First came the studies of gay parenthood. A year and a half ago, Mary Cheney, the vice president's daughter, announced that she was pregnant and that she and her lesbian partner would raise the child. Conservatives protested, arguing that gay parents are bad for kids. But dozens of studies compiled by the American Psychological Association showed otherwise.

You are wrong William. Those studies are scientifically flawed, and obviously so.

Here's your own Slate, explaining it for you:

<link>

Quite frankly, there is a very real likelihood that children intentionally born into same sex couples will perpetually hold a level of resentment or contempt for the radical individualist, unconventionalist thinking which led to their birth, whether that contempt is for their parents, or the system which enabled their parents to perform their rite, or the society which enables all of them, intentionally being born without a parent of the opposite sex is a psychological trauma that cannot be divorced from what nature and God intended.

Oh yes, I'm sure. Those children would totally rather have never been born at all, then be born into a gay family. And they'll totally blame any issues they encounter on their parents and the society that "allowed" them to be born, and not on those aspects of society that actually CAUSE the problems - the intolerant, reactionary, hateful, anti-liberty social conservatives like you.

How about this - you come back in 25 years and ask my children about it. We'll see then. In the meantime, I don't feel any need to wait for YOUR permission to start my family.

Usama2:

Quite frankly, there is a very real likelihood that children intentionally born into same sex couples will perpetually hold a level of resentment or contempt for the radical individualist, unconventionalist thinking which led to their birth, whether that contempt is for their parents, or the system which enabled their parents to perform their rite, or the society which enables all of them, intentionally being born without a parent of the opposite sex is a psychological trauma that cannot be divorced from what nature and God intended.

That's pretty presumptious. Some of us might think the same of, say, polygamist families, which are the norm in a great many God-fearing societies. And we already have single-parent homes, which God-fearing sorts have always warned would destroy society or whatever.

The studies may be flawed. But while these flaws do little to support the sympathetic view of same-sex parents, they certainly don't do anything to challenge their worth, either.

Or, more likely they will turn out about as well as most kids with affluent, well-educated parents, which means chances are they will be just fine.

I hate to rely on anecdotal inductive reasoning, but my presumptions are based on personal anecdotal similiar experiences.

I CAN say that many children of polygamous families do hold contempt for polygamy as a cultural institution, or for one or both of their parents, or for larger societal factors, or combinations thereof.

One needs only to analyze foster children, or adopted children and their assortment of observations towards their natural parents, the adoption policies and laws in America, or foster care, and so forth.

Essentially, the ideal is known. Breaking away from that ideal model of man and woman in marriage holds consequences. Period.

Essentially, the ideal is known. Breaking away from that ideal model of man and woman in marriage holds consequences. Period.

In my experience, you can have one mom, one dad, and still hate both of them with a passion.

It's like arguing over what is the best political system; all of them can suck if the people involved don't honor fundamental principles and act in good faith.

Usama2:

One needs only to analyze foster children, or adopted children and their assortment of observations towards their natural parents, the adoption policies and laws in America, or foster care, and so forth.

Essentially, the ideal is known. Breaking away from that ideal model of man and woman in marriage holds consequences. Period.

This is not a relevant comparison. Foster children become so because they have been severely abused or neglected by their parents. Some adopted children feel rejected by their birth parents.

Gay and lesbian parents often go to extaordinary lengths to conceive children-a compelling expression of "wanting" a child.

The data children of gay/lesbian children may be flawed, but I have seen no compelling examples of kids being irreversibley scarred by having two mommies or two daddies.

Hey Usama2, don't you have an honor killing or female circumcision to perform?

Your narrow-minded and ignorant rantings are not really productive towards intelligent, rational and humane conversation.

Nancy, the relevancy lies in the contempt that children have towards the choices of their parents which adversely affect the children. The child suffers the consequences even if the parent was completely within his or her personal freedom to undertake said action.

JohnBrown, your juvenile, personal insults are irrelevant.

Just curious, John Brown was the American abolitionist who advocated militancy/terrorism. Is your name related to this historic figure? If so, why? Or does it have a slang, counterculture meaning?

I understand the point that you are trying to make-its just that I think your reasoning via analogy is way off. We can look at all kinds of choices that parents make-like abusing drugs/alcohol, abusing children, abandoning them, choosing to be a liberal in a conservative community (or vice versa), bi-racial parents, moving to take a better job, go back to school etc. Whether or not children hold parents "in contempt" has more to do with whether these choices adversly affects the ability to parent.

Some of the decisions that I listed would have very serious consequences (like abusing drugs/alcohol), others like moving to another state would be likely to disrupt the child's social development. But, as long as the parents are there to help the child manage feelings/problem-solve etc, these kinds of things (including gay parents) are rarely the end of the world.

nancyh:

I understand the point that you are trying to make-its just that I think your reasoning via analogy is way off. We can look at all kinds of choices that parents make-like abusing drugs/alcohol, abusing children, abandoning them, choosing to be a liberal in a conservative community (or vice versa), bi-racial parents, moving to take a better job, go back to school etc. Whether or not children hold parents "in contempt" has more to do with whether these choices adversly affects the ability to parent.

Some of the decisions that I listed would have very serious consequences (like abusing drugs/alcohol), others like moving to another state would be likely to disrupt the child's social development. But, as long as the parents are there to help the child manage feelings/problem-solve etc, these kinds of things (including gay parents) are rarely the end of the world.

I was referring to the decisions PRIOR to the birth of the child which directly affects the child against a particular norm of behavior.

And there is another observation. In general, the ideal gay parents will do everything right in parenting, perhaps even overcompensating for some percieved misgiving. In general, one could assume the majority of gay couples are white, educated above high school level, usually from working to middle class and even upper class background. It is observed here in Florida at Gay Days that the gay community has wealth, disposal income, and thus education and social networking above and beyond most ethnic minority communities. There are no Asian Days or Muslim Days or even Spanish Days at Disney. Given the tiny percentage of the population, comparatively, gays have far more resources such as TV channels, politicans, academians, and even corners, streets, nieghborhoods in most major cities.

But once gay parenting is open to the same elements of society that the heterosexual population reflect, including poor, uneducated, from broken homes, then it is reasonable to assume many of the same societal ailments which plague the "breeders" in marriage will also plague the "gays".

"There are no Asian Days or Muslim Days or even Spanish Days at Disney. Given the tiny percentage of the population, comparatively, gays have far more resources such as TV channels, politicans, academians, and even corners, streets, nieghborhoods in most major cities."

While there may not be days at Disney for all groups (although all they would likely have to do is ORGANIZE ONE if they wanted it) there most certainly ARE TV channels, politicians, academians, and neighborhoods in most major cities for various ethnic groups. I mean, come on: BET? Latino studies? Little Tokyo? Take a look at your digital cable channel lineup and you'll find far more than LOGO. Take a look at a course catalog and "Queer studies" does not dominate. Take a look at a neighborhood map or ask a city resident where all the "____ people" live, and you'll find that gayborhoods are in good company.

What you're really trying to say is that gays have far more resources than we deserve, right?

"I was referring to the decisions PRIOR to the birth of the child which directly affects the child against a particular norm of behavior."

How about deciding to be Muslim? Deciding to take a job as a public defender instead of as a corporate attorney? Deciding to major in English instead of Computer Science? Deciding to be unfashionable nerds? Deciding to accidentally get pregnant before they were really ready?

There are a lot of choices parents make - before AND after children are born - that affect the child. It's unreasonable to assume that the decision of a GAY person to have children is any more selfish than the decision of, say, a hijab-wearing Muslim in a mostly Christian town to have children. Both potentially require the child to "defend" the actions of the parents against nosy and judgmental people.

You are applying higher standards to us than to any other disparaged group. Why? Maybe you believe that our gayness is not as valid an identity as the Muslim's religion. Maybe you believe that children can get over having a parent who decided to take a low-paying job, but the SHAME and HORRIBLENESS of having a gay parent is just too much - that's your personal bias showing.

Absolutely. And, more importantly, where in the world has it ever been written that leading a problem-free life produces well adjusted children or adults? Most of the really interesting (and well adjusted) people I know did NOT have problem-free childhoods.

As a friend of mine, who was the child of an unmarried mother and raised in the 60's in the deep south put it, its always something-kids will find something to tease you about even ever your parents are Ward and June Cleaver.