Doing The Moral Christian Right Thing: Trump Plans To Let Adoption Agencies Reject Same-Sex Parents

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Isn't the issue forcing faith based adoption agencies to send kids to homosexual couples? That's undeniably wrong and it's the cake baker and the gay wedding issue all over again.

The real issue is maximizing the probability that children in need of a permanent and stable home will find one. Arbitrarily disqualifying people based on fear , superstition, and questionable interpretations of ancient text diminishes that probability.

If an adoption agency has a problem placing kids with gay people, they should be in a business other than adoption

A child would be better off in an orphanage than with gay parents.

An orphanage without any queers working in it of course.

That is beyond idiotic!

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

I have always been very upfront about my belief that there is nothing wrong with parenting by same sex couples, and as I said, if the agency has a problem with it they should be in a different

As far as your "finding go" show us what you got. I have never seen a legitimate study that supports what you claim. I have been studying this issue for a very long time. Lids were being adopted by gays long before same sex marriage was even on the radar. I worked in an adoption agency for 26 years. I have placed with same sex couples and followed their cases over time. Pleople who spread your kind of tripe are doing a disservice to children in need of a home.

Children who truly need a home (my daughter and son in law recently adopted after years of waiting in line)
should go to single sex homes but only in a last resort situation. Time and again male AND female parenting is shown to be a natural and beneficial preferred option when it comes to adoption. That's not just my opinion:


Parents are a child’s first role model. Males and females are each unique. It takes one of each kind to ideally raise a child.

Here’s one study that gives more information:

“As the Federalist's D.C. McAllister, who reported on Sullins' findings, explains, his limited study is not the first to highlight potential harm resulting from single-sex parenting. "The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services published an extensive study proving the importance of biological fathers in the 'healthy development of children,'" McAllister notes. "In addition, 'the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted' on the issue of homosexual parenting found 'numerous and significant differences' between children raised by biological parents and children of homosexuals, 'with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated ‘suboptimal’ in almost every category.'"

Study: Same-Sex Parenting Hurts Kids More Than We Think

 

[deanrd]

Clearly Republicans hate gays more than any other minority.

 

[Polishprince]

Clearly Republicans hate gays more than any other minority.

Just because Republicans (and others, BTW) don't think that men in dresses acting like broads are good role models for children, doesn't mean they "hate" them.

Not everyone is parental material.

I'm sure they would say the same about winos, vagrants and schizoid Americans as well. Those folks aren't hated either, just not good role models for young kids.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I have always been very upfront about my belief that there is nothing wrong with parenting by same sex couples, and as I said, if the agency has a problem with it they should be in a different.

We all know why it is that you want to give homosexuals and other dangerous sexual perverts easy access to children. You're not fooling anyone.

Society has an obligation to protect children from your kind.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I have always been very upfront about my belief that there is nothing wrong with parenting by same sex couples, and as I said, if the agency has a problem with it they should be in a different

As far as your "finding go" show us what you got. I have never seen a legitimate study that supports what you claim. I have been studying this issue for a very long time. Lids were being adopted by gays long before same sex marriage was even on the radar. I worked in an adoption agency for 26 years. I have placed with same sex couples and followed their cases over time. Pleople who spread your kind of tripe are doing a disservice to children in need of a home.

Children who truly need a home (my daughter and son in law recently adopted after years of waiting in line)
should go to single sex homes but only in a last resort situation. Time and again male AND female parenting is shown to be a natural and beneficial preferred option when it comes to adoption. That's not just my opinion:


Parents are a child’s first role model. Males and females are each unique. It takes one of each kind to ideally raise a child.

Here’s one study that gives more information:

“As the Federalist's D.C. McAllister, who reported on Sullins' findings, explains, his limited study is not the first to highlight potential harm resulting from single-sex parenting. "The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services published an extensive study proving the importance of biological fathers in the 'healthy development of children,'" McAllister notes. "In addition, 'the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted' on the issue of homosexual parenting found 'numerous and significant differences' between children raised by biological parents and children of homosexuals, 'with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated ‘suboptimal’ in almost every category.'"

Study: Same-Sex Parenting Hurts Kids More Than We Think

Paul Sullins of the Catholic University? Seriously. I told you that I've doing this for a long time . T know these people

There Is Dangerous Power in Using 'Scientific' Findings to Undermine Gay Marriage

The paper has a straightforward title: "Emotional Problems Among Children With Same-Sex Parents: Difference by Definition." It's not hard to guess the conclusion of this research, released last month by Catholic University professor Paul Sullins: Kids with gay parents have more emotional problems than kids with straight parents, and it's because their parents are gay.

This is not a new argument. Especially in the past decade, as gay marriage has been legally recognized in many states, a small number of scholars have claimed that kids of same-sex parents are exposed to more potential harms than kids of straight parents. This, in turn, has been used to argue against gay adoption and marriage.

But just because some studies support this finding doesn't mean it's true. In fact, many, many more studies reached opposite conclusions. "Research ... has developed a scholarly consensus that shows that children raised by same-sex couples are at no important disadvantage," wrote Stanford University sociologist Michael Rosenfeld in an email. "There is a noisy fringe of academics who claim that children raised by same-sex couples are in disastrous peril," a viewpoint which "has little or no credibility within academia."

Sullins's paper is not just any argument against gay marriage. It's an argument presented in the form of science, complete with academic citations, hypothesis testing, and statistical evidence. This is not simply a matter of ideology; it's a question of how social science is used to further ideological goals, and the unique power that has in the public sphere.

* * *

From an academic perspective, there are a number of flaws in the design of Sullins's research. To his credit, he used a large sample of data compiled by the CDC to test his hypothesis, looking at kids who were living with same-sex parents at the time of various surveys taken between 1997 and 2013. But "what Sullins's paper does not show is that these children were actually raised by the same-sex couple," wrote Rosenfeld in an email.

Here is more on Sullins and his associate and snake oil salesman Mar Regnerus

Conservatives Seize On Hugely Flawed Study HYPERLINK "http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/02/10/3621375/regnerus-sullins-same-sex-parenting/

Conservatives are excitedly promoting a new study that supposedly reveals negative outcomes for the children of same-sex parents. Like the infamously flawed Mark Regnerus Study " rushed out two years ago, the new study seems timed to impact the Supreme Court’s upcoming consideration of marriage equality for same-sex couples. It suffers, however, from some of the same flaws and biases as Regnerus’ study, and doesn’t actually support the argument against marriage equality that it tries to make.

The new study comes from Donald Paul Sullins, a Catholic priest and sociology professor at Catholic University of America. Sullins is a fellow of the Marriage and Religion Research Institute, a project of the anti-LGBT Family Research Council,………

Sullins conducted an analysis of data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) that had been collected from 1997-2013. He concluded that information about the 512 same-sex parents identified in the study demonstrates that their children have more emotional problems compared to couples raised by their biological different-sex couples………… In other words, same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry because they make inferior parents.

One of the first major flaws, however, is the fact that Sullins has no information about whether the same-sex couples were actually married……….No conclusions can actually be drawn about the impacts of legalizing same-sex marriage because the study, by its own admission, collected no data about same-sex marriage or its effect on children

Sullins notes that many of the children had a biological connection to one of the same-sex parents, but it’s unknown if these are from prior relationships, which would suggest their negative outcomes are related to a broken home instead of having two parents of the same sex.

As a vehicle for opposing same-sex marriage, the study severely lacks integrity, as its political positions don’t jibe with its data. “Biology matters,” Regnerus asserts, and Sullins emphasizes that his study identifies “the importance of common biological parentage for optimum child well-being.” Nowhere, however, does Sullins or Regnerus suggest that this has any policy implications for adoption or foster care by different-sex couples. It might be a hard case to make given Sullins has two adopted children of his own.

Conservatives praise these studies for their large samples, eagerly highlighting their negative results while ignore the distortions required to arrive at them. A recent large study from Australia with a similarly-sized pool of same-sex parents who had actually raised children together as couples found that the children have quite positive outcomes Conservatives Seize On Hugely Flawed Study About Same-Sex Parents

 

[theHawk]

Clearly Republicans hate gays more than any other minority.

No, we hate progressives more than anything. A conservative gay person is tolerable, a progressive shit stain is not.

 

[RealDave]

This is indeed doing the moral right thing and President Trump knows this. It's the Christian thing to do. Same-Sex couples should not be allowed to adopt kids. The truth is they adopt them for their sexual pleasure. The children are mostly sexually violated and end up being tormented for life with deep psychological problems. Adoptions should be for the good of the child. Only heterosexual couples can make that goodness happen. With that said, let the volcanic explosions of homosexual diarrhea begin!

Trump's plan to let adoption agencies turn away same-sex parents

Only if you are a bigoted ass.

Homosexuality & pedophilia are not related.
Soi you are nty just a bigot but a stupid bigot.

 

[RealDave]

The SC will probably stop that, but he will rile the crazies up with the effort.

Colorado should have been a lesson for you gay lovers.

You learn slow

If God didn't like gay people, why did he make so many of them?

He didn't make them. They chose to be gay.

Debunked.

 

[elongobardi]

He didn't make them. They chose to be gay.

I'm sure lots of religious nutbags agree with you. Trained psychologists don't.

Yeah. Gives them a reason to have a job. The almighty dollar will make them say anything to have a purpose. If you think they’re born gay you are sadly mistaken.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's just funny, and a little sad that you are that dumb.

That’s what you always say. It’s true. Do some homework. You’ll see how dumb you really are. It’s funny that you live in Texas. I’m surprised they put up with an asshole like you. Have to check with my buddies from college that live in Texas to see if something changed. I know Dallas went to the shiter Hopefully they contain it there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crazy right wingers still have a death grip on our gerrymandered political representatives, but Texas is more purple than red, and getting bluer by the day.

Good luck trying to turn Texas into a liberal state. You’ll get major resistance. Not going to happen there. Keep dreaming though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elongobardi]

Yeah. Gives them a reason to have a job. The almighty dollar will make them say anything to have a purpose. If you think they’re born gay you are sadly mistaken.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's just funny, and a little sad that you are that dumb.

That’s what you always say. It’s true. Do some homework. You’ll see how dumb you really are. It’s funny that you live in Texas. I’m surprised they put up with an asshole like you. Have to check with my buddies from college that live in Texas to see if something changed. I know Dallas went to the shiter Hopefully they contain it there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crazy right wingers still have a death grip on our gerrymandered political representatives, but Texas is more purple than red, and getting bluer by the day.

Oh and demoquacks NEVER gerrymander?

You're a clueless clown

Texas being gerrymandered to the right is just a statement of fact. The demographic change in Texas is also a statement of fact.

I think the 80% of the state that are hard core conservatives and been carrying guns there hole life will tell you different. Just another libtard and there pipe dreams


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elongobardi]

Correct decision

Forcing faith based agencies to is a clear violation of the First. Much like ssm cake baking

Public funding of faith based agencies that exclude certain people based on religious beliefs is a clear violation of the first.

So. The liberals are trying to trample and violate the 2nd Amendment what’s the difference. Now we get to pick and choose what Amendments we can and can’t shit on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elongobardi]

Yes they should be excluded.

That will leave a hell of a lot of kids in an already backlogged foster care system without a permanent home. And how should they screen for it? Should it be a question in the adoption application? She they install a web cam in the prospective adoptive couples bedroom?

And please explain why and how they way people have sex relates to their ability to be parents.

I don't think how they have sex in the privacy of their bedroom effect their parenting skills. I think we need a strong Man and a strong Woman team to properly raise a balanced kid.

What you "think' they need and what research says that they need are two different things

Did you get that from a Craker Jacks box. Two fathers or two mothers leave a lot of explaining to do. Not too mention the problems the child will have in school.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elongobardi]

The SC will probably stop that, but he will rile the crazies up with the effort.

Colorado should have been a lesson for you gay lovers.

You learn slow

If God didn't like gay people, why did he make so many of them?

He didn't make them. They chose to be gay.

He didn't make you either

Really. So we all just appeared here. Next time before you post, take your medication first.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elongobardi]

Correct decision

Forcing faith based agencies to is a clear violation of the First. Much like ssm cake baking

Public funding of faith based agencies that exclude certain people based on religious beliefs is a clear violation of the first.

I don't give two fckn shits what you blabber about, queer. And yes you're queer no matter how much you deny it. Far too focused in faggot shit

One could say the same about you. You’re very focused on denying rights to other people.

What rights are being violated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Paul Sullins of the Catholic University? Seriously. I told you that I've doing this for a long time . T know these people

I found something by Slate and The Atlantic (in addition to you) both denigrating Paul Sullins.

However I found nothing from a disinterested third party that would lead me to conclude Sullins isn't producing studies that confirm what I've already read long ago in the past or would cause me to doubt what I already intuitively know, i.e. that society is made up of men and women and children who aren't raised in homes with both men and women are not receiving the most well rounded and well adjusted upbringing possible.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Paul Sullins of the Catholic University? Seriously. I told you that I've doing this for a long time . T know these people

I found something by Slate and The Atlantic (in addition to you) both denigrating Paul Sullins.

However I found nothing from a disinterested third party that would lead me to conclude Sullins isn't producing studies that confirm what I've already read long ago in the past or would cause me to doubt what I already intuitively know, i.e. that society is made up of men and women and children who aren't raised in homes with both men and women are not receiving the most well rounded and well adjusted upbringing possible.

Yes there are men and women but that fact does mean that it takes men and women together to parent, especially now that gender roles are very fluid and flexible. It does not take a man to teach a kid how to play sports or a woman to teach him to cook. Secondly, there are many opportunities for exposure to role models or both genders in a child's life outside of the home or with extended family. The family unit does not live in isolation. Therefor your argument is a Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), Logical fallacy. The premise does not support the conclusion .

As far as Sullins goes, I haven't seen anything by a disinterested third party supports his work . I will add that the Atlantic article is not over the top biased and does not have an agenda. It gave him credit where credit was due but also provided an objective analysis of where he went wrong. There is little reason to think that he was not always as sloppy. His associate Regnerous was humiliated in court in Michigan trying to sell that same bovine excrement on behalf of the state as an argument against same sex marriage.

The number of unbiased peer reviewed studies that that conclude that the respective genders of the parents are inconsequential far out weighs any studies that c0nclude otherwise, and those that do have flaws similar to the work of these two clowns,


A team at Columbia Law School has collected on one website the abstracts of all peer-reviewed studies that have addressed this question since 1980 so that anyone can examine the research directly, and not rely on talking heads or potential groupthink. Even when we might not agree with a study’s conclusions—with how a researcher interpreted the data—we still included it if it went through peer review and was relevant to the topic at hand. Peer review, of course, isn’t perfect, but it’s one of the best ways the world has to ensure that research conclusions are at least the product of good-faith efforts to get at the truth.

The Columbia project is the largest collection of peer-reviewed scholarship on gay parenting to date. What does it show? We found 71 studies concluding that kids with gay parents fare no worse than others and only four concluding that they had problems. But those four studies all suffered from the same gross limitation: The children with gay parents were lumped in with children of family breakup, a cohort known to face higher risks linked to the trauma of family dissolution.


Even the notion that some try to put forth that there are no good studies is wrong...the studies, while not perfect do give us a very good idea on the conclusions and that is that gay homes are not better nor worse.

Here is a link to all the studies

What does the scholarly research say about the well-being of children with gay or lesbian parents? | What We Know

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm sure lots of religious nutbags agree with you. Trained psychologists don't.

Yeah. Gives them a reason to have a job. The almighty dollar will make them say anything to have a purpose. If you think they’re born gay you are sadly mistaken.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's just funny, and a little sad that you are that dumb.

That’s what you always say. It’s true. Do some homework. You’ll see how dumb you really are. It’s funny that you live in Texas. I’m surprised they put up with an asshole like you. Have to check with my buddies from college that live in Texas to see if something changed. I know Dallas went to the shiter Hopefully they contain it there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crazy right wingers still have a death grip on our gerrymandered political representatives, but Texas is more purple than red, and getting bluer by the day.

Good luck trying to turn Texas into a liberal state. You’ll get major resistance. Not going to happen there. Keep dreaming though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's already happening.

 

[BULLDOG]

That's just funny, and a little sad that you are that dumb.

That’s what you always say. It’s true. Do some homework. You’ll see how dumb you really are. It’s funny that you live in Texas. I’m surprised they put up with an asshole like you. Have to check with my buddies from college that live in Texas to see if something changed. I know Dallas went to the shiter Hopefully they contain it there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crazy right wingers still have a death grip on our gerrymandered political representatives, but Texas is more purple than red, and getting bluer by the day.

Oh and demoquacks NEVER gerrymander?

You're a clueless clown

Texas being gerrymandered to the right is just a statement of fact. The demographic change in Texas is also a statement of fact.

I think the 80% of the state that are hard core conservatives and been carrying guns there hole life will tell you different. Just another libtard and there pipe dreams


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

80% of Texans haven't been carrying guns their whole life. The vast majority of those that currently do only started in the last few years

 

[Moonglow]

Christ never said that gay folks can't adopt..