-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I'll tell you what's dishonest: pretending these number don't exist
Marriage and Family as Deterrents from Delinquency, Violence and Crime
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
R. C. bishops: We'd rather see children suffer than acknowledge same-sex couples
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
I'll tell you what's dishonest: pretending these number don't exist
Marriage and Family as Deterrents from Delinquency, Violence and Crime
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
Here's an interesting article on some of the "research" that's been presented in this thread as well as results from some studies that paint a different picture
Timothy J. Dailey Ph.D. -- Homosexual Parenting: Placing children at risk
here's some excerpts:
"The presence of methodological defects--a mark of substandard research--would be cause for rejection of research conducted in virtually any other subject area. The overlooking of such deficiencies in research papers on homosexual failures can be attributed to the "politically correct" determination within those in the social science professions to "prove" that homosexual households are no different than traditional families. However, no amount of scholarly legerdemain contained in an accumulation of flawed studies can obscure the well-established and growing body of evidence showing that both mothers and fathers provide unique and irreplaceable contributions to the raising of children. Children raised in traditional families by a mother and father are happier, healthier, and more successful than children raised in non-traditional environments. David Cramer, whose review of twenty studies on homosexual parenting appeared in the Journal of Counseling and Development, found the following:
The generalizability of the studies is limited. Few studies employed control groups and most had small samples. Almost all parents were Anglo-American, middle class, and well educated. Measures for assessing gender roles in young children tend to focus on social behavior and generally are not accurate psychological instruments. Therefore it is impossible to make large scale generalizations . . . that would be applicable to all children.1 "
"Self-presentation Bias
Homosexual Promiscuity: Studies indicate that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime, a lifestyle that is difficult for even "committed" homosexuals to break free of and which is not conducive to a healthy and wholesome atmosphere for the raising of children.
Timothy J. Dailey Ph.D. -- Homosexual Parenting: Placing children at risk
here's some excerpts:
"The presence of methodological defects--a mark of substandard research--would be cause for rejection of research conducted in virtually any other subject area. The overlooking of such deficiencies in research papers on homosexual failures can be attributed to the "politically correct" determination within those in the social science professions to "prove" that homosexual households are no different than traditional families. However, no amount of scholarly legerdemain contained in an accumulation of flawed studies can obscure the well-established and growing body of evidence showing that both mothers and fathers provide unique and irreplaceable contributions to the raising of children. Children raised in traditional families by a mother and father are happier, healthier, and more successful than children raised in non-traditional environments. David Cramer, whose review of twenty studies on homosexual parenting appeared in the Journal of Counseling and Development, found the following:
The generalizability of the studies is limited. Few studies employed control groups and most had small samples. Almost all parents were Anglo-American, middle class, and well educated. Measures for assessing gender roles in young children tend to focus on social behavior and generally are not accurate psychological instruments. Therefore it is impossible to make large scale generalizations . . . that would be applicable to all children.1 "
"Self-presentation Bias
A lack of random sampling and the absence of controls guaranteeing anonymity allow subjects to present a misleading picture to the researcher that conforms to the subject's attitudes or opinions and suppresses evidence that does not conform to the image he or she desires to present.
In their National Lesbian Family Study N. Gartrell et al. found that eighteen of nineteen studies of homosexual parents used a research procedure that was contaminated by self-presentation bias. Gartrell mentions the methodological problems of one longitudinal study of lesbian families:
"The evidence demonstrates incontrovertibly that the homosexual lifestyle is inconsistent with the proper raising of children. Homosexual relationships are characteristically unstable and are fundamentally incapable of providing children the security they need. In their National Lesbian Family Study N. Gartrell et al. found that eighteen of nineteen studies of homosexual parents used a research procedure that was contaminated by self-presentation bias. Gartrell mentions the methodological problems of one longitudinal study of lesbian families:
Some may have volunteered for this project because they were motivated to demonstrate that lesbians were capable of producing healthy, happy children. To the extent that these subjects might wish to present themselves and their families in the best possible light, the study findings may be shaped by self-justification and self-presentation bias.23"
Homosexual Promiscuity: Studies indicate that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime, a lifestyle that is difficult for even "committed" homosexuals to break free of and which is not conducive to a healthy and wholesome atmosphere for the raising of children.
A. P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with five hundred or more partners, with 28 percent having 1,000 or more sex partners.29 "
"Promiscuity among Homosexual Couples
Even in those homosexual relationships in which the partners consider themselves to be in a committed relationship, the meaning of "committed" typically means something radically different than in heterosexual marriage.
In The Male Couple, authors David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison report that in a study of 156 males in homosexual relationships lasting from one to thirty-seven years: Only seven couples have a totally exclusive sexual relationship, and these men all have been together for less than five years. Stated another way, all couples with a relationship lasting more than five years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships.33 Most understood sexual relations outside the relationship to be the norm, and viewed adopting monogamous standards as an act of oppression.
In Male and Female Homosexuality, M. Saghir and E. Robins found that the average male homosexual live-in relationship lasts between two and three years.34
In their Journal of Sex Research study of the sexual practices of older homosexual men, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that only 2.7 percent of older homosexuals had only one sexual partner in their lifetime.35"
"Substance Abuse among Lesbians
A study published in Nursing Research found that lesbians are three times more likely to abuse alcohol and to suffer from other compulsive behaviors: Like most problem drinkers, 32 (91 percent) of the participants had abused other drugs as well as alcohol, and many reported compulsive difficulties with food (34 percent), codependency (29 percent), sex (11 percent), and money (6 percent). Forty-six percent had been heavy drinkers with frequent drunkenness.49
Greater Risk for Suicide
A study of twins that examined the relationship between homosexuality and suicide, published in the Archives of General Psychiatry, found that homosexuals with same-sex partners were at greater risk for overall mental health problems, and were 6.5 times more likely than their twins to have attempted suicide. The higher rate was not attributable to mental health or substance abuse disorders.50
Another study published simultaneously in Archives of General Psychiatry followed 1007 individuals from birth. Those classified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual were significantly more likely to have had mental health problems. Significantly, in his comments in the same issue of the journal, D. Bailey cautioned against various speculative explanations of the results, such as the view that "widespread prejudice against homosexual people causes them to be unhappy or worse, mentally ill."51
"Sexual Identity Confusion
The claim that homosexual households do not "recruit" children into the homosexual lifestyle is refuted by the growing evidence that children raised in such households are more likely to engage in sexual experimentation and in homosexual behavior.
Studies indicate that 0.3 percent of adult females report having practiced homosexual behavior in the past year, 0.4 percent have practiced homosexual behavior in the last five years, and 3 percent have ever practiced homosexual behavior in their lifetime.54 A study in Developmental Psychology found that 12 percent of the children of lesbians became active lesbians themselves, a rate which is at least four times the base rate of lesbianism in the adult female population.55"
"Incest in Homosexual Parent Families
A study in Adolescence found: A disproportionate percentage--29 percent--of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent...Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50.60"
"Homosexual or lesbian households are no substitute for a family: Children also need both a mother and a father. Blankenhorn discusses the different but necessary roles that mothers and fathers play in children's lives: "If mothers are likely to devote special attention to their children's present physical and emotional needs, fathers are likely to devote special attention to their character traits necessary for the future, especially qualities such as independence, self-reliance, and the willingness to test limits and take risks."
Blankenhorn further explains:Compared to a mother's love, a father's love is frequently more expectant, more instrumental, and significantly less conditional. . . . For the child, from the beginning, the mother's love is an unquestioned source of comfort and the foundation of human attachment. But the father's love is almost a bit farther away, more distant and contingent. Compared to the mother's love, the father's must frequently be sought after, deserved, earned through achievement.69
Author and sociologist David Popenoe confirms that mothers and fathers fulfill different roles in their children's lives. In Life without Father Popenoe notes, "Through their play, as well as in their other child-rearing activities, fathers tend to stress competition, challenge, initiative, risk taking and independence. Mothers in their care-taking roles, in contrast, stress emotional security and personal safety."
Parents also discipline their children differently: "While mothers provide an important flexibility and sympathy in their discipline, fathers provide ultimate predictability and consistency. Both dimensions are critical for an efficient, balanced, and humane child-rearing regime."70
The complementary aspects of parenting that mothers and fathers contribute to the rearing of children are rooted in the innate differences of the two sexes, and can no more be arbitrarily substituted than can the very nature of male and female. Accusations of sexism and homophobia notwithstanding, along with attempts to deny the importance of both mothers and fathers in the rearing of children, the oldest family structure of all turns out to be the best."
"Promiscuity among Homosexual Couples
Even in those homosexual relationships in which the partners consider themselves to be in a committed relationship, the meaning of "committed" typically means something radically different than in heterosexual marriage.
In The Male Couple, authors David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison report that in a study of 156 males in homosexual relationships lasting from one to thirty-seven years: Only seven couples have a totally exclusive sexual relationship, and these men all have been together for less than five years. Stated another way, all couples with a relationship lasting more than five years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships.33 Most understood sexual relations outside the relationship to be the norm, and viewed adopting monogamous standards as an act of oppression.
In Male and Female Homosexuality, M. Saghir and E. Robins found that the average male homosexual live-in relationship lasts between two and three years.34
In their Journal of Sex Research study of the sexual practices of older homosexual men, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that only 2.7 percent of older homosexuals had only one sexual partner in their lifetime.35"
"Substance Abuse among Lesbians
A study published in Nursing Research found that lesbians are three times more likely to abuse alcohol and to suffer from other compulsive behaviors: Like most problem drinkers, 32 (91 percent) of the participants had abused other drugs as well as alcohol, and many reported compulsive difficulties with food (34 percent), codependency (29 percent), sex (11 percent), and money (6 percent). Forty-six percent had been heavy drinkers with frequent drunkenness.49
Greater Risk for Suicide
A study of twins that examined the relationship between homosexuality and suicide, published in the Archives of General Psychiatry, found that homosexuals with same-sex partners were at greater risk for overall mental health problems, and were 6.5 times more likely than their twins to have attempted suicide. The higher rate was not attributable to mental health or substance abuse disorders.50
Another study published simultaneously in Archives of General Psychiatry followed 1007 individuals from birth. Those classified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual were significantly more likely to have had mental health problems. Significantly, in his comments in the same issue of the journal, D. Bailey cautioned against various speculative explanations of the results, such as the view that "widespread prejudice against homosexual people causes them to be unhappy or worse, mentally ill."51
"Sexual Identity Confusion
The claim that homosexual households do not "recruit" children into the homosexual lifestyle is refuted by the growing evidence that children raised in such households are more likely to engage in sexual experimentation and in homosexual behavior.
Studies indicate that 0.3 percent of adult females report having practiced homosexual behavior in the past year, 0.4 percent have practiced homosexual behavior in the last five years, and 3 percent have ever practiced homosexual behavior in their lifetime.54 A study in Developmental Psychology found that 12 percent of the children of lesbians became active lesbians themselves, a rate which is at least four times the base rate of lesbianism in the adult female population.55"
"Incest in Homosexual Parent Families
A study in Adolescence found: A disproportionate percentage--29 percent--of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent...Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50.60"
"Homosexual or lesbian households are no substitute for a family: Children also need both a mother and a father. Blankenhorn discusses the different but necessary roles that mothers and fathers play in children's lives: "If mothers are likely to devote special attention to their children's present physical and emotional needs, fathers are likely to devote special attention to their character traits necessary for the future, especially qualities such as independence, self-reliance, and the willingness to test limits and take risks."
Blankenhorn further explains:Compared to a mother's love, a father's love is frequently more expectant, more instrumental, and significantly less conditional. . . . For the child, from the beginning, the mother's love is an unquestioned source of comfort and the foundation of human attachment. But the father's love is almost a bit farther away, more distant and contingent. Compared to the mother's love, the father's must frequently be sought after, deserved, earned through achievement.69
Author and sociologist David Popenoe confirms that mothers and fathers fulfill different roles in their children's lives. In Life without Father Popenoe notes, "Through their play, as well as in their other child-rearing activities, fathers tend to stress competition, challenge, initiative, risk taking and independence. Mothers in their care-taking roles, in contrast, stress emotional security and personal safety."
Parents also discipline their children differently: "While mothers provide an important flexibility and sympathy in their discipline, fathers provide ultimate predictability and consistency. Both dimensions are critical for an efficient, balanced, and humane child-rearing regime."70
The complementary aspects of parenting that mothers and fathers contribute to the rearing of children are rooted in the innate differences of the two sexes, and can no more be arbitrarily substituted than can the very nature of male and female. Accusations of sexism and homophobia notwithstanding, along with attempts to deny the importance of both mothers and fathers in the rearing of children, the oldest family structure of all turns out to be the best."
Last edited:
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
Everybody has an agenda. Even your revered American Psychological Association. Having an agenda doesn't necessarily make you a liar. We also don't just reject data because we don't like where it's coming from.
Last edited:
Yes, but some peoples agenda is towards truth, while others are toward propagating an ideology that isn't consistent with data. And if you take the latter and promote it as a statistic, then you're being disingenious and lying.
Skwim
Veteran Member
And HERE is a critique of your source.
The author of your source Homosexual Parenting: Placing children at risk, a Timothy J. Dailey Ph.D., isn't even qualified to render an educated opinion on homosexual parenting. All his degrees, including his Ph.D., are in theology.
Sorry that you took the time to post such a worthless diatribe.
Alceste
Vagabond
I'd want my own children to be raised by loving, competent parents. The gender of those parents is inconsequential. I'm heterosexual. That just goes to show you your own thoughtless bigotry is not necessarily representative of the innate feelings of all mankind.
Alceste
Vagabond
Incorrect. I'd probably choose two lesbians.
Drolefille
PolyPanGeekGirl
Lets start with some information on Mr. Dailey:
Dr. Dailey is not a scientist. And his article shows funadmental misunderstanding of how studies work combined with a willingness to rely on studies that have similar and in fact more striking problems with them without criticism of the studies that support his opinion.
He is not an unbiased source. This is an opinion piece. Also I'd strongly question his theology.
Anyway, to the article you posted:
here's some excerpts:
No in fact, studies always include their limitations - small sample sizes or acknowledgement of improvements that could be made to increase the ability of these studies to be generalized to ever broader populations. His criticism is particularly funny in the face of the studies he quotes later.
He provides no evidence that these studies are somehow less valid than others due to their subject matter, just assumes the criticism.
None of which he cites or mentions by name.
This is his assumption. His unwillingness to challenge this shows his lack of scientific rigor.
So he's essentially arguing that there's not enough information. That neither supports the article's claim nor yours. Minority studies of all sorts typically require long periods of time to get more than small sample studies which is why although Cramer wrote that in 1986, it is now 2011.
Again, researchers are expected to note every possible bias. This is a bias with EVERY longitudinal study, because otherwise people don't want to volunteer for 20 years of studies. Lack of random sampling or control groups purely relates to the type of study.
And that comes out of nowhere, and is utterly unsupported garbage.
Most of these studies go back 30-40 years, at least one was at an STD/sexual addiction clinic, none look at married couples. Oh and the alcohol use claims are most likely sourced from the study that occurred at a bar.
Also many of these studies had sample sizes of 25-30... something that this non-scientist thinks is way too small if the studies disagree with him and he points out none of the flaws in these studies. They're almost copied and pasted from other lists of 'why gay people are unhealthy and immoral'. Yes, social pressure and lack of acceptance leads to higher alcohol abuse and increases mental health problems.
As for the allegations of incest, I'm just going to leave this critique of the relevant articles here before I get angry:Critique of Surveys by the Paul Cameron Group
This article is pretty much garbage, it's opinion but it begged the question from the beginning and I have more qualifications than this man does in this field.
Alceste
Vagabond
I live in Canada, worked extensively with Social Services in the UK as a government employee (read dozens of files on children in care as part of my job), and the OP is referring to an American church. There are differences and also similarities. Outsourcing child welfare and other vital social services to religious groups is not unique to any single country. The last Catholic adoption agency in the UK shuttered its doors in 2010 for the same reason:
Last Catholic adoption agency faces closure after Charity Commission ruling - Telegraph
In Canada, our most famous experiment with outsourcing social services to religious groups was the notorious residential school program, which ended in total disaster and disgrace to my country and every religious group that took part.
I'm not quite sure you know what I know.
FYI, you don't have to be "vetted by police", you need to provide a criminal record check. It's a pretty standard request here as well. I've had to get a bunch of them for my work in child care and teaching.
How ironic. You can't seem to decide whether you're talking about religious or secular social services or even what country you're talking about, but MY post screams ignorance.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I guess you missed all his quotes of more authoritative sources
Skwim
Veteran Member
I wouldn't trust anyone who spoke outside their field of expertize.
Timothy Dailey is not a sociologist, a sexologist, a psychologist, nor does he have a degree in family & marriage therapy. He's a theologian for crying out loud! He studied religion.
People with agendas and biased points of view cannot be trusted to present a balanced recitation of the facts--they necessarily lack objectivity. They invariably cherry pick information, and all the more so when the subject is outside their field of expertise. So it's immaterial that he quotes authoritative sources; HE can't be trusted to do it properly. Unfortunately, people predisposed to his view and those with little or no advanced education seldom recognize this, which is exactly what Dailey is counting on when he plays to their ignorance.
You've been hoodwinked.
Photonic
Ad astra!
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I wouldn't trust anyone who spoke outside their field of expertize.
Timothy Dailey is not a sociologist, a sexologist, a psychologist, nor does he have a degree in family & marriage therapy. He's a theologian for crying out loud! He studied religion.
Unfortunately, people predisposed to his view and those with little or no advanced education seldom recognize this, which is exactly what Dailey is counting on when he plays to their ignorance.
You've been hoodwinked.
Is every activist a scientist? Is Al Gore a PHD in environmental chemistry? Or do people like Al Gore simply work off the data of more qualified people?
Me Myself
Back to my username
Me Myself
Back to my username
Which of his sources were scientific ones, care to cite one?
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
It's going to take a few minutes hang on
Skwim
Veteran Member
Now you expect people to trust politicians? Of course, those who agree with one's own positions and ideas are always right. :slap:
As I said, I wouldn't trust anyone who spoke outside their field of expertize.
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
I'm working through it to pull out all the professionals listed as I know no one else will as opposed to spouting off ******** without thinking
David Cramer, whose review of twenty studies on homosexual parenting appeared in the Journal of Counseling and Development, found the following:
David Cramer, whose review of twenty studies on homosexual parenting appeared in the Journal of Counseling and Development, found the following:
The generalizability of the studies is limited. Few studies employed control groups and most had small samples. Almost all parents were Anglo-American, middle class, and well educated. Measures for assessing gender roles in young children tend to focus on social behavior and generally are not accurate psychological instruments. Therefore it is impossible to make large scale generalizations . . . that would be applicable to all children.1
MY ADDITION: That doesn't sound like a religious journal to me
"Silverstein and Auerbach, for example, see no essential difference between traditional mother-father families and homosexual-led families: "Other aspects of personal development and social relationships were also found to be within the normal range for children raised in lesbian and gay families." They suggest that "gay and lesbian parents can create a positive family context."2
This conclusion is echoed in the official statement on homosexual parenting by the American Psychological Association's Public Interest Directorate, authored by openly lesbian activist Charlotte J. Patterson of the University of Virginia:
In summary, there is no evidence that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of gay men or lesbians is compromised in any respect...Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents.3
This conclusion is echoed in the official statement on homosexual parenting by the American Psychological Association's Public Interest Directorate, authored by openly lesbian activist Charlotte J. Patterson of the University of Virginia:
In summary, there is no evidence that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of gay men or lesbians is compromised in any respect...Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents.3
Upon closer examination, however, this conclusion is not as confident as it appears. In the next paragraph, Patterson qualifies her statement. Echoing Cramer's concern from a decade earlier, she writes: "It should be acknowledged that research on lesbian and gay parents and their children is still very new and relatively scarce...Longitudinal studies that follow lesbian and gay families over time are badly needed."4 The years have passed since Patterson's admission of the inadequacy of homosexual parenting studies, and we still await definitive, objective research substantiating her claims.
In addition, Patterson acknowledges that "research in this area has presented a variety of methodological challenges," and that "questions have been raised with regard to sampling issues, statistical power, and other technical matters (e.g., Belcastro, Gramlich, Nicholson, Price, & Wilson, 1993)." She adds, revealingly:
MY ADDITION: That doesn't sound like a religious journal to me
"Silverstein and Auerbach, for example, see no essential difference between traditional mother-father families and homosexual-led families: "Other aspects of personal development and social relationships were also found to be within the normal range for children raised in lesbian and gay families." They suggest that "gay and lesbian parents can create a positive family context."2
This conclusion is echoed in the official statement on homosexual parenting by the American Psychological Association's Public Interest Directorate, authored by openly lesbian activist Charlotte J. Patterson of the University of Virginia:
In summary, there is no evidence that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of gay men or lesbians is compromised in any respect...Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents.3
This conclusion is echoed in the official statement on homosexual parenting by the American Psychological Association's Public Interest Directorate, authored by openly lesbian activist Charlotte J. Patterson of the University of Virginia:
In summary, there is no evidence that lesbians and gay men are unfit to be parents or that psychosocial development among children of gay men or lesbians is compromised in any respect...Not a single study has found children of gay or lesbian parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents.3
Upon closer examination, however, this conclusion is not as confident as it appears. In the next paragraph, Patterson qualifies her statement. Echoing Cramer's concern from a decade earlier, she writes: "It should be acknowledged that research on lesbian and gay parents and their children is still very new and relatively scarce...Longitudinal studies that follow lesbian and gay families over time are badly needed."4 The years have passed since Patterson's admission of the inadequacy of homosexual parenting studies, and we still await definitive, objective research substantiating her claims.
In addition, Patterson acknowledges that "research in this area has presented a variety of methodological challenges," and that "questions have been raised with regard to sampling issues, statistical power, and other technical matters (e.g., Belcastro, Gramlich, Nicholson, Price, & Wilson, 1993)." She adds, revealingly:
Research in this area has also been criticized for using poorly matched or no control groups in designs that call for such controls. . . . Other criticisms have been that most studies have involved relatively small samples [and] that there have been inadequacies in assessment procedures employed in some studies.5 "
MY ADDITION: Translation, Dailey through his uncanny ability to read English is pointing out that gay adoption activists have cherry picked quotes from studies while ignoring other parts.
"One suspects that the lack of studies with proper design and controls is due to the political agendas driving the acceptance of homosexual parenting, which favor inadequate and superficial research yielding the desired results.
In a study published in the Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, P. Belcastro et al. reviewed fourteen studies on homosexual parenting according to accepted scientific standards. Their "most impressive finding" was that "all of the studies lacked external validity. The conclusion that there are no significant differences in children raised by lesbian mothers versus heterosexual mothers is not supported by the published research data base."6 Similarly, in their study of lesbian couples in Family Relations, L. Keopke et al. remark, "Conducting research in the gay community is fraught with methodological problems."7 "
MY ADDITION: Leslie Koepke's qualifications: Leslie Koepke
Leslie Koepke
PhD
Human Development and Family Studies
And yes, her name typed in this report, spelled Keopke, is a typo as I've verified this fact by looking at other copies of the orginal article found at different places where it was spelled "Koepke".
MY ADDITION: Translation, Dailey through his uncanny ability to read English is pointing out that gay adoption activists have cherry picked quotes from studies while ignoring other parts.
"One suspects that the lack of studies with proper design and controls is due to the political agendas driving the acceptance of homosexual parenting, which favor inadequate and superficial research yielding the desired results.
In a study published in the Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, P. Belcastro et al. reviewed fourteen studies on homosexual parenting according to accepted scientific standards. Their "most impressive finding" was that "all of the studies lacked external validity. The conclusion that there are no significant differences in children raised by lesbian mothers versus heterosexual mothers is not supported by the published research data base."6 Similarly, in their study of lesbian couples in Family Relations, L. Keopke et al. remark, "Conducting research in the gay community is fraught with methodological problems."7 "
MY ADDITION: Leslie Koepke's qualifications: Leslie Koepke
Leslie Koepke
PhD
Human Development and Family Studies
And yes, her name typed in this report, spelled Keopke, is a typo as I've verified this fact by looking at other copies of the orginal article found at different places where it was spelled "Koepke".
Last edited:
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
This is a continuation of my thread citing all of Dailey's sources
"Inadequate Sample Size
Studies examining the effects of homosexual parenting are weakened by inordinately small sample sizes:
MY ADDITION: This doesn't sound like a religious journal either.
"S. Golombok and F. Tasker admit in their follow-up study of children reared by lesbians, "It is possible that the small sample size resulted in an underestimate of the significance of group difference as a result of low statistical power (Type II error)."11 Elsewhere they caution that negative effects of children reared by lesbians "could have remained undetected because of the relatively small sample size. Therefore, although discernible trends were identified, caution is required in interpreting these results."12
In his study published in Child Psychiatry and Human Development comparing the children of homosexual and heterosexual mothers, G. A. Javaid frankly admits that "the numbers are too small in this study to draw any conclusions."13"
MY ADDITION: Look! It's another scientific journal being cited. This is becoming a trend.
"J. J. Bigner and R. B. Jacobson state in the Journal of Homosexuality:
"Inadequate Sample Size
Studies examining the effects of homosexual parenting are weakened by inordinately small sample sizes:
After finding no significant difference between a group of nine children raised by lesbians and a similar group of children raised by heterosexual parents, S. L. Huggins admitted, "The meaning and implications of this finding are unclear, and the small sample size makes any interpretation of these data difficult."9
A report by J. M. Bailey et al. in Developmental Psychology, commenting on studies of the children of gay and lesbian parents, notes that "available studies [are] insufficiently large to generate much statistical power."10"
MY ADDITION: This doesn't sound like a religious journal either.
"S. Golombok and F. Tasker admit in their follow-up study of children reared by lesbians, "It is possible that the small sample size resulted in an underestimate of the significance of group difference as a result of low statistical power (Type II error)."11 Elsewhere they caution that negative effects of children reared by lesbians "could have remained undetected because of the relatively small sample size. Therefore, although discernible trends were identified, caution is required in interpreting these results."12
In his study published in Child Psychiatry and Human Development comparing the children of homosexual and heterosexual mothers, G. A. Javaid frankly admits that "the numbers are too small in this study to draw any conclusions."13"
MY ADDITION: Look! It's another scientific journal being cited. This is becoming a trend.
"J. J. Bigner and R. B. Jacobson state in the Journal of Homosexuality:
Those who do study gay fathers may be frustrated by the difficulties of obtaining valid and adequate sample sizes. Most often, researchers must deal with many methodological problems in locating and testing gay fathers in numbers sufficiently large to make acceptable statistical analyses of data. For this reason, what is known currently about gay fathers is weakened by these methodological problems. It is practically impossible to obtain a representative sample of gay fathers, and those studies published to date frequently utilize groups of white, urban, well-educated males for study because of convenience sampling.14"
MY ADDITION: My critics in this thread a right about one thing. Sources of propoganda are being cited. Except, this time it's a source with a PRO GAY AGENDA
"In her study of lesbian families, Patterson admits to sampling bias: Some concerns relevant to sampling issues should also be acknowledged. Most of the families who took part in the Bay Area Families Study were headed by lesbian mothers who were White, well educated, relatively affluent, and living in the greater San Francisco Bay Area. For these reasons, no claims about representativeness of the present sample can be made.15
Similarly, N. L. Wyers, in his study of male and female homosexual parents that appeared in Social Work, acknowledges that his study "cannot be considered representative" and that "therefore, the findings cannot be generalized beyond the sample itself."16 "
MY ADDITION: Once again, this doesn't sound like a religious journal
"By contrast, R. Green et al. writing in Archives of Sexual Behavior, found that the few experimental studies that included even modestly larger samples (13--30) of boys or girls reared by homosexual parents:
[Found] developmentally important statistically significant differences between children reared by homosexual parents compared to heterosexual parents. For example, children raised by homosexuals were found to have greater parental encouragement for cross-gender behavior [and] greater amounts of cross-dressing and cross-gender play/role behavior.17"
MY ADDITION: Wasn't somebody here crying for some professionals in the field of sex studies?
"Lack of Random Sampling
Researchers use random sampling to ensure that the study participants are representative of the population being studied (for example, homosexuals or lesbians). Findings from unrepresentative samples have no legitimate generalization to the larger population.
L. Lott-Whitehead and C. T. Tully admit the inherent weaknesses in their study of lesbian mothers: This study was descriptive and, therefore, had inherent in its design methodological flaws consistent with other similar studies. Perhaps the most serious concerns representativeness. . . . Probability random sampling . . . was impossible. This study does not purport to contain a representative sample, and thus generalizability cannot be assumed.18
N. L. Wyers acknowledges that he did not use random sampling procedures in his study of lesbian and gay spouses, rendering his study "vulnerable to all the problems associated with self-selected research participants."19
Golombok et al. write of their study: A further objection to the findings lies in the nature of the samples studied. Both groups were volunteers obtained through gay and single-parent magazines and associations. Obviously these do not constitute random samples, and it is not possible to know what biases are involved in the method of sample selection.20 "
MY ADDITION: Dailey proves he's capable of reading the English language as he actually reads the "fine print" that many pro gay adoption activists may have conveniently left out.
MY ADDITION: My critics in this thread a right about one thing. Sources of propoganda are being cited. Except, this time it's a source with a PRO GAY AGENDA
"In her study of lesbian families, Patterson admits to sampling bias: Some concerns relevant to sampling issues should also be acknowledged. Most of the families who took part in the Bay Area Families Study were headed by lesbian mothers who were White, well educated, relatively affluent, and living in the greater San Francisco Bay Area. For these reasons, no claims about representativeness of the present sample can be made.15
Similarly, N. L. Wyers, in his study of male and female homosexual parents that appeared in Social Work, acknowledges that his study "cannot be considered representative" and that "therefore, the findings cannot be generalized beyond the sample itself."16 "
MY ADDITION: Once again, this doesn't sound like a religious journal
"By contrast, R. Green et al. writing in Archives of Sexual Behavior, found that the few experimental studies that included even modestly larger samples (13--30) of boys or girls reared by homosexual parents:
[Found] developmentally important statistically significant differences between children reared by homosexual parents compared to heterosexual parents. For example, children raised by homosexuals were found to have greater parental encouragement for cross-gender behavior [and] greater amounts of cross-dressing and cross-gender play/role behavior.17"
MY ADDITION: Wasn't somebody here crying for some professionals in the field of sex studies?
"Lack of Random Sampling
Researchers use random sampling to ensure that the study participants are representative of the population being studied (for example, homosexuals or lesbians). Findings from unrepresentative samples have no legitimate generalization to the larger population.
L. Lott-Whitehead and C. T. Tully admit the inherent weaknesses in their study of lesbian mothers: This study was descriptive and, therefore, had inherent in its design methodological flaws consistent with other similar studies. Perhaps the most serious concerns representativeness. . . . Probability random sampling . . . was impossible. This study does not purport to contain a representative sample, and thus generalizability cannot be assumed.18
N. L. Wyers acknowledges that he did not use random sampling procedures in his study of lesbian and gay spouses, rendering his study "vulnerable to all the problems associated with self-selected research participants."19
Golombok et al. write of their study: A further objection to the findings lies in the nature of the samples studied. Both groups were volunteers obtained through gay and single-parent magazines and associations. Obviously these do not constitute random samples, and it is not possible to know what biases are involved in the method of sample selection.20 "
MY ADDITION: Dailey proves he's capable of reading the English language as he actually reads the "fine print" that many pro gay adoption activists may have conveniently left out.