Of course you can't provide evidence that gays aren't giving adopted children good homes. In fact, all studies show they provide stellar homes.
Yes, we know you are a right wing douche bag. Oh, and it is your bigoted position that doesn't hold up to actual facts.
post your facts
OK..
In a project launched last month, a team at Columbia Law School has collected on one website the abstracts of all peer-reviewed studies that have addressed this question since 1980 so that anyone can examine the research directly, and not rely on talking heads or potential groupthink. Even when we might not agree with a study’s conclusions—with how a researcher interpreted the data—we still included it if it went through peer review and was relevant to the topic at hand. Peer review, of course, isn’t perfect, but it’s one of the best ways the world has to ensure that research conclusions are at least the product of good-faith efforts to get at the truth.
The Columbia project is the largest collection of peer-reviewed scholarship on gay parenting to date. What does it show? We found 71 studies concluding that kids with gay parents fare no worse than others and only four concluding that they had problems. But those four studies all suffered from the same gross limitation: The children with gay parents were lumped in with children of family breakup, a cohort known to face higher risks linked to the trauma of family dissolution.
Even the notion that you try to put forth that there are no good studies is wrong...the studies, while not perfect do give us a very good idea on the conclusions and that is that gay homes are not better nor worse.
Here is a link to all the studies
What We Know Blog | What does the scholarly research say about the wellbeing of children with gay or lesbian parents?
I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
LGBT parenting - Wikipedia
Consensus
The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]
Okay, I get it, you and nobody can produce studies, but what you can do is get one study that says what all the other studies says.
Anything and everything you come up with, still does not dispute the fact, children naturally find homosexuality gross, repulsive.
You should produce a study, so I can show all the little flaws in the study. Go ahead, get a first hand study of actual families. I have been down this road before on these boards.
First and foremost, you will link but not produce a study. Most likely that will be to a simple abstract, nothing more, not the study.
If a study is produced, it will not really be a study but an editorial, or a study of a study, an opinion piece really. And when I check the sources of that study, the studies it is based on, I will quote what you do not want to hear or believe.
So go ahead, produce a real study, and lets see what you base your flawed opinion on.
Your side is claiming studies, facts, and science. So go ahead, be brave, produce links or simply post the studies you must possess to make such claims as to what they state.
Here is a clear example of the lengths to which opponents of same sex marriage, and child rearing by gays will go in order to manipulate data and distort evidence to support their narrow minded and bigoted agenda. If there was a body of credible evidence to show that having gay parents was in any way detrimental to children, this would not be necessary!
Opponents of Same-Sex Marriage Take Bad-for-Children Argument to Court 2.22.14 Selected excerpts follow….the full article can be found at
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/23/u...-bad-for-children-argument-to-court.html?_r=0
Scholars testifying in defense of Michigan’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage aim to sow doubt about the wisdom of change. They brandish a few sharply disputed recent studies — the fruits of a concerted and expensive effort by conservatives to sponsor research by sympathetic scholars — to suggest that children of same-sex couples do not fare as well as those raised by married heterosexuals.
That view will be challenged in court by longtime scholars in the field, backed by major professional organizations, who call those studies fatally flawed. These scholars will describe a near consensus that, other factors like income and stability being equal, children of same-sex couples do just as well as those of heterosexual couples.
In meetings hosted by the Heritage Foundation in Washington in late 2010, opponents of same-sex marriage discussed the urgent need to generate new studies on family structures and children, according to recent pretrial depositions of two witnesses in the Michigan trial and other participants. One result was the marshaling of $785,000 for a large-scale study by Mark Regnerus, a meeting participant and a sociologist at the University of Texas who will testify in Michigan.
………four social science researchers, all of whom attended at least one of the Heritage Foundation meetings and went on to publish new reports, are scheduled to testify in favor of Michigan’s ban.
The most prominent is Dr. Regnerus. His study, published in 2012, was condemned by leading social scientists as misleading and irrelevant, but some conservatives call it the best of its kind and continue to cite it in speeches and court cases.
Dr. Regnerus found that the subjects in that category fared worse based on a host of behavioral and psychological measures than those who grew up in intact traditional families. The study, Dr. Regnerus wrote, “clearly reveals” that children are most apt to succeed when they grow up “with their married mother and father.”
But professional rejections of Dr. Regnerus’s conclusions were swift and severe. In a friend-of-the-court brief to the Supreme Court last year in two same-sex marriage cases, a report by the 14,000-member American Sociological Association noted that more than half the subjects whom Dr. Regnerus had described as children of “lesbian mothers” and “gay fathers” were the offspring of failed opposite-sex marriages in which a parent later engaged in same-sex behavior, and that many others never lived with same-sex parents.
“If any conclusion can be reached from Regnerus’s study,” the association said, “it is that family stability is predictive of child well-being.”
Wendy D. Manning, a professor of sociology at Bowling Green State University in Ohio and the main author of the association report, said of the wider literature: “Every study has shortcomings, but when you pull them all together, the picture is very clear. There is no evidence that children fare worse in same-sex families.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/23/u...-bad-for-children-argument-to-court.html?_r=0
Michigan Update:
Same-Sex Marriage Bans Are Unconstitutional, And This Latest Ruling Proves That
The “will of the people” argument against same-sex marriage bans falls flat, as Judge Friedman pointed out. Here’s why: Something that is a right shouldn’t be subject to a vote. We should not be able to vote on who gets what rights in a free country. Or we are not truly free. The case against marriage as a right also doesn’t hold water.
It’s time for conservatives to realize that same-sex marriage bans are unconstitutional. It’s also time for the religious right to understand that they can’t continue to push their religious agenda for the purpose of denying equality to a certain group of people. Straight couples take their ability to marry or not for granted. Same-sex couples don’t have that. Since being gay isn’t a choice, they do fall under the Equal Protection clause. Same-sex marriage bans are illegal under the Constitution, and it’s time for the religious right to realize they’ve lost.
The attorney general's defense of Michigan's constitutional ban of same-sex marriage proved the weakness of his case: Expert after expert testified that children are most safe and secure when raised by two committed parents, regardless of gender and sexual orientation.
No reputable scientific study has documented harm to children raised by same-sex parents.
Gay marriage ruling moves Michigan forward
In addition the Sociology Department of the University of Texas issued this statement Monday about sociologist Mark Regnerus, who believes traditional marriage should be upheld in Michigan because, he says, kids thrive best in that setting. “Dr. Regnerus’ opinions are his own. They do not reflect the views of the Sociology… Nor do they reflect the views of the American Sociological Association, which takes the position that the conclusions he draws from his study of same-sex parenting are fundamentally flawed on conceptual and methodological grounds and that findings from
Dr. Regnerus’ work have been cited inappropriately in efforts to diminish the civil rights and legitimacy of LBGT partners and their families. We encourage society as a whole to evaluate his claims.” –
See more at:
Account Suspended
Marriage Equality Opponent Admits ‘No Difference’ Between Same Sex &Hetero Families
The talking points of those against marriage equality have never been grounded in the real world, and even strong opponents are realizing it. In this case, one of the people behind the flawed Regnerus study has admitted that there isn’t a difference between stable same-sex and heterosexual homes when it comes to the health of the child. Brad Wilcox, one of the researchers for the study, has now indicated some level of acceptance of data refuting his work.
The Regnerus study has captured the imaginations of anti-gay activists throughout the world. But in reality, it is complete bunk. Shortly after Regnerus published his work, the narrative behind it unraveled. It turned out that Regnerus had relied on a slew of flawed methodology and had only studied two people raised by same-sex couples. As one sociologist charged with auditing Regnerus’ study for an academic journal put it: “Since only two respondents were actually raised in gay or lesbian households, this study has absolutely nothing to say about gay parenting outcomes. Indeed, because it is a non-random sample, this study has nothing to say about anything.”
Most of the scientists would say that there’s no difference … between a stable same-sex family and a stable heterosexual family,” replied Wilcox, noting that those scientists might consider stability the “key factor, not other issues that might relate to a child’s well-being.”
…
“The data suggest that same-sex couples — and this is really preliminary — are more likely to have stable relationships when the legal regime is more supportive of their
relationships,” Wilcox replied.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/06...e-is-marriage/
iscussed "...limitations in the definitions, samples and analyses of the studies to date."
