Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 5
27
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Why are you asking me 'why' ?

Why have you felt it necessary to mention my possible 'conspiracy-mindedness' with regard to totally UNrelated topics ?

It's just not the done thing. You should know that


As for the rest of your post: most of us are aware that people's posts are searchable

It still does not explain your attempting to discredit or devalue my posts in THIS thread by comparing them to my posts in other, unrelated threads !


Anyway, I'm logging off. (1) very late here and (2) you've left a bad taste in my mouth which does not reflect well on ATS, I'm sorry to say




posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by SpectreDC
 


I agree with you.


All that I can think is that having homosexual adoptive parents is an additional stressor. If this is the case it means that the most vulnerable of children may be exposed to additional pressures. Anti discriminatory laws are one thing and I am against homophobia but this seems to have painted decent people into a corner.

I do hope the research is bogus. I am unimpressed by the Xtian arguements
and accept that gays have a right to be.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


Just saw your post when I refreshed

It needn't be an anti-gay affair

However, it suits the agenda of some to portray it that way

because in doing so, they hope to muddy the waters and divert people from the plight of the children concerned

Heaven forbid we should consider the children, eh ?

Bye for now and peace, as they say



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post 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'


Moderators Are People Too.

We as staff are entitled to our opinions, just an FYI
When we become staff it does not mean we give up our right to post and voice our opinions.
We do not MOD threads we post in. Meaning, we do not take actions on other members and their posts, when we post our opinions on threads. That way we remain neutral




[edit on February 24th 2010 by greeneyedleo]



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


Suits the agenda? Of who? People sticking up for people, or people spewing hate? If there's an agenda to be had, it is one from the fundies. Every thread with the word gay in the title goes the same way. Infact, the very fact that this poll was done by an organisation trying to "cure gays" is the agenda being pushed by the anti gay crowd. (or an anti gay poster, for starts)

And if we were really thinking about the children, we'd be thinking about EDUCATION for the children that are CAUSING the kids to become depressed. It's quite simple.

[edit on 24/2/2010 by Acidtastic]



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


I love how teaching children that being mean to others because they may be different is not stressed - instead what is stressed is that people who are different should change and be like everyone else.



***
Edit to take out a word that didnt make sense

[edit on February 24th 2010 by greeneyedleo]



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by Acidtastic
 


I love how instead of teaching children that being mean to others because they may be different is not stressed - instead what is stressed is that people who are different should change and be like everyone else.


I know, it seems so blindlingly obvious.

Almost.....too easy. Shame, cos this is the world we live in, and people still think that it's ok to go about like this.

I say this time and time again. if we all looked at one another and saw the simularities, instead of the differences. The world would get along just fine.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   
It is imperative when presented with "facts" like these that you take into account the source. It is the basis for any examination of the facts presented.

So lets look at the source shall we.

Dr. George A. Rekers

Ya , its wiki but it is only the start. Just a little brief about him, thats all.

Next some published works by him.

Growing up Straight: What Families Should Know about Homosexuality

Nope no bias there.

Shaping Your Child's Sexual Identity.

So he believes we can make our children straight. Nope no bias there.

How about some of the groups or organizations he belongs to or had helped found.

Narth


We respect the right of all individuals to choose their own destiny. NARTH is a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality. As an organization, we disseminate educational information, conduct and collect scientific research, promote effective therapeutic treatment, and provide referrals to those who seek our assistance.

NARTH upholds the rights of individuals with unwanted homosexual attraction to receive effective psychological care and the right of professionals to offer that care. We welcome the participation of all individuals who will join us in the pursuit of these goals.


Nope, no bias there.

Family Research Council


Family Research Council believes that homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed. It is by definition unnatural, and as such is associated with negative physical and psychological health effects. While the origins of same-sex attractions may be complex, there is no convincing evidence that a homosexual identity is ever something genetic or inborn. We oppose the vigorous efforts of homosexual activists to demand that homosexuality be accepted as equivalent to heterosexuality in law, in the media, and in schools. Attempts to join two men or two women in "marriage" constitute a radical redefinition and falsification of the institution, and FRC supports state and federal constitutional amendments to prevent such redefinition by courts or legislatures. Sympathy must be extended to those who struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions, and every effort should be made to assist such persons to overcome those attractions, as many already have.


Nope, no bias there.

LeadershipU

Nope no bias there.

His work has also been citied in such unbiased works as:

books.google.com...=onepage&q=&f=false

Hey the guy is well educated and well qualified but that doesn't mean he does not have bias. He is obviously a Christian Fundamentalist so his opinion, which this paper is, should always be taken that in mind.

One of the basics of critical thinking is to be able to discern bias. I think a some critical thinking would go a long way here.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


Guess this country isn't ready to be good and treat everyone like equals yet

-sigh-

well to all gays, lesbians, bis, transexuals...whatever you are...I love ya

-Kyo



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by KyoZero
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


Guess this country isn't ready to be good and treat everyone like equals yet

-sigh-

well to all gays, lesbians, bis, transexuals...whatever you are...I love ya

-Kyo


Yes, well any argument that is made against homosexuals can be made against straights too. And im sure enough studies and "facts" can be found to support each side.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


Christ as has already been shown in this thread, the study is bogus. It was released by a bunch of idiots who have frequently shown their cards to the world - NARTH. They are a joke. The only people who listen to them are their supporters, and other people who hate gays.

Lots of racist people owned slaves or had black house servants. You having gay employees or gay folks in your home doesn't prove anything about how clearly anti-gay you are.

reply to post by Bombeni
 


The group that performed the study were biased to the point of rendering this particular study as ineffective. There have been other studies, also listed in this thread, that showed no difference. So much for your fire being hot.

reply to post by Dock9
 


Because no one has to. If the KKK came out with a study saying black people or Jewish folks are sub-human scum, does that need to be challenged? Of course not - most people are sane enough to realise that the KKK is a racist organisation. You don't seem to realise that NARTH is a bogus sham of an organisation, filled with hatred for gay folks.

reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


That is disgusting. If you really believe that, then you're disgusting, too.

I'm done with trying to show hate-filled people just how hate-filled they are.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Isthisthingon
 


That's the shizzle, right there. Nice little bit of research.

This thread belongs in the hoax forum IMO.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Wow really?

Alright, the source is messed up to say the least, very selective study which goes on to indicate that children who grow up in "adoptive" situations, such as orphans abandoned by parents and that sort of thing are more prone to suicidal thoughts and emotional issues than kids who don't grow up in that system?

So really this study has nothing to do with the parents and everything to do with the system at hand which puts them in difficult situations PRIOR to being adopted by gay couples who can only attempt to help these children become strong willed, independant and succesfull adults.

Perhaps my opinion is biased because I have raised 4 children with another man, and they are all exeptional children.

This whole BS story about children being in fear of other children's ridicule for having two moms or two dads show up at school to pick them up or to even hide the fact they have two fathers or two mothers is a very flawed argument.

My children were taught to not care what other's said of their home life, because others did not understand the dynamic involved. You can't compare the two situations when it comes to straight and gay couples because each is significantly different than the other.

What ever happened to children who knew who they were and where they came from and were proud to have parents that loved and provided an environment and understanding, learning and opportunity?

My children had minor issues in highschool, mostly with adults however, as the children didn't really care and if they said anything my children were smart enough to realize that it was no skin off their back.

The adults who gave my children a hard time, namely a few teachers, no longer work in the positions they do because they decided to base their opinion of my child on my choices as an adult, which is inherintly wrong.

I'm sorry but ANY child that is adopted or comes from a broken home is going to have issues, regardless of who adopts them, gay or straight.

You cannot blanket statement all these families either, I am not alone when I say that my children are well adjusted and have no problems telling people they were raised by two men.

I know dozens of families either two men or two women who are in the same boat I am.

Please understand that mother/father, mother/mother, father/father has NO bearing on how that child will turn on. The only thing that matters to the development of a child is the love, understanding and opportunity for growth provided by parents, regardless of sex.

~Keeper



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Unless I'm badly mistaken, and I"m sure some of you will think I am, this study seems to lay the blame for this trend on the adoptive parents... In other words, Oooooh, the evil gays are to blame...

Oddly enough, as these things go, I happen to be acquainted with a couple of gay men who are raising a little girl from Africa. We aren't friends, they shop at the supermarket where I work, and they're regular customers in the mornings on their way to work... The little girl is about 5 years old, just about ready to start school, or has already I'm sure... She's cute as a button, cheerful, always jabbering in two languages, her English gets better by the day, I'm not at all sure what the other language is...
(must remember to ask one of these days).

If there is any stress on that little girl, it's from outside of that group. Which would place the blame, to my mind, on societies inability to grow the hell up, and accept that just because somethings different, it isn't necessarily evil.

I get the strangest feeling that this study set out to prove a point, and not explore anything...



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Well Sir you are but one person and your omments are valid but it is notg on the level of scientific research. Sorry but that is the case.

If your adopted children had all committed suicide would you have even told us. Can you say that you are real?? Hint I am a real person my name is Thor and i am the Son of Odin. Get my point??

FYI without going into detail I have always erred on the side of caution with regarding both my biological children and my adopted ones.

I even went as far as baptising all of my children. I was sufficiently caring as to give them the tools of conformity and let them realise the hypocrasy of Xtianity for themselves!


T



[edit on 24-2-2010 by Tiger5]



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Well this is a turn of events. Statistics and reports can be read any way you want them to, if it is only based off of a select group. I question the reports validity and the analysis of such. For starters there is the fact that it did not do a comparison, or have a control group to base the study off of, or report such. Without that comparison, without the actual comparing data, the report is invalid, as it only shows part of the picture.
My question would be what is more in need for the children? A stable home and professional help, or to be bounced from home to home? I have met 2 gay men, each of whom adopted or took care of a foster child, the mind set, like any good parent, was for the well being of the child, to the point of where they put their own personal life on hold to ensure that the household was condusive for children to be in and around. And in both cases, the children once away from the negative influences of their past lives, started to take a positive direction. And from what I could see both are still raising the children without there being the kinds of problems that are mentioned in the report, doing well in school and making choices that would make any parent proud. Is this such a bad thing?
Any more the question should be who is vetting the foster parents and those who would want to adopt children to ensure that the children are in an environment to ensure that they would grow up, after all that should be the primary focus and concern, not just putting out a blanket statement that a gay couple is unfit or not. The report did hit it on the head, the children that are being placed have problems, and serious problems at that if they are depressed to the point of committing suicide.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dock9

Why have you felt it necessary to mention my possible 'conspiracy-mindedness' with regard to totally UNrelated topics ?

It's just not the done thing. You should know that


You claim that the mans credentials mean he is virtually untouchable by anyone on ATS who is not one of his peers

And yet you openly mock global warming theory, which is presenteed by people with credentials that are equally as valid.

So which is it? Do we accept reports by such people based on their qualifications or do we understand that sometimes when you are looking for a certain result, because someone has paid you to find it, you find it?

The answer is very, very valid to this thread, and doesn't undermine it at all.



you've left a bad taste in my mouth which does not reflect well on ATS, I'm sorry to say


I don't see how your opinions do not reflect well on ATS. They are your opinions after all, and ATS has provided an outlet for them. What you type is nothing to do with ATS as a forum. Your words. Your opinions. Your posts.

[edit on 24/2/10 by neformore]



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 



Stress on the little girl is from "outside that group" -- well obviously. You said we need to grow the hell up. Do you think adverse affects are caused by us "evil" people pointing at the adopted child and laughing? I don't think so. It would be the peer group of the child.

Whether you are willing to accept it or not, homosexuality is still considered sexual deviation by many, although I agree homosexuals and lesbians are "regular" people except for one thing: their homosexuality. It's only 2010. Children are still being reproduced so obviously we still have plenty of heteros around, and we also still have plenty of what is called "social norms" around. If we get to the point where homosexuality is the norm, there aren't going to be any children to adopt, period.



posted on Feb, 24 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Isthisthingon
 



Yes this man clearly has a bias. Now tell me that you don't have any bias! Do you honestly believe that academic research is free from bias??

Do wise up. That is the reason why there is peer review. Frankly you are just adding further obfuscation. I contend that a biased researcher that does not falsify information can produce a valid scientific paper on the strength of the review process which can be a stiff hurdle to clear.

T





new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join