The "no difference" theory is dead - homosexual parenting is not as good as hetersexual parenting.

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
137,558
Reaction score
28,790
Points
2,180
Homosexuals have been claiming for decades that same-sex couples make just as good parents as opposite-sex couples, and I've been saying for decades that claim is bunk. Now we have the proof:


Fresh research has just tossed a grenade into the incendiary issue of same-sex parenting. Writing in the British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science, a peer-reviewed journal, American sociologist Paul Sullins concludes that children’s “Emotional problems [are] over twice as prevalent for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents”.

He says confidently: “it is no longer accurate to claim that no study has found children in same-sex families to be disadvantaged relative to those in opposite-sex families.”

This defiant rebuttal of the “no difference” hypothesis is sure to stir up a hornet’s next as the Supreme Court prepares to trawl through arguments for and against same-sex marriage. It will be impossible for critics to ignore it, as it is based on more data than any previous study -- 512 children with same-sex parents drawn from the US National Health Interview Survey. The emotional problems included misbehaviour, worrying, depression, poor relationships with peers and inability to concentrate.

After crunching the numbers, Sullins found opposite-sex parents provided a better environment. “Biological parentage uniquely and powerfully distinguishes child outcomes between children with opposite-sex parents and those with same-sex parents,” he writes.

As he points out, this has immense implications for public policy. The Elton John/David Furnish model of lavishing love and licorice on the offspring of surrogate mothers won’t do. Throwing down the gauntlet before supporters of same-sex marriage, Sullins contends that “the primary benefit of marriage for children, therefore, may not be that it tends to present them with improved parents (more stable, financially affluent, etc, although it does this), but that it presents them with their own parents.”
 

JFK_USA

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
2,606
Reaction score
412
Points
130
Homosexuals have been claiming for decades that same-sex couples make just as good parents as opposite-sex couples, and I've been saying for decades that claim is bunk. Now we have the proof:


Fresh research has just tossed a grenade into the incendiary issue of same-sex parenting. Writing in the British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science, a peer-reviewed journal, American sociologist Paul Sullins concludes that children’s “Emotional problems [are] over twice as prevalent for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents”.

He says confidently: “it is no longer accurate to claim that no study has found children in same-sex families to be disadvantaged relative to those in opposite-sex families.”

This defiant rebuttal of the “no difference” hypothesis is sure to stir up a hornet’s next as the Supreme Court prepares to trawl through arguments for and against same-sex marriage. It will be impossible for critics to ignore it, as it is based on more data than any previous study -- 512 children with same-sex parents drawn from the US National Health Interview Survey. The emotional problems included misbehaviour, worrying, depression, poor relationships with peers and inability to concentrate.

After crunching the numbers, Sullins found opposite-sex parents provided a better environment. “Biological parentage uniquely and powerfully distinguishes child outcomes between children with opposite-sex parents and those with same-sex parents,” he writes.

As he points out, this has immense implications for public policy. The Elton John/David Furnish model of lavishing love and licorice on the offspring of surrogate mothers won’t do. Throwing down the gauntlet before supporters of same-sex marriage, Sullins contends that “the primary benefit of marriage for children, therefore, may not be that it tends to present them with improved parents (more stable, financially affluent, etc, although it does this), but that it presents them with their own parents.”
Oh I wish you conservatives never actually check your sources and stay uneducated and low information forever.

Here is the "unbiased" sociologist.



I bet I know his next "groundbreaking" study will be. How Pedophilia helps kids become stronger.

And I like how "worrying" is a mental problem because kids never worry in heterosexual relationships. Guess my lawyer friend would have been better off with her crackhead mother than the Lesbian couple who raised her.
 

jwoodie

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
14,925
Reaction score
3,583
Points
280
I bet I know his next "groundbreaking" study will be. How Pedophilia helps kids become stronger.
Pathetic response, probably reflective of a dysfunctional upbringing.
 

TheOldSchool

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
62,631
Reaction score
10,069
Points
2,070
Location
last stop for sanity before reaching the south
Homosexuals have been claiming for decades that same-sex couples make just as good parents as opposite-sex couples, and I've been saying for decades that claim is bunk. Now we have the proof:


Fresh research has just tossed a grenade into the incendiary issue of same-sex parenting. Writing in the British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science, a peer-reviewed journal, American sociologist Paul Sullins concludes that children’s “Emotional problems [are] over twice as prevalent for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents”.

He says confidently: “it is no longer accurate to claim that no study has found children in same-sex families to be disadvantaged relative to those in opposite-sex families.”

This defiant rebuttal of the “no difference” hypothesis is sure to stir up a hornet’s next as the Supreme Court prepares to trawl through arguments for and against same-sex marriage. It will be impossible for critics to ignore it, as it is based on more data than any previous study -- 512 children with same-sex parents drawn from the US National Health Interview Survey. The emotional problems included misbehaviour, worrying, depression, poor relationships with peers and inability to concentrate.

After crunching the numbers, Sullins found opposite-sex parents provided a better environment. “Biological parentage uniquely and powerfully distinguishes child outcomes between children with opposite-sex parents and those with same-sex parents,” he writes.

As he points out, this has immense implications for public policy. The Elton John/David Furnish model of lavishing love and licorice on the offspring of surrogate mothers won’t do. Throwing down the gauntlet before supporters of same-sex marriage, Sullins contends that “the primary benefit of marriage for children, therefore, may not be that it tends to present them with improved parents (more stable, financially affluent, etc, although it does this), but that it presents them with their own parents.”
Oh I wish you conservatives never actually check your sources and stay uneducated and low information forever.

Here is the "unbiased" sociologist.



I bet I know his next "groundbreaking" study will be. How Pedophilia helps kids become stronger.

And I like how "worrying" is a mental problem because kids never worry in heterosexual relationships. Guess my lawyer friend would have been better off with her crackhead mother than the Lesbian couple who raised her.
/thread
 

JFK_USA

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
2,606
Reaction score
412
Points
130
I bet I know his next "groundbreaking" study will be. How Pedophilia helps kids become stronger.
Pathetic response, probably reflective of a dysfunctional upbringing.
Aww, u mad that I debunked your junk science? I would be too if I was clearly on the wrong side of history.
 

Missouri_Mike

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2012
Messages
17,697
Reaction score
6,941
Points
350
Oh look, a study to state the patently obvious.

When you live with freaks there's going to be problems for the kids raised in that environment.
 

aaronleland

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
32,667
Reaction score
9,741
Points
1,360
A Catholic priest believes homosexuality is wrong? Wonder how he feels about diddling children?
 

TheGreatGatsby

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
24,285
Reaction score
3,013
Points
280
Location
California
The idea that same sex couples are equally good for children as biological couples defies nature and basic sense. You don't need a study to tell you that.
 

aaronleland

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
32,667
Reaction score
9,741
Points
1,360
My father wasn't there for most of my life. I didn't meet him until I was 12, and my only bonding experience with him was smoking weed. My mother, believing that I needed a father figure in my life, married an abusive man. I was afraid to come home from school some days because I knew I was getting beaten for nothing.

Life sucks, and shit happens, whether you have two mother or fathers.
 

Flopper

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
25,673
Reaction score
5,733
Points
280
Location
Washington
Homosexuals have been claiming for decades that same-sex couples make just as good parents as opposite-sex couples, and I've been saying for decades that claim is bunk. Now we have the proof:


Fresh research has just tossed a grenade into the incendiary issue of same-sex parenting. Writing in the British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science, a peer-reviewed journal, American sociologist Paul Sullins concludes that children’s “Emotional problems [are] over twice as prevalent for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents”.

He says confidently: “it is no longer accurate to claim that no study has found children in same-sex families to be disadvantaged relative to those in opposite-sex families.”

This defiant rebuttal of the “no difference” hypothesis is sure to stir up a hornet’s next as the Supreme Court prepares to trawl through arguments for and against same-sex marriage. It will be impossible for critics to ignore it, as it is based on more data than any previous study -- 512 children with same-sex parents drawn from the US National Health Interview Survey. The emotional problems included misbehaviour, worrying, depression, poor relationships with peers and inability to concentrate.

After crunching the numbers, Sullins found opposite-sex parents provided a better environment. “Biological parentage uniquely and powerfully distinguishes child outcomes between children with opposite-sex parents and those with same-sex parents,” he writes.

As he points out, this has immense implications for public policy. The Elton John/David Furnish model of lavishing love and licorice on the offspring of surrogate mothers won’t do. Throwing down the gauntlet before supporters of same-sex marriage, Sullins contends that “the primary benefit of marriage for children, therefore, may not be that it tends to present them with improved parents (more stable, financially affluent, etc, although it does this), but that it presents them with their own parents.”
Could a study authored by Catholic priest who has been an outspoken critic of gay marriage and the gay lifestyle be just a bit biased?
 

Silhouette

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
25,815
Reaction score
1,928
Points
265
The idea that same sex couples are equally good for children as biological couples defies nature and basic sense. You don't need a study to tell you that.
However, such a study does exist. And it wasn't done by a priest.

Page 8 (the left side on the green background) http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/pdf/Youth_Index_jan2011.pdf
In addition to indexing the happiness and wellbeing of young people, the report explores some significant demographic differences between young people. They include a comparison between those not in education employment or training with their peers...those without a positive role model of their gender in their lives (women without a positive female role model and men without a positive male role model) and their peers...those with fewer than five GCSEs graded A* to C (or equivalent) with their peers... Respondents are asked how happy and confident they are in different areas of their life. The responses are converted to a numerical scale, resulting in a number out of 100-- with 100 representing entirely happy or confident and zero being not at all happy or confident.
Page 10 (The bold largest heading above the material that followed it)
Young people without a role model of the same gender in their lives
The Daily Mail article from the Prince's Trust study... Teens without parent role model are 67 per cent less likely to get a job Daily Mail Online
Young men with no male role models in their lives and women without a mother figure struggle to keep their lives on track, a hard-hitting report warns today. The Prince’s Trust youth index, the largest survey of its kind, found that....67 per cent more likely to be unemployed than their counterparts. They are also significantly more likely to stay unemployed for longer than their peers, the report suggests....It found that young men with no male role model are 50 per cent more likely to abuse drugs and young females in the corresponding position are significantly more likely to drink to excess..
Young men with no male role model to look up to were twice as likely to turn or consider turning to crime as a result of being unemployed...The report, which was based on interviews with 2,170 16 to 25-year-olds...These young men are also three times more likely to feel down or depressed all of the time and significantly more likely to admit that they cannot remember the last time they felt proud...They are also significantly less likely to feel happy and confident than those with male role models, according to the figures....The Prince’s Trust report, which was carried out by YouGov, suggests young people without male role models are more than twice as likely to lack a sense of belonging.
 

The Rabbi

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
67,734
Reaction score
7,917
Points
1,840
Location
Nashville
When you cant attack the message, attack the messenger! Classic lefty deflection.
 

Silhouette

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
25,815
Reaction score
1,928
Points
265
I'm surprised that the OP didn't cite the Prince's Trust survey. It's of 2,000+ young adults self-reporting that growing up without a role model of their same gender (50% of kids in "gay marriage") left them emotionally and psychologically-scarred in significant ways. I can't think of anything worse than believing you can't find meaning of your place in the world. Talk about existential angst!

Single parents as I said are preferable to gay ones in that at least singles often still date and court the opposite gender...so that child would see that "mom still values men" in some small way. Two lesbians raising a boy...wow...what a mind bender....daily paraded lesson on "how your gender doesn't matter or fit in AT ALL in a woman's life..

This is going to be institutionalized child abuse if the High Court forces this on the states...
 

Syriusly

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
54,851
Reaction score
7,126
Points
1,840
Okay- so I went and found the actual paper- here is the link

Emotional Problems among Children with Same-sex Parents Difference by Definition Paul Sullins - Academia.edu

And after a quick- and non-scholarly review- and admitting that my regression analysis skills are waaaay rusty- the author presents an interesting paper. I think it is worth noting that he likely does come from a background with a bias, but that doesn't mean that the paper shouldn't be read for what it is.

Read the paper

Here is one quote:
Biological relationship, it appears, is both necessary and sufficient to explain the higher risk of emotional problems faced by children with same-sex parents

One of his reviewers asked him why he thought that non-white children don't fit this model- that non-white children don't show this pattern- but I couldn't find in his paper where he answered that question.

And finally, the author himself notes that the sample size is really too small to be definitive- but suggests further studies should be done.
 

Syriusly

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
54,851
Reaction score
7,126
Points
1,840
I'm surprised that the OP didn't cite the Prince's Trust survey. It's of 2,000+ young adults self-reporting that growing up without a role model of their same gender (50% of kids in "gay marriage") left them emotionally and psychologically-scarred in significant ways. I can't think of anything worse than believing you can't find meaning of your place in the world. Talk about existential angst!

Single parents as I said are preferable to gay ones in that at least singles often still date and court the opposite gender...so that child would see that "mom still values men" in some small way. Two lesbians raising a boy...wow...what a mind bender....daily paraded lesson on "how your gender doesn't matter or fit in AT ALL in a woman's life..

This is going to be institutionalized child abuse if the High Court forces this on the states...
Since the OP was about an actual paper regarding homosexual parenting, and the Prince's study has nothing to do with that- not surprising to anyone but yourself.
 

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
95,202
Reaction score
16,759
Points
2,180
He admits in his paper he would need at least 800 same-sex couples to be a valid study, and yet he only studied 512 children of same-sex couples.

The greatest limitation of this study is its use of a representative sample of only 512 same-sex parent families, which is several times smaller than optimum for most population studies.
 

JFK_USA

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
2,606
Reaction score
412
Points
130
When you cant attack the message, attack the messenger! Classic lefty deflection.
The "sociologist" has published many studies and books against gay marriage so yeah, he is a completely biased source.

It would be like researchers from McDonalds stating "Eating 3 big macs a day cures cancer!" You would be skeptical.
 
Last edited:

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top