Kids in Gay Marriages maladjusted, 35% Less Likely to Graduate High School

[JakeStarkey]

Since when has the far right heeded empirical data?

It is an impediment to the far right.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Since when has the far right heeded empirical data?

It is an impediment to the far right.

Who said they did? Disagreeing with a lefty neocon doesn't render one far right. Except to lefty neocons maybe.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are a social con who is wrong almost every time, Rosh.

You cannot define "lefty" or "neo-con", although you are supporting the imperialist agenda of Russia. That is unAmerican.

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

Quit bothering me for an hour will you? I'm reading about the queer agenda & marxist academia's unanimous sanction of the empirically proven, Nobel-worthy, rightie-hate-denial-hate-agenda-hate-group-smearing of the unquestionably unquestionable science of...The Gay Gene! Gay science is sooo...gay.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Quit bothering me for an hour will you? I'm reading about the queer agenda & marxist academia's unanimous sanction of the empirically proven, Nobel-worthy, rightie-hate-denial-hate-agenda-hate-group-smearing of the unquestionably unquestionable science of...The Gay Gene! Gay science is sooo...gay.

So you are saying you and Rosh are the same poster.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

You are a social con who is wrong almost every time, Rosh.

You cannot define "lefty" or "neo-con", although you are supporting the imperialist agenda of Russia. That is unAmerican.

I'm a literal progressive's progressive. I've left you out-of-date left wing democrats in my dust. That probably explains why you have so much trouble seeing forward.
My definition of neocon for lefties is in the literal sense. You left wing democrats are rigidly mired in old school 1960's agendas and too conservative to budge forward.
You still advocate for segregation but call it diversity. You continue to contribute to unstructured families and the social problems that generates through your advocacy for single parenting by choice and homo parenting, refusing to pay attention to up-to-date empirical data because it contradicts your old fashioned dogma.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Rosh, you are a nut case, period.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Rosh, you are a nut case, period.

So my points flew over your lefty head. No surprise.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The point is this.

You may have your own opinion.

But when you change accepted narrative, terms, and definitions, you automatically lose.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The point is this.

You may have your own opinion.

But when you change accepted narrative, terms, and definitions, you automatically lose.

I didn't change anything. I applied objectivity.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, you applied your owned definitions. No one accepts them and no one will discuss the process by which you came up with them. You will simply be referred to a good dictionary, thesaurus, etc.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

You are a social con who is wrong almost every time, Rosh.

You cannot define "lefty" or "neo-con", although you are supporting the imperialist agenda of Russia. That is unAmerican.

I'm a literal progressive's progressive. I've left you out-of-date left wing democrats in my dust. That probably explains why you have so much trouble seeing forward.
My definition of neocon for lefties is in the literal sense. You left wing democrats are rigidly mired in old school 1960's agendas and too conservative to budge forward.
You still advocate for segregation but call it diversity. You continue to contribute to unstructured families and the social problems that generates through your advocacy for single parenting by choice and homo parenting, refusing to pay attention to up-to-date empirical data because it contradicts your old fashioned dogma.

Did you really just say that diversity is segregation? LOL

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

Rosh, you are a nut case, period.

No he isn't. He's right.

 

[Syriusly]

A lot more of these studies should be done with so much at stake.
]

Last week’s Michigan decision agreed, calling it an “absurdity” to ban marriages on the grounds that they might yield “sub-optimal” kids.

“Taking the … position to its logical conclusion, the empirical evidence at hand should require that only rich, educated, suburban-dwelling, married Asians may marry, to the exclusion of all other heterosexual couples,” he wrote.

Even Mr. Allen would seem to agree, telling the National Post, “I don’t believe the question of [same sex marriage] rests heavily on the outcomes of children.”'

Do you think that we should only study children raised by gay parents?

 

[Syriusly]

This is akin to the post-1960's phenomenon we've witnessed in the black neighborhoods in the US.
Kids need both parents. The more we contribute to and create alternatives to that the more we exacerbate social problems and failure. This is why democrats need to be removed. Or else they need to simply progress a little more than a little.

So are you suggesting that divorce be outlawed for parents?

And you suggest it is Democrats that are the problem- even though the 5 states with the highest divorce rates are Republican?

Even when Republican poster boy Newt Gingrich divorced his wife and abandoned his kids?

That is serious partisan blindness.

 

[Syriusly]

You are a social con who is wrong almost every time, Rosh.

You cannot define "lefty" or "neo-con", although you are supporting the imperialist agenda of Russia. That is unAmerican.

I'm a literal progressive's progressive. I've left you out-of-date left wing democrats in my dust. That probably explains why you have so much trouble seeing forward.
My definition of neocon for lefties is in the literal sense. You left wing democrats are rigidly mired in old school 1960's agendas and too conservative to budge forward.
You still advocate for segregation but call it diversity. You continue to contribute to unstructured families and the social problems that generates through your advocacy for single parenting by choice and homo parenting, refusing to pay attention to up-to-date empirical data because it contradicts your old fashioned dogma.

pure bat guano crazy talk.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

A lot more of these studies should be done with so much at stake.
]

Last week’s Michigan decision agreed, calling it an “absurdity” to ban marriages on the grounds that they might yield “sub-optimal” kids.

“Taking the … position to its logical conclusion, the empirical evidence at hand should require that only rich, educated, suburban-dwelling, married Asians may marry, to the exclusion of all other heterosexual couples,” he wrote.

Even Mr. Allen would seem to agree, telling the National Post, “I don’t believe the question of [same sex marriage] rests heavily on the outcomes of children.”'

Do you think that we should only study children raised by gay parents?

There has been study of children in general, and that will continue, of course.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

This is akin to the post-1960's phenomenon we've witnessed in the black neighborhoods in the US.
Kids need both parents. The more we contribute to and create alternatives to that the more we exacerbate social problems and failure. This is why democrats need to be removed. Or else they need to simply progress a little more than a little.

So are you suggesting that divorce be outlawed for parents?

And you suggest it is Democrats that are the problem- even though the 5 states with the highest divorce rates are Republican?

Even when Republican poster boy Newt Gingrich divorced his wife and abandoned his kids?

That is serious partisan blindness.

What is wrong with wanting what is best?

 

[Syriusly]

This is akin to the post-1960's phenomenon we've witnessed in the black neighborhoods in the US.
Kids need both parents. The more we contribute to and create alternatives to that the more we exacerbate social problems and failure. This is why democrats need to be removed. Or else they need to simply progress a little more than a little.

So are you suggesting that divorce be outlawed for parents?

And you suggest it is Democrats that are the problem- even though the 5 states with the highest divorce rates are Republican?

Even when Republican poster boy Newt Gingrich divorced his wife and abandoned his kids?

That is serious partisan blindness.

What is wrong with wanting what is best?

I want what is best. I want mothers and fathers to not abandon their children.

And I want the 100,000 children a year who go unadopted, to be adopted.

And I want the 20,000 children a year who currently age out of the system to instead be adopted by loving parents.

Gay parents adopting will not solve the problem of the children abandoned by heterosexuals, but every child adopted by gay parents is one less child unadopted, one less child that will age out of the system to live on the streets.

 

[Syriusly]

A lot more of these studies should be done with so much at stake.
]

Last week’s Michigan decision agreed, calling it an “absurdity” to ban marriages on the grounds that they might yield “sub-optimal” kids.

“Taking the … position to its logical conclusion, the empirical evidence at hand should require that only rich, educated, suburban-dwelling, married Asians may marry, to the exclusion of all other heterosexual couples,” he wrote.

Even Mr. Allen would seem to agree, telling the National Post, “I don’t believe the question of [same sex marriage] rests heavily on the outcomes of children.”'

Do you think that we should only study children raised by gay parents?

There has been study of children in general, and that will continue, of course.

Studying what is best for children is a good thing.

But what if the studies said that children were worse off with traditional families? Would you embrace such a study and argue that children shouldn't be raised by a mother and father?