Do you think kids need parents of opposite sex?

John_Rambo · 18-06-2017 11:53PM

Deleted User wrote: »

During the gay marriage referendum I know a few who are married with kids, middle aged, intelligent, articulate, very liberal...who had concerns about the whole gay parents thing. Not that it was bad per se, but just that it wasn't the optimum situation. Maybe they are biased, maybe they are relying too much on their own experiences, but to say "bigoted young bucks without kids" is not accurate.

I said "in my experience".

That means real life experience. I doubt you really "know a few who are married with kids, middle aged, intelligent, articulate, very liberal...who had concerns about the whole gay parents thing"

I'd say you read about them on the internet!

wakka12 · 18-06-2017 11:55PM

pangbang wrote: »

I know! And as I said already, time will tell, hundreds of years from now possibly.

I'm using the argument that, generally, children have been ideally raised by a man and woman. Okay!

I'm just saying that a few years and a few studies to the contrary are just a drop in the ocean of evidence.

Let me put it as a question, and maybe it will help clear things up.

Why are same sex parents, completely new phenomenon socially, viewed as just the same, given the lack of evidence? What is the driving point behind such strongly-held views?

My own answer is that it is just shocking to have a contrary opinion to whats in fashion, and people are flying to their emotions instead of actually considering the lack of evidence/time/impact.

Simply because there is no reason to believe they would be/are worse parents than straight parents, thats literally it. There are hundreds of thousands of children raised same sex in the world, if it was such a case that the same gender house hold was having very negative impact on childrens development it would be glaringly obvious by now, it would be acknowledged on an anecdotal level and eventually become common knowledge to society as a whole that same sex couples raise children poorly. Especially considering how scrutinised the parenting of gay couples is for this exact reason.

AtomicHorror · 18-06-2017 11:55PM

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Also, cross sectional means at a point in time. That survey was generated at one point in time, 2012. It's not really longitudinal.

I know what longitudinal means, cheers. The study was published in 2010, not 2012. Data was taken at 5 time points per case, not 1. It is ongoing, which means more time points will be published in a follow on study.

As stated, I agree with you about the flaws.

However, you claimed there were no such studies, but stated you'd cede the point if one were produced. Then when one was produced, you instantly assessed it as "crap" while misstating several facts about it. Then rounded it all off by patronising me on my understanding of study methodology, when in fact you'd misunderstood the methodology of this (again, flawed) study.

Notably you haven't produced any evidence of your own, nor supported your earlier claims about homosexuals "abusing more"

As I said earlier, we have the cut of you.

pumpkin4life wrote: »

So you couldn't understand that, but good on the snark tho for a typo.

Again patronising. There was no snark. If you or I made a typo, I genuinely didn't spot it.

pangbang · 18-06-2017 11:59PM

wakka12 wrote: »

I understand where you're coming from. But we live in a more enlightened time where we are giving rights to minority groups, this involves raising children. As yet there is no reason to believe same sex parents would be worse parents than mixed sex couples, and there is evidence to believe they are as good if not better parents on average.

You are essentially saying you want the right to raise children to never be granted to same sex couples out of fear of the unknown. And this is an exaggeration, its not really unknown. We know quite well that same sex couples can raise children well, and I highly doubt any future long term studies will disprove this

And again, I think the argument is unfair to use against gay parents. As gay people have never had the chance to form families throughout history due to prejudice. Now they have a chance to prove they can do jus that, and they are proving it

Just in regard the bolded, I think that is a serious issue in itself. Although you mightn't have intended it that way, I would be quite sure it is the going thing.

Namely, we are putting minorities ahead of everything to please them.....which in this case just so happens to be "giving" them children.

Children should take precedent (the fact I have to say that!), over the feelings of a certain minority group, and it feeds inot my ideas about questionable scientific evidence. The agenda is toward the minority, and children are just commodotised in the process (is commodotised a word! :P)

wakka12 · 18-06-2017 11:59PM

pangbang wrote: »

Well look, you can be as sarcastic as you want, but theres as much to say that it will happen as it wont.

We might live to find out!

But theres not though...same sex families have not been around long but they have been around long enough such that there are large numbers of grown adults now around who have been raised by gay parents. And if these adults were experiencing unusually high rates of mental or social problems this would become evident and it would be quickly realised that the same sex upbringing could have been a large factor

18-06-2017 11:59PM

John_Rambo wrote: »

I said "in my experience".

That means real life experience. I doubt you really "know a few who are married with kids, middle aged, intelligent, articulate, very liberal...who had concerns about the whole gay parents thing"

I'd say you read about them on the internet!

Well our experiences differ. And you can doubt away. For my part, I seriously doubt you really believe that anyone anywhere who expresses anything less than wholesome support for gay parents is a bigoted young buck without kids, as you claim. For starters, you are answering posts from someone who is not young, and has a kid....

18-06-2017 11:59PM

pangbang wrote: »

I know! And as I said already, time will tell, hundreds of years from now possibly.

I'm using the argument that, generally, children have been ideally raised by a man and woman. Okay!

I'm just saying that a few years and a few studies to the contrary are just a drop in the ocean of evidence.

Let me put it as a question, and maybe it will help clear things up.

Why are same sex parents, completely new phenomenon socially, viewed as just the same, given the lack of evidence? What is the driving point behind such strongly-held views?

My own answer is that it is just shocking to have a contrary opinion to whats in fashion, and people are flying to their emotions instead of actually considering the lack of evidence/time/impact.

well, I am in my forties & have 2 friends that were raised by same sex couples, they are completely functioning members of society.
i also have a very close friend who was raised by her mother, grandmother and two uncles. Completely normal.
I myself was raised by my mother, I actually had more contact with my fathers family than my mothers.
same sex parents are not a new phenomenon, same sex couples may be fairly recently out & public, but same sex parents have existed in many different ways for many many years.
I know one guy who was raised in a house of women, his mother, 3 unmarried aunts, and his grandmother, It has no affect on him.

You don't miss what you never had.

wakka12 · 19-06-2017 12:01AM

pangbang wrote: »

Just in regard the bolded, I think that is a serious issue in itself. Although you mightn't have intended it that way, I would be quite sure it is the going thing.

Namely, we are putting minorities ahead of everything to please them.....which in this case just so happens to be "giving" them children.

Children should take precedent (the fact I have to say that!), over the feelings of a certain minority group, and it feeds inot my ideas about questionable scientific evidence. The agenda is toward the minority, and children are just commodotised in the process (is commodotised a word! :P)

Gay people who have children are being granted the right to have children as they have proven to adoption agencies they are fit to raise children. Not for abolsutely any other reason whatsoever or any agenda that wants to please minorities
You are acting as if any gays who ask for children are granted them, because PC liberalism hurry gurdy
They go through the same thorough process of examination to make sure they are fit parents as any adoptive straight couple. Coupled with the pressure to disprove societal ideas that they are immediately going to be bad parents simply due to their gender/sexuality.

pangbang · 19-06-2017 12:05AM

wakka12 wrote: »

Simply because there is no reason to believe they would be/are worse parents than straight parents, thats literally it. There are hundreds of thousands of children raised same sex in the world, if it was such a case that the same gender house hold was having very negative impact on childrens development it would be glaringly obvious by now, it would be acknowledged on an anecdotal level and eventually become common knowledge to society as a whole that same sex couples raise children poorly. Especially considering how scrutinised the parenting of gay couples is for this exact reason.

Well its a matter of opinion then. I err on the side of caution and question things, whereas you take the stance "lets just see what happens".

Fair enough.

As regard the bolded, not a chance. There is no-where near anything resembling enough evidence. You will need entire generations raised by same sex-couples before you will see (or not see) differences. Hundreds of years perhaps. My issue with this is the head-long charge into it, the attitude that "nothing seems wrong in the last few years, so it'll be grand forever".

You know theres still a threat from BSE, mad cow disease? There is quite a likely chance that many people will die decades from now due to that disease. Proper science takes a very long time, and results can take a very long time. That's why, generally, you take your time and don't rush when youre playing with the pre-existing fabric of human society.

AtomicHorror · 19-06-2017 12:07AM

pangbang wrote: »

Its not a perfect out, and its not the reason I mentioned it. And I stand by what I said, that scientific studies these days are highly questionable, whether FOR a certain sociological trend, or AGAINST.

I don't need to decide on the truth of history. It is there, it is general enough, and widely known enough, that anyone can agree.

Anyone, except for people who don't "like" my questions and suppositions.

I've already said it, I'll say it again. One side is based on evidence, and I use that evidence to QUESTION the supposition that gay couples are the same.

What evidence? Present it. Are you talking about history again?

pangbang wrote: »

Your side, is based on studies conducted on a micro-scale, and you INSIST that something is a fact.

One side questions based on history, the other side insists based on a few flimsy studies. And I defend the word "flimsy" because the longitudinal depth is practically non-existent.

So, in conclusion, I say that people are just upset with what I'm saying. Feelings over logic.

I've already been called stupid, and now I'm a "post-truther" (first time for everything!)......its genuinely amusing.

I'm sorry but this is nonsense. The evidence that is available gives us no reason to assume there is a difference. That may change, if more evidence is produced. In the absence of such evidence, the notion that there is a difference in outcomes is a mere hypothesis and one without a good justification.

pangbang · 19-06-2017 12:08AM

bubblypop wrote: »

well, I am in my forties & have 2 friends that were raised by same sex couples, they are completely functioning members of society.
i also have a very close friend who was raised by her mother, grandmother and two uncles. Completely normal.
I myself was raised by my mother, I actually had more contact with my fathers family than my mothers.
same sex parents are not a new phenomenon, same sex couples may be fairly recently out & public, but same sex parents have existed in many different ways for many many years.
I know one guy who was raised in a house of women, his mother, 3 unmarried aunts, and his grandmother, It has no affect on him.

You don't miss what you never had.

True, and you'll never know the difference it could have made as well! :P

pangbang · 19-06-2017 12:10AM

AtomicHorror wrote: »

What evidence? Present it. Are you talking about history again?

I'm sorry but this is nonsense. The evidence that is available gives us no reason to assume there is a difference. That may change, if more evidence is produced. In the absence of such evidence, the notion that there is a difference in outcomes is a mere hypothesis and one without a good justification.

Look, you are never going to take on board what I have to say. And there is no way I am going to clarify anything for you.

You don't like what I am saying, good for you.

19-06-2017 12:10AM

pangbang wrote: »

True, and you'll never know the difference it could have made as well! :P

but it doesn't matter.
If a child grows up without a parent of the opposite sex, and lives their life productively and well, what would it matter if an opposite parent had been present?

19-06-2017 12:12AM

pangbang wrote: »

Look, you are never going to take on board what I have to say. And there is no way I am going to clarify anything for you.

You don't like what I am saying, good for you.

do you believe that a man can be a good parent?
do you believe that a woman can be a good parent?
if you believe both of the above, then it shouldn't matter whether there are 2 mothers or 2 fathers

pangbang · 19-06-2017 12:13AM

wakka12 wrote: »

Gay people who have children are being granted the right to have children as they have proven to adoption agencies they are fit to raise children. Not for abolsutely any other reason whatsoever or any agenda that wants to please minorities
You are acting as if any gays who ask for children are granted them, because PC liberalism hurry gurdy
They go through the same thorough process of examination to make sure they are fit parents as any adoptive straight couple. Coupled with the pressure to disprove societal ideas that they are immediately going to be bad parents simply due to their gender/sexuality.

Let me tell you something that I cant actually back up. I personally know, from a societal level, that major concessions and policies are made JUST to please certain groups.

You might like to believe that it doesn't happen, but trust me (or don't!), I know for fact that it happens, and will continue to happen.

I cant explain any further, take it for what it is. Its a bad, bad world out there.

MadDog76 · 19-06-2017 12:14AM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I never actually said you did say anything about natural or unnatural - I specifcially said I was ridiculing the idea.

Why quote me so .......... now that is ridiculous.

caniask86 · 19-06-2017 12:15AM

I think children need love and understanding and to be kept warm and safe. That is it, pretty basic.

19-06-2017 12:16AM

pangbang wrote: »

Let me tell you something that I cant actually back up. I personally know, from a societal level, that major concessions and policies are made JUST to please certain groups.

You might like to believe that it doesn't happen, but trust me (or don't!), I know for fact that it happens, and will continue to happen.

I cant explain any further, take it for what it is. Its a bad, bad world out there.

bollocks

MadDog76 · 19-06-2017 12:16AM

bubblypop wrote: »

no, sorry, you can't actually state that.
'In general' ? really? in your opinion.
there are many many reasons why a child my turn out the way they do. It cannot be determined just by their parents.
it's actually insulting.

Well, I can state my opinion ........... in fact, I did.

As did you and everybody else on here ......... sorry if my opinion differs from yours, I'm sure you'll get over it.

MadDog76 · 19-06-2017 12:18AM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

True, question should really have said asked if there was anything essential that can only be given by one gender-specific parent which is unavailble elsewhere.

Also - I never said anything about cherry-picking science (or did I?)? I think that was someone else.

He's probably not saying you did say it, he's just ridiculing the idea.

pangbang · 19-06-2017 12:18AM

bubblypop wrote: »

do you believe that a man can be a good parent?
do you believe that a woman can be a good parent?
if you believe both of the above, then it shouldn't matter whether there are 2 mothers or 2 fathers

Forget it man, you have your mind made up on what I consider to be the trend of the day........theres no talking about it, theres no discussion to be had, no questions to be asked, nothing. You have no doubts about anything, well that's a nice way to be.

I could point out the daring idea that a man and woman is different, that there is actual scientific evidence (without agenda) that indicates biochemical interaction within children at a formative stage, unique to men and woman, I could trot out the dangerous "opinion" that men and women serve different roles for a child beyond what they simply choose, la de dah dah doo........

Heres another way to look at it. Imagine I pointed to a cat, and insisted it was f**king dolphin.......how long would you keep arguing with me?

Lets leave it at that.

19-06-2017 12:19AM

MadDog76 wrote: »

Well, I can state my opinion ........... in fact, I did.

As did you and everybody else on here ......... sorry if my opinion differs from yours, I'm sure you'll get over it.

you can state an opinion, but you can't state it as fact, then turn round and say, 'in my opinion'
you really should say, at the start, in my opinion same sex couples cant be good parents etc etc just because i think so, I have no facts to back this up, I just reckon I'm right.

AtomicHorror · 19-06-2017 12:20AM

pangbang wrote: »

Look, you are never going to take on board what I have to say. And there is no way I am going to clarify anything for you.

You don't like what I am saying, good for you.

I don't like arguments from ignorance, appeals to consequences and related horse **** fallacies. I don't like the hypocrisy of claims that one's opponents are thinking emotionally, whilst one liberally makes use of an appeal to unsubstantiated potential negative consequences. I don't like unsupported claims, generally. I don't like demands for evidence followed by refusal to refute or even acknowledge said evidence. I don't like prophylactic claims of bias and I really, really don't like refusals to clarify or support claims dressed up as insightful assessments of how rational I am.

So no, I don't like what you are saying, but not for the reasons you would like to pretend.

19-06-2017 12:20AM

pangbang wrote: »

Forget it man, you have your mind made up on what I consider to be the trend of the day........theres no talking about it, theres no discussion to be had, no questions to be asked, nothing. You have no doubts about anything, well that's a nice way to be.

I could point out the daring idea that a man and woman is different, that there is actual scientific evidence (without agenda) that indicates biochemical interaction within children at a formative stage, unique to men and woman, I could trot out the dangerous "opinion" that men and women serve different roles for a child beyond what they simply choose, la de dah dah doo........

Heres another way to look at it. Imagine I pointed to a cat, and insisted it was f**king dolphin.......how long would you keep arguing with me?

Lets leave it at that.

such bull****, thats not an argument!!
do you think men can make good parents?
do you believe women can make good parents?

MadDog76 · 19-06-2017 12:21AM

wakka12 wrote: »

Almost any gay couple who want children either through surrogacy or adoption generally have to be model parents and jump through hoops for years to prove themselves worthy of caring for the child, which really renders this argument fairly null and void. I think you will not have to worry about children of same sex parents having poor upbringings..certainly not on average worse than the upbringing of a child with both biological parents.

That's also true of heterosexual couples who want to adopt ........

One eyed Jack · 19-06-2017 12:22AM

bubblypop wrote: »

well, I am in my forties & have 2 friends that were raised by same sex couples, they are completely functioning members of society.
i also have a very close friend who was raised by her mother, grandmother and two uncles. Completely normal.
I myself was raised by my mother, I actually had more contact with my fathers family than my mothers.
same sex parents are not a new phenomenon, same sex couples may be fairly recently out & public, but same sex parents have existed in many different ways for many many years.
I know one guy who was raised in a house of women, his mother, 3 unmarried aunts, and his grandmother, It has no affect on him.

You don't miss what you never had.

If that were true, then how do you explain away the numbers of children and adults who can spend decades searching for their biological parents?

It's an issue that has been the subject of controversy in interracial adoptions when black children are placed with white parents for example.

wakka12 · 19-06-2017 12:22AM

pangbang wrote: »

Let me tell you something that I cant actually back up. I personally know, from a societal level, that major concessions and policies are made JUST to please certain groups.

You might like to believe that it doesn't happen, but trust me (or don't!), I know for fact that it happens, and will continue to happen.

I cant explain any further, take it for what it is. Its a bad, bad world out there.

Its not just to please minority groups though. If the people passing these laws believed there to be any valid reason not to grant gay adoption rights then they wouldnt do it. But theres no obvious negative impact of same sex upbringing on children development, and hence they powers that be allowed it to occur. And you seem to think that society is pandering to the needs of minorities such as lgbt, need i remind you gay people couldn't even marry each other in usa or ireland just two years ago
You seriously think they would knowingly allow a policy that would negatively affect childrens development. Just to please gay people . absolutely ridiculous

Will I Am Not · 19-06-2017 12:23AM

John_Rambo wrote: »

I said "in my experience".

That means real life experience. I doubt you really "know a few who are married with kids, middle aged, intelligent, articulate, very liberal...who had concerns about the whole gay parents thing"

I'd say you read about them on the internet!

Ok then. I call bullsh*t on the examples you gave. This is a fun game.

AtomicHorror · 19-06-2017 12:25AM

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Right now, there hasn't been done, and note, I say longitudinal. People here can post one and I'll happily concede but otherwise as you said pang, the effects are unknown and it is an extremely unethical thing to encourage as a result.

Still waiting.

I should post that skeleton.jpg meme thing here, right?

pangbang · 19-06-2017 12:27AM

bubblypop wrote: »

bollocks

Right so, you don't believe it. Anytime youd like to swap your fantasy land where everything is done for the greater good, with my world where its all about agenda....I'll be right here.

Heres another way to look at it. I did walk into it, knowingly, I am in no position to back up what I said there, but consider this.

Lets say your name is john, as a matter of fact. Now imagine that someone on the internet declares resolutely that it is NOT John.

How amusing would you find that person? And that's rhetorical.

Do you think kids need parents of opposite sex?

Comments