The Simple Answer is Yes

I found this article to be full or ignorance and arrogance. My girlfriend and I (same sex) are planning on having a baby in a few months, and we both are highly educated and make as much (or more) as any heterosexual couple in the way of income. I feel like our child will have advantages over scores of children raised in traditional families. And besides, it will be the best darn kid in the universe because it will be OURS!

I applaud every same sex family in America. Don't let ignorant people make you or your children feel inferior. The fact that they we are a threat to them should be a compliment. We must be as good if not better, or they wouldn't be so worried.

Lots of love everyone!

Team U

The Focus on the Family have for years, been highly critical of any progressive or common sense thought! They are so far to the "right" on the political spectrum, that sensible and fair minded people should not give homage to these reactionaries! They are filled with hatred towards all gay people and those who support and more inclusive society !
A child adopted by a loving and caring gay 2 parent household, will grow
normally, feeling loved and accepted! The hetorsexual experiece has done a wonderful job in bringing about huge numbers of divorce families,
children out of wedlock esp in the Black community, and the children of ddivorced parents, feeling neglected and unloved! If 2 gay parents are
truly in love and in a committed relationship and have the financial and emotional resources to provide for that child-then whats the problem? The extreme right expoused by the Focus on the Family, believe fervently in the status quo and are always resistant to any change that can make our society better. I look forward to the day when ggays and lesbians will have the same equal rights as others have and
take for granted!

According to Love Isn’t Enough: 5 Reasons Why
Same-Sex Marriage Will Harm Children By Trayce Hansen, Ph.D.
Hansen sites these five reasons in her article.

1.First, mother-love and father-love—though equally important—are qualitatively different and produce distinct parent-child attachments. Specifically, it’s the combination of the unconditional-leaning love of a mother and the conditional-leaning love of a father that’s essential to a child’s development. Either of these forms of love without the other can be problematic. Because what a child needs is the complementary balance the two types of parental love and attachment provide.
2. Only heterosexual parents offer children the opportunity to develop relationships with a parent of the same, as well as the opposite sex. Relationships with both sexes early in life make it easier for a child to relate to both sexes later in life. For a girl, that means she’ll better understand and appropriately interact with the world of men and be more comfortable in the world of women. And for a boy, the converse will hold true. Having a relationship with “the other”—an opposite sexed parent—also increases the likelihood that a child will be more empathetic and less narcissistic.
Overall, fathers play a restraining role in the lives of their children. They restrain sons from acting out antisocially, and daughters from acting out sexually. When there’s no father to perform this function, dire consequences often result both for the fatherless children and for the society in which these children act out their losses.
3.Third, boys and girls need an opposite-sexed parent to help them moderate their own gender-linked inclinations. As example, boys generally embrace reason over emotion, rules over relationships, risk-taking over caution, and standards over compassion, while girls generally embrace the reverse. An opposite-sexed parent helps a child keep his or her own natural proclivities in check by teaching—verbally and nonverbally—the worth of the opposing tendencies. That teaching not only facilitates moderation, but it also expands the child’s world—helping the child see beyond his or her own limited vantage point.
4.Fourth, same-sex marriage will increase sexual confusion and sexual experimentation by young people. The implicit and explicit message of same-sex marriage is that all choices are equally acceptable and desirable.
5. The emotional and psychological ramifications of these assorted arrangements on the developing psyches and sexuality of children would be disastrous. And what happens to the children of these alternative marriages if the union dissolves and each parent then “remarries”? Those children could end up with four fathers, or two fathers and four mothers, or, you fill in the blank.

Certainly homosexual couples can be just as loving as heterosexual couples, but children require more than love. They need the distinctive qualities and the complementary natures of a male and female parent. end of article

I think Hansen does a fine job in conveying the dangers of homosexual parenting . Other disasters below:
http://blog.taragana.com/n/duke-univ-official-charged-with-offering-5-year-old-son-for-sex-93039 /
http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=128&fArticleId=3171828

I've read all the arguments and Focus on the Family had 1 excellent point. "the more precise question is “disadvantaged compared to what?”. After they say that they go on and on about how great it is when kids are raised by their married biological mom and dad. You know what, they may be right about that. On average (certainly not in every case but on average) kids are probably better off being raised by their married biological parents (BTW, those married biological parents could be gay). Thing is, that's not an option for these kids. Their biological parents can't, or won't, raise them anymore.

Kids that are up for adoption aren't being pulled out of the homes of perfectly good married heterosexual parents. Kids that are up for adoption are in orphanages, or bouncing around from one foster home to another. I think we can all agree that's not an ideal way for a kid to grow up.

So the real question isn't whether having straight parents is better than having gay parents. The question is, is it better to bounce from foster home to foster home, never living with the same parents for more than a few years, never setting down roots and making long term family or friend connections, or, is it better for a child to be raised by a loving gay couple who want to love them, and take care of them throughout their childhood.

Personally I think it's obviously better to be raised by loving gay parents but you can all make your own decision. The important thing is that you make that decision based on the facts, not some scare tactics FOTF is throwing out.

The choice isn't married straight parents or gays. The choice is orphanage/foster care or gays. Which do you think is better?

...in this "debate" is the state that children typically are in when they come to same-sex parents for foster care or adoption . My kids had been in and out of foster care eight times before they were permanently placed with us. My husband and I had to address years of abusive behavior, domestic violence that had been witnessed in previous homes, etc., with our kids. All of those things happened during their critical formative years, and the damage of all of them is difficult, if not impossible, to undo completely. And this is just one of many realities that Focus dismisses, ignores or rationalizes to support its political interests. If Focus were truly concerned about the welfare of kids, it would devote resources to placing more of them in loving homes rather than trying to undermine the ability of GLBT parents to be good parents to their foster and adoptive kids.

Let's be clear: I didn't make my kids. A heterosexual couple did. And that same couple abused, neglected and ultimately abandoned them. They are my children and my husband's children now. And we are "serving their best interests" in ways that have literally meant salvation for them both.

Focus and other far-right, anti-gay groups continually distort data regarding gay and lesbian parents to the degree that to call them "experts" in this area is like calling the Klan experts in race relations.

These articles say it best for me anyway.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=529214 This article was very sad because what kind of message are these adults sending to children ? Disrupt church services and break the law , what ever it takes, to force ourselves onto people. Is that a healthy lifestyle for children? No way it is.
Heres another article:
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=528376
More proof children should not be raised in this environment . When your an adult you can decide when you will become sexually active and with whom but this agenda is pushing it down the throats of American children and that is too heavy a burden for them to carry and it is in my opinion criminal to do so to them. Just my thoughts. Have a good day.

Does the phrase "it takes a village" mean anything anymore? Two people, no matter what their sexuality, are incapable of giving a child everything they need to form into a fully functioning healthy adult. For instance, a kid with two loving parents but no friends is not going to have the happiest of childhoods.

There is so much more to raising a kid than the parent's involvement. I mean, finances, location, the child's disposition, and access to education all play big roles.

And speaking of roles, I think the straight community sometimes gets confused when it comes to gay couples. Many of us see gay couples and think that one partner assumes the "male" role and one plays the "female" role. This is a myth perpetuated largely by the media , (and the existence of loud, overly effeminate drag queens).

I don't know how gay men are, but most lesbian couples don't really assume very defined gender roles. Of course we always notice the cliche "butch" chick with clear lesbian vibes, but more often than not, female gays tend to split the gender roles equally.Typically amongst straight couples, chores and activities are split into female and male roles. I.E., the father plays baseball with the kids, the mother takes them shopping; the father takes out the trash and mows the lawn, the mother does the dishes, etc. Within lesbian couples, both parents play baseball, go shopping, take out trash, do dishes, etc. While this means that the kid has neither a father figure or a mother a figure, it definitely does not equal having two dads or two moms. If both partners are well rounded enough to play both roles from time to time, I would imagine that this would teach a child that their activities (and personality, for that matter) are not defined by their gender. I don't see how this is a disadvantage.

Children that grow up with single parents is no different then children that grow up with two fathers, or two mothers. Sexuality doesn't change the person you are. I'm bi, and I'm still the same person that everybody knew me as before they knew i was bi. So if I were to get a girlfriend, and we got married, and we wanted a child, we couldn't get one because we're both females? becuase people don't think the child would grow up like any other child? because people think that we are a disadvantage for that child? ..... your exact words are "children who grow up in any other family form single parent family, divorced, step family, or co-habiting parents- dont' do as well by up to half in these measures compared to children living with their own married mother and father"
I don't think that having same sex parents are any different then having opposite sex parents, ok, yeah their the same sex, they have the same parts, but it doesn't matter. They can still provide the money, and the home and everything else needed just as much as an opposite sex couple can.

It seems that some believe that no matter the individual cases, a child is much better off being raised by a man and a woman rather than two parents of the same sex. Today, mariages fail almost as often as they succeed. Constant fighting between parents creates a very tense and unhappy environment for children. Divorce is never a pleasant thing for a child to go through. It can be emotionally draining for a kid to move back and forth between homes and almost live two seperate lives. However, they are still being raised by a man and a woman. So, does this still put them at an advantage over kids who are raised by homosexual parents? In my opinion, a child who has grown up being raised by two happy but same sex parents will lead a much stabler life than a child who is living in a broken family. Obviously this is just one situation for comparison but it just shows that kids are not always better off being raised by by a man and a woman.

I think growing up with two same sex parents can make children more open-minded and accepting towards others. These are very valuable traits in life.

How does growing up in a family with two parents of the same sex put a child at greater risk for domestic violence and sexual abuse as this argument proposes? That would be a great example of ad hominem: you can't use your opinions of the care-takers sexual preference as a vice for whether or not they will be good parents, or sexual abuse their kids. That's really just sick.

I find it interesting, but not at all surprising, that the biased and anti-gay rights group thinks it knows more about children than the obvious expert in this argument.

Worse, there wasn't even an attempt at making an argument, but that's even less surprising: it's simply not possible to logically argue anti-gay opinions like this. It's because they're nothing more than hate and prejudice founded on absolutely nothing.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but can we see some of this evidence? Because all of the scientific or medical organisations I've gone to about this have said the exact opposite, and they've had studies on hand to back them up.

all the research done to date about gay couples CAPACITY to raise children says that they have a clear adavantage. First they have to choose to have children by whatever means is available to them. they don't just have a litter and go from there.
Second, gay couples tend to not fight as much as heteros research says. They are more likely to assign things such as chores to the person who is most capable and or most interested in that chore rather than default to stereotypical roles. Roles where Dad is off the clock when he gets home except for repairing the roof where the mother's duties never end from sun up to sun down do not readily exist in gay parenting couples. The pettiness of conflict that come from resented roles does great damage to children much less teaching a boy that laundry is for girls and telling girls math and making money is for boys.

The fact that there are glass ceilings for women and that women declare this undesireable says that the way our society has been programing children has demonstrable failures. Any theories that children raised by same-sex parents face challenges beyond the threshold of those of any other child is an illusion. children get taught early and often to abuse the one in their midst who is different....poor...racially a minority....disabled. this has come from the stallwart defence of normality that is promulgated by white hetero christian society. Adults who are "other" have a greater capacity to understand and thus teach compassion and fairness.

I cannot imagine a gay couple allowing the N word to describe a person of color to be used in their house....but I have heard my straight father, grandfather, grandmother, cousins and uncles use the word.

The real need to raise a child is enlightened and insightful parenting. Parenting that can grapple with all of the issues that a child faces that the parents may have never experienced themselves at that age....both threats to wellness and never before seen opportunity. The parents must learn what they do not know on the fly and they must learn it well and fast. that learning curve and adaptablity has been demonstrated to exist more readily in gay parenting couples today. that is not to say that it does not exist in hetero couples nor is it to say that if gay parenting were more wide spread and made easier that these talents would not be diluted to the more base and laxidasial parenting styles we have seen over the decades.

Compared to children with a father and a mother married to each other and getting along with each other, the answer is yes. Compared to children living in an orphanage, it's hard to say.

"no evidence to date indicates that same-sex parenting would be an improvement on any of these other forms."

neither is there any evidence suggesting it would be in any way deleterious. this so-called "argument" is a joke, and a bad one at that.

ed

Seeing how our son graduated with honors from UC Berkeley in the Fall, and is currently doing research via a Fulbright Fellowship in Africa and hopes to go on to graduate school, nope. We are more normal than is his girlfriend (who has a kid of three years) and her family both parents divorced a few times. All my GLBT parent colleagues report similar findings. Now as a professor, absolutely ALL of the extremely messed up, problematic kids come from heterosexual “traditional” families. As well, in the local high school I both volunteer in and do research with a teacher in, all the kids involved in gang oriented drug violent behavior come from “traditional” families, and despite being minorities, are the most homophobic and violent kids I have ever tried to work with. Thought folks would like to know… that when we talk of traditional families, the tradition doesn’t seem to be working so well. Earlier, I asked my son about this debate and he only laughed.

I think you're making the wrong comparisons. You are comparing children born into a married heterosexual family to everyone else. However the question posed is to compare children born into a homosexual family to everyone else. Its clear that you have no research that supporting your argument but you try to spin other research to help you out.

Dr. Crawford highlights all of the facts that we all know to be true. All of his statements supporting his opinion are simply characteristics of our human nature. Few creatures on this earth do not look out for the wellfare their offsprings. However, the primary premise of raising children is not to make us feel good, but to promote procreation and continuation of the species. As childern grow up they see their parents as role models whether good or bad. Homosexual households are simply sending the wrong message to the maturing child.

Sorry, buster, but this makes no sense. The evidence has all been refuted big time, and I was raised by my dad and my brother. My mom was a wacko alcoholic who thankfully didn't raise me. Yes, I had an unhappy childhood, but it would've been ten times worse has my mom been there - she's anything but motherly. Now that I'm in college away from my mom, I am as happy as can be. My first roommate, a girl, has been like a mother to me and made a much happier person out of me, but I'm also sexually attracted to her, so try to use your puny evidence to prove which one of those matters!!! And don't tell me that I'm attracted to her only because I never had a mother... that couldn't explain what being one of the happiest people in the world has to do with disadvantages in childhood.

This post is almost insulting in its complete lack of evidence or even a reasoned argument. Merely dismissing the other side is not an argument.