White_MAGA_Man
Platinum Member
- Jan 24, 2019
- 3,238
- 1,310
- Thread starter
- #101
When are you going to have your conversion therapy? You need it so you can receive God.I found something by Slate and The Atlantic (in addition to you) both denigrating Paul Sullins.Paul Sullins of the Catholic University? Seriously. I told you that I've doing this for a long time . T know these people
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