Schumm (The guy who made the study) used a meta-analysis of existing data from 10 books on gay parenting. That's an 11th grade reading assignment. Not to mention he skewed his data so that only self-identified gay and lesbian children would be labeled as such.
Which means that he actually tried to skew the data is such a way which would give homosexual parents the benefit of the doubt.
Even with these measures, there was
still a significant positive correlation between homosexual parentage and latent homosexuality later in life.
The conclusion supported by the data is clear. Homosexual parents have a tendency to raise homosexual children.
Wow.
What harm would it do?
I'm sorry, but are we in the business of trying to multiply sexual deviancy here? Is that our society's goal now?
I thought the goal here was to grant homosexuals "equal rights," not to provide them with the means to indoctrinate and recruit impressionable children into their lifestyle.
I must have missed the memo. :roll:
Considering the problems the West is already having with maintaining current population levels, the very
last thing we need right now is to promote deviant lifestyles which effectively transform productive heterosexuals into objectively useless genetic mules.
Mea cupla, it was a typo. I mean't to write 'data', not date.
Lower income households in most US minority cultures are built around a three generation model.
These same households are the one's most likely to experience single parenthood.
I am not denying anything. I am pointing out that humans are an adaptable species, and as such are capable of taking on roles that are outside there biological 'norms'.
And being objectively terrible at them.
You seem so certain. Mind posting a link that proves your point?
You have not. What you have given me is vague talking points and no real rationale for your view.
I already demonstrated that homosexual parents have a tendency to raise "abnormal" children.
Just fine? What the ****? We didn't abolish slavery until the 1860's, and it took another hundred years to end segregation. Women didn't get the right to vote until less than a century ago. How the hell is that "just fin"?
Slavery is not a "traditional value," and neither is racial segregation.
Women having the right to vote has proven itself to be valuable to society as a whole.
And I have posted data that disproves your second point. Do you want me to re-link it?
Your sources prove absolutely nothing. Again, a mere generation's worth of data from an extremely limited sample (a significant portion of which turned out to be gay, incidentally) doesn't conclusively demonstrate anything.
Are you honestly comparing drug addicts and cultists to a gay couple? seriously?
Why shouldn't the cultists be allowed to raise children given your argument? Why wouldn't their belief system count as a valid "alternate lifestyle?"
Oh please, get off your high horse. "Traditional family' is just a buzz word social conservatives throw around to try to add emotional appeal to their arguments. It hasn't worked before, and It won't work now.
And you know what? History has proven us right time and again.
Every time traditional values and morality have been ignored in favor of modern hedonistic sensibilities, society as a whole has suffered for it. STDs, teenage pregnancies, and single parenthood have all absolutely exploded since the onset of the so called "sexual revolution," and they have all wound up costing tax payers untold billions in the process.
Hurray for Leftist social engineering! :roll:
