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

[Skylar]

It isn't the logical deduction from the Prince's Trust. At least you've finally admitted that you were talking out of your ass. Previously you were claiming it was the Prince's Trust's deduction. Now we have you admitting it was yours...Interesting to note that you believe an abusive same gender heterosexual parent would be a desirable role model.

It IS the Prince's Trust's deduction.

No, it isn't. You yourself have admitted that the Prince Trust Study doesn't measure any kind of parenting.

You are citing yourself, not the Prince Trust study.

If children are harmed psychologically by the daily message "your gender has no place in the adult world" then that applies to 50% of all kids caught up in gay lifestyles. Yes, it does, logically, structurally, undeniably..

The Prince Trust study says none of this. All of that 'your gender has no place in the adult world' gibberish is your citing yourself. And you have no idea what you're talking about.

Worse, you assume that the only source of 'good same sex rolemodels' are parents. The Prince Trust Study never says this either. You made it up.

'Logically and structurally, a good same gender role model could be a parent. Or a sibling. Or a grandparent. Or an aunt/uncle. Or a friend. Or a mentor. Or coach. Or a member of their church. Or a teacher. Or any of a myriad of sources.

You pretend it can only be parents. An assumption that is both illogical and irrational. As the Prince Trust Study never says anything you believe on the topic.

Worse still, in the examples in the Prince Trust study that they did cite, those without same sex role models were the children of SINGLE parents. Which is known to have a negative effects on a child's health. When this is pointed out, you insist that the Prince Trust study doesn't measure any type of parenting, including single parenthood.

And then laughably insist that the Prince Trust study measures same sex parenting, which it never so much as mentions.

And of course, there are more than a dozen studies that directly measure the effects of same sex parenting, with the overwhelming consensus being that these children are just fine. Yet you ignore any such study, from any source, using any methodology, from any country, any university, using any sample size...without exception.

And this you call logical? I don't think that word means what you think it means.

 

[Ravi]

It isn't the logical deduction from the Prince's Trust. At least you've finally admitted that you were talking out of your ass. Previously you were claiming it was the Prince's Trust's deduction. Now we have you admitting it was yours...Interesting to note that you believe an abusive same gender heterosexual parent would be a desirable role model.

It IS the Prince's Trust's deduction. How stupid can you be? Logic applies to everything, including the Prince's Trust. Properly it is Logic's deduction:

If children are harmed psychologically by the daily message "your gender has no place in the adult world" then that applies to 50% of all kids caught up in gay lifestyles. Yes, it does, logically, structurally, undeniably..

So you took the lesser of two evils I spoke of and said because I'd prefer a lesser of two evils for kids that somehow equates to "I approve of single parent abusive homes". You're an asshole and a liar. Go get therapy. Oh wait, you can't, I forgot because you're now "totally normal"..

So you are back to lying. So sad.

By the way, Silly, if the same sex couple didn't think the gender of the child mattered, why would they adopt an opposite gendered child in the first place?

 

[Silhouette]

So you are back to lying. So sad.

By the way, Silly, if the same sex couple didn't think the gender of the child mattered, why would they adopt an opposite gendered child in the first place?

People can visit the links in the OP and use logic. The beauty is they don't have to take my or your word for it. The youtube interview itself is quite illuminating about the source of what the US Supreme Court was using as "God's word" on "all things good or bad for kids". Now they have the Prince's Trust survey (the largest of its kind, real science likes large samples to arrive to statistical conclusions) to balance that subjective "science".

You're in favor of both sides arguing the child's voice in the marriage debate aren't you? You want a fair fight at the Hearing this Spring, right? You wouldn't want children to inadvertently get placed in a federally-mandated institution that causes them by its very structure to not feel like they belong to society, right?

You would gladly return the question to the states if it meant a deeper introspection into what was actually good for kids, right?

From the OP: (again)

Young men with no male role model to look up to were twice as likely to turn or consider turning to crime as a result of being unemployed...The report, which was based on interviews with 2,170 16 to 25-year-olds...These young men are also three times more likely to feel down or depressed all of the time and significantly more likely to admit that they cannot remember the last time they felt proud...They are also significantly less likely to feel happy and confident than those with male role models, according to the figures....The Prince’s Trust report, which was carried out by YouGov, suggests young people without male role models are more than twice as likely to lack a sense of belonging.

 

[Skylar]

So you are back to lying. So sad.

By the way, Silly, if the same sex couple didn't think the gender of the child mattered, why would they adopt an opposite gendered child in the first place?

People can visit the links in the OP and use logic.

Logic? I don't think that word means what you think it means. The instances in the Prince Trust study where they cite a specific example they found that the child was being raised by a single parent. With negative outcomes from single parenthood well recognized. Yet you insist that the Prince Trust Study isn't measuring the effects of single parenthood. Despite explicitly citing examples of single parenting.

But bizarrely, you claim that the Prince Trust Study does measure same sex parenting. Despite making absolutely no mention of same sex parenting.

That's not logical, Silo. That's hapless batshit.

Young men with no male role model to look up to were twice as likely to turn or consider turning to crime as a result of being unemployed...The report, which was based on interviews with 2,170 16 to 25-year-olds...These young men are also three times more likely to feel down or depressed all of the time and significantly more likely to admit that they cannot remember the last time they felt proud...They are also significantly less likely to feel happy and confident than those with male role models, according to the figures....The Prince’s Trust report, which was carried out by YouGov, suggests young people without male role models are more than twice as likely to lack a sense of belonging.

That's not the Prince Trust Study. That's the Daily Mail. When you quote the Trust study, they add a vital component that both you and the Daily Mail intentionally omit:

A GOOD same gender role model.

And where does the Prince Trust Study say that every father is a 'good' role model for a son? Or that parents. are the only source of good same gender role models?

No where.

You imagined both. And your imagination is neither logical, rational, nor factually based.

 

[Ravi]

So you are back to lying. So sad.

By the way, Silly, if the same sex couple didn't think the gender of the child mattered, why would they adopt an opposite gendered child in the first place?

People can visit the links in the OP and use logic. The beauty is they don't have to take my or your word for it. The youtube interview itself is quite illuminating about the source of what the US Supreme Court was using as "God's word" on "all things good or bad for kids". Now they have the Prince's Trust survey (the largest of its kind, real science likes large samples to arrive to statistical conclusions) to balance that subjective "science".

You're in favor of both sides arguing the child's voice in the marriage debate aren't you? You want a fair fight at the Hearing this Spring, right? You wouldn't want children to inadvertently get placed in a federally-mandated institution that causes them by its very structure to not feel like they belong to society, right?

You would gladly return the question to the states if it meant a deeper introspection into what was actually good for kids, right?

From the OP: (again)

Young men with no male role model to look up to were twice as likely to turn or consider turning to crime as a result of being unemployed...The report, which was based on interviews with 2,170 16 to 25-year-olds...These young men are also three times more likely to feel down or depressed all of the time and significantly more likely to admit that they cannot remember the last time they felt proud...They are also significantly less likely to feel happy and confident than those with male role models, according to the figures....The Prince’s Trust report, which was carried out by YouGov, suggests young people without male role models are more than twice as likely to lack a sense of belonging.

The OP blurb you just posted is someone else willfully misstating the findings of the survey. Exactly as you are doing.

 

[Syriusly]

The Prince's study not only does not mention homosexual families, or marriage or parents- 'positive gender role models' is not even the focal point of the study- unemployment is the focal point.

From the introduction of the Prince's Study:

Whilst our joint report sheds
further light on the changing
happiness and well being
of a generation of young
people, a consistent pattern
transcends all three reports:
young people who are not in
work, education or training
are increasingly more likely
to face a lifetime of poorer
health and lower happiness

Failing to step in and help
these young people now will
only store up big problems
for our country’s future

From the second introduction:
Introduction
Julie White
Global Head, Macquarie Group Foundation
This report highlights
how being NEET – not in
education employment or
training - can impact on a
young person’s happiness
and mental health.
Alarmingly, almost half of
unemployed young people
claim that joblessness
has caused mental health
problems such as self harm,
panic attacks and insomnia.
For a significant number,
being out of work has
caused feelings of self-
loathing and inferiority, while
others admit to drinking
excessively or taking drugs.

For many young people,
unemployment goes hand in
hand with emotional stress,
presenting a very real and
frightening mental health
hazard for those who are
out of work. And the longer
they are jobless, the greater
the risk

The findings are equally
bleak for young people with
few or no qualifications,
suggesting that they are
destined to be significantly
less happy than their peers
after leaving school.

The Prince’s Trust Macquarie
Youth Index shows that
The Trust’s work with
disadvantaged young people
is more important than ever
– helping the unemployed
into jobs, supporting those
who are struggling at school
and providing positive role
models to help the young
and vulnerable get their lives
back on track

So where are the threads from Silhouette addressing the actual problems as outlined in this study?

Nowhere.

Silhouette lies- as she always lies.

Here are the key findings from the report- Silhouette never mentions theses:

Key findings:
Almost half
of young people not in work
(48 per cent)
claim that unemployment has
caused problems including self harm, insomnia, self loathing and panic attacks

Young people are
twice as likely to self harm or suffer panic attacks a year into
unemployment

Around one in six young people (16 per cent)
have found unemployment as stressful as a family breakdown, while more than one in ten
(12 per cent) claim their joblessness has given them nightmares
Young people who are not in education employment or training (NEETs) are
almost twice as likely as those in work or education to lack a sense of belonging in life
More than a third
of NEETs (37 per cent) lack a sense of identity. This rises to nearly
half(47 per cent)
of those out of work a year or longer

More than a third of unemployed young people
(34 per cent)
feel isolated all or most of
the time, increasing to
45 per cent
for those who have been out of work for a year or
longer

Half
of young people seeking work
(50 per cent)
say that visiting the job centre makes
them feel ashamed

 

[Silhouette]

Just watched a youtube on Monty Python's "Spam" skit..

*cue the Vikings*

"Spam Spam Spam Spam Spam Spam, baked beans and Spam"...

I guess when all you can do is post long distracting posts no one will read, or fill up one...line....post...one...after....the...other until a page disappears, it pretty much means y'all are nervous about the topic at hand. After all, the Prince's Trust survey is the largest of its kind..

 

[Skylar]

Just watched a youtube on Monty Python's "Spam" skit..

*cue the Vikings*

"Spam Spam Spam Spam Spam Spam, baked beans and Spam"...

I guess when all you can do is post long distracting posts no one will read, or fill up one...line....post...one...after....the...other until a page disappears, it pretty much means y'all are nervous about the topic at hand. After all, the Prince's Trust survey is the largest of its kind..

You posted the Prince Trust study more than 117 times in two weeks.

But you complain about 'spam'? C'mon.

 

[Ravi]

The Prince's study not only does not mention homosexual families, or marriage or parents- 'positive gender role models' is not even the focal point of the study- unemployment is the focal point.

From the introduction of the Prince's Study:

Whilst our joint report sheds
further light on the changing
happiness and well being
of a generation of young
people, a consistent pattern
transcends all three reports:
young people who are not in
work, education or training
are increasingly more likely
to face a lifetime of poorer
health and lower happiness

Failing to step in and help
these young people now will
only store up big problems
for our country’s future

From the second introduction:
Introduction
Julie White
Global Head, Macquarie Group Foundation
This report highlights
how being NEET – not in
education employment or
training - can impact on a
young person’s happiness
and mental health.
Alarmingly, almost half of
unemployed young people
claim that joblessness
has caused mental health
problems such as self harm,
panic attacks and insomnia.
For a significant number,
being out of work has
caused feelings of self-
loathing and inferiority, while
others admit to drinking
excessively or taking drugs.

For many young people,
unemployment goes hand in
hand with emotional stress,
presenting a very real and
frightening mental health
hazard for those who are
out of work. And the longer
they are jobless, the greater
the risk

The findings are equally
bleak for young people with
few or no qualifications,
suggesting that they are
destined to be significantly
less happy than their peers
after leaving school.

The Prince’s Trust Macquarie
Youth Index shows that
The Trust’s work with
disadvantaged young people
is more important than ever
– helping the unemployed
into jobs, supporting those
who are struggling at school
and providing positive role
models to help the young
and vulnerable get their lives
back on track

So where are the threads from Silhouette addressing the actual problems as outlined in this study?

Nowhere.

Silhouette lies- as she always lies.

Here are the key findings from the report- Silhouette never mentions theses:

Key findings:
Almost half
of young people not in work
(48 per cent)
claim that unemployment has
caused problems including self harm, insomnia, self loathing and panic attacks

Young people are
twice as likely to self harm or suffer panic attacks a year into
unemployment

Around one in six young people (16 per cent)
have found unemployment as stressful as a family breakdown, while more than one in ten
(12 per cent) claim their joblessness has given them nightmares
Young people who are not in education employment or training (NEETs) are
almost twice as likely as those in work or education to lack a sense of belonging in life
More than a third
of NEETs (37 per cent) lack a sense of identity. This rises to nearly
half(47 per cent)
of those out of work a year or longer

More than a third of unemployed young people
(34 per cent)
feel isolated all or most of
the time, increasing to
45 per cent
for those who have been out of work for a year or
longer

Half
of young people seeking work
(50 per cent)
say that visiting the job centre makes
them feel ashamed

So basically positive role modes in academia and business are needed. I guess the neanderthal father that beats the crap out of these young people is not a positive role model. Big surprise!

 

[Montrovant]

Just watched a youtube on Monty Python's "Spam" skit..

*cue the Vikings*

"Spam Spam Spam Spam Spam Spam, baked beans and Spam"...

I guess when all you can do is post long distracting posts no one will read, or fill up one...line....post...one...after....the...other until a page disappears, it pretty much means y'all are nervous about the topic at hand. After all, the Prince's Trust survey is the largest of its kind..

Silhouette complaining about someone else spamming =

 

[Silhouette]

So basically positive role modes in academia and business are needed. I guess the neanderthal father that beats the crap out of these young people is not a positive role model. Big surprise!

The nicest gay couple in the world always by the very structure of their "marriage" imparts a daily message to 50% of the kids in their home, "your gender NEVER matters in the functioning structure of the adult world".

This reflects perfectly the finding that boys (and girls) without their same gender as a role model finds it hard to find their place in the world...and all the subsequent outfall of that like drinking, drugging, depression, unemployment etc..

I don't think the fed should force all those fiscal woes on the states without their imput on this weird new "family" experiment..

 

[Montrovant]

So basically positive role modes in academia and business are needed. I guess the neanderthal father that beats the crap out of these young people is not a positive role model. Big surprise!

The nicest gay couple in the world always by the very structure of their "marriage" imparts a daily message to 50% of the kids in their home, "your gender NEVER matters in the functioning structure of the adult world".

This reflects perfectly the finding that boys (and girls) without their same gender as a role model finds it hard to find their place in the world...and all the subsequent outfall of that like drinking, drugging, depression, unemployment etc..

I don't think the fed should force all those fiscal woes on the states without their imput on this weird new "family" experiment..

decided is

Luckily most people don't agree with this baseless, irrational conclusion you've created that not having an opposite gender parent causes children to think their gender never matters.

 

[Skylar]

So basically positive role modes in academia and business are needed. I guess the neanderthal father that beats the crap out of these young people is not a positive role model. Big surprise!

The nicest gay couple in the world always by the very structure of their "marriage" imparts a daily message to 50% of the kids in their home, "your gender NEVER matters in the functioning structure of the adult world".

Says who? You're not quoting the Prince Trust Study. You're quoting yourself.

And you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about. You're not a child of same sex parents. You're someone who despises same sex couples, the LGBT 'cult' and the 'rainbow reicht', as you call them.

In what world would you pretending to be a child of same sex parents be 'logical'?

This reflects perfectly the finding that boys (and girls) without their same gender as a role model finds it hard to find their place in the world...and all the subsequent outfall of that like drinking, drugging, depression, unemployment etc..

Who says that parents are the only possible source for good same gender role models?

Not the Prince Study. That would be you citing yourself again. And you're nobody.

I don't think the fed should force all those fiscal woes on the states without their imput on this weird new "family" experiment..

Affirm or deny the right to gay marriage, gays and lesbians are still having kids. So denying gay marriage doesn't mean that there won't be any same sex parents. It only guarantees that the children of these same sex parents will never have married parents.

Which the court has found harms these very children.

"And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples. The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives....

....DOMA also brings financial harm to children of same-sex couples. It raises the cost of health care for familiesby taxing health benefits provided by employers to their workers’ same-sex spouses. And it denies or re-duces benefits allowed to families upon the loss of a spouseand parent, benefits that are an integral part of family security."

Windsor v. US

The harm you imagine is completely speculative and utterly uneffected by gay marriage. The harm your proposal inflicting by denying same sex marriage is a reality and recognized by the courts. I believe Kennedy used the term 'immediate legal harm'.

Can you show us any case law that finds that same sex couples are detremental to children?

Of course not.

 

[Syriusly]

So basically positive role modes in academia and business are needed. I guess the neanderthal father that beats the crap out of these young people is not a positive role model. Big surprise!

The nicest gay couple in the world always by the very structure of their "marriage" imparts a daily message to 50% of the kids in their home, "your gender NEVER matters in the functioning structure of the adult world".

This reflects perfectly the finding that boys (and girls) without their same gender as a role model finds it hard to find their place in the world...and all the subsequent outfall of that like drinking, drugging, depression, unemployment etc..

I don't think the fed should force all those fiscal woes on the states without their imput on this weird new "family" experiment..

Again- how does preventing same gender marriage change any of that?

The only thing preventing same gender marriage accomplishes is ensuring that those children don't have married parents.

 

[Silhouette]

Montrovant, Skylar, Syriusly....Montrovant, Skylar, Syriusly....Montrovant, Skylar, Syriusly.. "but how does the study show 50% of kids would be deprived of their gender as a role model in gay marriage!!" "Your conclusions don't make sense!"..

"They never mention gay marriage!"..

Well, that's because they don't have to. When the shoe fits..

 

[mdk]

Well if you're going to use The Prince's Trust to besmirch gay parents and gay marriage than at the very least the study should, ya know, actually study gay parents/gay marriage. It doesn't. You can pretend all you wish this study proves your assertions but the only person you are fooling is yourself.

 

[Silhouette]

Well if you're going to use The Prince's Trust to besmirch gay parents and gay marriage than at the very least the study should, ya know, actually study gay parents/gay marriage. It doesn't. You can pretend all you wish this study proves your assertions but the only person you are fooling is yourself.

The study doesn't have to study the adults to find out what is happening already to the kids. The survey doesn't say "well did you have two gay parents?". It just asked about missing their own gender as an adult role model; a thing that happens to 50% of kids in gay marriage AUTOMATICALLY, by virtue of its physical structure.

So, (I know how much the Rainbow-APA enthusiasts HATE numbers and raw data), the physical structure and statistical raw data states that with 50% of kids in gay marriage will fall prey to the woes found for kids without their gender as a role model. Period. There can be no other interpretation.

 

[Montrovant]

Well if you're going to use The Prince's Trust to besmirch gay parents and gay marriage than at the very least the study should, ya know, actually study gay parents/gay marriage. It doesn't. You can pretend all you wish this study proves your assertions but the only person you are fooling is yourself.

The study doesn't have to study the adults to find out what is happening already to the kids. The survey doesn't say "well did you have two gay parents?". It just asked about missing their own gender as an adult role model; a thing that happens to 50% of kids in gay marriage AUTOMATICALLY, by virtue of its physical structure.

So, (I know how much the Rainbow-APA enthusiasts HATE numbers and raw data), the physical structure and statistical raw data states that with 50% of kids in gay marriage will fall prey to the woes found for kids without their gender as a role model. Period. There can be no other interpretation.

Except that it asks about positive same-gender role models, not simply same-gender role models, and it doesn't specify that a parent must be that role model. Of course, since this has been pointed out to you over and over by multiple people, it's clear that you are willfully ignoring it since it doesn't advance your anti-gay marriage agenda.

 

[Syriusly]

Montrovant, Skylar, Syriusly....Montrovant, Skylar, Syriusly....Montrovant, Skylar, Syriusly.. "but how does the study show 50% of kids would be deprived of their gender as a role model in gay marriage!!" "Your conclusions don't make sense!"..

"They never mention gay marriage!"..

Well, that's because they don't have to. When the shoe fits..

Because the study has nothing to do with 'gay marriage'- doesn't mention marriage at all, nor does it even focus on 'positive same gender role models'- those are just one element of the study.

You never even mention what the study is about. Do you even know?

 

[Syriusly]

Montrovant, Skylar, Syriusly....Montrovant, Skylar, Syriusly....Montrovant, Skylar, Syriusly.. "but how does the study show 50% of kids would be deprived of their gender as a role model in gay marriage!!" "Your conclusions don't make sense!"..

"They never mention gay marriage!"..

Well, that's because they don't have to. When the shoe fits..

Again- how does preventing same gender marriage change any of that?

The only thing preventing same gender marriage accomplishes is ensuring that those children don't have married parents.