Gay Marriage

[Ms Tree]

Post 1168. Your quote. Second paragraph. Pay attention to.what you write.

As was stated by both Glen and my self, we read the study the East posted. The study is BS as proven by the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. They are not my peers. They are not Glens peers. They are other scientist. All credible papers go through peer review. If you ever read anything you would know that.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Yet you come here and post things as if you are knowledgable about the subject.

I could say the same about anybody here. Unless of course your occupation includes the research of peer studies. Another attempt at manipulation by another liberal.
 

Maybe you should take some time and do some research on these topics before continuing to make a fool of yourself.

I read and access the same information anyone else does. Welcome to the internet. You are simply trying to discredit my viewpoints because you don't agree with them.
 

I would hardly call the APA's body of research "fantasy propaganda".

"According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. "
 
There was no new science to remove homosexuality as a mental disease in DSM-II. It was political.
 
APA research is "politically colored". Maybe you should do a bit of research yourself.
 

You have made it clear through your postings on this forum that you do not do anything in your off time other than play fantasy pilot or car driver. 

Did I Glenn? Did I make that perfectly clear? LoL.
 

At least EastUS does have the ability to clearly read and write.

Oh I see. So you feel like I cannot clearly read and write. Apparently you believe I am so uneducated and stupid I cannot construct legible sentences.
 

It was a large body of research and study that came to the conclusions. Not "whatever you say".

Propaganda says what?
 

If you ever have to write a research paper in APA format, you may begin to understand.

Understand? You mean like you? GMAFB. I could not think as slow as you if I was in a f'ing coma.

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

"According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. "
 
There was no new science to remove homosexuality as a mental disease in DSM-II. It was political.
 
APA research is "politically colored". Maybe you should do a bit of research yourself.
 

Understand? You mean like you? GMAFB. I could not think as slow as you if I was in a f'ing coma.

You really are that dense. The APA, which I linked to and quoted, is the American Psychological Association. Yet again you prove your lack of comprehension.

Let me try this again and see if it takes this time:

"The American Psychological Association is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. APA is the world's largest association of psychologists, with nearly 130,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students as its members." http://www.apa.org/about/index.aspx

You call me slow.

And the standard style of research writing is the "APA style".

Yet you come here and post things as if you are knowledgable about the subject.
Maybe you should take some time and do some research on these topics before continuing to make a fool of yourself.

I would hardly call the APA's body of research "fantasy propaganda".

"The American Psychological Association is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. APA is the world's largest association of psychologists, with nearly 130,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students as its members." http://www.apa.org/about/index.aspx

 

[Ms Tree]

I could say the same about anybody here. Unless of course your occupation includes the research of peer studies. Another attempt at manipulation by another liberal.
 

I read and access the same information anyone else does. Welcome to the internet. You are simply trying to discredit my viewpoints because you don't agree with them.
 

"According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. "
 
There was no new science to remove homosexuality as a mental disease in DSM-II. It was political.
 
APA research is "politically colored". Maybe you should do a bit of research yourself.
 

Did I Glenn? Did I make that perfectly clear? LoL.
 

Oh I see. So you feel like I cannot clearly read and write. Apparently you believe I am so uneducated and stupid I cannot construct legible sentences.
 

Propaganda says what?
 

Understand? You mean like you? GMAFB. I could not think as slow as you if I was in a f'ing coma.

Can you point to any scientific research that supports the claim that homosexuality is a.mental defect?

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

None of the rest of it should even have to be said.
 
Since 1998 and across the early 2000s, millions of Americans voted at the state level to define marriage as the union of a man and woman and more than 38 states have such laws on their books today. Yet with state and district courts overturning those laws across the country and the Supreme Court punting on the issue earlier this fall, a number of questions increasingly come in to play:
 
The fact is Americans VOTED on this issue because that is what they wanted. The courts took it upon themselves to IMPOSE their will upon the people.
 
This is nothing more than an assault on American culture and values by the left.

Aww somebody's fussy because they're not getting their way?

Looks like someone needs a nap!

When you wake up, you might want to check the public opinion polls on gay marriage. A majority of Americans support it now, and the number continues to grow EVERY DAY.

Sorry if that ruins your nap, Mr. Grouchypants.

 

[Ms Tree]

La La does not believe in polls or studies unless they agree with his POV in which case he does agree with them. Other wise he goes with personal experience or what he believes in even if all the evidence suggests otherwise.

 

[EastUS1]

The study is BS as proven by the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

 
In full fairness; arguments against the actual validity of any supposed study of the issue can easilly be made. A minor point of curiosity here: What "overwhelming evidence to the contrary" have you to offer for reasonable consideration? Any compelling data to the contrary that's truly "up to scientific standards" would naturally be given it's proper due.
 
The truth is that precious little (if really ANY) in the way of entirely unbiased, serious study has yet been attempted.The biggest problem with conducting serious research these days arises from the often biased work that's yet been even attempted in the way of any efforts at serious research. This is every bit as much true with those supporting as it is with those attacking...Just sayin'...
 
The APA it's self did indeed consider homosexuality to be mental disorder at one point, however bizarre we can all agree that to have been.
 
I'd now like to offer a more full "study" that none can reasonably deny. Human history has no shortage of documented homosexuality, arguably the Greek city states offering the most obvious examples. Few could even at all sanely attempt an argument that those that birthed democracy, and/or that fielded the heroic force at Thermopylae, did any disservice to the later western civilization that they birthed. It should be properly noted though, that within those societies the raising of children wasn't done by gay couples, nor were such considered elible for marriage. Marriage was clearly understood to be between a man and woman, and established and maintained with the birthing/raising of children in mind...even within those cultures that easily embraced homosexual relationships. Perhaps you've imagined yourself the intellectual superior to the likes of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, which would hardly serve to surprise, given your often-established "intellectual" arrogance...? If that's (at least hopefully) not the case; then exactly why do/can you imagine that homosexuality was fully accepted, but marriage limited to the union of man and woman? Were the very same people that layed the foundation for all later democracies complete idiots?...Did they, at least even perhaps understand a few things?...Or has all of human nature completely and magically changed since their time?

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

A minor point of curiosity here: What "overwhelming evidence to the contrary" have you to offer for reasonable consideration? Any compelling data to the contrary that's truly "up to scientific standards" would naturally be given it's proper due.
 
The truth is that precious little (if really ANY) in the way of entirely unbiased, serious study has yet been attempted.
 
The APA it's self did indeed consider homosexuality to be mental disorder at one point, however bizarre we can all agree that to have been. The biggest problem with conducting serious research these days arises from the often biased work that's yet been even attempted in the way of any efforts at serious research. This is every bit as much true with those supporting as it is with those attacking...Just sayin'...

I know you did not address me, however;

See this post:

http://www.airlineforums.com/topic/54679-gay-marriage/page-97#entry1131239

And for clarification purposes, the APA to which I have been referring is the American Psychological Association.

Is it overwhelming evidence? That is subject to scrutiny. It is a large body of respected, peer reviewed research.

 

[EastUS1]

I know you did not address me, however;

See this post:

http://www.airlineforums.com/topic/54679-gay-marriage/page-97#entry1131239

And for clarification purposes, the APA to which I have been referring is the American Psychological Association.

Is it overwhelming evidence? That is subject to scrutiny. It is a large body of respected, peer reviewed research.

 
Ah...yeah. While kind of you, and hopefully intended for anyone that might be otherwise unaware...I kinda' got the APA part, so no need for further clarification there. 😉

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

I thought so. Some are not so quick on the draw.

 

[EastUS1]

I thought so. Some are not so quick on the draw.

 
No worries GQ...You know a nudge-back on that was almost mandatory. 😉
 
Seriously though; whenever one even attempts to dig into the presumed or actual validity of studies involving any currently "hot potato" realms...It's sadly worth considering the fact that all studies are necessarily costly, and money has to come from somewhere. This sad fact, at least to any rational student, must always raise reasonable doubts, lest all we can be left to process amounts to mutual nyahh, nyaahs and opinions. I'll suggest such plays into both "sides" if you will, that are currently involved.
 
Observe just the financial politics involved with the below:
 
http://www.apa.org/pi/mfp/committees/fund-message.aspx
 
"Contribute to the Fund for Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Neuroscience and Psychology (FRED), established through the American Psychological Foundation (APF) and administered by the Minority Fellowship Program (MFP)." Hardly an unworthy idea...but clearly having nothing to do with pure science or research, and instead, obviously "political" in nature. It's crass to note, but it just "might" be suggestable that an entity greatly concerned with promoting "Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Neuroscience and Psychology" is at least likely to take left-leaning positions on other issues as well.

 

[Ms Tree]

 
In full fairness; arguments against the actual validity of any supposed study of the issue can easilly be made. A minor point of curiosity here: What "overwhelming evidence to the contrary" have you to offer for reasonable consideration? Any compelling data to the contrary that's truly "up to scientific standards" would naturally be given it's proper due.
 
The truth is that precious little (if really ANY) in the way of entirely unbiased, serious study has yet been attempted.The biggest problem with conducting serious research these days arises from the often biased work that's yet been even attempted in the way of any efforts at serious research. This is every bit as much true with those supporting as it is with those attacking...Just sayin'...
 
The APA it's self did indeed consider homosexuality to be mental disorder at one point, however bizarre we can all agree that to have been.
 
I'd now like to offer a more full "study" that none can reasonably deny. Human history has no shortage of documented homosexuality, arguably the Greek city states offering the most obvious examples. Few could even at all sanely attempt an argument that those that birthed democracy, and/or that fielded the heroic force at Thermopylae, did any disservice to the later western civilization that they birthed. It should be properly noted though, that within those societies the raising of children wasn't done by gay couples, nor were such considered elible for marriage. Marriage was clearly understood to be between a man and woman, and established and maintained with the birthing/raising of children in mind...even within those cultures that easily embraced homosexual relationships. Perhaps you've imagined yourself the intellectual superior to the likes of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, which would hardly serve to surprise, given your often-established "intellectual" arrogance...? If that's (at least hopefully) not the case; then exactly why do/can you imagine that homosexuality was fully accepted, but marriage limited to the union of man and woman? Were the very same people that layed the foundation for all later democracies complete idiots?...Did they, at least even perhaps understand a few things?...Or has all of human nature completely and magically changed since their time?

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/14/635/abstract
 
http://theconversation.com/kids-from-same-sex-families-fare-as-well-as-peers-or-better-28803
 
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/18/peds.2013-0377
 
There is a massive amount of information out there if you are interested you are more than welcome to search for it your self or if not you are also more than welcome to take FRC's word for it.  Many other have so you will be in good company.
 
You say a lot of things.  This, as many other things you have said is incorrect.
 
What science did the APA have that supported their classification that it was a mental disorder?  Could probably fill a good sized book with things that were believed to be true and have since been proven false. 
 
That was their culture.  We are a democratic republic with a constitution that says all (not some, not certain but all) people are to be equal.  That is the difference between the US and everyone else.  we have the 14th amendment:
 

 
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
 

This is what makes us different. 

 

[EastUS1]

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/14/635/abstract
 
http://theconversation.com/kids-from-same-sex-families-fare-as-well-as-peers-or-better-28803
 
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/18/peds.2013-0377
 
There is a massive amount of information out there if you are interested you are more than welcome to search for it your self or if not you are also more than welcome to take FRC's word for it.  Many other have so you will be in good company.
 
You say a lot of things.  This, as many other things you have said is incorrect.
 
What science did the APA have that supported their classification that it was a mental disorder?  Could probably fill a good sized book with things that were believed to be true and have since been proven false. 
 
That was their culture.  We are a democratic republic with a constitution that says all (not some, not certain but all) people are to be equal.  That is the difference between the US and everyone else.  we have the 14th amendment:
 
This is what makes us different. 

 
1) "There is a massive amount of information out there if you are interested.." Umm...Ok, let's start with your first bit of "information":  "Results:  315 parents completed the survey." Let me get this right..A "survey"??? Are, even CAN you be at all serious here? 🙂  Supposed "Conclusions" from a survey, no less, and those are always proudly responded to by people who's lives aren't working, or have serious issues...right? How many of said surveys were sent out but never returned or answered?  Is some survey at ALL honestly what you imagine constitutes a "scientific" approach?...Really? 😉
"Australian children with same-sex attracted parents score higher than population samples on a number of parent-reported measures of child health. Perceived stigma is negatively associated with mental health. Through improved awareness of stigma these findings play an important role in health policy, improving child health outcomes."  Did anyone bother to factor in household income, educational levels, or even established years of stability within the households of those that "score higher"?...Didn't think so. What say you as to "Perceived stigma is negatively associated with mental health. Through improved awareness of stigma these findings play an important role in health policy, improving child health outcomes." Why should any "improved awareness" be any issue at all with such supposedly already happy and successful children?
 
2) From your second link: "A little more than two years ago Doctor’s for the Family created headlines by suggesting that: the evidence is clear that children who grow up in a family with a mother and a father do better in all parameters than children without." Additionally it was quizzically noted: "But on most health measures, including emotional behaviour and physical functioning, there was no difference when compared with children from the general population. In spite of doing well, many children did experience stigma, which was linked to lower scores on a number of scales." So which is it? Children of gay couples face stigma, or they're just the happiest and healthiest possible of all children everywhere? "Our results suggest children with same-sex attracted parents are doing well in terms of their overall health and that their families are getting along really well."..Umm..."suggest"?, and what sort of serious "science" can ever presume that "their families are getting along really well."..?  "Interestingly, there is growing evidence to suggest.."? Seriously? Silly me, but I didn't see so much a single shred of actual evidence to be found ANYWHERE within that article. Where was it hidden?  Lastly; "But research my colleagues and I published in the journal BMC Public Health shows this isn’t the case." OK..so just WHO IS this guy, and who are his colleagues?
 
3) Perhaps you opted to blindly jump your unicorn over some of the linked information, so I'll post a bit for you: "Extensive data available from more than 30 years of research reveal that children raised by gay and lesbian parents have demonstrated resilience with regard to social, psychological, and sexual health despite economic and legal disparities and social stigma" Oh!...So there IS existing stigma those children must suffer?...Any yet there couldn't possibly be any better situation for them to be raised in? How about this part?  "RESULTS: Although 77.5% of children with married opposite-sex parents had private health insurance, only 63.3% of children with dual fathers and 67.5% with dual mothers were covered by private health plans. Children with same-sex parents had fewer odds of private insurance..." I guess we naturally disregard the "economic...disparities" as well? What child's life isn't always made better through having less money in the family, after all?
 
"This is what makes us different."? Indeed, since I've no assinine (even juvenile) fantasies that just because something CAN be accomplished through courts and lawyers that it's inherently ANY sort of great idea to actually DO. We've the highest percentage of any supposedly civilized nation's population in prison these days, and largely for non violent offenses. Would you even attempt to argue that the "War on Drugs" did anything good for America?...Yet the law would have us imagine it's all a "good" thing...with which you must agree...right? After all...lawyers and courts did it all, so how could it be at all bad?
 
"That was their culture."  Yes it was. I can understand your being so easily dismissive of it...The very same culture that first imagined and produced the later western world's notions of democracy, as well as the foundations of philosophy...Really, why pay any attention to those silly yokels? Heck! Just walk around any street corner in the nation and one can't help but almost trip over the likes of Socrates and Aristotle these days, there being so many such great minds stumbling about, after all. 😉  "We are a democratic republic with a constitution that says all (not some, not certain but all) people are to be equal.  That is the difference between the US and everyone else." Ah!...Silly me again, since I hadn't before realized that human beings in the US were all that much different than those from anywhere else in the world...But heck, so long as our laws are different, well...it almost goes without saying that our very genetic code and essential, human nature must be as well...?
 
Bottom Line: "Perceived stigma is negatively associated with mental health. Through improved awareness of stigma.."/Blah Blah Blah." Hey!...I've got a completely crazy idea here! WHY ever intentionally and KNOWINGLY place helpless children into positions that will even produce such stigma?...I know, I know...that's just crazy talk on my part. 😉

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

You really are that dense. The APA, which I linked to and quoted, is the American Psychological Association. Yet again you prove your lack of comprehension.

Let me try this again and see if it takes this time:

"The American Psychological Association is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. APA is the world's largest association of psychologists, with nearly 130,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students as its members." http://www.apa.org/about/index.aspx

You call me slow.

And the standard style of research writing is the "APA style".

Ignore history. Libtards do it best.
 

The APA, which I linked to and quoted, is the American Psychological Association. 

There is more than one APA.
 
http://www.psychiatry.org/
http://www.apa.org/
 
I am not going to ignore history just because it is inconvenient for you. Removing homosexuality as a mental disease in DSM-II was political. That happened, no matter how much you want to deny it.

 

[EastUS1]

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/14/635/abstract

There is a massive amount of information out there if you are interested ........

 
Yeah...umm...sure. Perhaps you could trouble yourself to focus on anything that actually amounts to "information", versus purely speculative BS?
 
"Methods
A cross-sectional survey, the Australian Study of Child Health in Same-Sex Families, was distributed in 2012 to a convenience sample of 390 parents from Australia who self-identified as same-sex attracted and had children aged 0-17 years. Parent-reported, multidimensional measures of child health and wellbeing and the relationship to perceived stigma were measured.
Results
315 parents completed the survey (completion rate = 81%) representing 500 children."
 
So a mere survey "was distributed" but only 81% even responded to it,and even that was entirely within their "self identified" gay parents in their "convenience sample"...(What about those not "self identified" and thus even less "convenient"?)  🙂 No matter for now.  Should we then "logically" assume that the other 19% within those given surveys that didn't respond were all thrilled with how their lives were going, and their children equally so? ZERO actual interviews with ANY of the children involved not being of even the slightest concern...? Whew! Now that's sho' 'nuff some impressive "science" in action...and that's just from your first link. 😉
 
"a convenience sample of 390 parents from Australia who self-identified"...Seriously?  Shall we first discuss even just what constituted said "convenience sample" and who determined such? Hard science is always a matter of "convenience", after all, isn't it?
 
One factor does appear to almost universally surface within any/all such "surveys" or supposed "studies" though, and that's concern regarding "child health and wellbeing and the relationship to perceived stigma..." Heck!  i just can't think of a more brilliant idea for ensuring the healthy growth of any child than to place them into an enviornment that immediately shadows them over with any stigma...can you?