Rick Santorum Admits Gay Couples Can Be Just Normal Parents

[TheProgressivePatriot]

"I'm not saying that a same-sex couple can't have a very positive and nurturing environment."

Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Penn.), who has aggressively opposed gay marriage throughout his career, admitted on Wednesday that gay couples can provide a healthy environment for children.

Santorum, who has said that the Supreme Court's June decision legalizing same-sex marriage, further put the "nail in the coffin" of the nuclear family, was pressed on his position by ABC's "The View" co-host Raven-Symoné, who said she considers herself a part of the "gay and transgender community."

"I don't understand why you feel like people in the gay and transgender community can't raise a very beautiful, smart, intelligent child as well as a man and a woman when sometimes, coming from a heterosexual family, there's a lot more fighting, there's a lot more going on," she said on "The View."

Santorum, who is running for president, responded by saying that same-sex couples could in fact create a good environment for their children.

"I'm not saying that a same-sex couple can't have a very positive and nurturing environment," he said.

Despite admitting that gay couples can be just as good parents as anyone else, Santorum didn't back away from his position that gay marriage will destroy the traditional family.

More: Rick Santorum Admits Gay Couples Can Be Just Normal Parents, But Still Opposes Same-Sex Marriage

Well, there it is. Even Santorum admits that gay couples can provide a healthy environment for children. Many of us already knew that.

More lies from the left, no where did he say "normal". Because that is physically impossible, normal is having both biological parents.

So a heterosexual couple adopting a child is not "normal"?

A heterosexual couple using a sperm donor or a surrogate because one partner is unable to have children is not "normal"

A single parent who re-marries and where the spouse adopts the child is not"normal"?

What the fuck is normal? It seems to me it is only "abnormal" if it involves gay people. Anything else is "normal" regardless of whether or not both parents are biological parents.

Are all children who do not have two biological parents unworthy of the security of having two married and legal parents , or is it only the children of gay people.? It's either "normal" or it is not" normal" for one or both parents to not be biological. Which is it and what the fuck does it matter?

All variate from the norm, your point? Made up relationships can't replace biological relationships. Some are decent substitutes, but none are capable of being identical.

So then you are saying that HETEROSEXUAL couples who cannot or do not have BIOLOGICAL children where BOTH are the BIOLOGICAL parents should not be treated the same-should not have the same rights- as HETEROSEXUALS who DO HAVE children in the NORMAL way?

OR.....are you saying that the HETEROSEXUAL couple who adopts child is a "decent substitute" but the gay couple who does is not?

What the fuck is YOUR point?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The thing is, liberals don't care if being raised by a gay couple is good or bad for children. Even if they found out that it was bad for children, they would still support it.

Democratic politicians used to kiss babies, now they abort them.

And now they want to add infanticide to the list of things they can do to children.

The thing is, conservatives don't care that there is more evidence that being raised by ridged, right wing, nut jobs is harmful to kids, than there is that having gay parents is harmful .......29 Things Only People Raised By Conservative Parents Will Understand

 

[Seawytch]

yes! because two women can teach their son boy things and to be a good man and husband to his wife and two men can teach their daughter girl things and to be a good wife to her husband

........... you libs are so stupid its dangerous.

You're right, they can. The fact is that not a single study shows that a mother and a father are required. What all the studies show is that children do best in two parent households. Two parents, gender is immaterial.

 

[Seawytch]

• Lesbians have higher rates of alcohol use, poor nutrition, and obesity. These factors may increase the risk of breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers, and other cancers.

• Sexual Health. Lesbian women are at risk for many of the same STDs as heterosexual women. Lesbian women can transmit STDs to each other through skin-to-skin contact, mucosa contact, vaginal fluids, and menstrual blood. Sharing sex toys is another method of transmitting STDs. These are common STDs that can be passed between women:
• Bacterial vaginosis (BV). Although we don’t know for sure that BV is caused by a sexually transmitted agent, BV occurs more commonly among women who have recently acquired other STD’s, or who have recently had unprotected sex. For reasons that are unclear, BV is more common in lesbian and bisexual women than heterosexual women, and frequently occurs in both members of lesbian couples. BV happens when the normal bacteria in the vagina get out of balance. Sometimes, BV causes no symptoms, but over half of affected women have a vaginal discharge with a fishy odor or vaginal itching. If left untreated, BV can increase a woman’s chances of getting other STDs such as HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and pelvic inflammatory disease.

Lesbian Health

I didn't say they had no risk, I said they were in the lowest risk category for STDs. Way lower than you, a straight man. Obviously that makes me a much better parent, right?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The thing is, liberals don't care if being raised by a gay couple is good or bad for children. Even if they found out that it was bad for children, they would still support it.

Democratic politicians used to kiss babies, now they abort them.

And now they want to add infanticide to the list of things they can do to children.

The thing is, conservatives don't care that depriving children of the opportunity to have MARRIED parents, and depriving children of the opportunity to be adopted by ANY and ALL people who are able and willing to do so may result in their not have the security of TWO LEGAL parents. They are too stupid and short sighted to understand that the children become the collateral damage of bigotry and need to punish people for being gay.

 

[Tank]

• Lesbians have higher rates of alcohol use, poor nutrition, and obesity. These factors may increase the risk of breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers, and other cancers.

• Sexual Health. Lesbian women are at risk for many of the same STDs as heterosexual women. Lesbian women can transmit STDs to each other through skin-to-skin contact, mucosa contact, vaginal fluids, and menstrual blood. Sharing sex toys is another method of transmitting STDs. These are common STDs that can be passed between women:
• Bacterial vaginosis (BV). Although we don’t know for sure that BV is caused by a sexually transmitted agent, BV occurs more commonly among women who have recently acquired other STD’s, or who have recently had unprotected sex. For reasons that are unclear, BV is more common in lesbian and bisexual women than heterosexual women, and frequently occurs in both members of lesbian couples. BV happens when the normal bacteria in the vagina get out of balance. Sometimes, BV causes no symptoms, but over half of affected women have a vaginal discharge with a fishy odor or vaginal itching. If left untreated, BV can increase a woman’s chances of getting other STDs such as HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and pelvic inflammatory disease.

Lesbian Health

I didn't say they had no risk, I said they were in the lowest risk category for STDs. Way lower than you, a straight man. Obviously that makes me a much better parent, right?

Lesbians are at a much higher risk for std's then a straight male

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

• Lesbians have higher rates of alcohol use, poor nutrition, and obesity. These factors may increase the risk of breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers, and other cancers.

• Sexual Health. Lesbian women are at risk for many of the same STDs as heterosexual women. Lesbian women can transmit STDs to each other through skin-to-skin contact, mucosa contact, vaginal fluids, and menstrual blood. Sharing sex toys is another method of transmitting STDs. These are common STDs that can be passed between women:
• Bacterial vaginosis (BV). Although we don’t know for sure that BV is caused by a sexually transmitted agent, BV occurs more commonly among women who have recently acquired other STD’s, or who have recently had unprotected sex. For reasons that are unclear, BV is more common in lesbian and bisexual women than heterosexual women, and frequently occurs in both members of lesbian couples. BV happens when the normal bacteria in the vagina get out of balance. Sometimes, BV causes no symptoms, but over half of affected women have a vaginal discharge with a fishy odor or vaginal itching. If left untreated, BV can increase a woman’s chances of getting other STDs such as HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and pelvic inflammatory disease.

Lesbian Health

I didn't say they had no risk, I said they were in the lowest risk category for STDs. Way lower than you, a straight man. Obviously that makes me a much better parent, right?

Lesbians are at a much higher risk for std's then a straight male

This is just stupid. Maybe if gay people were treated as human beings, instead of being marginalized, any special health problems that they may have would be minimized, if they in fact exist at all. Has anyone compared the general mental and physical heath of gay people across different social environments such as those who are in a tolerant location where there rights are respected and places where discrimination still exists?. What about longitudinal studies...tracking changes in gay heath issues over time as society becomes more accepting of them? Unless you can control for these intervening variables, none of this is worth anymore that a stinking pile of horseshit.

And....from your own link:

Q: What challenges do lesbian women face in the health care system?
A: Lesbians face unique challenges within the health care system that can cause poorer mental and physical health. Many doctors, nurses, and other health care providers have not had sufficient training to understand the specific health experiences of lesbians, or that women who are lesbians, like heterosexual women, can be healthy normal females. There can be barriers to optimal health for lesbians, such as:

• Fear of negative reactions from their doctors if they disclose their sexual orientation.
• Doctors’ lack of understanding of lesbians’ disease risks, and issues that may be important to lesbians.
• Lack of health insurance because of no domestic partner benefits.
• Low perceived risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases and some types of cancer.

For the above reasons, lesbians often avoid routine health exams and even delay seeking medical care when health problems occur.

Which bears out what I'm saying about discrimination, marginalization, and lack of rights. So what is it EXACTLY that your trying to prove here...in this thread that is supposed to be about gay parenting?

 

[9thIDdoc]

I can't believe how some people fail to understand the whole "birds and bees" thing!

 

[g5000]

"I'm not saying that a same-sex couple can't have a very positive and nurturing environment," he said.

It is interesting Santorum used a double negative. He couldn't bring himself to say a same-sex couple can have a very positive and nurturing environment.

So what are you saying, Rick?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I can't believe how some people fail to understand the whole "birds and bees" thing!

Who would that be?

 

[g5000]

Heterosexuals destroyed the institution of marriage a long, long, long time ago. Long before same-sex marriage was even on the radar.

Adultery of every form described in the Bible has become not only acceptable, but the norm. So acceptable it is no longer considered a sin to get married two, three, four, five times even though Jesus plainly said that was adultery, and God says adultery is in the Top Ten of No-Nos.

Adultery has been made normal by the very same hypocrites claiming that gays will somehow destroy marriage!

Sorry, you can't break what is already destroyed.

 

[9thIDdoc]

I can't believe how some people fail to understand the whole "birds and bees" thing!

Who would that be?

Anyone who so profoundly fails to understand that it is biologically impossible for same sex couples to have children in the normal manner which means that it is also impossible to be normal parents.

 

[g5000]

I can't believe how some people fail to understand the whole "birds and bees" thing!

Who would that be?

Anyone who so profoundly fails to understand that it is biologically impossible for same sex couples to have children in the normal manner which means that it is also impossible to be normal parents.

Where did you ever get the idea you have to birth a child to provide a better home environment for them than a lot of heterosexual couples do?

 

[OKTexas]

"I'm not saying that a same-sex couple can't have a very positive and nurturing environment."

Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Penn.), who has aggressively opposed gay marriage throughout his career, admitted on Wednesday that gay couples can provide a healthy environment for children.

Santorum, who has said that the Supreme Court's June decision legalizing same-sex marriage, further put the "nail in the coffin" of the nuclear family, was pressed on his position by ABC's "The View" co-host Raven-Symoné, who said she considers herself a part of the "gay and transgender community."

"I don't understand why you feel like people in the gay and transgender community can't raise a very beautiful, smart, intelligent child as well as a man and a woman when sometimes, coming from a heterosexual family, there's a lot more fighting, there's a lot more going on," she said on "The View."

Santorum, who is running for president, responded by saying that same-sex couples could in fact create a good environment for their children.

"I'm not saying that a same-sex couple can't have a very positive and nurturing environment," he said.

Despite admitting that gay couples can be just as good parents as anyone else, Santorum didn't back away from his position that gay marriage will destroy the traditional family.

More: Rick Santorum Admits Gay Couples Can Be Just Normal Parents, But Still Opposes Same-Sex Marriage

Well, there it is. Even Santorum admits that gay couples can provide a healthy environment for children. Many of us already knew that.

More lies from the left, no where did he say "normal". Because that is physically impossible, normal is having both biological parents.

So a heterosexual couple adopting a child is not "normal"?

A heterosexual couple using a sperm donor or a surrogate because one partner is unable to have children is not "normal"

A single parent who re-marries and where the spouse adopts the child is not"normal"?

What the fuck is normal? It seems to me it is only "abnormal" if it involves gay people. Anything else is "normal" regardless of whether or not both parents are biological parents.

Are all children who do not have two biological parents unworthy of the security of having two married and legal parents , or is it only the children of gay people.? It's either "normal" or it is not" normal" for one or both parents to not be biological. Which is it and what the fuck does it matter?

All variate from the norm, your point? Made up relationships can't replace biological relationships. Some are decent substitutes, but none are capable of being identical.

So then you are saying that HETEROSEXUAL couples who cannot or do not have BIOLOGICAL children where BOTH are the BIOLOGICAL parents should not be treated the same-should not have the same rights- as HETEROSEXUALS who DO HAVE children in the NORMAL way?

OR.....are you saying that the HETEROSEXUAL couple who adopts child is a "decent substitute" but the gay couple who does is not?

What the fuck is YOUR point?

I didn't say that at all, but a hetro couple provides roll models from both genders, which is the better alternative in adoption. Remember we are making comparisons to a traditional family, with ties to both biological parents verses the alternatives.

 

[Seawytch]

• Lesbians have higher rates of alcohol use, poor nutrition, and obesity. These factors may increase the risk of breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers, and other cancers.

• Sexual Health. Lesbian women are at risk for many of the same STDs as heterosexual women. Lesbian women can transmit STDs to each other through skin-to-skin contact, mucosa contact, vaginal fluids, and menstrual blood. Sharing sex toys is another method of transmitting STDs. These are common STDs that can be passed between women:
• Bacterial vaginosis (BV). Although we don’t know for sure that BV is caused by a sexually transmitted agent, BV occurs more commonly among women who have recently acquired other STD’s, or who have recently had unprotected sex. For reasons that are unclear, BV is more common in lesbian and bisexual women than heterosexual women, and frequently occurs in both members of lesbian couples. BV happens when the normal bacteria in the vagina get out of balance. Sometimes, BV causes no symptoms, but over half of affected women have a vaginal discharge with a fishy odor or vaginal itching. If left untreated, BV can increase a woman’s chances of getting other STDs such as HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and pelvic inflammatory disease.

Lesbian Health

I didn't say they had no risk, I said they were in the lowest risk category for STDs. Way lower than you, a straight man. Obviously that makes me a much better parent, right?

Lesbians are at a much higher risk for std's then a straight male

No, they aren't. Check your facts.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I can't believe how some people fail to understand the whole "birds and bees" thing!

Who would that be?

Anyone who so profoundly fails to understand that it is biologically impossible for same sex couples to have children in the normal manner which means that it is also impossible to be normal parents.

So then you would agree that an opposite sex couple who, for whatever reason, can't have biological children in the "normal way" and who chooses to adopt or whatever can't be "normal parents "either, right? What the fuck is a "normal parent"? Why don't you just admit that you don't like the idea of gays having kids and being parents and stop making up this horseshit?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

"I'm not saying that a same-sex couple can't have a very positive and nurturing environment."

Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Penn.), who has aggressively opposed gay marriage throughout his career, admitted on Wednesday that gay couples can provide a healthy environment for children.

Santorum, who has said that the Supreme Court's June decision legalizing same-sex marriage, further put the "nail in the coffin" of the nuclear family, was pressed on his position by ABC's "The View" co-host Raven-Symoné, who said she considers herself a part of the "gay and transgender community."

"I don't understand why you feel like people in the gay and transgender community can't raise a very beautiful, smart, intelligent child as well as a man and a woman when sometimes, coming from a heterosexual family, there's a lot more fighting, there's a lot more going on," she said on "The View."

Santorum, who is running for president, responded by saying that same-sex couples could in fact create a good environment for their children.

"I'm not saying that a same-sex couple can't have a very positive and nurturing environment," he said.

Despite admitting that gay couples can be just as good parents as anyone else, Santorum didn't back away from his position that gay marriage will destroy the traditional family.

More: Rick Santorum Admits Gay Couples Can Be Just Normal Parents, But Still Opposes Same-Sex Marriage

Well, there it is. Even Santorum admits that gay couples can provide a healthy environment for children. Many of us already knew that.

More lies from the left, no where did he say "normal". Because that is physically impossible, normal is having both biological parents.

So a heterosexual couple adopting a child is not "normal"?

A heterosexual couple using a sperm donor or a surrogate because one partner is unable to have children is not "normal"

A single parent who re-marries and where the spouse adopts the child is not"normal"?

What the fuck is normal? It seems to me it is only "abnormal" if it involves gay people. Anything else is "normal" regardless of whether or not both parents are biological parents.

Are all children who do not have two biological parents unworthy of the security of having two married and legal parents , or is it only the children of gay people.? It's either "normal" or it is not" normal" for one or both parents to not be biological. Which is it and what the fuck does it matter?

All variate from the norm, your point? Made up relationships can't replace biological relationships. Some are decent substitutes, but none are capable of being identical.

So then you are saying that HETEROSEXUAL couples who cannot or do not have BIOLOGICAL children where BOTH are the BIOLOGICAL parents should not be treated the same-should not have the same rights- as HETEROSEXUALS who DO HAVE children in the NORMAL way?

OR.....are you saying that the HETEROSEXUAL couple who adopts child is a "decent substitute" but the gay couple who does is not?

What the fuck is YOUR point?

I didn't say that at all, but a hetro couple provides roll models from both genders, which is the better alternative in adoption. Remember we are making comparisons to a traditional family, with ties to both biological parents verses the alternatives.

I see. Now you're changing your story. You got called on the biology thing and realize that it was stupid, so now it's about gender role models. Now all that you have to do is come up with some credible , scientific evidence that have opposite sex parents is necessary, or even provides an advantage to a child's social and emotional development.

While your at it , you can also explain where all of those opposite sex couples that are needed for all the children who are in the foster care system are going to come from. Lastly, try to explain why it's OK, as some believe, to deprive children who are already in the care of a gay person, the securityof second parent or step parent adoption by the partner of that fay person.

 

[OKTexas]

More lies from the left, no where did he say "normal". Because that is physically impossible, normal is having both biological parents.

So a heterosexual couple adopting a child is not "normal"?

A heterosexual couple using a sperm donor or a surrogate because one partner is unable to have children is not "normal"

A single parent who re-marries and where the spouse adopts the child is not"normal"?

What the fuck is normal? It seems to me it is only "abnormal" if it involves gay people. Anything else is "normal" regardless of whether or not both parents are biological parents.

Are all children who do not have two biological parents unworthy of the security of having two married and legal parents , or is it only the children of gay people.? It's either "normal" or it is not" normal" for one or both parents to not be biological. Which is it and what the fuck does it matter?

All variate from the norm, your point? Made up relationships can't replace biological relationships. Some are decent substitutes, but none are capable of being identical.

So then you are saying that HETEROSEXUAL couples who cannot or do not have BIOLOGICAL children where BOTH are the BIOLOGICAL parents should not be treated the same-should not have the same rights- as HETEROSEXUALS who DO HAVE children in the NORMAL way?

OR.....are you saying that the HETEROSEXUAL couple who adopts child is a "decent substitute" but the gay couple who does is not?

What the fuck is YOUR point?

I didn't say that at all, but a hetro couple provides roll models from both genders, which is the better alternative in adoption. Remember we are making comparisons to a traditional family, with ties to both biological parents verses the alternatives.

I see. Now you're changing your story. You realized got called on the biology thing and realized that it was stupid, so now it's about gender role models. Now all that you have to do is come up with some credible , scientific evidence that have opposite sex parents is necessary, or even provides an advantage to a child's social and emotional development.

While your at it , you can also explain where all of those opposite sex couples that are needed for all the children who are in the foster care system are going to come from. Lastly, try to explain why it's OK, as some believe, to deprive children who are already in the care of a gay person, the securityof second parent or step parent adoption by the partner of that fay person.

Sorry you lack the ability to actually comprehend what you read, maybe your should read this string again, then try again. I have been totally consistent.

 

[Tank]

Sorry but, you can't impregnate fecal matter

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So a heterosexual couple adopting a child is not "normal"?

A heterosexual couple using a sperm donor or a surrogate because one partner is unable to have children is not "normal"

A single parent who re-marries and where the spouse adopts the child is not"normal"?

What the fuck is normal? It seems to me it is only "abnormal" if it involves gay people. Anything else is "normal" regardless of whether or not both parents are biological parents.

Are all children who do not have two biological parents unworthy of the security of having two married and legal parents , or is it only the children of gay people.? It's either "normal" or it is not" normal" for one or both parents to not be biological. Which is it and what the fuck does it matter?

All variate from the norm, your point? Made up relationships can't replace biological relationships. Some are decent substitutes, but none are capable of being identical.

So then you are saying that HETEROSEXUAL couples who cannot or do not have BIOLOGICAL children where BOTH are the BIOLOGICAL parents should not be treated the same-should not have the same rights- as HETEROSEXUALS who DO HAVE children in the NORMAL way?

OR.....are you saying that the HETEROSEXUAL couple who adopts child is a "decent substitute" but the gay couple who does is not?

What the fuck is YOUR point?

I didn't say that at all, but a hetro couple provides roll models from both genders, which is the better alternative in adoption. Remember we are making comparisons to a traditional family, with ties to both biological parents verses the alternatives.

I see. Now you're changing your story. You realized got called on the biology thing and realized that it was stupid, so now it's about gender role models. Now all that you have to do is come up with some credible , scientific evidence that have opposite sex parents is necessary, or even provides an advantage to a child's social and emotional development.

While your at it , you can also explain where all of those opposite sex couples that are needed for all the children who are in the foster care system are going to come from. Lastly, try to explain why it's OK, as some believe, to deprive children who are already in the care of a gay person, the securityof second parent or step parent adoption by the partner of that fay person.

Sorry you lack the ability to actually comprehend what you read, maybe your should read this string again, then try again. I have been totally consistent.

Tell you what old sport. Why don't we take a step back. Why don't you do this to clarify your position in one comprehensive and coherent post-if you can. Clearly state your position on each of the following issues- for, against, or whatever, and give you exact reasons:

1. Agency adoption by gay couples and individuals of children who have no legal parents.

2. Second parent and step parent adoption-by the partner or spouse of a gay person- of children who are already in the care of that gay person.

3. The conception of children by gay people and their partners with the help of medical and scientific technology

Please link to supporting documentation for anything that you present as fact.

Take your time.