The Homosexuals Of Alderaan Want Your Children

[Me Myself]

These examples are just the tip of the ice berg. I'm a little diappointed you put so little effort to learn what you were talking about before making the bolded statement

Those are sources with no affirmations.

WHAT information was extracted from them may I ask? Be specific.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Star Wars is pretty gay anyway.

Take that back you will. :yoda:

 

[-Peacemaker-]

We have seen what you think constitutes "sufficient" data.
And we have found it to be self serving and lacking.

I agree completely. Now that Zach Wahls has come out with the stunning revelation that everything worked out for him, it's time to completely change our thinking.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

I'll tell you what's laughable. If I was going around posting You Tube links of one man's testimony and using that as conclusive evidence why we should be against gay adoptions, you guys would have a field day mocking me.

 

[Me Myself]

I agree completely. Now that Zach Wahls has come out with the stunning revelation that everything worked out for him, it's time to completely change our thinking.

At least consider he may not be the only one.

Furthermore, for adoptions a lot of factors are considered. In between them the couple´s life and customs. This means that the people of social care can detect the relationships that are not stable enough for adopting children and do so with a lot of factors in mind.

Even if the majority of homosexual relationships werent monogamous, the filtering process can well turn down the ones who are not and not discriminate against the ones who are.

It´s like saying that here in Guayaquil Cholos (a race) shouldn´t be able to adopt because most of them don´t have enough money to give the kids quality education. It is true that most cholos are poor (a mixture between their parents having been poor and the few that managed to get a good education being discriminated against when trying to get a job and other factors) but that doesn´t mean you won´t let any cholo adopt, that means you look into the SPECIFIC family to see if they ahve enough money to raise the child and give him a propr education.

The same way should be done with any other social or ethnic or sexual group. While stadistics may reveal different tendencies for each, the SPECIFIC cases must be evalued by the social workers, not just discriminated against as if "most of them" meant "all of them".

 

[McBell]

I'll tell you what's laughable. If I was going around posting You Tube links of one man's testimony and using that as conclusive evidence why we should be against gay adoptions, you guys would have a field day mocking me.

Sad that you think it all about one you tube video.

Not the least bit surprising though.
You have to do something to protect your box...

What is laughable is that you think no one can see it for what it is....

 

[McBell]

I agree completely. Now that Zach Wahls has come out with the stunning revelation that everything worked out for him, it's time to completely change our thinking.

Thank you for further demonstrating that you are not the least bit hesitant to be dishonest when protecting your beliefs.

 

[Me Myself]

I'll tell you what's laughable. If I was going around posting You Tube links of one man's testimony and using that as conclusive evidence why we should be against gay adoptions, you guys would have a field day mocking me.

"all children adopted by gay parents will suffer" is an affirmation proven wrong by one single video.

Now if you say "must", then health care people are obliged to see each individual relationship as for what it is: one relationship that stands on it´s own not to be judged simply by the generalities of the sexualities involved.

 

[Duck]

Damn those atheists right

I know, right? Damn them straight to hell for quoting our holy book verbatim!!!

 

[-Peacemaker-]

"all children adopted by gay parents will suffer" is an affirmation proven wrong by one single video.

Now if you say "must", then health care people are obliged to see each individual relationship as for what it is: one relationship that stands on it´s own not to be judged simply by the generalities of the sexualities involved.

Again, you guys are so to take a face value a 3 minute testimony that says what you want to hear. You guys know damn well that if he said what you didn't want to hear that you'd be thinking much more rationally and be much more discerning

 

[Duck]

In the U.S., we have a presidential candidate who has been married 3 times--cheated on a wife with cancer, asked his second wife for an open marriage.

We have televangelists who make millions upon millions off gullible and desperate people who probably don't have a pot to pee in.

One of the world's largest religious institutions has covered up for known child molestors.

Two straight people can show up at a Los Vegas wedding chapel drunk off their behinds, be united in matrimony by a minister dressed as Elvis, file for divorce once the hangover wears off and they both realize they're repulsed by one another, and then each do it again with someone else the next time they're drunk in Vegas.

Jimmy Swaggart and Ted Haggard fool around with prostitutes.

There is poverty, earthquakes, pollution, war, murder, unclean drinking water, starvation, cancer, and a guy named Warren Jeffs who manipulated and abused underage girls.

And we're supposed to be worried about two grown people of the same sex who love each other wanting to get married?????

And don't forget that he divorced her sometime after she refused and was diagnosed with MS. Calista better hope she stays healthy. She ought to start looking for the tell tale signs of Newt cheating as well, since, well, he was married for 12 years to his first wife, starting cheating on her and carried on the affair for about 6 years before divorcing. Wifey nr 2 ('open marriage') got the same treatment, Newt started carrying on an affair after about 12 years of marriage, kept it up for about 6 years before divorcing. He and Calista got married in 99, so I figure she is about due to be shopped around on any day now.

 

[Me Myself]

Again, you guys are so to take a face value a 3 minute testimony that says what you want to hear. You guys know damn well that if he said what you didn't want to hear that you'd be thinking much more rationally and be much more discerning

You still fail to see the rationale behind what I said.

example:

Affirmation exists that all gingers are bad parents

video about a ginger saying how aweful his parents were doesn´t prove that ALL gingers are bad parents.

video about ginger saying happy about parents and having a good carreeer, character, etc proves that not ALL gingers are bad parents.


So one single person raised properly by lesbian parents IS enough to prove that not ALL gay aprents are bad for their kids.

Simple enough?

 

[-Peacemaker-]

You still fail to see the rationale behind what I said.

example:

Affirmation exists that all gingers are bad parents

video about a ginger saying how aweful his parents were doesn´t prove that ALL gingers are bad parents.

video about ginger saying happy about parents and having a good carreeer, character, etc proves that not ALL gingers are bad parents.


So one single person raised properly by lesbian parents IS enough to prove that not ALL gay aprents are bad for their kids.

Simple enough?

You don't have the slightest clue about that guy's life except a three minute excerpt in his own words. That guy might practice incest for all you know.

 

[Me Myself]

You don't have the slightest clue about that guy's life except a three minute excerpt in his own words. That guy might practice incest for all you know.

Actually, the fact that he presented himself in that way makes it already highly likely that anyone that finds ANY dirt on him will post it somewhere to descredit him. Trust me, it WOULD be known.

By all means, I am doing a google search now.

You still haven´t clearn out my question a few posts back where I ask you for what he used the sources you cited that are 1990 and above. You just cited the sources, not what he said because of them.

 

[Me Myself]

Zach Wahls | Zach's official homepage

Far more than a single 3 minutes video.

You really sure nobody is digging up his closet for skeletons? You think they wouldn´t find them?

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Actually, the fact that he presented himself in that way makes it already highly likely that anyone that finds ANY dirt on him will post it somewhere to descredit him. Trust me, it WOULD be known.

By all means, I am doing a google search now.

You still haven´t clearn out my question a few posts back where I ask you for what he used the sources you cited that are 1990 and above. You just cited the sources, not what he said because of them.

I mean this in the most sicncere way, I'm not trying to be a prick. Do you understand how a bibliography and footnotes work? Every one of those studies quoted has a footnote so that you can check when it was originally published in the bibliography. There are no secrets here. It's right there in plain English if you care enough to look

 

[Me Myself]

My Two Moms

On January 31, 2011, Zach Wahls adressed the Iowa House Judiciary Committee in a public hearing regarding a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in Iowa. The nineteen-year-old son of a same-sex couple, Wahls proudly proclaimed, “the sexual orientation of my parents has had zero effect on the content of my character.” Hours later, his speech was posted on YouTube, where it went viral, quickly receiving more than two million views. By the end of the week, everyone knew his name and wanted to hear more from the boy with two moms.

Same-sex marriage will be a major—possibly the defining—issue in next year’s election cycle, and Wahls speaks to that, but also to a broader issue. Sure, he’s handsome and athletic, an environmental engineering student, and an Eagle Scout. Yet, growing up with two moms, he knows what it’s like to feel different and to fear being made fun of or worse. In the inspirational spirit of the “It Gets Better” campaign, My Two Moms also delivers a reassuring message to same-sex couples, their kids, and anyone who’s ever felt like an outsider: “you are not alone.”
The book is available now for pre-order at Amazonor Barnes and Noble or at your local independent book seller!

 

[Duck]

Out of curiosity, do you think adultery is evil? Are you as committed to fighting other "deviant lifestyles" as you are fighting queers?

How about fornicators?

On that note, while I'm freely associating and calling you out, what about gluttony? Pride? Greed? Do you fight with the same passion that you do homosexuality? Do you go around saying that you can't support greedy people because it's evil? That you're fighting adultery because it's evil?

Because, you are well aware I'm sure, that greed and gluttony are perfectly legal. Nobody is legally required to tithe to a church or an organization, are they?

Or do you shrug your shoulders at any of these?

As I have said before, the only unforgivable sin in christian theology is to not be sorry that you are gay. And of course because of that none of the resident "hate the sin" crowd is going to admit to harassing the local Weight Watchers meetings with signs proclaiming 'God hates Fatties', largely because THEY DON'T care about any of the other 'seven deadly sins'.

Truthfully, I think that they wouldn't care about Lesbians very much if the gay men would just go away. The sole focus (really, when was the last time you heard of an anti-gay preacher proclaim that scissoring was causing the downfall of western civilization?) of the hate groups and their crowd of not-yet-declared-hate-group-sycophants is gay male sex. I really think part of their issue is their treatment and attitude toward women. The patriarchal attitude of women as property/sex objects has completely infected their thinking, and they are afraid that allowing men to be seen as sexually desirable beings will lead to they themselves being treated like they have treated women, and it frightens them unto death. Why else would they violate one of the few DIRECT commands of their God? (you know, one of the Thou Shalt NOT's given in the same part of the book as the levitical man lieing with man line?)

 

[Duck]

I've known several homosexuals over the years -- all were bed post notchers like you describe your hetero friends to be -- and not once have I ever heard any of them even talk about getting married. Maybe it's just that you don't know enough heterosexuals personally to make an informed statement?

And where do you live? How many of them are ABLE to be married where you live? Given that marriage has only been an option since 2003 or so, have they had much opportunity for marriage?

 

[Me Myself]

10 J. M. Bailey et al., "Sexual Orientation of Adult Sons of Gay Fathers," Developmental Psychology 31 (1995): 124

59 Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz, "(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter," American Sociological Review 66 (2001): 174, 179.

43 Lettie L. Lockhart et al., "Letting out the Secret: Violence in Lesbian Relationships," Journal of Interpersonal Violence 9 (1994): 469--492.

28 Robert Lerner and Althea K. Nagai, No Basis: What the Studies Don't Tell Us About Same Sex Parenting (Washington: Ethics and Public Policy Center, 2001):

27 Justin Torres, "APA Fatherhood Report 'Utter Nonsense,'" Conservative News Service, July 16, 1999

10 J. M. Bailey et al., "Sexual Orientation of Adult Sons of Gay Fathers," Developmental Psychology 31 (1995): 124

31 "Sex Survey Results," Genre (October 1996), quoted in "Survey Finds 40 percent of Gay Men Have Had More Than 40 Sex Partners," Lambda Report, January 1998, p.

These examples are just the tip of the ice berg. I'm a little diappointed you put so little effort to learn what you were talking about before making the bolded statement

One by one then:

-Doesn´t prove that gay parents are worst than straight parents:

A report by J. M. Bailey et al. in Developmental Psychology, commenting on studies of the children of gay and lesbian parents, notes that "available studies [are] insufficiently large to generate much statistical power."10


27-28 They don´t prove that gay parents are worst either, they are just descrediting the other studies without bringing anything in.


59 I am curious about this statement, because a quick wiki search told me that the author says in that book: "How Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter?" argues that children of lesbian and gay parents develop at least as well as those with straight parents, but are more likely themselves to be open to different kinds of relationships.[3]

31 talks about the amount of sexual partners that most (most is the key word there) homosexuals have had. While this is relevant to a point, it is also one of the first things that any competent social worker would take note when analizing the SPECIFIC couple that asked for rights to adopt. This means that this research wouldn´t apply to couples that haven´t had the number of sex partners this study implies most people have had. Besides, number of sexpartners hasnothing to do with number of monogamous relationships. If someone has had a lot of sex partners but the few monogamous relationships s/he has had have been stable and good, that doesn´t disqualify him/her at all to be an emotionaly balanced person.

Furthermore, all the sex partners could very well be from a part of life left behind.


Only ONE of the notes you pointed out couldn´t be discarded in a quick search, and that was 43. But honestly, after the person presenting all those worthless sources as if they had any real importance for his subject, I have no reason to believe that that point was also done in very questionable circumstances.