- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,575
- Reaction score
- 6,767
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
Thanks Gardener, it seemed fishy from the start.
Nope, just waiting for you to present the data with a link.
Taking a stab at this, but perhaps something that exists outside your rather active and fearful imagination?
Yay more cat and mouse from ya.
I've noticed trolls and moles seem to do best in the dark, along with worms, possums.....or people.
Many are quite steadfast in their resistance to all attempts thereof.
Ya'd think 3 people with well over 50,000 comments total would be able to sense they've jumped on the bandwagon without much consideration for what it might mean.
Regnerus Study
heh heh you don't accept the study but boy Think Progress really got the juices going, huh.
read the study.
Thanks Gardener, it seemed fishy from the start.
heh heh you don't accept the study but boy Think Progress really got the juices going, huh.
read the study.
I said “lesbian mothers” and “gay fathers,” when in fact, I don’t know about their sexual orientation; I do know about their same-sex relationship behavior.
The are quoting the author of the study.
Um ... yes, I read it ... he said that within his own study. I didn't need TP to tell me.Did YOU actually read the tink Progress article, or did you just gloss through. Here since you don't want to read, this is Mark Regnerus's own words:
Try reading what I said again, I didn't claim thinking homosexuality is a sin is being racist.
I made the point saying that you wouldn't be arrested for thinking homosexuality is a sin.
As to your last statement of gay marriage not being a civil right, that is your opinion and an opinion that the SCOTUS might have ruled against you on. We will find out in the next couple of months.
Gay Marriage is not a Civil Right
If gays get the special right to change the definition of marriage from man + woman to man + ? Or woman + ?, then every other sexual interest group that wants to change it gets the right too. Not everyone gets what they want.
Gay Marriage is not a Civil Right
If gays get the special right to change the definition of marriage from man + woman to man + ? Or woman + ?, then every other sexual interest group that wants to change it gets the right too. Not everyone gets what they want.
Um ... yes, I read it ... he said that within his own study. I didn't need TP to tell me.
But at least you now have TP to comfort you ... just as someone predicted on this thread long ago.
Now ... did you read the study?
Did you stomp your feet as you were typing that too?
Sorry, but your OPINION doesn't mean much to me. If the SCOTUS rules otherwise you and the other anti-SSM will be out of luck and pouting.
1-One of the first (and one of the most important) steps one needs to do to even get married is to apply for a license to do so by the State.
2-Whether anyone likes it or not, any special interest group has the right to TRY to have a law changed.Does not necessarily mean they can automatically succeed.
It seems to me that quite a number of the Anti-SSM Crowd wants to prevent groups from even trying.
That's Un-American.
I love how you have to resort to insults when your studies don't hold weight. I said I would look at it later and I will. I am interested in how the questions were presented to the people or if it was anonymous as well as the sample along with the reasoning behind it. I am hoping the sudy presents those answers. If not, well, the study is flawed and lacks even those basic answers. Again, I am hoping the answers are there.
What I find lacking about this whole thing is that SSM has NOTHING to do with raising children since gays can ALREADY raise children legally without marriage even being in the equation. So marriage is not required for parenting.
when your studies don't hold weight. I said I would look at it later and I will. I am interested in how the questions were presented to the people or if it was anonymous as well as the sample along with the reasoning behind it. I am hoping the sudy presents those answers. If not, well, the study is flawed and lacks even those basic answers. Again, I am hoping the answers are there.I love how you have to resort to insults
.What I find lacking about this whole thing is that SSM has NOTHING to do with raising children since gays can ALREADY raise children legally without marriage even being in the equation. So marriage is not required for parenting
That's kinda the point. Yet it didn't appear to bother the SSM proponents so I was trying to work with them on their level.
But anyway ... the data is there ... how about if I tell you that 61% of children of lesbian mothers & 71% of children of gay fathers reported themselves to be "entirely heterosexual" compared to 90% of children from traditional parents.
So is it nature or nurture?
61% of children of lesbian mothers & 71% of children of gay fathers reported themselves to be "entirely heterosexual" compared to 90% of children from traditional parents.
So is it nature or nurture?
Is it evidence?
This is laughably predictable.
Does the source really matter to you at all?
Are you prepared to accept any data that doesn't conform to the current cause celebre?
If *ANY* marriage is a civil right then yes, gay marriage is a civil right.
Ya'd think 3 people with well over 50,000 comments total would be able to sense they've jumped on the bandwagon without much consideration for what it might mean.
Regnerus Study
If you read the author's study itself he admits (as I did early on) that the sample groups for ANY SSM study is just not large enough. He used what he could and avoided some problems that earlier studies didn't try to avoid ... and they were skewed even within itself.