I love this ohio guy. i just wish this stuff happened more often. I hope that we stop pertending to take the republican bigotry seriously simply because they attach the word chrisitian to their simple minded hatered and bigotry as that is all that it is.

Talk of the Nation did a story on this the other day. These people are crazy. Their basic argument was that children are better off w/out a loving family or home and on the streets - than being raised by a homosexual couple. WTF? And they call themselves Christians...

...and I forgot to mention that this is HILARIOUS. Good for Sen. Hagan! Funny how the Republicans in the racist Dorchester posts are trying to say that the Ds need to lighten up and find a sense of humor. The difference is that what Hagan did is ACTUALLY FUNNY and the crap that was pulled at Dorchester over the weekend was just that, CRAP.

Now that I think of it, I sure know a lot of Republican families with children who have all sorts of behavioral and psychological problems. Hmmm? Maybe Senator Hagan is on to something. At the same time, I know many well-adjusted kids living with gay parents. Just goes to show you how ass-backwards things can get when hate is allowed to dictate public policy.

Hope I don't get banned from BlueOregon for making this very un-PC post:

Is it homophobic to believe that heterosexual couples are more likely to provide their adopted children with a dual-gender parenting environment?

Most adopted children will develop heterosexual preferences and those children will need education and guidance about relating to the opposite sex. Is it homophobic to believe that heterosexual couples are better positioned than homosexual couples to educate and guide their adopted children regarding their sexual development?

I'm not suggesting that homosexual couples should be prohibited from adopting children. But it seems to me that the state has an interest in giving preference to heterosexual couples, everything else being equal.

Right, because kids don't get enough of an education or guidance about being hetersexual from their peers, the media, living in the WORLD? Hmm.

Bill Homer wrote:

"Is it homophobic to believe that heterosexual couples are more likely to provide their adopted children with a dual-gender parenting environment?"

Of course not, Bill. The important question is whether this matters. In my personal experience, it doesn't. I haven't heard of any research that concludes differently. Have you?

Bill-

I dunno, when I was in high school I dated a girl who had two lesbian mothers, and she seemed to be pretty well educated it how to properly relate to the opposite sex!! And really, if the alternative is the foster care system... OK, let's say you're a kid. Would you rather be adopted by joe-booze-drinking-schmoe and his wife who have agreed to take on foster kids to add more income to their disfunctional lifestyle, or would you prefer to be taken in by annie and leslie, the friendly gay household, where you get ben & jerry's for dessert and get to go see live music and stuff?

I mean, all of this crap is so hypothetical... just let people live their lives. Gay households are no better or worse than straight households. If a couple loves one another, they will be good parents. Otherwise... good luck.

cheers, ~Garlynn

"Is it homophobic to believe that heterosexual couples are better positioned than homosexual couples to educate and guide their adopted children regarding their sexual development?"

Not necessarily, but it is either ignorant or just disingenuous trolling. For that matter, it doesn't rule out being a communist, a Canadian, or a homophobe...

Being hetro doesn't mean you are better prepared to discuss the birds and the bees; to illustrate: one doesn't need to know anything about the science of human reproduction in order to parent a child. Instinctual desires can do a fine job of that.

With that said, how does instinctual desire prepare a hetro parent to guide children regarding responsible sexuality? Clearly, not very well when you consider teen pregnancy rates have increased since Bush and the puritan ostrich brigade took power.

If you mean to suggest that only hetro parents understand how to participate in responsible, fidelitous, and long lasting relationships than I challenge you to explain why so few of them choose to practice it.

If you mean to suggest that only hetro parents understand how to mitigate the personal risks of sexual activity at any, your premise is laughable as we see preventable STD infection rates among hetrosexual teens increasing for the last half-decade. If they know, why aren't they sharing that knowledge now?

If you mean to suggest that only hetro parents can possibly advance your sexual morality, than even that fails to hold up the moment we identify a hetro parent who doesn't share your sexual morality (hint: the four in ten Oregonians who voted against Measure 37 include a large number of hetrosexual parents who apparently have no problems staying out of their neighbor's bedrooms).

Last session Oregon saw attempts (though pretty unnoticed by most) to ban gay adoption in a variety of discriminating ways. Three different proposed bills. I think that if this next session we come across the same thing - we need a D who can hold his own - to introduce something like this... how about Jeff Merkley??

-Bryan

Well, at least Kari hasn't banned me - yet.

So let's talk about the research. In the April 2001 issue of the American Sociological Review, University of Southern California sociology professors Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz examined 21 studies of "lesbigay" couples' children compared with heterosexual parents' children. While all of the researchers had claimed to find "no difference" in outcomes between the two groups, Biblarz and Stacey disagreed. There were statistically significant differences in gender identity, sexual experimentation, and promiscuity.

First, both boys and girls raised by homosexuals were far more likely to tell researchers that they had experimented with or considered homosexuality themselves. The research further showed that daughters raised by lesbians tended to have a larger number of sexual partners from puberty to adulthood than children raised by heterosexuals. It also, quite interestingly, showed that boys raised by lesbians had fewer sexual encounters than boys raised by heterosexual parents.

Biblarz and Stacey are hardly homophobes. If fact, Biblarz suggested that lesbian parenting is preferable to heterosexual parenting in that co-mothers tend to be more involved in their children's lives and more nurturing than heterosexual parents.

In any event, they deserve credit for their honesty and their willingness to attack the "no difference" orthodoxy. But their breezy embrace of homosexual parenting is highly reminiscent of the cheerful accounts offered in the 1970s for divorce and single parent households. In those days, we were told that whatever made for a happier parent also made for a happier child. We are sadder and wiser now. The children are much sadder.

Bill Holmer wrote:

Is it homophobic to believe that heterosexual couples are more likely to provide their adopted children with a dual-gender parenting environment?

Others have already explained the ignorance of this view, so I want to address your question: is it homophobic?

Unless you are prepared to support legislation (1) barring adoption by single parents, (2) requiring state certification of parenting skills, and (3) requiring "covenant" (no divorce, ever) marriage as a pre-requisite to adoption (and childbirth), then yes, I suspect your views may be tinged with homophobia. Otherwise, you are singling out homosexuals as inherently less able to exercise good role modeling, and other core parenting skills, than heterosexuals.

First, both boys and girls raised by homosexuals were far more likely to tell researchers that they had experimented with or considered homosexuality themselves.

The fact that you cite this point - that children would consider homosexuality normal - as a negative, indicates strongly to me that homophobia may be underlying your views.

I do not like to use the term "homophobia" lightly. However, when arguments - such as yours - are made with the prior assumption that homosexuality is an inherently lesser state than heterosexuality, then those arguments are, indeed, homophobic.

Even if the conclusions of Biblarz and Stacey hold, I don't see the differences they claim to be very significant. A bit more experimentation, girls with more partners, boys with fewer. Compared to the effects of not being adopted, these are not alarming and might also be explained by the other factors - politics, neighborhood, soioeconomics, for instance - that varied in the same sex couples.

Bill sez: "Biblarz examined 21 studies of "lesbigay" couples' children compared with heterosexual parents' children. While all of the researchers had claimed to find "no difference" in outcomes between the two groups, Biblarz and Stacey disagreed."

...interesting interpretation. The Human Rights Campaign's analysis of the SAME STUDY says: "The prevailing professional opinion is that a parent's sexual orientation has nothing to do with his or her ability to be a good parent. All major research studies, including a 2001 meta-analysis of two decades of studies on the topic, show that the sexual orientation of a parent is irrelevant to the development of a child's mental health and social development and to the quality of a parent-child relationship. (See (How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter? by Judith Stacey and Tim Biblarz in the American Sociological Review, April 2001.)"

Read what professional organizations say about GLBT parenting:

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1999)

American Academy of Family Physicians (2002)

American Academy of Pediatrics (2002)

American Bar Association (1995, 1999 and 2003)

American Medical Association (2004)

American Psychiatric Association (1997 and 2002)

American Psychoanalytic Association (2002)

American Psychological Association (1976 and 2004)

Child Welfare League of America (1988)

National Association of Social Workers (2002)

North American Council on Adoptable Children (1998)

... so when do you make an argument about demonstrated harm done to children raised in such a home?

I've heard Judith Stacey speak. She was frustrated and exhausted and rolling her eyes about having to endlessly deal with people who have interpreted her work in the way Bill Holmer does. She does not see adverse effects on children of same-sex couples.

However, I think we all know children and young adults who grew up thinking themselves to be Republicans -- not for any rational reason, but because their parents and grandparents identified themselves that way. Some of these kids eventually come to understand that they don't have to conform to that minority lifestyle, but this is a hard and traumatic process -- and what about the kids who never get that far?

A gay adoptive parent might teach a child that gay people aren't any more evil than anybody else, but a Republican adoptive parent is almost certain to lead a child into a pattern of open Republicanism.

Surely this society owes some protection to kids, or at least to those kids adopted by gay Republicans.

Hey, I've got some of those friends too. But are you saying we don't owe their adopted kids some protection?

I'll bet these folks: the Ohio Restoration Project http://www.ohiorestorationproject.com/ are a major factor behind this legislation...and their thousands of "Patriot Pastors". They've been very effective. In part similar to the old Oregon Citizen's Alliance, who interesting gathered nearly 3,000 pastors once in support of their anti-gay agenda.

Just a question:

Why does it always seem the focus of adoption rhetoric is about the parents and not about what is the best thing for children?

Here is what I think: Having a home environment, that is what is best for children. Good parent(s) to love, provide for and protect each child is what we need in our country.

I'm not sure what happened to those links... but I came across this link today which shows just where the priorities lie.

Catholic Church Refuses Gay Adoptions

FWIW all the other links came from the HRC website: Human Rights Campaign Foundation

<hr/>