Re: Michael Sam - NFL's first openly gay prospect
Posted: July 29 14, 4:20 pm
A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
https://gatewayredbirds.org/forum/
I disagree. Why can't gay people act on their feelings?Schlich wrote:It’s amazing what lengths we’ll take to claim our beliefs are pro-equality.
Segregation was the “separate but equal” answer to slavery and racism.
Complimentarianism was/is the “equal but we have different gender roles” answer to the patriarchy.
Queer celibacy and civil unions are the “gay people are equal but just can’t act on their feelings” answer to homophobia.
Interestingly enough, despite these claims, segregation is still racism, complimentarianism is still sexism, and queer celibacy is still homophobia. To claim that any of these views could possibly treat people of color, women, and queer people as equal is staggering.
Yeah, that happened. And somehow it wasn't the least factual part of the post.lukethedrifter wrote:Did corncob say that Dan Savage married a woman a few pages back or did I misread?
cardsfansince82 wrote:Yeah, that happened. And somehow it wasn't the least factual part of the post.lukethedrifter wrote:Did corncob say that Dan Savage married a woman a few pages back or did I misread?
I didn't read that whole study or anything but it seems like it would be extremely hard to do a study. First off, since gay couples can only adopt, that means they are getting kids that often come from difficult situations. Even if you only compare gay couples that adopt vs straight couples that adopt, there are so many other factors that could mess it up. For example, do gay parents have the same socio-economic status as straight parents? I doubt it. So you'd only really be able to look at a subset of straight couples.Jocephus wrote:Franken Takes Down Anti-Gay Witness For Mischaracterizing Study
i dont claim to be a scholar but this is fascinating to me that this could be considered legitimate research.
(fyi the italic is how the article is written)Limitations of the Study
While the Regnerus study is a vast improvement over virtually all the prior research in the field, it still leaves much to study and learn about homosexual parents and their effect on children. Author Mark Regnerus emphasizes the traditional caveat in social science, warning against leaping to conclusions regarding "causality." In other words, just because there are statistical correlations between having a homosexual parent and experiencing negative outcomes does not automatically prove that having a homosexual parent is what caused the negative outcomes--other factors could be at work.
This is true in a strict scientific sense--but because Regnerus carefully controlled for so many other factors in the social environment, the study gives a clear indication that it is this parental characteristic which best defines the household environment that produces these troubling outcomes. The large number of significant negative outcomes in this study gives legitimate reason for concern about the consequences of "homosexual parenting."
"the traditional caveat". i love how it says that, like a disclaimer or legal obligation. but then the next paragraph just bull [expletive] its way thru that and says "but this is actually what does it"