Prince's Trust Survey & The Voices of the Voteless (Children) in Gay Marriage Debate

[Ravi]

Parents don't think about their children's needs anymore, at least not the greater amount of parents, this is after all, the "me' Generation.

Let the schools and daycares raise the children, parents have better things to do, like getting drunk, and getting laid.

It's sad really, and it's no wonder so many young people are committing horrible crimes, like that 19 year old road rage killer in Vegas. I'll bet you his parents didn't raise him, his video games, and schools did the job.

Wut! The OP is very insistent that kids only thrive if their parent is dating (and probably getting laid).

 

[Silhouette]

Wut! The OP is very insistent that kids only thrive if their parent is dating (and probably getting laid).

I said nothing about parents getting laid. I said that a single parent continuing to reach out to the opposite gender "as mattering" (relationships particularly in a child's mind are not about the sexual act) by dating is far better psychologically to that child of the parent's opposite gender than of two opposite-gendered-to-the-child "gay parents" who have institutionalized that child's gender as "not ever mattering"..

For once, pull your mind out of the gutter.

 

[Ravi]

There's something really fucking weird about a kid thinking their parent going on dates makes the kid matter.

A child sees the world and himself in it through the eyes of his parent(s). That's how child developmental psychology works. You think child development standards are weird?

Odd..

Link us to some evidence that a parent dating is helpful to a child's mental health. Something rational and thoughtful, if possible.

Bump for Silly.

 

[Skylar]

Wut! The OP is very insistent that kids only thrive if their parent is dating (and probably getting laid).

I said nothing about parents getting laid. I said that a single parent continuing to reach out to the opposite gender "as mattering" (relationships particularly in a child's mind are not about the sexual act) by dating is far better psychologically to that child of the parent's opposite gender than of two opposite-gendered-to-the-child "gay parents" who have institutionalized that child's gender as "not ever mattering"..

And where does the Prince Trust Study say that good same gender role models come only from parents?

Or measure anything about any kind of parenting? As remember, the standard isn't a 'same sex role model'. But a GOOD one.

Can you see the distinction? Because we certainly can.

 

[Silhouette]

You see a distinction between "same sex role model" and "same gender role model"? Really? Are you using "sex" as a verb there?

 

[Ravi]

There's something really fucking weird about a kid thinking their parent going on dates makes the kid matter.

A child sees the world and himself in it through the eyes of his parent(s). That's how child developmental psychology works. You think child development standards are weird?

Odd..

Link us to some evidence that a parent dating is helpful to a child's mental health. Something rational and thoughtful, if possible.

Bump for Silly.

 

[koshergrl]

Yes, by all means. Let's make marriage between homos legal so we can legitimize the terrible decisions they have made all their lives that will adversely affect their children.

 

[koshergrl]

Wow, great poll question.

'Important, but less so than adults'

We don't extend equal rights to children for sometimes iffy reasons. But their opinions, if bright enough to form one, are important. But out of necessity, because they can't vote, work, pay taxes, etc. they have to be put under the relevance of adults who can do those things.

So you essentially consider children at the whims of adults when push comes to shove? And yet our laws are written differently when it comes to signs of impending child endangerment at the hands of adults, aren't they? In fact, child endangerment laws are dominant to adults "rights" in every instance.

How do you square up that legal fact against the findings in the Prince's Trust study pitted against gay marriage which will create that unfortunate situation 50% of the time for children caught up in that situation?

We announced to children that we didn't value them the minute we made abortion on demand available to the public, and started encouraging women to engage in risky behavior that leads to single parenthood and grinding poverty for kids.

 

[Skylar]

You see a distinction between "same sex role model" and "same gender role model"? Really? Are you using "sex" as a verb there?

Its the 'good' part you're intentionally and consistently omitting. And the fact that the Prince Trust Study never said where good same gender role models are drawn. You assume its only parents. The study never says this.

You do.

Do you honestly think that the lies you tell yourself about the Prince Trust study, the passages you literally make up from nothing actually persuade us to believe you? The Prince Trust Study doesn't measure ANY type of parenting. It doesn't even mention same sex parents, gay marriage, or any of the inane babble you've invented.

Why do you feel compelled to make shit up? Its not like you're going to slip it by us. Its not like an objective reader of this thread isn't going to notice the fact that the Prince Trust study doesn't say what you claim it does. So what's the point?

The only reason I can see.......is that your lies are for you. That you're trying to convince yourself WAY harder than you're trying to convince us. As the dissonance created by the dawning realization that your animus toward gays is losing, and your belief that it is winning is really uncomfortable. And its lies like the ones you tell about the Prince Trust study that make you feel better.

 

[Skylar]

Yes, by all means. Let's make marriage between homos legal so we can legitimize the terrible decisions they have made all their lives that will adversely affect their children.

Adversely affect their children according to who?

And even following your reasoning, your logic doesn't work. Gays and lesbians are having kids anyway. It doesn't matter if you 'legitimize them' with marriage or not, they're still having kids. So denying same sex marriage doesn't mean these kids magically have opposite sex parents. It only guarantees that these children can NEVER have married parents.

And that helps these children.....how?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sil forgets that the statement, " the LGBT's argue that the study "doesn't mention gay parents". I argue that it doesn't have to. 50% of children in any "gay marriage" would fit the category surveyed," would fit hetero and single parents.

Sil's fallacy is false exclusion and is filled, once again like many of Sil's posting, with fabrications and lies.

June is coming, Sil.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The links do not lead to Sil's conclusions.

June is coming, Sil.

 

[Montrovant]

Wow, great poll question.

'Important, but less so than adults'

We don't extend equal rights to children for sometimes iffy reasons. But their opinions, if bright enough to form one, are important. But out of necessity, because they can't vote, work, pay taxes, etc. they have to be put under the relevance of adults who can do those things.

So you essentially consider children at the whims of adults when push comes to shove? And yet our laws are written differently when it comes to signs of impending child endangerment at the hands of adults, aren't they? In fact, child endangerment laws are dominant to adults "rights" in every instance.

How do you square up that legal fact against the findings in the Prince's Trust study pitted against gay marriage which will create that unfortunate situation 50% of the time for children caught up in that situation?

We announced to children that we didn't value them the minute we made abortion on demand available to the public, and started encouraging women to engage in risky behavior that leads to single parenthood and grinding poverty for kids.

You may have announced that to some children, but I'm guessing most other people have not.

 

[Montrovant]

Good job Sil on bringing up the same years-old study you've been misquoting and lying about in other threads. I guess consistency is one of your virtues!

 

[Syriusly]

Yes, by all means. Let's make marriage between homos legal so we can legitimize the terrible decisions they have made all their lives that will adversely affect their children.

Finally- you are willing to admit that homosexuals are just like heterosexuals.

I knew you could do it!

 

[Syriusly]

Wow, great poll question.

'Important, but less so than adults'

We don't extend equal rights to children for sometimes iffy reasons. But their opinions, if bright enough to form one, are important. But out of necessity, because they can't vote, work, pay taxes, etc. they have to be put under the relevance of adults who can do those things.

So you essentially consider children at the whims of adults when push comes to shove? And yet our laws are written differently when it comes to signs of impending child endangerment at the hands of adults, aren't they? In fact, child endangerment laws are dominant to adults "rights" in every instance.

How do you square up that legal fact against the findings in the Prince's Trust study pitted against gay marriage which will create that unfortunate situation 50% of the time for children caught up in that situation?

We announced to children that we didn't value them the minute we made abortion on demand available to the public, and started encouraging women to engage in risky behavior that leads to single parenthood and grinding poverty for kids.

So you are admitting that 'we heterosexuals'- which would be presumably include you- dont' value children.

 

[Syriusly]

Why is a conversation about British youths who are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds relevant?

Most kids these days are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds. Certainly the vast majority are. .

Really?

You are more and more delusional all the time- you think that the 'vast majority of children' are from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds?

Totally unrelated to the topic....but you just pull this crap out of your ass.

 

[Silhouette]

Yes, by all means. Let's make marriage between homos legal so we can legitimize the terrible decisions they have made all their lives that will adversely affect their children.

1. Adversely affect their children according to who? 2, And even following your reasoning, your logic doesn't work. Gays and lesbians are having kids anyway. It doesn't matter if you 'legitimize them' with marriage or not, they're still having kids. 3. So denying same sex marriage doesn't mean these kids magically have opposite sex parents. It only guarantees that these children can NEVER have married parents.

4. And that helps these children.....how?

1. Adversely affecting according to the Prince's Trust survey, the largest of its kind. Consult those details in the OP.

2. Gays and lesbians can never have children. Only heteros can produce offspring. No baby has ever landed on the earth as a product of male/male or female/female sexual coupling. So in any scenario involving a child around a gay pair, that child is never with its two parents, or any two people that could ever be father and mother to it.

3. Kids always have opposite gendered parents. Always. There is never an exception to that. Where those kids wind up though is another matter...

4. States incentivizing only the best formative environment for kids (see #1.) helps children by encouraging a brass ring for men and women to reach for so that children find themselves in homes more often (instead of less often) with a father and a mother present and necessary for their best sense of esteem and to feel like they have a place in the world.

5. Gay homes will strip 50% of the children in them of that feeling of having a place in the world. Read the Prince's Trust survey for details of precisely how that is. You will find those links and excerpts in the OP.

6. A single parent home even is preferable to a gay one in that a hetero single parent would still be open to/reaching out to/dating a member of the opposite gender. Any child opposite the parent's gender would see that at least they mattered still (this is the simple way the child's formative mind processes the world). A gay home would daily send the message: "your gender NEVER matters". It would be a form of institutionalized child-abuse.

 

[Ravi]

Hey, SIL, maybe if the single parent dated their child it will really show how much they matter.

 

[Silhouette]

Strawman, let me know when you want to address my points..