[Scheherazade]

You can't just claim things, you have to provide evidence. The only evidence you have that same sex marriages are evil and destroy children and "ecology" is your own feelings. Which I will continue to ignore because your feelings are irrelevant.

Plenty of good logical arguments and evidence, which of course is far superior to 'empirical evidence' anyway.

Radical changes to any ecosystem, human or animal, have been empirically proven to cause harm to those in them, so one can logiclaly therefore extend this to homosexual marriages and children, as this is a significant deviation from the natural environment, and collecting 'empirical evidence' specifically regarding gay relationships is therefore unnecessary, since it's already addressed by broader topics.

My plan is to work to impose my views of what's disgusting on others,

They can be proven via logic and formal laws of the universe, so they're not personal feelings, but far superior to trendy 'emperical evidence', because like mathematical proofs, they never change, while emperical evidence does.

So society should be governed by logical evidence, while empirical evidence should always be considered the inferior of the two.

[mikema63]

Plenty of good logical arguments and evidence, which of course is far superior to 'empirical evidence' anyway.

I'm an empiricist not a rationalist. This is also just a claim on your part and doesn't even come with the logical justification you'd expect from a rationalist. Your hiding your emotional reaction behind a facade of psudo rationalism.

Radical changes to any ecosystem, human or animal, have been empirically proven to cause harm to those in them, so one can logiclaly therefore extend this to homosexual marriages and children, as this is a significant deviation from the natural environment, and collecting 'empirical evidence' specifically regarding gay relationships is therefore unnecessary, since it's already addressed by broader topics.

Marriage is a social construct not an ecological one. You are trying to take a poor understanding of ecology and apply it to social structures which is irrational.

They can be proven via logic and formal laws of the universe, so they're not personal feelings, but far superior to trendy 'emperical evidence', because like mathematical proofs, they never change, while emperical evidence does.

By all means post your mathematical proof that moral law is determined by what you find gross.

So society should be governed by logical evidence, while empirical evidence should always be considered the inferior of the two.

Except that humans have cognitive biases built in and we are incapable of logically understanding the universe outside of the very narrow scope we evolved in. Even within that scope we never really understood what was actually going on till relatively recently in human history.

[Godstud]

That's a strawman, the hamrful effects on ecology and the children who are victim of those faux-unions.

Please show us the studies and science behind this moronic claim of yours. I'd be interested to see where you get them from.

Plenty of good logical arguments and evidence, which of course is far superior to 'empirical evidence' anyway.

We're still waiting for the evidence, not more banter and personal opinion. Link us to these studies, please. Could it be that they don't exist, and that your argument is simply you making up things to support your own personal belief?

Theocracy is to be fought tooth and nail. You have taken your personal feelings and beliefs about unprovable things and elevated them to the sacred so that you can hate what disgusts you without feeling like an asshole.

QFT.

[jaydedjen110]

That is complete BS. I know kids from same sex families who are very well-adjusted and I'm bisexual myself.

[Chetna3_sharma]

Non-English Post - This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.

-TIG Edit

[blackjack21]

Question: Should we disallow single mothers or fathers from raising their children simply because it's not best for the child? I mean, they should go up for adoption "in favor of straight couples which are a much more ecologically natural and time-tested environment for raising children.". Right? That would be just a "rational discernment", correct?

Yes. Sexual liberation and no-fault divorce have generally been a bad thing. Intact families are very important, but not taken seriously by the political left. Married biological parents consistently produce the best results.

Gay and Bisexual Men's Health

Such data illustrate overwhelming evidence that LGB persons are at greater risk for poor mental health across developmental stages. Studies using adult samples indicate elevated rates of depression and mood disorders (Bostwick et al. 2010, Cochran et al. 2007), anxiety disorders (Cochran et al. 2003, Gilman et al. 2001), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Hatzenbuehler et al. 2009a), alcohol use and abuse (Burgard et al. 2005), and suicide ideation and attempts, as well as psychiatric comorbidity (Cochran et al. 2003, Gilman et al. 2001).

The Children of Mentally Ill Parents

The children of mentally ill parents have a higher risk of developing mental illnesses themselves over the course of their lives. This known risk must be taken into account in the practical provision of health care.

[Godstud]

The children of mentally ill parents have a higher risk of developing mental illnesses themselves over the course of their lives. This known risk must be taken into account in the practical provision of health care.

Step into the 21st century. Homosexuality is not a "mental illness", so your argument is SHITE.

In 1973, the weight of empirical data, coupled with changing social norms and the development of a politically active gay community in the United States, led the Board of Directors of the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

I underlined one of the important parts, so you don't have to have the assume the educational level of a 1970s bigot.

[MistyTiger]

I have never seen a study that says children of same-sex parents are more damaged than children of heterosexual parents. If anything, the ones with the most psychological problems are the children of abusive parents or the children who suffer from PTSD due to an accident or murder that they witnessed at a very young age.

[One Degree]

Well, children do live in all the situations described in the above posts so I am not sure of the value of the debate.
Sexual confusion is a problem most children deal with and our current lifestyle choices are making this more difficult for children. This is the real problem we need to be facing. How is it possible to give them a foundation to start from no matter the life style choice of their home? Originally we simply told them heterosexuality was normal, but now that is no longer acceptable. Is it right to tell a young child it is okay to be homosexual? Does this just add to their confusion? Yet, if the parents are homosexual then you can't expect them to say it is not normal. I doubt this would be any more confusing than having parents who are swingers, but we are adding new layers to the confusion of our children. We need to look at this very closely and very clinically without political bias.

[Tewodros III]

Honestly, I'm not too keen on gay marriage, but even I think these children of a two parent stable income unit(gay or not) would have less trauma than a single Black mother with her child in the ghetto. It all depends on the parents really, I hate girly men and honestly a boy would be better off with two fathers than mothers. Mothers don't understand a son need of a father, which is why Black family is mess up in america.

[One Degree]

I feel I am very knowledgeable about raising children and I can not imagine raising children on my own. Without the support of a partner, it would be an overwhelming job. Anyone who does it half way successfully deserves a lot of gratitude from their children.

[XogGyux]

Well, children do live in all the situations described in the above posts so I am not sure of the value of the debate.
Sexual confusion is a problem most children deal with and our current lifestyle choices are making this more difficult for children. This is the real problem we need to be facing. How is it possible to give them a foundation to start from no matter the life style choice of their home? Originally we simply told them heterosexuality was normal, but now that is no longer acceptable. Is it right to tell a young child it is okay to be homosexual? Does this just add to their confusion? Yet, if the parents are homosexual then you can't expect them to say it is not normal. I doubt this would be any more confusing than having parents who are swingers, but we are adding new layers to the confusion of our children. We need to look at this very closely and very clinically without political bias.

This idea that children have to be pampered through life might cause more harm than any of the non-sense parents/society tries to "protect them" from. Kids are resilient and understand way more than people give them credit from if only parents take the time and effort to do their best.
Further more if this "monkey see monkey do" theory had any merit, there would not exist any gays to begin with as they would all come (and be raised) by straight family so how did they even learned to be gay to begin with? Complete bullshit. Most likely scenario is that a kid from a gay couple will be straight (as it is the most common outcome regardless of parent orientation).

Honestly, I'm not too keen on gay marriage, but even I think these children of a two parent stable income unit(gay or not) would have less trauma than a single Black mother with her child in the ghetto. It all depends on the parents really, I hate girly men and honestly a boy would be better off with two fathers than mothers. Mothers don't understand a son need of a father, which is why Black family is mess up in america.

Congratulations, you just managed to be homophobic, sexist and racist all in the same paragraph.

[MistyTiger]

This idea that children have to be pampered through life might cause more harm than any of the non-sense parents/society tries to "protect them" from. Kids are resilient and understand way more than people give them credit from if only parents take the time and effort to do their best.

True. Kids are very sensitive to emotional cues and they observe a lot. They absorb so much like sponges. But they also are capable of forming their own conclusions.

Further more if this "monkey see monkey do" theory had any merit, there would not exist any gays to begin with as they would all come (and be raised) by straight family so how did they even learned to be gay to begin with? Complete bullshit. Most likely scenario is that a kid from a gay couple will be straight (as it is the most common outcome regardless of parent orientation).

Good point.

I think it is a choice based on their inner sense of self. Everyone has a leaning towards either a masculine or feminine side and the same goes with sexual preferences.

[Hong Wu]

A man who can't (or won't) express authority over his woman is viewed as a beta and therefore as a possible cuck, no matter what else he might have going for him. This is because the expression of authority is literally an expression of sexual monopoly; in its absence there can be no sexual monopoly and as such, beta cuck. There is no debating that.

It should be easy to extrapolate from this why male/male and female/female "relationships" have an adverse effect upon the "children" of such couples. I put children in quotes because there is, of course, always a biological father or mother involved who has usually been removed from the picture but simply making it so does not resolve the dilemma that circumstance presents for children, this being another source of their spiritual challenges.

For all of their problems, I respect that the French have been open enough to largely acknowledge this despite otherwise accepting gay relationships.

[Drlee]

That's a strawman, the hamrful effects on ecology and the children who are victim of those faux-unions.

Well Scheherazade. You sure know how to post babble don't you.

I have read a bunch of these "studies". Mostly commissioned by organizations who have an axe to grind.

Not a single study I have read has been worth a shit. One enormous mistake is to compare the biological children of straight couples with the adopted children of same-sex couples. This fucks the data right from the git-go. I doubt that I need to explain why. Then. Even the couple of studies that compared adopted children did not factor for the choices made available to same-sex couples and heterosexual couples. Then. Just because a man and a woman live together does not mean that one or both of them are not homosexual. Fun to look into those numbers.

There is no doubt that married homosexual couples are experiencing a higher rate of divorce than straight couples. The thing is that we do not have any historical data, absent overwhelming discrimination from which to begin any study. Or to put it in a scientific way.

Shit studies are shit.

[Rich]

Gay marriage exists, and no one has died

Lots of people have died because of of gay male sex. Heterosexuals have died because of gay male sex, spread to heterosexuals by bisexual men. How much gay marriage has exacerbated this horrific epidemic of AIDS and other sexually or part sexually transmitted deceases is a matter of debate. But I doubt Gay marriage has helped, because it normalises, the extremely promiscuous Gay male culture.

[redcarpet]

STIs are overwhelmingly a heterosexual problem since they're the ultra-majority.

And obviously they're the bulk of humans everyday being promiscuous. Which is not a crime, remember. No one is obliged to use contraception, clearly many heterosexuals don't use it and so the STIs are there. Cast aside your tweezers and stop being so selective, it's brazen

[One Degree]

This idea that children have to be pampered through life might cause more harm than any of the non-sense parents/society tries to "protect them" from. Kids are resilient and understand way more than people give them credit from if only parents take the time and effort to do their best.

You are basically saying don't worry about it. The kids will figure it out on their own. Very interesting, since this thread shows adults have not figured it out. There is a difference between pampering children and seeing they have real concerns that if not addressed cause emotional problems. It is very clear that home environments have a dramatic effect on children's thinking and behavior. Young children are not capable of reasoning. They simply absorb their environment as the correct way to behave. I do not see the difference between a straight child raised by gays and a homosexual child raised by straights. Our society has addressed the issue of the latter, yet you tell me we should ignore the former. Why is that? You seem to be letting your politics influence your logic.

[Drlee]

I do not see the difference between a straight child raised by gays and a homosexual child raised by straights. Our society has addressed the issue of the latter, yet you tell me we should ignore the former. Why is that? You seem to be letting your politics influence your logic.

There are some very obvious differences. Admittedly fewer now than when you and I were kids but significant anyway.

The straight child enters a tailor-made world. Short of a birds-and-bees talk they don't really need much in the revelation department. The gay child goes through a traumatic journey of discovery just because he/she is gay. Their orientation is unexpected and relatively rare not to mention still a curiosity (at the very best) for their friends.

Just touching on the issue. The homosexual child raised by straights usually presents as an unexpected and often unwelcome phenomena the discovery of which happens after the child has already mostly been raised to the heterosexual role definition. The straight child of gay parents is totally expected. That child has been raised to be straight but simply with an understanding that his parents are "different".

Even though we are far more accepting of gay folks these days there are still enormous problems for them. Note the appalling attempts on POFO by certain homophobes to marginalize them. And to the horror of religious people of my bent, sometimes in "God's" name. For someone just learning about life this is a pretty heavy hammer to smack them with.

My personal opinion is that we do not have enough information to draw real conclusions but even if we did I can't see how they could be actionable. Story follows.

One night about a decade ago, I stumbled across a state adoption site. They had profiles of children who were waiting to be adopted. One was an African American little girl of 10 who has spent her life in foster care. She still rings in my mind. I mentioned to my wife that since I was arguably pretty old to have a child of my own, we could make a real difference in her life. Had we acted on this she would have been raised in an affluent, educated family with high expectations of her. Raised to two parents who were firm believers in education and (if she had needed it) in a position to provide remediation for any shortfalls in her education. Possibly she would have been able to choose any school for which she was qualified. Her parents (us) would have been ardent anti-racists, Christians and possessing the time and money to show her the world. IN short, her life would have changed in unexpected and unusual ways. So my point is that there are very few "studies" to predict what would have become of her. There is not a large sample of affluent, white, educated people adopting 10 year old black girls. So with this incident in mind I am always wary of studies like some that have been referenced here. But for the sake of conjecture, imagine the issues we would have faced with/for her. They are legion. They pale in comparison to those faced by the examples above.

[One Degree]

That child has been raised to be straight but simply with an understanding that his parents are "different".

Excellent post, so forgive me for cherry picking this one point. Children learn from what goes on around them much more than by what we tell them. Gay parents can be very conscientious about telling their child they might be different than him/her, but this does not matter to children. 'Right' is what they observe on a day to day basis. Homosexuality will appear the norm to this child and therefore there must be confusion if they are straight. I agree that I am at a loss what we could do about it.