Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Marriage's benefits R4 D kids, not the adults
- Thread starter LuvRPgrl
- Start date
- Jan 8, 2007
- 30,528
- 2,263
- 1,045
Oh, no! Does that mean I have to go back to doing it the traditional way? Jiffy-Pop, or even over an open fire...maybe I'll just stick to chips.
Popcorn is most probably contraband, yo. I mean, do you SEE the word POPCORN or ORVILE REDENBACHER in the Constitution?
In fact, i'm not sure "snack food" is covered at all.
AllieBaba
Rookie
- Oct 2, 2007
- 33,778
- 3,927
- 0
- Banned
- #83
I get so tired of the left trying to hijack words, phrases and institutions and change their meanings.
Why can't they just come up with a different word for homosexual marriages and leave it at that?
Oh, that's right. Because they don't believe in freedom of the people. They believe in forcing people to accept their philosophy, whether those people agree or not. And if they won't, then they'll bastardize the language and the law until it represents them, and only them, and everybody who doesn't think just like them is left out in the cold.
Wonder if the fervor is dying down yet? Because the fact is, in this country, the majority isn't falling head over heels for the gay marriage thing, and likely never will.
And the children of homosexuals DO have myriad problems and increased incidence of mental illness.
Why can't they just come up with a different word for homosexual marriages and leave it at that?
Oh, that's right. Because they don't believe in freedom of the people. They believe in forcing people to accept their philosophy, whether those people agree or not. And if they won't, then they'll bastardize the language and the law until it represents them, and only them, and everybody who doesn't think just like them is left out in the cold.
Wonder if the fervor is dying down yet? Because the fact is, in this country, the majority isn't falling head over heels for the gay marriage thing, and likely never will.
And the children of homosexuals DO have myriad problems and increased incidence of mental illness.
JeffWartman
Senior Member
Why can't they just come up with a different word for homosexual marriages and leave it at that?
Because that doctrine has been widely disproven.
The government should get out of marriage all together. Completely take the power to grant a "marriage" out of the hands of government, institute civil unions for any two, consenting adults that want to form a partnership, and let the individual churches decide what kind of "marriage" they want to recognize.
It's amazing to me how foreign a concept "limited government" is to Republicans these days. You guys are setting a new record for big government.
AllieBaba
Rookie
- Oct 2, 2007
- 33,778
- 3,927
- 0
- Banned
- #85
Follow the link and find the first-hand accounts of children who do "well" being raised by homosexual parents.
Children Of Homosexual Parents Report Childhood Difficulties
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_homokids.html
Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: Referenced as both supporting and weakening the case for parenting by homosexuals, 57 life-story narratives of children with homosexual parents published by Rafkin in 1990 and Saffron in 1996 were subjected to content analysis. Children mentioned one or more problems/concerns in 48 (92%
of 52 families. Of the 213 scored problems, 201 (94%) were attributed to the homosexual parent(s). Older daughters in at least 8 (27%) of 30 families and older sons in at least 2 (20%) of 10 families described themselves as homosexual or bisexual. These findings are inconsistent with propositions that children of homosexuals do not differ appreciably from those who live with married parents or that children of homosexuals are not more apt to engage in homosexuality.
Correspondence to Paul Cameron, Family Research Institute, Inc., POB 62640, Colorado Springs, CO, 303 681-3113.
Children Of Homosexual Parents Report Childhood Difficulties
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Research Report critically examines empirical data on families, sexual social policy, AIDS, drug addiction, and homosexuality, digging behind the 'headlines' and breaking new scientific ground.
FRR is published 8 times/year by the Family Research Institute.
Dr. Paul Cameron, Publisher
Dr. Kirk Cameron, Editor
Subscriptions: $25/yr ($40 foreign)
Family Research Institute
P.O. Box 62640
Colorado Springs, CO 80962-2640
(303) 681-3113
©2002
Children Of Homosexual Parents Report Childhood Difficulties
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_homokids.html
Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: Referenced as both supporting and weakening the case for parenting by homosexuals, 57 life-story narratives of children with homosexual parents published by Rafkin in 1990 and Saffron in 1996 were subjected to content analysis. Children mentioned one or more problems/concerns in 48 (92%
of 52 families. Of the 213 scored problems, 201 (94%) were attributed to the homosexual parent(s). Older daughters in at least 8 (27%) of 30 families and older sons in at least 2 (20%) of 10 families described themselves as homosexual or bisexual. These findings are inconsistent with propositions that children of homosexuals do not differ appreciably from those who live with married parents or that children of homosexuals are not more apt to engage in homosexuality.Correspondence to Paul Cameron, Family Research Institute, Inc., POB 62640, Colorado Springs, CO, 303 681-3113.
Children Of Homosexual Parents Report Childhood Difficulties
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Research Report critically examines empirical data on families, sexual social policy, AIDS, drug addiction, and homosexuality, digging behind the 'headlines' and breaking new scientific ground.
FRR is published 8 times/year by the Family Research Institute.
Dr. Paul Cameron, Publisher
Dr. Kirk Cameron, Editor
Subscriptions: $25/yr ($40 foreign)
Family Research Institute
P.O. Box 62640
Colorado Springs, CO 80962-2640
(303) 681-3113
©2002
AllieBaba
Rookie
- Oct 2, 2007
- 33,778
- 3,927
- 0
- Banned
- #86
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26549
Trophy children
Posted: February 21, 2002
1:00 am Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com
On Feb. 2, the American Academy of Pediatrics announced that it was endorsing homosexual adoption. The response from the pro-family community was woefully inadequate. It consisted of bellyaching about the flawed or biased nature of available studies, hand wringing about the lack of empirical evidence or the simple assertion that children of two-parent, married heterosexual couples do best.
The report made by the AAP's Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health says that there is "no existing data to support the widely held belief that there are negative outcomes" for children raised by homosexual parents. Furthermore, the committee asserts, "No data have pointed to any risk to children as a result of growing up with one or more gay parents."
While there is ample evidence to show that children of married couples in intact families fare better than children of single parents or divorced couples, reliable studies comparing children raised in traditional families to those raised by cohabitating adults who engage in homosexual practices are few and far between but they do exist and should have been cited to refute the AAP's claims.
The study with the largest number of children was completed by Cameron and Cameron of the Family Research Institute and published in 1998. It examined all appellate cases of custody disputes involving a homosexual parent in 29 states to 38 appeals cases involving custody disputes drawn randomly from 1956 to 1991.
The advantages of selecting cases that reach the appeals court level are many: They offer official distillations of large bodies of information that have passed through two or more layers of the legal system. Also, the children in these studies tend to be older, thereby providing evidence of long-term effects. Furthermore, unlike studies done with volunteers, in which all relevant data is available only to the investigator, the relevant data in Cameron and Cameron is available for public inspection in essentially every law library in the United States.
It was the first study to examine the character of homosexual and heterosexual parents in an adversarial setting. The results were startling. Eighty-two percent of the homosexual parents versus 18 percent of the heterosexual parents were recorded as having poor character. More importantly, of the recorded harms to children, which included molestation and physical abuse, 97 percent were attributed to the homosexual parent.
The study with the second largest number of children of homosexuals is the only one that has compared children of coupled married heterosexual parents and coupled cohabiting heterosexual parents to coupled paired homosexual parents.
Dr. Sotirios Sarantakos, an associate professor of sociology in Australia, ran an investigation to compare the school performance of 58 children who were being raised by homosexual couples to 58 closely matched children being raised by married couples and 58 children being raised by cohabiting partners.
The children's school teachers were ask to rate their scholastic achievements, participation in varies group activities as well as their socialization skills. The teachers also reported on parental involvement through their observations as well as by interviewing the children.
The children of homosexual couples scored dramatically lower than the average of the children of the other two groups in verbal skills, vocabulary, composition and basic mathematical skills. The children of the homosexual couples performed better in social studies but only slightly. Also, there was an important difference in the social development. The children of homosexual parents were less likely to be involved with sports or other group activities. They were considered by their teachers to be introverts and loners, and were uncomfortable when having to work with students of a sex different from that of their co-habiting homosexual parent.
Far from being ideal parents, the homosexual couples were less likely to visit the children's schools, volunteer or help the children with their homework.
Sarantakos was published in 1996 in the obscure journal, Children Australia. He gave no indication that he was aware of the "best interest of the child" argument being used to promote gay adoptions. He made no reference to any of the published studies regarding homosexual parents that could best be described as "junk science," nor has his report been cited in any of the contentious literature about homosexual parenting.
Pro-family groups can be forgiven for not citing Sarantakos. It is not available in any of the conventional databases or indexes. (A synopsis is available through Family Research Institute.) However, Cameron and Cameron should be a primary weapon in the quiver of those who defend children and work to keep them from being used as trophies for the mainstreaming of homosexuality and the advancement of gay rights.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jane Chastain a southern California-based broadcaster, author and political commentator. If you would like to comment on this column, go to Jane's blog.
Trophy children
Posted: February 21, 2002
1:00 am Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com
On Feb. 2, the American Academy of Pediatrics announced that it was endorsing homosexual adoption. The response from the pro-family community was woefully inadequate. It consisted of bellyaching about the flawed or biased nature of available studies, hand wringing about the lack of empirical evidence or the simple assertion that children of two-parent, married heterosexual couples do best.
The report made by the AAP's Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health says that there is "no existing data to support the widely held belief that there are negative outcomes" for children raised by homosexual parents. Furthermore, the committee asserts, "No data have pointed to any risk to children as a result of growing up with one or more gay parents."
While there is ample evidence to show that children of married couples in intact families fare better than children of single parents or divorced couples, reliable studies comparing children raised in traditional families to those raised by cohabitating adults who engage in homosexual practices are few and far between but they do exist and should have been cited to refute the AAP's claims.
The study with the largest number of children was completed by Cameron and Cameron of the Family Research Institute and published in 1998. It examined all appellate cases of custody disputes involving a homosexual parent in 29 states to 38 appeals cases involving custody disputes drawn randomly from 1956 to 1991.
The advantages of selecting cases that reach the appeals court level are many: They offer official distillations of large bodies of information that have passed through two or more layers of the legal system. Also, the children in these studies tend to be older, thereby providing evidence of long-term effects. Furthermore, unlike studies done with volunteers, in which all relevant data is available only to the investigator, the relevant data in Cameron and Cameron is available for public inspection in essentially every law library in the United States.
It was the first study to examine the character of homosexual and heterosexual parents in an adversarial setting. The results were startling. Eighty-two percent of the homosexual parents versus 18 percent of the heterosexual parents were recorded as having poor character. More importantly, of the recorded harms to children, which included molestation and physical abuse, 97 percent were attributed to the homosexual parent.
The study with the second largest number of children of homosexuals is the only one that has compared children of coupled married heterosexual parents and coupled cohabiting heterosexual parents to coupled paired homosexual parents.
Dr. Sotirios Sarantakos, an associate professor of sociology in Australia, ran an investigation to compare the school performance of 58 children who were being raised by homosexual couples to 58 closely matched children being raised by married couples and 58 children being raised by cohabiting partners.
The children's school teachers were ask to rate their scholastic achievements, participation in varies group activities as well as their socialization skills. The teachers also reported on parental involvement through their observations as well as by interviewing the children.
The children of homosexual couples scored dramatically lower than the average of the children of the other two groups in verbal skills, vocabulary, composition and basic mathematical skills. The children of the homosexual couples performed better in social studies but only slightly. Also, there was an important difference in the social development. The children of homosexual parents were less likely to be involved with sports or other group activities. They were considered by their teachers to be introverts and loners, and were uncomfortable when having to work with students of a sex different from that of their co-habiting homosexual parent.
Far from being ideal parents, the homosexual couples were less likely to visit the children's schools, volunteer or help the children with their homework.
Sarantakos was published in 1996 in the obscure journal, Children Australia. He gave no indication that he was aware of the "best interest of the child" argument being used to promote gay adoptions. He made no reference to any of the published studies regarding homosexual parents that could best be described as "junk science," nor has his report been cited in any of the contentious literature about homosexual parenting.
Pro-family groups can be forgiven for not citing Sarantakos. It is not available in any of the conventional databases or indexes. (A synopsis is available through Family Research Institute.) However, Cameron and Cameron should be a primary weapon in the quiver of those who defend children and work to keep them from being used as trophies for the mainstreaming of homosexuality and the advancement of gay rights.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jane Chastain a southern California-based broadcaster, author and political commentator. If you would like to comment on this column, go to Jane's blog.
Follow the link and find the first-hand accounts of children who do "well" being raised by homosexual parents.
Children Of Homosexual Parents Report Childhood Difficulties
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_homokids.html
Paul Cameron and Kirk Cameron
Summary: Referenced as both supporting and weakening the case for parenting by homosexuals, 57 life-story narratives of children with homosexual parents published by Rafkin in 1990 and Saffron in 1996 were subjected to content analysis. Children mentioned one or more problems/concerns in 48 (92%) of 52 families. Of the 213 scored problems, 201 (94%) were attributed to the homosexual parent(s). Older daughters in at least 8 (27%) of 30 families and older sons in at least 2 (20%) of 10 families described themselves as homosexual or bisexual. These findings are inconsistent with propositions that children of homosexuals do not differ appreciably from those who live with married parents or that children of homosexuals are not more apt to engage in homosexuality.
Correspondence to Paul Cameron, Family Research Institute, Inc., POB 62640, Colorado Springs, CO, 303 681-3113.
Children Of Homosexual Parents Report Childhood Difficulties
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Research Report critically examines empirical data on families, sexual social policy, AIDS, drug addiction, and homosexuality, digging behind the 'headlines' and breaking new scientific ground.
FRR is published 8 times/year by the Family Research Institute.
Dr. Paul Cameron, Publisher
Dr. Kirk Cameron, Editor
Subscriptions: $25/yr ($40 foreign)
Family Research Institute
P.O. Box 62640
Colorado Springs, CO 80962-2640
(303) 681-3113
©2002
Kids with homosexual parents have problems because morons like you are homophobic and give them shit about it .
nibor
Senior Member
YES, I have a right to reproductive choice.... at least until a pregnancy is so far advanced that the governmental interest in protecting the fetus superceds my own right to control my body.
It's really not that complicated.
It's waaaaay more complicated than you profess Jillian, at least in your last statement....................because YOU in fact do not have that right of reproductive choice in truth, do you.....................oh sure by the push of feminists and American law standard others do................but Jewish women are not allowed to have abortions no matter how they champion the "cause" ?
It's waaaaay more complicated than you profess Jillian, at least in your last statement....................because YOU in fact do not have that right of reproductive choice in truth, do you.....................oh sure by the push of feminists and American law standard others do................but Jewish women are not allowed to have abortions no matter how they champion the "cause" ?
That's untrue... in conservative and reform judaism it's a personal moral choice.
Like any other religion, the fundies have issues.
I get so tired of the left trying to hijack words, phrases and institutions and change their meanings.
Why can't they just come up with a different word for homosexual marriages and leave it at that?
Here we go again, how about legal and sanctioned marriage, same for everyone.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ0oFTZ_J1E[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPvVnrV1tow&NR=1[/ame]
nibor
Senior Member
That's untrue... in conservative and reform judaism it's a personal moral choice.
Like any other religion, the fundies have issues.
Hmmm in all my years I've NEVER met OR known one that has................AND is it not the "fundi" law that's been imposed on the written law of this nation and up until now fortunately not enforced......................but who knows what types of ordained nonsense could happen to this country in the future?
Hmmm in all my years I've NEVER met OR known one that has................AND is it not the "fundi" law that's been imposed on the written law of this nation and up until now fortunately not enforced......................but who knows what types of ordained nonsense could happen to this country in the future?
Christian fundies have different rules than other Christians... it has nothing to do with them being right... it has to do with the way they view the bible. Same with Jewish fundies. So, all things considered, I think I'll listen to my rabbi.
Thanks anyway.
nibor
Senior Member
Christian fundies have different rules than other Christians... it has nothing to do with them being right... it has to do with the way they view the bible. Same with Jewish fundies. So, all things considered, I think I'll listen to my rabbi.
Thanks anyway.
Well I'm in no way a religious fundi of any type.....................but I do know what your rabbi will say.
mattskramer
Senior Member
or, you know.. a right to privacy under the 14th Amendment as was the actual verdict.
Okay. Help me get this straight. The right to privacy is an inherent right because the 14th amendment says that we have a right to privacy. Got it.
mattskramer
Senior Member
Actually, it's from 1967... nothing new about it.
The Supreme Court has, since day one, determined what can and can't be done under the Constitution. They don't give us rights... they INTERPRET the Constitution.
The Constitution doesn't say there's a right to judicial review. Marbury v Madison established that right and showed WHY the right had to logically exist in order to give effect to the Constitution.
Loving v Virginia, the case that I cited, was one of the first of the right to privacy cases... and
YES, I have a right to reproductive choice.... at least until a pregnancy is so far advanced that the governmental interest in protecting the fetus superceds my own right to control my body.
It's really not that complicated.
Okay. The Supreme Court does not give us inherent rights. It is this piece of paper the Constitution that gives us rights or says that we have inherent rights or something like that. So, the people who created the Constitution say that we have inherent rights and they were right in all that they said, right? Im so confused.
ScreamingEagle
Gold Member
- Jul 5, 2004
- 13,399
- 1,706
- 245
You have no reason to call anybody a moron, moron. Most heterosexuals (fyi as you probably are not one) have very good reasons for not wanting to expose their children to homosexual lifestyles. This attitude has roots deep in our social history for good reasons…gay marriage has never succeeded because it does not do much good for society.Kids with homosexual parents have problems because morons like you are homophobic and give them shit about it .
Seems to me it's the gay parents who are to blame here….not the others you call morons. Gays know that 99.99999% of the family world is heterosexually oriented, yet for their own self-serving and selfish reasons they still have/acquire children who then are euphemistically and unavoidably "thrown under the bus".
Yet pinheads like you point fingers, guilt-trip the rest of the world, expecting everybody else to change, and claim (with no real proof) that everybody else in the world is to blame….who are the real morons here?
You have no reason to call anybody a moron, moron.
Actually I very much do.
Most heterosexuals (fyi as you probably are not one) have very good reasons for not wanting to expose their children to homosexual lifestyles.
Such as the above statement, moron. I am quite straight. Unlike you, I'm not only out for myself.
This attitude has roots deep in our social history for good reasons
Such as?
gay marriage has never succeeded because it does not do much good for society.
As opposed to alcohol, marijuana, cigs and the rest which succeeded and have done such wonders for society?
Seems to me it's the gay parents who are to blame here .not the others you call morons.
No, its pretty much you morons.
Gays know that 99.99999% of the family world is heterosexually oriented,
They know an incorrect fact? Thats interesting. Regardless, care to inform me who the rest of the world wants to fuck should effect who I, or anyone else, wants to fuck? Just because all the Priests want to fuck small children really doesn't mean I want too.
yet for their own self-serving and selfish reasons they still have/acquire children who then are euphemistically and unavoidably "thrown under the bus".
Unavoidably? Really? Care to explain how they are "unavoidably" thrown under the bus?
Yet pinheads like you point fingers, guilt-trip the rest of the world, expecting everybody else to change, and claim (with no real proof) that everybody else in the world is to blame .who's the real moron here?
You are. I'm guilt tripping the homophobes. Cry me a river.
ScreamingEagle
Gold Member
- Jul 5, 2004
- 13,399
- 1,706
- 245
I see you had to resort to your usual idiotic parsing...not a substantive thought to be had...moron.Actually I very much do.
Such as the above statement, moron. I am quite straight. Unlike you, I'm not only out for myself.
Such as?
As opposed to alcohol, marijuana, cigs and the rest which succeeded and have done such wonders for society?
No, its pretty much you morons.
They know an incorrect fact? Thats interesting. Regardless, care to inform me who the rest of the world wants to fuck should effect who I, or anyone else, wants to fuck? Just because all the Priests want to fuck small children really doesn't mean I want too.
Unavoidably? Really? Care to explain how they are "unavoidably" thrown under the bus?
You are. I'm guilt tripping the homophobes. Cry me a river.
Gunny
Gold Member
Okay. The Supreme Court does not give us inherent rights. It is this piece of paper the Constitution that gives us rights or says that we have inherent rights or something like that. So, the people who created the Constitution say that we have inherent rights and they were right in all that they said, right? Im so confused.
There is no inherent right. From the second you are born you exist at the whim of your parents, society in which you live, and your own ability to maintain your own existence.
The Founding Father's maintained that we have certain unalienable Rights. Those words and ideas are only as good as their ability to protect them.
I see you had to resort to your usual idiotic parsing...not a substantive thought to be had...moron.
LMAO...nice dodge. I questioned your beliefs and asked you to further explain them because they are obviously incredibly stupid. No surprise you don't want to elaborate on them.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 63
- Replies
- 27
- Views
- 486
- Replies
- 7
- Views
- 330
- Replies
- 49
- Views
- 637
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 257
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 64
- Views
- 443
- Replies
- 25
- Views
- 48
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8039
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-