Quantcast

Comments about ‘Studies challenge widely held assumptions about same-sex parenting’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, June 9 2012 10:01 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
aminahyaquin
GALLIPOLIS FERRY, WV

A variety of experiences need to be factored into any accurate study of children's outcomes with parenting being closely examine. The most important, in terms of outcomes, is if, and how early they were farmed out into factory farm daycares.

There may well be a corollary between the fact that many traditional families have a stay at home parent, at least for the kids' earliest years, and the less than stellar outcomes of kids impacted by the abysmally shrinking age at which so many children are left in congregate care settings.

That may be the common denominator between lesbian moms and single parents--a reliance on daycare, which is ultimately not optimal for the child in most cases. Rich parents have au pairs and governesses, and usually no other kids in the home but family, so socio-economic factors that add a layer of attention paid to a family's children are also important. Some poorer families have extended family that help, and the quality of that parenting can be superior. The children of gays are often bullied so this is also a factor.

Cats
Somewhere in Time, UT

What a surprise! Studies validate what civlization has known for thousands of years. Traditional marriage and families are better for raising children. Everyone knows this. It is only those who want to indulge their unnatural urges that try to assert otherwise. There is NO evidence that "gayness" is genetic or biological. It is a learned behavior. This sort of behavior destroys civilizations. That is not speculation. It is history.

Utah Businessman
Sandy, UT

I certainly appreciate and encourage this type of research. Looking at this from an LDS perspective, I would note that in 1832 the prophet Joseph Smith received a revelation indicating that both tobacco and alcoholic drinks should be avoided. Not long ago, tobacco companies were maintaining that there was no scientific evidence that tobacco use was harmful. Now, essentially everyone is on the stop smoking, stop chewing bandwagon for reasons that are now obvious.
Regarding alcoholic drinks, I recently read an article in a national magazine indicating that there are approximately 20 million problem drinkers in the U.S. If we assume that each of those people negatively affect five other people (probably a conservative number), then about 1/3 of the U.S. population is negatively affected by alcohol consumption.
I have seen tragic results of both alcohol and tobacco use in my own family.
A recent statement from our LDS leaders indicates that homosexuality is a serious sin. Considering the above, I would boldly suggest that we take notice of that statement as we also consider the results of the research.

Utah Businessman
Sandy, UT

As a clarification of my earlier post, I want to make it clear that I understand and accept the fact that the LDS church does not condemn homosexual feelings or desires. Acting on those feelings is a different matter.
I personally have great empathy for people who have these feelings and desires. I simply suggest that acting on those desires is to be avoided, just as acting on a desire for intimacy with ANYONE but our husband or wife is to be avoided.

Charlemagne
Salt Lake City, Utah

ChuckGG, The comparison of same sex "marriage" to inter-racial marriage is absurd !An inter-racial marriage is a real marriage i.e. a union between a biological man and a biological woman.Racial differences are superficial and in no way prevent the normal biological production of healthy fertile children.They are likewise nothing new one need only look at the populations of places like Latin America and Sudan to see that such unions have been around for centuries if not millennia!

Same sex "marriage"on the other hand is merely a recent invention and parody of real marriage.A person's biological gender is not a superficial trait like skin color or hair texture but a foundational determinant of who they are. Individuals of the same sex were not designed to become one and are completely incapable themselves of producing offspring of any sort.

bountifulmomofsix
BOUNTIFUL, UT

The statistics for LB children being touched in a sexual way by a parent and forced to have sex are heartbreaking! After scanning the statistics, I couldn't bring myself to read the article.

EvenLogic
Smithfield, UT

I was going to say a lot of stuff and erased it all in favor of just supporting what Utah Businessman said. Well put.

BlueEyesBrittany
Paris, 00

I was raised in an heterosexual famitly and i have suffered much because of the horrible things or lack of things that my dad, who was an heterosexual man, did.

I also know homosexual men who are the sweetest people i have come across and i know many heterosexual men who are the worse people there are, so much so that just seeing them make me cringe inside. t ...... so i would never share your view that one person raised in a heterosexual family can find joy or less joy than one raised in a homosexual one..

Sorry about this ....

I have also met awfully nice men that any woman would want for a husband or children for a father ..... some of them were mormons...

So dont ask me to condemn the homosexual on a wholescale because i never will

Because i have sometimes received more love and kindness and human understanding from homosexuals than i have from heterosexual ...

Just my point of view

BlueEyesBrittany
Paris, 00

So many children are abused in heterosexual families that i think if is really unfair and unrealistic to say that children raised in heterosexual families fare better than their counterparts who are raised in homosexual family.

As a woman, i find being friends with homosexuals sometimes most safe than being friends with heterosexuals...

Though some very good heterosexual men too ...

mattrick78
Cedar City, UT

I think it is interesting that those who virulently discredit surveys do it simply because they don't agree with it. Of course the survey is not perfect, but it does go against widely held beliefs (outside of Utah at least) that kids of gay couples are just as well adjusted as kids of hetero couples.

Still (and excuse the side note), I believe all kids should have full legal rights whether the parents are straight, gay, or even in a polygamous relationship.

EvenLogic
Smithfield, UT

BlueEyes- You just made a perfect example expressed in the journal of "convenience" or "snowball" studies.

aminahyaquin
GALLIPOLIS FERRY, WV

What strikes me as suspicious is the "explaining away" of how two parents who are gay and male, look like better parents that heterosexual couples. I find this likely to be true, and the fact that the researchers could not seem to find sufficient numbers of gay male parenting couples to study is just plain odd, in my opinion.
Do more gay men couples than lesbian couples have a partner in the home, just like more traditional families do? From the strata of gay male couples with whom i am familiar, the longevity of their relationships most often surpasses that of my straight friends, families and acquaintances. So stability would be likely to be a factor of strength in gay male relationships, and that i think is something that can be seen when one looks at the very large numbers of gay male(and some lesbian) couples in New York City and elsewhere who brilliantly, lovingly and bravely parented AIDS children with almost incandescent love, during the epidemic's 100% fatality period in the 1990s

Mukkake
Salt Lake City, UT

A voice of Reason:
[However, we CAN reasonably deduce that 'because a gay agent is intentionally acting in dysfunction of our anatomical design to biologically multiply and replenish the Earth, their rebellion to the most basic law of the existence of mankind disqualifies them from being able to adequately parent.']

No. This is probably the single most asinine comment on this thread, all the more because it attempts to pass itself off as intelligent.

To put it simply, you're saying that because they don't breed they can't be expected raise children?

In which case, your comment has no basis in reality. Stop trying to use rhetoric to pass off your dogma as "reason".

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

So we're comparing lesbian mother (single parent who may or may not be dating/co-habiting/in relationship) with two parent households? Seems like a not totally equivalent comparison.

Either way even if the study is right and kids do better in "intact mixed-gender parent households" does it matter? Children of divorced parents do worse on average. Should I have been taken away from my parents because they got divorced? Children of poor parents do worse on average. Should we oppose poor people having kids? Children of black parents do worse on average. Should we oppose black people having kids? Why is it okay to apply this standard to only one group?

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

This whole discussion seems very convaluted and nonsensical. If we know the basic parental behaviors that seem to porduce healthy happy children, then why don't they just study single sex parents that display those characteristics and see if their children are as likely to be healthy and happy as herotsexual parents. If not, then gayness may have some bearing, if so then, unhealthy children from same sex couples are being affected by indiviual skills and not sexual orientation, and that is a much bigger issue (you don't need, any training or license to be a parent).

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

A voice of Reason:
[However, we CAN reasonably deduce that 'because a gay agent is intentionally acting in dysfunction of our anatomical design to biologically multiply and replenish the Earth, their rebellion to the most basic law of the existence of mankind disqualifies them from being able to adequately parent.']

I don't know about you, but I don't measure the worth of my life in terms of how much sex I have or how many kids I have (probably a good thing since I have none of either haha). Besides, we have 7 billion people, we really don't need more multiplying. Havent' we seen all those articles here about water in this state? Goodness, we're having issues with half a bad year following one of the best years; what're we going to do when it's 30 years in the future, Utah has at least another half a million people, other states want more water, and we end up with two bad years in a row after an average year?

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT

On account of people complaining about bias- It may appear to be biased to only show data promoting traditional marriage. But that is no less logical than if I were biased in only showing data promoting happiness.

On account of the use of this data- Some say we shouldn't argue policy off of incomplete data, but this is a rejection of an objective truth we all know- There is no such thing as complete data.

Those who reject religion argue that only secular arguments be allowed- arguments based on incomplete observations of the picture of life. However, the observable universe is in a state of never-ending flux. I see one thing today, you see something else in the same place tomorrow. It's irrational that the anti-religious only want objective observations to govern us. Why? Because objective observations account for a small fraction of the human experience compared to subjective experiences.

This is why democracy should welcome all opinions including those about subjective religious experiences. The problem is that relativists reject anyone else's experience and any objective observations made by those who disagree. Relativism only favors being a law unto one's self.

vdubbin'
Ogden, UT

From reading the comments here I am terrified that the demographics of Utah are changing. There was a time when there was never any question as to whether or not "normal" (and I use that phrase intentionally over "traditional" or "heterosexual") parents were better suited to raise children. Now, it looks as though we are evenly split on the subject. Heaven forbid Utah turn into another California or New York, where we go out of our way to include and even champion deviancy at the cost of the things we once held to be absolutely true...

Al Thepal
Salt Lake City, UT

I am not surprised at all about the results of this study and I dare say it will always be this way. Same gender parents is unnatural. It is not the way God intended His children to be raised while in their mortal life. Even if you don't believe in God, it was most definitely not the way nature intended either.

The best way for a child to be raised is with both biological parents staying together. Other studies have shown that it is even better if the parents are married. It seems like common sense to me, but sadly many don't see it. Unfortunately in this imperfect world not everyone gets to be raised by both or even one of their biological parents. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to decrease the frequency of the less effective ways children are raised (including being raised by same gender parents).

Mormoncowboy
Provo, Ut

The control group for the study was "intact biological families". I didn't grow up in one of those, and yet my parents weren't gay. Anecdotally, I have two separate friends who were partly raised by homosexual parents and their partners. However, those children were the actual biological children of of the parents. In both cases the homosexual parents were priorly married in a Mormon heterosexual marriage, had children, and later split. If this is representative of the kind of family that makes up the population for the homosexual study group, then I think it is fair to say that there are more variables at play than just "homosexual parents".

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments