Compassion for the weak is paramount
Mystech ....
You might be banging your head against the wall here. D'ster has shown no capability to comprehend or even perceive the obvious. For instance, from his "Politics Before Medicine" post:
D'ster said:
Those current studies that appear to indicate neutral to favorable results from homosexual parenting have critical flaws such as non-longitudinal design, inadequate sample size, biased sample selection, lack of proper controls, and failure to account for confounding variables.
A symptom of the marginalization of homosexuality. At present, homosexuals are living in a dynamic situation wherein changing circumstances make it difficult to obtain a homogenized snapshot of a diverse community. To check the endnotes, I can't say the Marriage Law Project, the Christian Institute, or the Massachusetts Family Institute and National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality are sources whose veracity I trust. All start with a lack of neutrality, pursuing political ends instead of scientific.
D'ster said:
Childrearing studies have consistently indicated that children are more likely to thrive emotionally, mentally, and physically in a home with two heterosexual parents versus a home with a single parent.
This is a particularly odious deployment of irrelevance. Part of the dynamic situation surrounding homosexuals is increased social acceptance of homosexuality which
allows for greater stability among relationships. Drugs, sex, depression: anything forced "into the closet" becomes less stable and more dangerous. At issue is
not single parenthood, but
stable homosexual relationships. There are plenty of drawbacks to unstable heterosexual parentage, too, but our man D'ster, nor his gurus at the ACP seem to care about that.
The endnotes in this case are largely irrelevant, owing to the irrelevance of the point offered.
D'ster said:
Violence among homosexual partners is two to three times more common than among married heterosexual couples ... Homosexual partnerships are significantly more prone to dissolution than heterosexual marriages with the average homosexual relationship lasting only two to three years ... Homosexual men and women are reported to be inordinately promiscuous involving serial sex partners, even within what are loosely-termed "committed relationships." ... Individuals who practice a homosexual lifestyle are more likely than heterosexuals to experience mental illness ... substance abuse ... suicidal tendencies ... and shortened life spans ... Although some would claim that these dysfunctions are a result of societal pressures in America, the same dysfunctions exist at inordinately high levels among homosexuals in cultures were the practice is more widely accepted ... Children reared in homosexual households are more likely to experience sexual confusion, practice homosexual behavior, and engage in sexual experimentation ... Adolescents and young adults who adopt the homosexual lifestyle, like their adult counterparts, are at increased risk of mental health problems, including major depression, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, substance dependence, and especially suicidal ideation and suicide attempts.
Violence, dissolution, promiscuity, mental illness, substance abuse, and suicidal tendencies are all symptomatic of institutionalized bigotry. Most of those symptoms also contribute to shortened lifespan. A check of the endnotes suggests a number of troubles, including the "loosely-termed 'committed relationships'"--which are unhealthy for heterosexuals as well, but again D'ster and his gurus don't seem to care--and the use of what are at least tertiary analyses of old data.
As to whether or not children reared in homosexual households are more likely to be homosexual, on the one hand, that's not exactly proven, and to the other I'm not sure what the problem is, aside of course from the institutional bigotry that lends to increased risk of mental health problems, relationship instability, &c.
In the end, to use a racism analysis, if we hold blacks in slavery, outlaw literacy among them, and set an exploitative example for them to aspire to, should we be surprised that there is social trouble in the community upon emancipation, or is it just because they're black?
The ACP and its minions seem to forget that you only get from something what you put into it. If you work toward destabilizing and marginalizing a community, do not be surprised when symptoms of marginalization occur within that group, and certainly do not hold those symptoms as evidence of the inferiority or insufficiency of the group.
That D'ster does not demonstrate such understanding should not be a surprise, either. After all, the ACP doesn't get it, and they're
doctors. Both D'ster and the ACP are sad testaments to what happens when one uses science as an exploitative tool in service of a political cause.
We must remember that asking these folks to do real research may be problematic in itself. There are enough secondary and tertiary analyses available that one can keep looking up the endnotes and give up long before they come to the realization that a year-2000 study is based on 1970s (e.g. pre-HIV and received with prejudice) figures. It becomes easier for these folks to say that reality is what they want it to be instead of actually what it is.
Obfuscation and dishonesty are the tools of conservatism. Is D'ster a victim? Can we presume that our associate actually knows any better?
