At age 25, kids in the longest-running study of same-sex parenting are doing just fine

[Keith&Co.]

But, hey, any actual evidence to the neggies would be interesting to see.

There is much evidence. .

I, um, stipulated that breast milk was bestest.
I was asking for evidence that this one, single aspect of providing for the kid was the only way to judge the success rate of parenting.
I mean, i knew a womam who did breast feed, but went to a doctor known to overprescribe behavior meds, so her kids would be more docile while her husband was out to sea.
So +5 point for boobing them, -10 points for being a lazy bitch...

I suspect it would be easy for a samesex couple to match her for parent of the year.

 

[bilby]

There is a move here by environmentalists to ban the use of disposable plastic drinking straws provided by fast food outlets.

Judging from his arguments above, I imagine that Lion IRC stands opposed to such a move, as a ban on straws would leave him with nothing to clutch at.

 

[phands]

Sure. But as long as we accept that it's better to have two parents who love you, but who feed you formula because they are physiologically incapable of producing breast milk (as is the case with many heterosexual couples); than it is to be breastfed, but not wanted or loved, it will remain better to allow homosexual couples to adopt children whose birth parent(s) want to put them up for adoption, than it is to force unwilling or incapable parent(s) to raise them 'naturally'.

When the appeal to nature fallacy intersects with religious dogma, lots of innocents are at risk of getting hurt.

And even when natural is demonstrably best, the religious dogma can do enough harm on its own to more than compensate.

Agree without hesitation or reservation. Well said.

 

[phands]

[
I was asking for evidence that this one, single aspect of providing for the kid was the only way to judge the success rate of parenting.

My bad, I misinterpreted what you were asking. And, of course, you're right and LIRC maintains his unbroken run of being wrong with weak digression attempts. Nutrition is only part of the picture, and while basic, it's not the major part.

 

[phands]

Thought I'd resurrect this, since LIRC brought up the xtian falsehood about a marriage being better if it was man-woman.

 

[Lion IRC]

Thread resurrected after three days

Where was I?
Oh yeah...can adoptive, gay men breast feed their non-biologically related child without lactating breasts? According to science (and God) breast is best for childhood developmental welfare.

I do have you on ignore, but I still see your garbage when others reply.

And the point about breastfeeding also betrays lack of actual knowledge, because while it IS best, breastfeeding rates are very low in developed countries, making the poor attempt to devalue same-sex parenting nothing other than laughable. Or....maybe the BEST parenting would then be a lesbian couple, both of whom are lactating.

You seem undecided.
Is breast feeding a good point or not?
Are you ignoring my posts or or not?

 

[southernhybrid]

Sure breastfeeding is good, but a lot of women don't breastfeed and a lot of women aren't capable of breastfeeding.

You do realize that a lot of hetero couples adopt young infants and those mothers can't breastfeed their adopted babies either, can they? My own Christian mother never breastfed any of us. And, I've heard of gay men adopting older kids too. So, what in the world does breastfeeding have to do with any of this? Breastfeeding an infant may be ideal, but it's not necessary to raise a healthy, decent person.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Where was I?
Oh yeah...can adoptive, gay men breast feed their non-biologically related child without lactating breasts? According to science (and God) breast is best for childhood developmental welfare.

I do have you on ignore, but I still see your garbage when others reply.

And the point about breastfeeding also betrays lack of actual knowledge, because while it IS best, breastfeeding rates are very low in developed countries, making the poor attempt to devalue same-sex parenting nothing other than laughable. Or....maybe the BEST parenting would then be a lesbian couple, both of whom are lactating.

You seem undecided.
Is breast feeding a good point or not?
Are you ignoring my posts or or not?

Do you seriously not understand that phands can only see your posts in other's responses (like mine here)?

 

[Lion IRC]

I thought "ignore" meant ignore.

 

[bilby]

I thought "ignore" meant ignore.

You think a lot of things that are factually wrong.

Perhaps you should work on that?

 

[Keith&Co.]

I thought "ignore" meant ignore.

You think a lot of things that are factually wrong.

Perhaps you should work on that?

This has also been specifically explained to him before.
He just chooses to only learn some facts, not all of them.

 

[atrib]

Are you ignoring my posts or or not?

Ha!!

 

[phands]

Sure breastfeeding is good, but a lot of women don't breastfeed and a lot of women aren't capable of breastfeeding.

You do realize that a lot of hetero couples adopt young infants and those mothers can't breastfeed their adopted babies either, can they? My own Christian mother never breastfed any of us. And, I've heard of gay men adopting older kids too. So, what in the world does breastfeeding have to do with any of this? Breastfeeding an infant may be ideal, but it's not necessary to raise a healthy, decent person.

Breastfeeding is undeniably best for babies, but it all too often is denied them for various reasons...

Most women can breastfeed (only a few inherently cannot), but some choose not to, or give up soon after starting. Those choices are just fine, and just like abortion, only the decision of the woman in question.

The biggest reason for BF failure, however, is sabotage by formula milk companies. They place formula milk, and pressure to use it, in delivery suites. Generally, if BF isn't started with ~24 hours of birth, the "let-down" reflex never happens, and almost all nurses and midwives "force" formula feeding to start, because they only care about rapid weight gain. I know more than most about this topic because my ex-wife and I were instrumental in setting up a very successful BF charity in the UK about 20 years ago.

The sabotage is now illegal in most western countries, but in the third world, it still happens, and formula costs so much, many families can't afford it, and babies and other children die.

 

[Lugubert]

We seem to agree that it would have been better had he NOT abandoned her.
Right?

You seem to be trying to oversimplify the situation to the point where you can claim agreement; But it is very clear to me that Ford thinks it was better that the guy who didn't care fucked off elsewhere and let someone who did care take his place and be a real parent. (Ford, please correct me if I am mistaken).

The sole point of your interjection in this thread appears to be to make the very obvious (and undisputed) claim that children do better with two loving parents than with one or none. And the whole 'biological' part is a pointless red herring that adds nothing other than your prejudices and is NOT a part of the The United Nations Convention on The Rights of The Child.

Because you seem to have added that word unilaterally and for no other reason than to allow you to exercise your prejudices.

A child with two loving parents is better off than one with only one, or none; And as the OP study shows, it matters not one whit whether those parents are biologically related to the child, nor whether they are of different or similar gender.

If you have some evidence to the contrary, now would be the time to present it.

Do you have any evidence that "children do better with two loving parents than with one or none" or "A child with two loving parents is better off than one with only one, or none"? Agreed, anecdotally, but my two sisters and I were basically brought up by mother only; father was a merchant navy captain and seldom at home for more than a few days at a time per month. The three of us live in partially different ways, but we all live lives that anybody with sufficient insight would describe as fulfilled.

The way most views were in the 50's, I'm rather afraid that more of father's presence would have made me less appreciating of women's efforts in maintaining a household. Sure, I didn't learn "manly" skills like woodworking, but I think that this is more than enough compensated by for example helping at and learning too cook.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

My aunts were part of a big court case a couple decades back which allowed same sex couples to adopt. That always annoyed my cousin because the video they played in school whenever they talked about the case in health class or whatever had him as a baby in it and he was always really embarrassed to be up on the screen. Other than that, he's turned out perfectly normal, though.

I mean, sure, he is a cannibalistic serial killer, but that's because he was influenced by the violence on TV and in video games, not because he was raised by two women.

 

[Lion IRC]

So many same-sex male adoptive parents of an opposite gender child say they can compensate and provide an (outside) female role model influence by co-opting an aunt, sister, etc. to help out with stuff like...um...tampon talk, PMT chat, secret womens business.

Why would they do that?

 

[Sarpedon]

I know its hard for you to fathom the fact that some people are quite aware that they don't know everything and seek expert advice on subjects they know little about.

Parents getting advice from others is a custom much older than your religion.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

So many same-sex male adoptive parents of an opposite gender child say they can compensate and provide an (outside) female role model influence by co-opting an aunt, sister, etc. to help out with stuff like...um...tampon talk, PMT chat, secret womens business.

Why would they do that?

Ummm ... because they want that outside advice from someone who would know more about a given topic?

I've heard that a number of religious couples seek advice from priests and ministers regarding religious matter involving their children. Why would they do that if having both a mother and a father is so optimal? What are the theists hiding?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The whole point of this is that for years, religious right believers have loudly claimed that a child being raised by a same sex couple would be harmed by that. It turns out to not be true when one looks at the facts calmly and competently. There have now been several such studies and no harm can be demonstrated by being raised by same sex couples. Trying to move the goalposts does not make those facts go away.

 

[phands]

The whole point of this is that for years, religious right believers have loudly claimed that a child being raised by a same sex couple would be harmed by that. It turns out to not be true when one looks at the facts calmly and competently. There have now been several such studies and no harm can be demonstrated by being raised by same sex couples. Trying to move the goalposts does not make those facts go away.

Of course, xtians don't care about facts or truth....