HRC Condemns Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant’s Statement of Support for LGBT Adoption Ban

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Actual data does not support your opinion.

Actual data is compellingly empirical. Look at every mostly black jurisdiction in the country. Gets no clearer than that.

Wait, what? Now you're comparing single parenthood? Children do best with two parents. Data proves that the gender of those parents is immaterial.

Wrong, neocon. The data shows kids need both parents, mom and dad.

No, actually it doesn't. What the data shows is that the children of gays are at no disadvantage to the children of heterosexuals.

Children in gay adoptions at no disadvantage - Health News - Health Families - The Independent

Anecdotally almost anything can be justified. Empirically, communities suffer when the culture becomes influenced by a large number of homes devoid of both parents. Homo parenting contributes to that problem at least potentially. It is reckless to allow for homo and single parent adoption when the option for both genders is available.

It is interesting and telling to note how you, and the others here who rail against gay adoption can do nothing more than make vague and generalized pronouncements, and spew invectives like "homo" without actually making an argument. It's quite obvious that you are weak minded , intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

'"The Mississippi adoption ban is an outdated relic of a time when courts and legislatures believed that it was somehow OK to discriminate against gay people simply because they are gay," states the lawsuit, which was filed with assistance from the Campaign for Southern Equality and the Family Equality Council.

Gov. Phil Bryant, a Republican, said he still supports the ban. "I hope the attorney general will vigorously defend the State of Mississippi against this lawsuit," he said in a statement.'

Couples Sue to Overturn Mississippi Ban on Gay Adoptions - ABC News

The unwarranted fear and hate exhibited by most on the right with regard to gay Americans is also an outdated relic; Mississippi lawmakers should act to repeal the ban.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I was wondering how many of you here that have rushed to the defense of Mississippi would agree with this lunatic. Slavery? Really?

Fischer: Gays Are Trying To Reimpose Slavery On The South Submitted by Kyle Mantyla on Thursday, 8/13/2015 3:33 pm

Mississippi is the last state in the nation that bans adoption by gay couples and this ban is currently being challenged in court by several same-sex couples, prompting Bryan Fischer to warn that gay activists are seeking to reimpose slavery on the south. On his radio show today, Fischer declared that "if the homosexual lobby is successful on this, then they will be forcing the state of Mississippi, against its will" to drop its ban on gay adoption, which is nothing more than tyranny and the imposition of slavery. "Ladies and gentlemen," Fischer said, "that is just a form of tyranny. When you compel people to do things contrary to their will, contrary to their conscience, that's slavery as well as tyranny. So you think about it, who's bringing slavery back to the south? Who's bringing slavery back to the Confederate States of America? It's the homosexual lobby. When you compel people to provide services against their will, that is involuntary servitude, that is slavery. I submit to you that it is the homosexual lobby that's single-handedly bringing slavery back to the Confederate States of America." - See more at: Fischer Gays Are Trying To Reimpose Slavery On The South Right Wing Watch

Who the hell is being forced to do what against their will? This is just over the top moronic equine excrement. And like some of you here, he doesn't give a crap about the kids and is all to willing to use them as pawns in the failed battle to thwart gay rights. Shame on him and shame on you.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Actual data is compellingly empirical. Look at every mostly black jurisdiction in the country. Gets no clearer than that.

Wait, what? Now you're comparing single parenthood? Children do best with two parents. Data proves that the gender of those parents is immaterial.

Wrong, neocon. The data shows kids need both parents, mom and dad.

No, actually it doesn't. What the data shows is that the children of gays are at no disadvantage to the children of heterosexuals.

Children in gay adoptions at no disadvantage - Health News - Health Families - The Independent

Anecdotally almost anything can be justified. Empirically, communities suffer when the culture becomes influenced by a large number of homes devoid of both parents. Homo parenting contributes to that problem at least potentially. It is reckless to allow for homo and single parent adoption when the option for both genders is available.

It is interesting and telling to note how you, and the others here who rail against gay adoption can do nothing more than make vague and generalized pronouncements, and spew invectives like "homo" without actually making an argument. It's quite obvious that you are weak minded , intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Wait, what? Now you're comparing single parenthood? Children do best with two parents. Data proves that the gender of those parents is immaterial.

Wrong, neocon. The data shows kids need both parents, mom and dad.

No, actually it doesn't. What the data shows is that the children of gays are at no disadvantage to the children of heterosexuals.

Children in gay adoptions at no disadvantage - Health News - Health Families - The Independent

Anecdotally almost anything can be justified. Empirically, communities suffer when the culture becomes influenced by a large number of homes devoid of both parents. Homo parenting contributes to that problem at least potentially. It is reckless to allow for homo and single parent adoption when the option for both genders is available.

It is interesting and telling to note how you, and the others here who rail against gay adoption can do nothing more than make vague and generalized pronouncements, and spew invectives like "homo" without actually making an argument. It's quite obvious that you are weak minded , intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

Before any pieces of empirical data are collected, scientists carefully design their research methods to ensure the accuracy, quality and integrity of the data. If there are flaws in the way that empirical data is collected, the research will not be considered valid. http://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct 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 you 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
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

What say you now?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Wrong, neocon. The data shows kids need both parents, mom and dad.

No, actually it doesn't. What the data shows is that the children of gays are at no disadvantage to the children of heterosexuals.

Children in gay adoptions at no disadvantage - Health News - Health Families - The Independent

Anecdotally almost anything can be justified. Empirically, communities suffer when the culture becomes influenced by a large number of homes devoid of both parents. Homo parenting contributes to that problem at least potentially. It is reckless to allow for homo and single parent adoption when the option for both genders is available.

It is interesting and telling to note how you, and the others here who rail against gay adoption can do nothing more than make vague and generalized pronouncements, and spew invectives like "homo" without actually making an argument. It's quite obvious that you are weak minded , intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

Before any pieces of empirical data are collected, scientists carefully design their research methods to ensure the accuracyView attachment 47391, quality and integrity of the data. If there are flaws in the way that empirical data is collected, the research will not be considered valid. http://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct 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 you 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
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

 

[Seawytch]

No, actually it doesn't. What the data shows is that the children of gays are at no disadvantage to the children of heterosexuals.

Children in gay adoptions at no disadvantage - Health News - Health Families - The Independent

Anecdotally almost anything can be justified. Empirically, communities suffer when the culture becomes influenced by a large number of homes devoid of both parents. Homo parenting contributes to that problem at least potentially. It is reckless to allow for homo and single parent adoption when the option for both genders is available.

It is interesting and telling to note how you, and the others here who rail against gay adoption can do nothing more than make vague and generalized pronouncements, and spew invectives like "homo" without actually making an argument. It's quite obvious that you are weak minded , intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

Before any pieces of empirical data are collected, scientists carefully design their research methods to ensure the accuracyView attachment 47391, quality and integrity of the data. If there are flaws in the way that empirical data is collected, the research will not be considered valid. http://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct 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 you 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
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Anecdotally almost anything can be justified. Empirically, communities suffer when the culture becomes influenced by a large number of homes devoid of both parents. Homo parenting contributes to that problem at least potentially. It is reckless to allow for homo and single parent adoption when the option for both genders is available.

It is interesting and telling to note how you, and the others here who rail against gay adoption can do nothing more than make vague and generalized pronouncements, and spew invectives like "homo" without actually making an argument. It's quite obvious that you are weak minded , intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

Before any pieces of empirical data are collected, scientists carefully design their research methods to ensure the accuracyView attachment 47391, quality and integrity of the data. If there are flaws in the way that empirical data is collected, the research will not be considered valid. http://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct 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 you 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
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

No, actually it doesn't. What the data shows is that the children of gays are at no disadvantage to the children of heterosexuals.

Children in gay adoptions at no disadvantage - Health News - Health Families - The Independent

Anecdotally almost anything can be justified. Empirically, communities suffer when the culture becomes influenced by a large number of homes devoid of both parents. Homo parenting contributes to that problem at least potentially. It is reckless to allow for homo and single parent adoption when the option for both genders is available.

It is interesting and telling to note how you, and the others here who rail against gay adoption can do nothing more than make vague and generalized pronouncements, and spew invectives like "homo" without actually making an argument. It's quite obvious that you are weak minded , intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

Before any pieces of empirical data are collected, scientists carefully design their research methods to ensure the accuracyView attachment 47391, quality and integrity of the data. If there are flaws in the way that empirical data is collected, the research will not be considered valid. http://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct 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 you 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
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

THAT IS YOU RESPONSE!! Still no actual research.? Still expecting people to just accept your made up horseshit as fact? Are you mentally or intellectually challenged.? What I presented is EXACTLY about whether or not there is a need for both genders in the home. You really don't get that do you? What is being wasted here is my time. Nevertheless, here is part 2 that I promised you. It will no doubt be lost on you but others may learn from it:


Children are Also Victims When Gay and Lesbian Parents and Potential Parents are Discriminated Against by the Progressive Patriot June 7th 2015

I am decidedly weary people of who use children and child rearing issues as pawns in the failed attempts to derail same sex marriage and opposing adoption. Those children, who more than anything, need a stable, secure and loving home have a major stake in the issue.

Yet, there are those who persist in claiming that children need a mother and a father to the exclusion of all other considerations in order to assail same sex marriage and adoption by gays. They will point to bogus and faulty studies that purportedly show that the developmental and emotional outcomes for children of same sex couples is inferior to that of other children. My purpose here to not to debunk those studies-I have done that elsewhere- but rather to address the fact that regardless of what studies show, it is ludicrous and logically fallacious - a non sequitur because there is a disconnect between the faulty premise that gay parenting results in outcomes that are inferior to opposite sex parenting, and the conclusion that gay people should not be permitted to marry or adopt.

Even if the outcomes for children raised in same sex household were in fact different than other children Consider this: If we are to base our policies as to who can marry on who does the best jobs with children, perhaps we should be taking a hard look at certain socio-economic or ethnic groups who produce children who’s development and wellbeing can be contrasted to that of other groups. Maybe we should look at inner city vs. suburban parenting outcomes to set marriage policy? Is anyone willing to go there?

And how about this: It is known that Asian American children tend to be higher achievers than others, so maybe should prohibit marriage in order to discourage child rearing by white Americans whose children might not do as well.

The fact is that there are a couple of million kids already in the care of gay people and couples. Many are the biological children of a gay person. Those children can benefit greatly if their parent is able to marry and the non-biological parent is able to adopt as a second parent. There are many economic, legal and social benefits to doing so. Not allowing the adults to marry only serves to punish those children and place them at a disadvantage.

As far as agency adoption goes, My home state of New Jersey has been allowing joint adoption by same sex couples since 1997, the first state to do so. These are children who had NO parents until these gay folks stepped up. Maybe someone would like to compare the long term outcomes for children who grow up as wards of the state with those raised by same sex couples. Gay people can and will adopt children regardless of whether or not the parent(s) can marry so why deprive the children the advantages-discussed above- of having married parent

Lastly, the smallest number of children who are in the care of gay and lesbian parents are those who were conceived with the use of surrogacy, or artificial insemination. These are children who, arguably would not have been born at all. While there are those who may believe that their souls might have otherwise been born into some what some believe more advantageous environment, we really don’t know how that works. What we do know is that those children are real, and once again, those children will benefit from having married parents.

So, I ask. What do we do, even if the highly questionable assertion that gay parenting is inferior is correct? Do we discourage or even prohibit gays from having children in their care? Or do we adapt policies to support them and maximize their ability to care for those children? Do we enact complex policies regarding which groups will be encouraged and which will be discouraged from having children based on some measure of their parenting ability which will, most assuredly be disputed. Or, do we treat everyone equally, and provide them with maximum support, so as they can be the best possible parents in whatever circumstances they find themselves .

Yes, it is possible that there may be some unknown number of additional children living with gay parents as the result of same sex marriage. Some will adopt and some will have children with medical/ scientific intervention. Those adopted children had no parents and the ones who were conceived with help, would not have been born at all. But all of those children, like countless others in the care of gay couples, will have two legal parents who are married. A tremendous advantage.

Let's see what you do with this. I won't be responding to anymore of your stupidity

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is interesting and telling to note how you, and the others here who rail against gay adoption can do nothing more than make vague and generalized pronouncements, and spew invectives like "homo" without actually making an argument. It's quite obvious that you are weak minded , intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

Before any pieces of empirical data are collected, scientists carefully design their research methods to ensure the accuracyView attachment 47391, quality and integrity of the data. If there are flaws in the way that empirical data is collected, the research will not be considered valid. http://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct 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 you 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
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Who the fuck is intentionally depriving kids of anything!!?? Kids who are up for adoption are already deprived of a mother , a father , or both? Are you so out of touch with reality that you think that there is a home with a mother and a father for every kid who needs a home.?

 

[Seawytch]

It is interesting and telling to note how you, and the others here who rail against gay adoption can do nothing more than make vague and generalized pronouncements, and spew invectives like "homo" without actually making an argument. It's quite obvious that you are weak minded , intellectually deficient and morally bankrupt.

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

Before any pieces of empirical data are collected, scientists carefully design their research methods to ensure the accuracyView attachment 47391, quality and integrity of the data. If there are flaws in the way that empirical data is collected, the research will not be considered valid. http://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct 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 you 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
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

Before any pieces of empirical data are collected, scientists carefully design their research methods to ensure the accuracyView attachment 47391, quality and integrity of the data. If there are flaws in the way that empirical data is collected, the research will not be considered valid. http://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct 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 you 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
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

Very good point! Of course you are the parents. This @#&%### is especially annoying.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Wrong. I use empirical data to back up my assertions. Sorry if the facts bother you and your agenda.
And I refuse to use the hijacked term gay so I say homo like hetero. If you think homo is disparaging then you need to take that up with the insulting lefties who coined the misnomer but widely accepted term homophobe. Can't have it both ways around me.

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

Before any pieces of empirical data are collected, scientists carefully design their research methods to ensure the accuracyView attachment 47391, quality and integrity of the data. If there are flaws in the way that empirical data is collected, the research will not be considered valid. http://www.livescience.com/21456-empirical-evidence-a-definition.html

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

The scientific method begins with scientists forming questions, or hypotheses, and then acquiring the knowledge to either support or disprove a specific theory. That is where the collection of empirical data comes into play. Empirical research is the process of finding empirical evidence. Empirical data is the information that comes from the research.

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

In a project launched last month, a team I direct 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 you 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
http://whatweknow.law.columbia.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/


I should add, the consensus that kids in gay homes do just as well as kids in straight homes is recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting

Consensus

The scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,[3][4][5] despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families.[4] Major associations of mental health professionals in the U.S., Canada, and Australia, have not identified credible empirical research that suggests otherwise.[5][6][7][8][9] Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union.[5][6][87][92] Statistics show that home and childcare activities in homosexual households are more evenly split between the two rather than having specific gender roles,[93] and that there were no differences in the interests and hobbies of children with homosexual or heterosexual parents.[94]

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

Because self segregating black locales have the problem of depleted family structure the most. The results are disastrous. Allowing homo family arrangements only contributes to an existing problem.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

Because self segregating black locales have the problem of depleted family structure the most. The results are disastrous. Allowing homo family arrangements only contributes to an existing problem.

 

[Seawytch]

You used empirical data ? You keep bandying that about be it appears to me that you don’t even know what empirical data is.

What research is there that have you conducted or that others have conducted that you can cite?. And consider this:

You just keep trying to bamboozle us into believing that you know something , that you can prove that gay people should not adopt kids but you have nothing. I am going to show you what research looks like which will clearly show that children do just fine with same sex parents

Then I’m going to demonstrate why the question of whether or not children are at any disadvantage with same sex parents is not even the right question to be asking when it comes to the debate over same sex marriage and adoption. In fact, it’s a downright dumb ass question-a logical fallacy- and I’m willing to be that you don’t even have the brain power to imagine why that is. However, you will have to wait and wonder. This will be in two parts. First the research:

What say you now?

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

Because self segregating black locales have the problem of depleted family structure the most. The results are disastrous. Allowing homo family arrangements only contributes to an existing problem.

You still have not explained what that has to do with gays and their children.

You're trying to compare single parent households to intact ones. That's way beyond apples and oranges.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

Because self segregating black locales have the problem of depleted family structure the most. The results are disastrous. Allowing homo family arrangements only contributes to an existing problem.

You still have not explained what that has to do with gays and their children.

You're trying to compare single parent households to intact ones. That's way beyond apples and oranges.

This horses ass does not consider a family with same sex parents to be an intact family.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

Because self segregating black locales have the problem of depleted family structure the most. The results are disastrous. Allowing homo family arrangements only contributes to an existing problem.

You can't deal with the empirical? Your focus is on the anecdotal but when I illustrate a more comprehensive problem you can't handle it.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

What a waste of space. The issue is about the presence of both genders in the home. The empirical data clearly demonstrates that both genders are necessary. Homo marriage lacks a gender.

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

Because self segregating black locales have the problem of depleted family structure the most. The results are disastrous. Allowing homo family arrangements only contributes to an existing problem.

You still have not explained what that has to do with gays and their children.

You're trying to compare single parent households to intact ones. That's way beyond apples and oranges.

I'm demonstrating empirically that kids need both genders. Plenty of single mom homes in mostly black neighborhoods are essentially intact in the sense that necessary financial resources are there and opportunity for success still exists.
The problem is the kids lack that innately necessary gender role model. Usually it's a missing father.
Homo marriage contributes to that same problem by denying both gender role models in the home. It's very simple and the results are very clear. Just not convenient to those who want to push their self-focused and/or misguided agenda.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

No data supports your claim. You saying it over and over isn't evidence.

This is evidence...

Psychologist in same-sex case says parents gender irrelevant in child care - The Donaldson Adoption Institute

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

Because self segregating black locales have the problem of depleted family structure the most. The results are disastrous. Allowing homo family arrangements only contributes to an existing problem.

You can't deal with the empirical? Your focus is on the anecdotal but when I illustrate a more comprehensive problem you can't handle it.

You would have to be seriously deranged-I mean back ward deranged- or profoundly retarded to believe this bovine excrement . I've going to give you the benefit of the doubt and conclude that you are just playing a sick and perverted mind fuck game. I'm not playing anymore.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Tell your psychologist to visit every black community in the country and get some empirical perspective.
What's more, intentionally depriving a human of the right to the opportunity to be raised by his actual parents is beyond rude and selfish. It's cruel.

Why do you keep bringing up blacks? Can't you discuss the topic?

Who is being deprived of anything? We ARE our children's parents.

Because self segregating black locales have the problem of depleted family structure the most. The results are disastrous. Allowing homo family arrangements only contributes to an existing problem.

You can't deal with the empirical? Your focus is on the anecdotal but when I illustrate a more comprehensive problem you can't handle it.

You would have to be seriously deranged-I mean back ward deranged- or profoundly retarded to believe this bovine excrement . I've going to give you the benefit of the doubt and conclude that you are just playing a sick and perverted mind fuck game. I'm not playing anymore.

I've given you empirical evidence and you can't handle it. Your problem, not mine.