Gay Marriage and Abused Children

[_Gadianton Plumber]

Hey bcspace, where'd you go to college?

I'm taking odds:

2:3 -- BYU
6:1 -- Ricks
15:1 -- Arizona State University
10,000:1 -- Any college that isn't for morons.

What are the odds for Utah Valley High?

[_Paul Osborne]

Typcially, the percentage of homosexual "relationships" that become open relationships approaches 100% over not too long a time

They must be having a damned good time!

Paul O

[_Tchild]

All things being equal, yes.

Spoken like a brainwashed cult inductee. Too bad you missed out on the Heaven's Gate suicide pact. Maybe you will catch the next suicide pact coming along and get in on the action?

Ok. I didn't really mean that BCspace. You are probably a good fella when it comes to Badminton and squash and you surely make an excellent bridge partner, and probably play a mean game of Monopoly that losing you would be a real waste.

That I did not say. But you seem to be of the erroneous opinion that gay couples are the salvation of children. There are plenty of non gay families who will take and nurture these quite well if given the chance. We don't need to add additional risk factors to their lives.

As a heterosexual male married to a wife with big fake implants (who loves her children), I would love to see every child with a strong senstive role model father and loving caring female mother. Problem is, the world is flawed, cruel and unjust, and life doesn't work that way, and the absentee Mormon God is as uncaring as the cold siberian winters. So, where anyplace you can find love and caring, we ought to accept alternative situations, where one human is willing to love, care and nurture another living human being.

Bcspace, when your God enters the human scene, it/he/she can have a say in our human affairs. Until then lets leave this imaginary God out of the equation and focus on what is real, what is here and what solves the problem affecting real living children.

Gay couples can only help the human solution, while the absentee God of Christianity only hurts, destroys and diminishes from what we ourselves do to help ourselves.

Hey God, hope your golf sessions have been fun. Love to see you in the human scene sometime in the next 800,000 years. If not, don't' worry, we will work around your busy schedule.

Oh by the way God, We have been busy here solving our own problems, Please stay away where you will not do any more harm. Big thanks!

[_harmony]

Because it is love, commitment, service and sacrifice that instills positive values in a child, not the sexual orientation of the couple or the individual.

Non sequitur. Those can can be had without marriage.

I'm pretty sure you don't realize what you just said, BCspace.

If those things can be had (and thus instill those positive values into a child), then marriage is not necessary... for anyone!.

Surely you didn't mean to say that.

[_Jason Bourne]

But I just noted that honest and good people can reach a different conclusion and that does not make them not care about children as TDs OP implies.

This does not reflect my opinion at all.

Hmmm But what do you say below:

But people who claim that it is abusive for a lesbian couple to parent are not only dishonest but not "good" (smile) and no, they don't care about children. People who care about children want the best for children... they know how important it is for children to be loved, nurtured, cared for.

So if someone disagrees that it is not in the best interest of a child to be parented by a gay couple you say they don't care about children. Ok. So it does reflect your opinion which was exactly what my point was. And I think you are wrong. They can disagree with you and still care about children. And they can even be wrong about their conclusion and still care about children.

There is no evidence whatsoever that children raised with two moms or two dads suffer from abuse because of the sexual orientation of their parents. It is utter nonsense. There is not a single, knowledgeable, reputable expert in the world who would suggest such a thing. It is craziness!

You could be right. I am not an expert on this though I know there are studies that disagree with you. And I imagine a few of them are reputable.

Some folk are just so hung up on what goes on in the bedroom that they come up with all sorts of *&%$ to justify their stupidness! (smile)

Ooooookaaaaay.

I'm not sure why the LDS church is obsessed with gay/lesbian marriage but I am quite certain it has NOTHING to do with children and family.

I don't think they are obsessed. I think it is one of many issues that they discuss. But it is clear why it is one that they deal with. First, it is a big issue these days. Next, they think homosexuality is a sin. Since they are in the fight against sin business it seems fairly logical if they think it is a sin they would spend effort, time and resources going against it.

[_Jersey Girl]

This whole thread is so all over the place! I still think it should have begun with determining what all children universally need to grow healthy and then deciding whether or not a gay couple could meet those needs.


Having said that, td brought up the issue of foreign adoptees in Siberia. I should like to see some discussion about this because I know something about it. I have studied and reported on the conditions of foreign orphanges and mainstreamed foreign adoptees from Russia, Romania and also China which had at the time, a surplus of female orphans. While conditions have improved in some ways, let me briefly describe what I think truthdancer is talking about.

In the Russian/Romanian orphanges, children who had undiagnosed disorders such as hearing and vision impairments, cleft palate, In other words, easily corrected conditions, were labeled retarded and sent to the "baby houses". There they would be *maintained* by an inadequate ratio of caregivers:child to the point where several infants were placed in single cribs, their basic physical needs barely met; their emotional needs for bonding were not met at all.

This resulted in a high level of "failure to thrive" babies. A child whose basic needs for bonding and attachments are not met, follow a course that leads to death. The infant cries out for a comfort response that never comes. After a period of time, the infant stops crying out. The infant then turns inward to employ self stimulating behaviors such as rocking, banging it's head against the crib, whatever it takes to receive any kind of stimulation that should have come from another human being. An infant on this treacherous course to death, stops self stimulating, stops feeding, drinking and *dies*.

Children who manage to grow beyond infancy, develop other types of behaviors and disorders. Along with the self stimulation are behaviors such as interacting with one's own feces, hoarding behaviors, attachment disorders (this is what makes a socio path) and later, sexual behaviors that in this country would warrant incarceration.

These are children who are not interacted with in any meaningful way and who have never been played with!

Children who enter the system in the baby houses follow a government established life course. When they reach later teen/young adult years, they are turned out on the streets to fend for themselves with no sense of self, lack of empathy (socio path again) no life skills, no education and no way to support themselves physically, emotionally, socially or psychologically and with none of their medical needs (that brought them into the system to begin with) corrected or addressed.

Are the people on this thread saying that such a person would be better off dead in infancy or on the streets than raised by a loving gay couple when there are a multitude of gay couples who are willing to take/rescue the special needs children that nobody else wants?

[_Jersey Girl]

For anyone who is interested in what becomes of a child whose emotional/psychological needs for play are not met in early childhood, I would recommend the work of Stuart Brown whose research, which began with a study of serial murders, identified that the one thing all his subjects had in common was play deprivation.

[_Jersey Girl]

Improvements have beem made in some orphanages but here, let me make you all sick!

THESE are the types of children and their conditions that td is referring to:










Somebody seriously tell me that these children would not have been better off raised by a loving gay couple in the US!

[_Yoda]

Here is the study that supports Jersey Girl's assertion that homosexual couples are more willing to adopt children with special needs than heterosexual couples:

We also know that LGBT individuals are more likely than their heterosexual counterparts to foster and adopt children with special needs, and that same-sex couples raising children live in ninety-six percent of all U.S. counties—most highly concentrated in the South and the Midwest. In addition, Hispanic and African-American same-sex couples are raising children at higher rates than their Caucasian counterparts, a finding that suggests the disproportionately negative impact that parenting restrictions have on communities of color.[2]

[2] Cianciotto, J. Hispanic and Latino Same-Sex Couple Households in the United States: A Report from the 2000 Census. New York: National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute and the National Latino/a Coalition for Justice, 2005, p. 53; Dang, A. and Frazer, S. Black Same Sex Households in the United States: A Report from the 2000 Census. New York: National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute and National Black Justice Coalition, 2004, p. 22.

My thought is.....As long as the homosexual couples are put through the same paces as the heterosexual couples are, as far as determination in financial, emotional needs, etc., then what is the problem? These children need homes. If the majority of heterosexual couples are too wrapped up in wanting "the perfect family", and don't have the resources, or want to supply the resources, to help special needs children, but these homosexual couples are....then who are we to stand in their way?

And, just to clarify....I'm not making some blanket statement that ALL homosexual couples would make great parents.....any more than ALL heterosexual couples would make great parents. I don't think that Jersey Girl or TD are saying that, either.

[_truth dancer]

Hi JB,

So if someone disagrees that it is not in the best interest of a child to be parented by a gay couple you say they don't care about children. Ok. So it does reflect your opinion which was exactly what my point was. And I think you are wrong. They can disagree with you and still care about children. And they can even be wrong about their conclusion and still care about children.

I'm saying that folks like BC are more concerned with the sexual orientation of two people than they are about the needs of children. And, to clarify, I don't think these sorts of folk care in the least about children. Their concerns are about forcing their beliefs on others and not admitting they are totally wrong, rather than trying to help those most vulnerable in our world. If they cared about children they would let go of the stupidness that harms them. (smile)

There is no evidence whatsoever that children raised with two moms or two dads suffer from abuse because of the sexual orientation of their parents. It is utter nonsense. There is not a single, knowledgeable, reputable expert in the world who would suggest such a thing. It is craziness!

You could be right. I am not an expert on this though I know there are studies that disagree with you. And I imagine a few of them are reputable.

Again, I do not think there is any such reputable study.

I'm not sure why the LDS church is obsessed with gay/lesbian marriage but I am quite certain it has NOTHING to do with children and family.

I don't think they are obsessed. I think it is one of many issues that they discuss. But it is clear why it is one that they deal with. First, it is a big issue these days. Next, they think homosexuality is a sin. Since they are in the fight against sin business it seems fairly logical if they think it is a sin they would spend effort, time and resources going against it.

I know of only two times the church has become so obsessed with any issue, to the point it has asked members to contribute hundreds of millions of dollars... to fight against the rights of women, and to fight against the rights of the gay/lesbian community.

I think it is fair to say they are obsessed.

What we hear from LDS leaders (and some members) is that if gay partners are allowed to have a piece of paper authenticating their relationship, or describing their relationship as a marriage, the world is going to HELL, families will be destoryed, and children will suffer. It is craziness!


Children need families, they need people who love them, they need care and attention and love; the sex of the loved ones just doesn't matter.

~td~