Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New Study: Children Adopted by Homosexuals Are 'More Prone to Suicide'

page: 4
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


MAKES SENSE AND IS VERY SAD THEY SHOULD OF BEEN THOUGHT OF THIS. IF TWO CANNOT CREATE NOT DUE TO ILLNESS OF SOME TYPE then they shouldnt be parents. Parenting is something learned thru pregnancy and those who wish not to participate shouldnt ACT LIKE THEY WANT TOO BE PARENTS GET A PET. Not being mean either so dont take it that way its SENSE OF COMMON GROUND.




posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


I don't need to.

I'm not the person defending this guy's credentials - you are.

And yet you question a load of other equally - and possibly better scientists credentials on a different subject.

Have you "put up or shut up?"



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dock9
reply to post by KyoZero
 


You'll notice it's you and the angry, defensive crowd who're spewing the hate

Scroll back through the posts. It's illuminating. 'Sick to the stomach' is one. Very emotional. Very aggressive

Is that the sort of reaction we see here from an OP that sheds a little light ? That dares to drag the truth from behind the rock it's been hidden beneath ?

Depression, overwhelming depression affecting children adopted by gay couples ... depression so life-endangering that it causes those children to prefer death to life ?

Depression so deep, so all-encompassing that it stops those children from physically growing ?

Hey, you toss all the epithets around that you like, if that's what it takes for you to feel ok about all this


Followed by the condescending tone you just took with me. You're playing high and mighty so why can't you rise above my supposed anger and hate?

I will feel OK about things when we stop treating homosexuals like second class citizens. And if you can't see that there might be a nasty bias since the source is what it is then there is no hope for this argument

so you go ahead and keep thinking that the source is totally fair if that is 'what it takes for you to feel ok about all this'

-Kyo



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


It sounds reasonable ... but

You knew there'd have to be a 'but', I guess

Back to the three gay employees, because they were a great learning curve:

one of them, around 40 or so by then, said that all things being equal, he'd have been married ten years ago and would by now have a couple of children

'There's still time, Kim' I said

But he shook his head .. and yes, he shook it 'sadly and thoughtfully' and said his life had been changed forever by the fact his parents had put him in boarding school at age 7

He went on to add words to the effect: ' You can imagine it, can't you ? I've always been small and fine boned. The blonde hair, the shyness. I didn't stand a chance. They (meaning the older boys) literally fought over me. By the time I left that place, my future was already made '

I understood him to mean (correctly or not) that he believed that had his circumstances been different, he would have been heterosexual



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


wow, just wow. Are you for real? *pokes the troll*

There's absolutly no point even trying to debate such rancid ignorace and hate. So i ain't going to bother. Have a nice day.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
You know I think putting a straight kid into a family with two gay parents could almost be considered abuse. You know how it is when you watch TV and then all the sudden unexpectedly you see two guys kiss and your first INVOLUNTARY reaction is to vomit a little in your own mouth? Well that is what a poor straight kid would have to deal with on a daily basis.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]


This may be your reaction....those of us with a shred of decency dont.

Whats funny is, I see gay people kiss or embrace, i dont even notice anymore. It is what it is.

Interesting how some get some stuck on it though.

me thinks he doth protest too much....



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Just realised you're a forum moderator

Curtains for me from now on, I suppose


No. YOU are the one attempting to justify the claims of 'biased research'

And I've said, quite reasonably, that if you actually believe the research is biased, then instead of merely and very carefully 'implying' it here in this forum, why instead don't you ... can't you ... provide something definitive ?

OR .... take your claims to the source. Or to any number of sources. Lay your claims before those employed to conduct the research, or to the science publications which broadcast the research

And surely as a supposedly 'unbiased moderator' (lack of bias would be essential for a Mod, wouldn't it ?) it smacks of UTTER lack of neutrality --- when you feel compelled to comment on my posts in other, totally unrelated threads --- in order to 'make your point'



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Here ya go Dock....TONS of links showing that homosexuals in relationships are...well just like me...a hetero married man

Sources

Unbiased...impartial and taking from MANY studies so as to get good answers

-Kyo



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Dock9
 


Kids understand it just fine. They have a frame of reference, if hate-filled people don't try to keep being gay underground. It's not homosexuality itself that is the problem, but attitudes like yours where homosexuality is somehow inferior.

You are the problem, not gay folks.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by davesidious]


Those of us who believe in Our G_D, The Lord Jesus Christ, do our best to follow Him. He is the One who tells us that homosexuality, theft, murder...
is inferior. Take your argument to Him.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
I think maybe I have just come up with a solution to this problem. We don't we wait until a kid is say 5 or so and then decide if they are gay (since they are allegedly born that way). Then when we see a little boy running around wearing high heels and playing barbies or a girl running around being butch and domineering then we could place the little gay boy in a home with two gay men and the little gay girl in a home with two lesbians. Then everyone is happy and with their own kind and less trauma as a result.


homphobia at its finest.

Because all gay men run around in high heels and lipstick?

Because all gay women are butch, right?


By this reasoning, we better only place asian children with asian parents, whites with whites, etc. Heck, while we are at it, why dont we just designate specific areas in the world where only gays can live, or blacks, or whites....

downright pathetic



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


I am not saying that is how I want to feel when I see two men kiss, but that it is just my natural reaction.. it is involuntary. I wish it were different because puking in your own mouth is not really very enjoyable.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by KyoZero
Here ya go Dock....TONS of links showing that homosexuals in relationships are...well just like me...a hetero married man

Sources

Unbiased...impartial and taking from MANY studies so as to get good answers

-Kyo


But your avatar is of a female



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


I am not saying that is how I want to feel when I see two men kiss, but that it is just my natural reaction.. it is involuntary. I wish it were different because puking in your own mouth is not really very enjoyable.


Yeah, it is a conditioned reaction based out of your homophobia.

Doesnt make it any less pathetic.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Dock9
 


Kids understand it just fine. They have a frame of reference, if hate-filled people don't try to keep being gay underground. It's not homosexuality itself that is the problem, but attitudes like yours where homosexuality is somehow inferior.

You are the problem, not gay folks.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by davesidious]


Those of us who believe in Our G_D, The Lord Jesus Christ, do our best to follow Him. He is the One who tells us that homosexuality, theft, murder...
is inferior. Take your argument to Him.
So, you take the bible word for word. When was the last time you stoned someone to death for have their hedge too high? That's in the bible. Let's not be picky, shall we. More?
Leviticus 20:9
If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death.
20:10 If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

So you fully support and endorse KILLING PEOPLE for adultary, or cussing their mother or father? (or many of the countless references there is to murdering in the name of God there are in "holy scriptures") For this is "the word of God" apparently. And not a twisted mindwashing freakathon written by man at all, oh no siree.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


This is NOT an 'anti gay' thread, in case you hadn't noticed


THIS THREAD concerns reported research which claims that children who're adopted by gay couples suffer stress (from the situation in which they've been placed, i.e., gay parents) which exceeds the pain they experienced when abandoned/given up by their biological parents or when they lived in an orphanage or other facility

The stress is reported to create within the adopted children a depression so overwhelming that it can result in suicide. And it's claimed their overall height is diminished as the result of being placed with gay parents


Now, if you read of children being so negatively affected by ANY situation, would you nevertheless ignore the child's suffering in order to indulge those who are part of that suffering ?

For example, if children were contemplating suicide and failing to realise their physical potential because they lived in a certain State, or attended a particular religious school, or because they ate three slices of toast each day .... would you decide it was fine for the kids to suffer, as long as it didn't negatively reflect on the cause ? Would you ?

So this is not so much a 'gay issue' as it's an issue involving children's welfare

Which is something people are tending to ignore or conveniently forget

For once, it's NOT about gays and their love of the limelight

IT'S ABOUT THE KIDS !



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by KyoZero
Here ya go Dock....TONS of links showing that homosexuals in relationships are...well just like me...a hetero married man

Sources

Unbiased...impartial and taking from MANY studies so as to get good answers

-Kyo


But your avatar is of a female


To quote Peter Griffin

"You gotta be yankin me!"

Let's examine just how wrong your statement is

1. I did not say the sources were MINE. I am not a shrink yet. These sources are from the NIMH. So my orientation could have nothing to do with it even if I was gay...strike 1

2. I have a picture of Rose Tyler, a character on Dr who. I have it because I like her character...strike 2

3. Even if I DID choose it for superficial reasons than that must mean as a hetero man I find her beautiful (which btw I do)...strike 3

oh and for a little extra, do you instantly judge people on one superficial trait or avatar?

UH OH!!! I am a hetero man...guess what else I do...I cook and clean and give my wife backrubs that don't end in sex

man I must be queer as a 3 dollar bill

that was the saddest attack on my stance or me that I have ever seen

-Kyo



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dock9
And surely as a supposedly 'unbiased moderator' (lack of bias would be essential for a Mod, wouldn't it ?) it smacks of UTTER lack of neutrality --- when you feel compelled to comment on my posts in other, totally unrelated threads --- in order to 'make your point'


Please do explain to me where in the ATS T&C it says that a moderator, or any other member on the site, cannot look at or remember previous posts on a different subject, notice an ambiguity in how you are assessing data and address it in a current thread?

Everything you post is searchable on ATS and is freely available.

How is that being non-neutral, or against the site Terms and Conditions, or have any bearing on me being a site moderator whatsoever?

If you wish to lodge a complaint about my post, feel free to do so.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   



But your avatar is of a female


Yours is a UFO so does that mean you are an alien? I think that statement above goes a long way to prove how much you cannot see past your nose and how you take values based on a single view.


It's been mentioned on here and I'll reiterate. As being gay is normal the only opposing effect that being in a same sex family must be something that is abnormal.

So what can be abnormal about being in a same sex family? The only thing I can think of is intimidation and bigotry directed at the difference. So it has nothing to do with the make up of the family unit but external forces that disrupt it.

So therefore the only way I can honestly see why an kid adopted into a gay relationship where both parents are normal and loving is through hate from anti-gay bigots.

That means people like those on here who oppose this sort of thing and make some outlandish statements to back up their bigotry.


So if people accepted gay relationships, gay marriage and gay adoption as being normal there would be no other problems for the kid except for those it would normal come up against in life and through a broken background.

So if kids adopted into gay marriages do kill themselves in the future I'd look at myself and question how much my opposing attitudes had a hand in causing that death.

That's mighty Christian of y'all.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


This may not have started off as a gay bashing thread, but you can bet your ass it's going that way. Cos when them christian fundamentalists get on, that's the way it always goes. (like, every.single.time) And I'm not talking about christians, I said fundamentaists. 2 completly different things.

As for the topic, it wouldn't really supprise me that kids who get bullied more, end up depressed. That's not really rocket science. But that's a fault of ignorance taught to children, through their parents. Pure and simple. The poll may have been loaded, and it may have a point. But it's pointing the finger at the wrong culprit. 2 loving people, who bring a child into their home when it needs a loving home, are not responsible for those who think that it's acceptable to teach their children hate. They are the ones with blood on their hands.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dock9
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


This is NOT an 'anti gay' thread, in case you hadn't noticed


THIS THREAD concerns reported research which claims that children who're adopted by gay couples suffer stress (from the situation in which they've been placed, i.e., gay parents) which exceeds the pain they experienced when abandoned/given up by their biological parents or when they lived in an orphanage or other facility

The stress is reported to create within the adopted children a depression so overwhelming that it can result in suicide. And it's claimed their overall height is diminished as the result of being placed with gay parents


Now, if you read of children being so negatively affected by ANY situation, would you nevertheless ignore the child's suffering in order to indulge those who are part of that suffering ?

For example, if children were contemplating suicide and failing to realise their physical potential because they lived in a certain State, or attended a particular religious school, or because they ate three slices of toast each day .... would you decide it was fine for the kids to suffer, as long as it didn't negatively reflect on the cause ? Would you ?

So this is not so much a 'gay issue' as it's an issue involving children's welfare

Which is something people are tending to ignore or conveniently forget

For once, it's NOT about gays and their love of the limelight

IT'S ABOUT THE KIDS !

No it's not an anti-gay thread, yet it is being used to further anti-gay sentiment. I'll back off of that when you do.

The reported research is from a prominent anti-gay organization. It has no merit. It does not even mention the variables in place. It takes a snapshot of an intended result.

You are chosing not to answer ANY of the questions i have posed. You simply continue to spew rhetoric.

If we are going to talk about height(which really, could it be any more foolish), perhaps we ought to start taking children away from any parent who allows their child to drink caffeine, take ANY meds, smoke, eat GMO's, or any of the other dozens of things that reportedly effect height.


You wish to place blame on those that are suffering, as opposed to those that cause the suffering.

To say it is not about gay's is pathetic. OF COURSE that's what it is about. Did you stop to look at who published the damn report?






top topics



 
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join