That's the stupidest thing I've ever seen.. Wow?
Redress -
So you have nothing, again. I on the other hand, have documetation:
http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/n...-adjusted-kids
You don't have jack..
The article is from 2005, and it exactly the kind of article one would expect from someone who supports gay marriage. Most, if not all studies done on gay parenting were done by researchers that were pro-gay. They also suffer from at least, one, and many time more methodological flaws. The conclusions developed in most of the studies are lacking the threshold burden to form a statistical correlation. In other words, they are manufactured conclusions. Judith Stacey's, analysis of all of the major studies is perhaps the most often quoted study to date. In it, and although she has gone on record refuting the results of her own study, she states that, in fact children reared by homosexual couples are much more likely to identify as gay when they reach adulthood. She also concludes that, empirically, children in stable healthy heterosexual homes, are much more psychologically healthy than those of homosexual homes, where the stability of the homosexual home is equivalent to that of the heterosexual home.
See especially S. 159-183. See especially 168-171
Just like children of broken homes, divorce, and single parent homes are less likely to experience the emotion well-being found in children of healthy, and stable heterosexual marriages.
Now, we know there are exceptions to any of these rules, we KNOW this, but using studies that examine statistical data, we must form conclusions based on the broad sample We can't throw out statistics, because they don't say what we want them to say as a whole, just like we can't take a single, or exceptional variable, and apply it to the broad sample. The purpose of broad samples is to more narrowly define the conclusion. We can never take a single individual experience, or even a small number of similar experiences, and apply it to a sample that has a specific intent of drawing a broad conclusion. That's why small samples, even if done with precision, and attuned with the highest regard for the scientific method, are incomplete at forming broad, narrow conclusions. In other words, they don't tell us anything about society, all they tend to is tell us about the sample itself.
I KNOW, that the liberal, and to some degree more liberal social conservatives here on this forum argue that marriage shouldn't be the government's business. I get that, I also get that many here feel that, heterosexual marriage isn't exactly great anymore, and that heterosexual marriage proponents can't exactly make a claim that their form of marriage is stable, when we see divorce rates as high as 50%. I get that as well. However, I have long maintained that the devaluing of the traditional marriage has been the result of many attacks from less conservative principles, legislation, liberally influenced educational indoctrination, media,
inter alia, and as a result, over the last 40 years, especially over the last 25 or so years, we have seen a massive devaluing of marriage. I contend that if marriage is not "brought-back", and promoted, and recognized as it has been historically, and traditionally, our society will not survive another 100 years. I truly believe this, and all available data points to this eventuality.
This, of course, is merely my opinion. I have no magic googled link that backs up my opinion, as the issue is extremely complex, and covers a wide range of equally complex variables, and even if I did provide 50 links to add weight to this or that variable, most here would dismiss it. In fact people are dismissing the complexity of this issue as it stands now. The reason people, even members here raise the issue, "Well how the **** does it affect you, or your marriage" is because there is no one sentence, or even a Ph.D thesis that could answer it, in a way that is quantifiable. The affects are over many years, and affect society, not the individual marriage, per say. Now, I know I'm a small voice on this forum, in favor of keeping traditional marriage, traditional, and I also advocate for legislation to strengthen it, and provide more recognition to heterosexual marriage, but that's another topic.
I found this article by a Princeton review, that articulates my position on marriage with a great deal more authority, and in fact, is exactly my feeling on the matter.
http://www.winst.org/family_marria... Marriage and the Public Good: Ten Principles
It's a great read for anyone that shares my viewpoint in wanting to restore the strength of the traditional marriage within society. I highly recommend it.
Tim-
