly jack shit.

Two huge problems with your made up numbers, Silo: 1) Almost all child abusers are men. 2) The overwhelming majority of the victims of child abuse are girls.

• 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys is a victim of child sexual abuse;

Child Sexual Abuse Statistics

So riddle me this, bat man. How can gay males make up 40% of all child molesters....when boys make up only 20% of victims? How are your numbers mathematically possible, even assuming that every act of abuse against a boy is from a gay male? They obviously aren't possible. You're just making up shit in an attempt to shore up a position that is complete nonsense.

Worse, when we look at the boys who are victimized, 99% of the abusers self identify as heterosexual. With 75% of these male abusers were in heterosexual relationships with the mother or female relative of the boy they abused. You're literally arguing that a man who self identifies as a heterosexual, that is sexually attracted to women, that is having heterosexual sexual relationships with women..........is a gay male?

Laughing.....that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. These are heterosexual men, who are sexually attracted to adult women that are abusing these boys. To such an extent that a child is over 100 times MORE likely to be abused by the heterosexual male partner of their mother or close family relative than a homosexual male.

And you're shitting yourself over the gay men? And not the heterosexual males that is over 100 times more likely to abuse such a child?

Mayo Clinic Special Article 2007

Pedophiles are usually attracted to a particular age range and/or sex of child. Research categorizes male pedophiles by whether they are attracted to only male children (homosexual pedophilia), female children (heterosexual pedophilia), or children from both sexes (bisexual pedophilia).3,6,10,29 The percentage of homosexual pedophiles ranges from 9% to 40%, which is approximately 4 to 20 times higher than the rate of adult men attracted to other adult men

And here's where your argument breaks, in the exact same place. You assume that if a man is a homosexual pedophile (attracted to male children), that means they're a gay male (attracted to gay men). When in reality, the overwhelming majority of homosexual pedophiles self identify as heterosexual (sexually attracted to women). With most in heterosexual relationships with the mothers or female relatives of the boys they abuse.

And what's worse, you know damn well that your conclusion isn't supported by the very evidence you're citing. Here's your quote again, this time including the very next sentence, which you intentionally and deceptively omitted:

Pedophiles are usually attracted to a particular age range and/or sex of child. Research categorizes male pedophiles by whether they are attracted to only male children (homosexual pedophilia), female children (heterosexual pedophilia), or children from both sexes (bisexual pedophilia).3,6,10,29 The percentage of homosexual pedophiles ranges from 9% to 40%, which is approximately 4 to 20 times higher than the rate of adult men attracted to other adult men. This finding does not imply that homosexuals are more likely to molest children, just that a larger percentage of pedophiles are homosexual or bisexual in orientation to children.

Special Report: A profile on Pedophilia

http://www.abusewatch.net/pedophiles.pdf

You lied. You intentionally tried to misrepresent your source, citing a conclusion that your source explicitly and unambiguously refutes. You knew you were lying when you omitted the statement.

And this is the part of your ilk's argument that's so loathsome: you're more than happy to lie to support it. You don't bat an eye lash at your own disgusting mischaracterizations, blatant deception or outright lies. As long as it lets you accuse gay people of something.

Something a person genuinely interested in children and their safety would never do.

 

[Syriusly]

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

Your numbers are crap little faggot-hater, and it doesn't fucking matter, it's not about the children.

He is correct. Gay males, at only 2% of the total human population, are responsible for up to 40% of all child molestation. That is a disproportionate propensity to molest children.

The Mayo Clinic explains that the phenomenon is learned and socially-transmitted.

Silhouete you are such a pathetic liar.

a) The Mayo Clinic doesn't say anything- that paper is not by the Mayo Clinic- and I have explained that to you over and over.
b) The paper, by Dr. Hall and Dr. Hall specifically says just the opposite of what you say it says- again- you are lying.

This finding does not imply that homosexuals
are more likely to molest children

The only question is why you find it necessary to lie to support your homophobia.

You do it over and over. And the obvious answer is that the truth doesn't support your claims- so you just lie.

 

[Syriusly]

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed. But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends. Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

Saintmichael will not like your reply GreenBean. He is playing the role of "stereotype homophobe" to elicit sympathy for gays and water down any points those opposed to gay marriage might be making. You are replying to the opposition, not one who actually agrees with you. Might want to make a note of the sock puppet "Saintmichaeldefendthem" for future rememberance.

Still don't know what you're trying to achieve with that. Any research into "saintmichaeldefendthem" will find my posts going back at least 7 years on 5 different forums all with consistent conservative viewpoints. That means if I'm a ploy of the Left, I've sure been keeping it up a LONG time. And that has to be it, because the only alternative is that you're a complete jackass.

For what its worth- I believe you are truly a bigot when it comes to homosexuals.

And Silhouette is just delusional.

But wierdly enough- she is on your side- go Team Homophobia!

 

[Syriusly]

Gay marriage hurts kids by stripping them of the complimentary gender as role model and one blood parent 100% of the time.

The only thing preventing gay marriage does ensure that the children of gay parents won't have married parents.

Let's talk about this sick little situation you're passing off as normal. How did the children of cohabitators come to be in that situation? Did lesbians get a sperm donor? Then that sperm donor is the child's father, not the shack up carpet muncher. And where is the father if not living in the same home as his child? Or how about an adopted child, how is it moral to deliberately impose upon a child a less than ideal home where two same sex shack ups are depriving him of a mother or a father?

Do you see what I'm getting at? There's no way to involve children in your crazy homo setup without causing harm and doing so is cruel and only serves the ego gratification of the adult homos who want to "have it all". Real, moral, loving adults place the needs of children before their own.

Let's talk about what a hateful bigot you are and how good it is that attitudes like yours are dying off fast. Let's talk about how you can't find a single reputable source that will tell you that our children are at a disadvantage to yours. Let's talk about how children have nothing to do with marriage and marriage has nothing to do with children and how we're having kids anyway and you can't stop us.

Gays cohabitating and adopting kids is a very recent phenomenon that has yet to offer opportunity for studies to be performed. But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories, gays molesting their adopted children, gays pimping them out to friends. Russia changed their law to defend against any more Russian children from being adopted to faggots who just want to shag them. Yes, all that happened in a brief timespan and the more gays are allowed to adopt children, I suspect the more we'll see children being abused by these already immoral liaisons.

...... But in the short time that gays have been adopting, there's already been a disproportionate amount of horror stories .......

That's the part that seems to be beyond the abiliity or inclination of these Liberal douchebags to comprehend - disproportionate - No matter how many time I point out the ludicrously high percentages of Homosexual child molesters as opposed to heterosexuals - they always comeback with the same argument - That heterosexuals molest many more kids than homos do - well gee ya think !? Heteros are around 95% of the population - on a per capita basis Homosexuals are 3000 times more likely to molest your kid than a sane person.

Except of course that is not true.

As the father of a girl, I read up on this crap.

My daughter is between twice and 10 times more likely to be molested than a boy.
Virtually all child molesters are men.
Virtually all child molesters who molest boys identify themselves as heterosexuals.

As I have pointed out before- and clearly you don't care- you are making the argument that endangers children.

Everytime a homophobic bigot like yourself makes these claims, you are encouraging parents to leave their daughters with kindly Father Pat- because he is no homosexual. Or leave their promising pee wee football player with that heterosexual icon Jerry Sandusky- because he is no homosexual.

You folks not only put children in danger by using the issue of child molestation as a tool to attack homosexuals- what is worse- you don't give a damn that you do.

 

[Syriusly]

Gay marriage hurts kids by stripping them of the complimentary gender as role model and one blood parent 100% of the time.

The only thing preventing gay marriage does ensure that the children of gay parents won't have married parents.

Let's talk about this sick little situation you're passing off as normal. How did the children of cohabitators come to be in that situation? Did lesbians get a sperm donor? Then that sperm donor is the child's father, not the shack up carpet muncher. And where is the father if not living in the same home as his child? Or how about an adopted child, how is it moral to deliberately impose upon a child a less than ideal home where two same sex shack ups are depriving him of a mother or a father?

Do you see what I'm getting at? There's no way to involve children in your crazy homo setup without causing harm and doing so is cruel and only serves the ego gratification of the adult homos who want to "have it all". Real, moral, loving adults place the needs of children before their own.

Let's talk about what a hateful bigot you are and how good it is that attitudes like yours are dying off fast. Let's talk about how you can't find a single reputable source that will tell you that our children are at a disadvantage to yours. Let's talk about how children have nothing to do with marriage and marriage has nothing to do with children and how we're having kids anyway and you can't stop us.

Are Children with Same-Sex Parents at a Disadvantage?
By Glenn T. Stanton, Director, Family Formation Studies
\

So who is behind this article?

the American College of Pediatricians, in coalition with other organizations who share a concern for the well-being of all youth. Unfortunately, some medical organizations, influenced by political correctness, have misrepresented science in order to affirm unhealthy lifestyles as normal behavior:

that would be like every respected medical association- including the American Academy of Pediatrics- it is estimated that the ACP has between 60 and 200 members- but who knows- they are very secretive about their membership

The College has received support and assistance for this project from the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH),

So basically this is an anti-homosexual association.

So what does the American Academy of Pediatric- with 60,000 members- have to say?

Promoting the Well-Being of Children Whose Parents Are Gay or Lesbian

Extensive data available from more than 30 years of research reveal that children raised by gay and lesbian parents have demonstrated resilience with regard to social, psychological, and sexual health despite economic and legal disparities and social stigma. Many studies have demonstrated that children's well-being is affected much more by their relationships with their parents, their parents' sense of competence and security, and the presence of social and economic support for the family than by the gender or the sexual orientation of their parents. Lack of opportunity for same-gender couples to marry adds to families’ stress, which affects the health and welfare of all household members. Because marriage strengthens families and, in so doing, benefits children’s development, children should not be deprived of the opportunity for their parents to be married. Paths to parenthood that include assisted reproductive techniques, adoption, and foster parenting should focus on competency of the parents rather than their sexual orientation.

 

[Skylar]

Hey, what's a little 10,000 to 1 rates of support when you're balls deep in confirmation bias?

After all, the ACP has said no 'reliable' studies indicate that gays and lesbians raise children that are as healthy as straights. With 'reliable' being agreement with the ACP charter:

"with Judeo-Christian, traditional values that is open to pediatric medical professionals of all religions who hold true to the group's core beliefs: that life begins at conception; and that the traditional family unit, headed by a different-sex couple, poses far fewer risk factors in the adoption and raising of children."

Pro-Life Pediatric Group Stands Contrary to Established American Academy of Pediatrics

Its a perfect circle. Where any evidence that doesn't confirm their conclusions is ignored.

 

[hipeter924]

Nice rainbow "Happy New Year" there SaintMichael...

You know the "if you're so against homosexuality you must be one" argument falls flat on its face, don't you?

If that's the best you got, I'd say my side won this.

Nice try actor. That's not quite the response I'd expect from someone who I know for a fact has read my posts and knows precisely "which side I'm on"...as if there could be a shadow of doubt...

I got news for you, the rainbow symbol isn't yours and never was.

Actually the sky is colorless, the blue we see is scattered light. Rainbows only appear to have color as they have refracted and reflected light. They are colorless as the sky.

 

[GreenBean]

Gay marriage hurts kids by stripping them of the complimentary gender as role model and one blood parent 100% of the time.

The only thing preventing gay marriage does ensure that the children of gay parents won't have married parents.

Let's talk about this sick little situation you're passing off as normal. How did the children of cohabitators come to be in that situation? Did lesbians get a sperm donor? Then that sperm donor is the child's father, not the shack up carpet muncher. And where is the father if not living in the same home as his child? Or how about an adopted child, how is it moral to deliberately impose upon a child a less than ideal home where two same sex shack ups are depriving him of a mother or a father?

Do you see what I'm getting at? There's no way to involve children in your crazy homo setup without causing harm and doing so is cruel and only serves the ego gratification of the adult homos who want to "have it all". Real, moral, loving adults place the needs of children before their own.

Let's talk about what a hateful bigot you are and how good it is that attitudes like yours are dying off fast. Let's talk about how you can't find a single reputable source that will tell you that our children are at a disadvantage to yours. Let's talk about how children have nothing to do with marriage and marriage has nothing to do with children and how we're having kids anyway and you can't stop us.

Are Children with Same-Sex Parents at a Disadvantage?
By Glenn T. Stanton, Director, Family Formation Studies
\

So who is behind this article?

the American College of Pediatricians, in coalition with other organizations who share a concern for the well-being of all youth. Unfortunately, some medical organizations, influenced by political correctness, have misrepresented science in order to affirm unhealthy lifestyles as normal behavior:

that would be like every respected medical association- including the American Academy of Pediatrics- it is estimated that the ACP has between 60 and 200 members- but who knows- they are very secretive about their membership

The College has received support and assistance for this project from the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH),

So basically this is an anti-homosexual association.

So what does the American Academy of Pediatric- with 60,000 members- have to say?

Promoting the Well-Being of Children Whose Parents Are Gay or Lesbian

Extensive data available from more than 30 years of research reveal that children raised by gay and lesbian parents have demonstrated resilience with regard to social, psychological, and sexual health despite economic and legal disparities and social stigma. Many studies have demonstrated that children's well-being is affected much more by their relationships with their parents, their parents' sense of competence and security, and the presence of social and economic support for the family than by the gender or the sexual orientation of their parents. Lack of opportunity for same-gender couples to marry adds to families’ stress, which affects the health and welfare of all household members. Because marriage strengthens families and, in so doing, benefits children’s development, children should not be deprived of the opportunity for their parents to be married. Paths to parenthood that include assisted reproductive techniques, adoption, and foster parenting should focus on competency of the parents rather than their sexual orientation.

Extensive data available from more than 30 years of research reveal that children raised by gay and lesbian parents have demonstrated resilience with regard to social, psychological, and sexual health despite economic and legal disparities and social stigma.

The article open with a false premise -" EXTENSIVE DATA available from more than 30 years "....

1.} There is no extensive data on Gay Adoption going back 30 years

2.} If they are referring to households where one parent flipped to being queer - than the argument dissolves as it is not a queer household - at least one parent remains sane to maintain and enforce a decent upbringing.

The American Academy of Pediatrics is another organization akin to the APA and there are many crossover members - that is to say - members who serve on both groups and at varying times serve on both boards. The rank and file membership fall in line and most do not know nor do many care what propagandistic lunacy in the guise of enlightened data the manipulated directorate puts out.