• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

On average would straight couples make better parents then gay couples?

On average would straight couples make better parents then a gay couple?

  • Total voters
    37
Maximus Zeebra said:
YES.

Its best for a child to have input from both a mother/female and a father/male, that will best prepare him for life.

Aside from that it would be awful and input in a child's life to have any of his parents be one of those "gay pride"/"outrageous gay behaving" peoples input.
Click to expand...

I stopped reading after this comment. You have a biased and prejudiced view of gay parents. Therefore your opinion is irrelevant.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I stopped reading after this comment. You have a biased and prejudiced view of gay parents. Therefore your opinion is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

As is yours if you think a child will develop well with any "outrageous gay" people... Trying makeup on the child, waving their hands, talking like a woman, acting like morons. Anyways, if you read the rest...
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
As is yours if you think a child will develop well with any "outrageous gay" people... Trying makeup on the child, waving their hands, talking like a woman, acting like morons. Anyways, if you read the rest...
Click to expand...

And if you read CC's links you would know that your statement I just bolded is false.

What you have demonstrated here is that you don't really know anything about homosexuals other than what you see in a movie. I've known several gay couples and none of them ever tried talking like women or put makeup on their kids (the one couple that I knew that had a kid) or waved their hands around like they do in the movies. And everyone can be morons. It's not limited to homosexuals.

However have you ever seen studies done about children, parents and beauty pageants? You have any idea what those children go through? Most of the time because their mothers want them in the pageants?
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
As is yours if you think a child will develop well with any "outrageous gay" people... Trying makeup on the child, waving their hands, talking like a woman, acting like morons. Anyways, if you read the rest...
Click to expand...

Prove that this is how all gays act. Your bigotry and prejudice is showing, Maximus.
 
Not really sure off hand if there would be a huge difference between the two. I can't think of anything innate that would make one so much worse than the other. Though I think the one thing we can say for sure is that a same-sex household would be a hell of a lot better than an State run orphanage.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Prove that this is how all gays act. Your bigotry and prejudice is showing, Maximus.
Click to expand...

You can't win this kind of argument. Because no doubt Maximus will be able to link to all sorts of YouTube videos or 'scientific' reports in which gay couples have placed their children in some outrageous situations.

But I could just as easily link to videos of 'Toddlers With Tiarras' or outlandish reports of other outrageous heterosexual child-rearing and make the case that heterosexual couples are unhealthy.

I've practically given up reviewing links to any study of sexuality at all... because as with other politically heated issues, I firmly believe that any scientific field dealing with 'statistical analysis' is hopelessly flawed from the outset. Or even if one weren't, it would be nearly impossible for any of us to pick out from among the garbage produced by both fringes.

:confused:
 
Grateful Heart said:
You can't win this kind of argument. Because no doubt Maximus will be able to link to all sorts of YouTube videos or 'scientific' reports in which gay couples have placed their children in some outrageous situations.

But I could just as easily link to videos of 'Toddlers With Tiarras' or outlandish reports of other outrageous heterosexual child-rearing and make the case that heterosexual couples are unhealthy.

I've practically given up reviewing links to any study of sexuality at all... because as with other politically heated issues, I firmly believe that any scientific field dealing with 'statistical analysis' is hopelessly flawed from the outset. Or even if one weren't, it would be nearly impossible for any of us to pick out from among the garbage produced by both fringes.

:confused:
Click to expand...

Actually I can win this argument. My comment was "Prove that this is how all gays act." Notice the word in bold. If he cannot concede this point, he is exposed as a bigot, since all I have to do is find one gay that doesn't act in the way that he claims. If he concedes the point, then my data becomes valid. In other words, he loses either way. ;)
 
Last edited:
I voted yes. Not because a straight couple would make better parents, I don't think it would matter.

What does matter to me is that the traditional family is time tested and works. So I think in the long run it could be better.
 
Kal'Stang said:
And if you read CC's links you would know that your statement I just bolded is false.

What you have demonstrated here is that you don't really know anything about homosexuals other than what you see in a movie. I've known several gay couples and none of them ever tried talking like women or put makeup on their kids (the one couple that I knew that had a kid) or waved their hands around like they do in the movies. And everyone can be morons. It's not limited to homosexuals.

However have you ever seen studies done about children, parents and beauty pageants? You have any idea what those children go through? Most of the time because their mothers want them in the pageants?
Click to expand...

Thats why I am SEPARATING the "gay pride/outrageous gays", with relative normal gays. You think of them as one group, thats just unhealthy.

I did this in the first post as well, separated between those gays and other gays. But even so, mother/dad parents is the best solution for a child, and normal gays far better than "gay pride" gays. Also lesbians favorably against faggots.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Prove that this is how all gays act. Your bigotry and prejudice is showing, Maximus.
Click to expand...

I didn't say its how ALL gays act, I am just trying to group the gays. The ones I am talking about would be the worst parents and very damaging to a child in my opinion, while "normal behaving" gay people would be better than some combinations of man/woman parents. But then again, if you read my whole post about this last time, I wouldt have to explain all this AGAIN.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
I didn't say its how ALL gays act, I am just trying to group the gays. The ones I am talking about would be the worst parents and very damaging to a child in my opinion, while "normal behaving" gay people would be better than some combinations of man/woman parents. But then again, if you read my whole post about this last time, I wouldt have to explain all this AGAIN.
Click to expand...

So what. Some drunk heterosexual family with no inclination towards intellectual growth would be damaging to a child too. But we don't forbid all heterosexuals from being parents just because some of them are bad.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Actually I can win this argument. My comment was "Prove that this is how all gays act." Notice the word in bold. If he cannot concede this point, he is exposed as a bigot, since all I have to do is find one gay that doesn't act in the way that he claims. If he concedes the point, then my data becomes valid. In other words, he loses either way. ;)
Click to expand...

Oh it's obvious that the phrase as written is clearly wrong. My point was that even attempts among rational people to analyze things such as 'relative healthiness' of gay relationships or straight relationships become hopelessly bogged down in unreliable or confusing statistics and studies.

:2wave:
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Much of this article centers around Stacey and Bilbartz. I have debunked that information in another thread as taken out of context. Stacey herself has stated that she is often taken out of context in this matter.


And again, this article uses the Stacey and Bilbartz study...already debunked. Further, even though the article makes the above comment, every piece of evidence it quotes, contradicts that comment.



I reject this on two levels. Firstly, any Christian website is going to go with their anti-gay agenda. Secondly, And I will have to re-review the Golomok/Tasker study (haven't looked at it in a while), the article takes out of context and spins some of the wording to make gay parenting look less favorable. This is one of the studies I used in my overview, and the research was sound.



I will agree that more research needs to be done. However, current research is positive, and the methology is sound.
Click to expand...
Nope, to me it seems controversial and debatable with the current research often unsound,. I was not looking to debate the independent studies though I was just contrasting some other people's views of the studies with yours. No offense but I don't see why I should accept yours as gospel and reject these others out of hand.

Plus the bold part is absurd and definitely part of the partisanship you seem to hate. If I were to completely reject your opinion and others because they leant to the liberal side then there'd be few sources left that we could debate.
 
Last edited:
Kal'Stang said:
And if you read CC's links you would know that your statement I just bolded is false.
Click to expand...
CC gave his opinion of the studies, as I showed this is challenged by others who are just as qualified as a message board moderator, no offense to CC, so let's not start treating his opinion as gospel shall we.
 
There's no science so open to interpretation as the social sciences. My opinion on gay issues is that we let society determine where we want to go... and I don't have any problem with the direction we've been headed. Studies on either side of the issue (or those purporting to be impartial) be damned.

;)
 
.

It would depend on the individual couple an the temper of those who make up a couple. Has very little to do with gay or straight. Some Gays would be better parents, and some heteros would be better. There are no negative statistics against gays.

From what I have read, statiscally gays are less abusive to their children than straights.

Parental sexual abuse seems to be more prevelant in Straights rather than Gays. Yet I forget where I got this information.

From what I have read, children of gays are not any more prone to become gay than children of straights.

I am a straight hetero sexual male and have never had any sexual interest gay men. I do like my women, but I am not interested in living a world of misinformation and lies.:)

One of the strange things that I have learned in the last few years is that just because christian or christian minister says something does not make the statement true and accurate.
 
Last edited:
Grateful Heart said:
There's no science so open to interpretation as the social sciences. My opinion on gay issues is that we let society determine where we want to go... and I don't have any problem with the direction we've been headed. Studies on either side of the issue (or those purporting to be impartial) be damned.

;)
Click to expand...

Think of the children!!!

Its natural for children to grow up in a man/woman parenting relationship. And lately it has become more and more normal to grow up in a man or woman /semi relationship with parents. That has had some damaging effects...

Taking away the childrens right to grow up with man/women parents and putting them in the hands of something as unnatural as man/man or woman/woman parenting relationships WILL damage things much more than one parent /semi parentING relations have done.

Imagine the bitter child who had no choice and grew up with two gay men as parents, just because some liberals wanted to allow gay adoption. Shame.. Shame.. SHAME...


Think of the children...
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
I didn't say its how ALL gays act, I am just trying to group the gays. The ones I am talking about would be the worst parents and very damaging to a child in my opinion, while "normal behaving" gay people would be better than some combinations of man/woman parents. But then again, if you read my whole post about this last time, I wouldt have to explain all this AGAIN.
Click to expand...

Guess what? Any parents, gay or straight that would behave in some sort of extreme and damaging way would be inappropriate parents. Though your position is accurate, it is not all encompassing. Any parent that acts out would be damaging to their kids, gay or straight.
 
Wessexman said:
Nope, to me it seems controversial and debatable with the current research often unsound,. I was not looking to debate the independent studies though I was just contrasting some other people's views of the studies with yours. No offense but I don't see why I should accept yours as gospel and reject these others out of hand.
Click to expand...

The studies that I posted have been peer reviewed and are reproducible. This is consistent with validity testing in research. I have seen little information that makes these studies debatable other than the fact that there needs to be more of them, especially those with gay fathers.

Plus the bold part is absurd and definitely part of the partisanship you seem to hate. If I were to completely reject your opinion and others because they leant to the liberal side then there'd be few sources left that we could debate.
Click to expand...

Show me a pro-Christian website that supports gay marriage...and not a gay pro-Christian website...and then we can talk. It is not partisanship if it is true.
 
Wessexman said:
CC gave his opinion of the studies, as I showed this is challenged by others who are just as qualified as a message board moderator, no offense to CC, so let's not start treating his opinion as gospel shall we.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you accept my opinion as gospel, there would be a whole lot fewer problems around here. :2razz:
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
The studies that I posted have been peer reviewed and are reproducible. This is consistent with validity testing in research. I have seen little information that makes these studies debatable other than the fact that there needs to be more of them, especially those with gay fathers.
Click to expand...
My point is that you reviewed the data, quoted some of it and came to your conclusions. These others did exactly the same. Without really getting to grips with it all in detail myself I don't see why I should reject theirs and accept your analysis of the data and studies, no offense.


Show me a pro-Christian website that supports gay marriage...and not a gay pro-Christian website...and then we can talk. It is not partisanship if it is true.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what your point is. Why do they have to support it? The vast majority of libs support gay marriage. Can I just ignore everything they say? I personally do not consider being a Christian site to necessarily negate their opinion, I have a lot of respect for Christians. In general I prefer Conservatives Christians to liberals myself.

This is what I talked about before. No doubt you'd reject the heritage foundation or similar as well and it gets silly because soon we'll all have our own sources who the other side will simply dismiss and it will get nowhere. That really is dangerously partisan.

As a former anarchist I know how annoying it is when people reject your sources out of hand because "they're anarchists":doh. .
 
Last edited:
Maximus Zeebra said:
As is yours if you think a child will develop well with any "outrageous gay" people... Trying makeup on the child, waving their hands, talking like a woman, acting like morons. Anyways, if you read the rest...
Click to expand...

We put makeup on my nephew. He likes to be done up just like his older sisters. I don't see what the issue is. Are we going to "make him gay" by doing so? :rofl


Oh, he wears pink shirts too. :shock:
 
rivrrat said:
We put makeup on my nephew. He likes to be done up just like his older sisters. I don't see what the issue is. Are we going to "make him gay" by doing so? :rofl


Oh, he wears pink shirts too. :shock:
Click to expand...

Pink shirts ARE NOT gay....though the lipstick thing....
 
Wessexman said:
My point is that you reviewed the data, quoted some of it and came to your conclusions. These others did exactly the same. Without really getting to grips with it all in detail myself I don't see why I should reject theirs and accept your analysis of the data and studies, no offense.
Click to expand...

Methodology. I reviewed the methodology used. It's sound. The biggest complaint from those who reject the conclusions is that there is not enough data.


I'm not sure what your point is. Why do they have to support it? The vast majority of libs support gay marriage. Can I just ignore everything they say? I personally do not consider being a Christian site to necessarily negate their opinion, I have a lot of respect for Christians. In general I prefer Conservatives Christians to liberals myself.

This is what I talked about before. No doubt you'd reject the heritage foundation or similar as well and it gets silly because soon we'll all have our own sources who the other side will simply dismiss and it will get nowhere. That really is dangerously partisan.

As a former anarchist I know how annoying it is when people reject your sources out of hand because "they're anarchists":doh. .
Click to expand...

I have a lot of respect for Christians, also. I defend them, often, in the Religious forum. Perhaps I should have been more clear. Mon-moderate Christians do not support gay marriage and this is mostly for religious reasons. Every site that has been posted with "data", the data has been spun or misrepresented to fit in with the site's agenda. Further the methodology of the data is flawed, or if they reviewed some positive data, that review was flawed. One must be cognizant of the sites presented for evidence. Presenting a study done by evangelicals on the dangers of abortion is far less valid than presenting a similar study by the AMA. Hence, a study on gay marriage presented by the APA has far more weight than one presented by a pro-Christian organization. One must look at agenda, validity, credentialing, etc... Questioning a source is valid in debate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom