Fresh research has just tossed a grenade into the incendiary issue of same-sex parenting. Writing in the British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science, a peer-reviewed journal, American sociologist Paul Sullins concludes that children’s “Emotional problems [are] over twice as prevalent for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents.”
He says confidently: “it is no longer accurate to claim that no study has found children in same-sex families to be disadvantaged relative to those in opposite-sex families.”
This defiant rebuttal of the “no difference” hypothesis is sure to stir up a hornet’s next as the Supreme Court prepares to trawl through arguments for and against same-sex marriage. It will be impossible for critics to ignore it, as it is based on more data than any previous study — 512 children with same-sex parents drawn from the US National Health Interview Survey. The emotional problems included misbehaviour, worrying, depression, poor relationships with peers and inability to concentrate.
After crunching the numbers, Sullins found opposite-sex parents provided a better environment. “Biological parentage uniquely and powerfully distinguishes child outcomes between children with opposite-sex parents and those with same-sex parents,” he writes.
As he points out, this has immense implications for public policy. The Elton John/David Furnish model of lavishing love and licorice on the offspring of surrogate mothers won’t do. Throwing down the gauntlet before supporters of same-sex marriage, Sullins contends that “the primary benefit of marriage for children, therefore, may not be that it tends to present them with improved parents (more stable, financially affluent, etc, although it does this), but that it presents them with their own parents.”
The Ultima Thule of same-sex marriage, legal and social recognition of gay and lesbian partnerships, will not reduce the risk of emotional problems. “The two family forms will continue to have fundamentally different, even contrasting effects on the biological component of child well-being, to the relative detriment of children in same-sex families.”
Until recently nearly all studies of same-sex parenting were very small. In a survey of 49 studies in 2010, one researcher found that their mean sample size was only 39 children. Only four of these were random samples; the others had been selected by contacting gay and lesbian groups. An ambitious 2012 study by Mark Regnerus, of the University of Texas at Austin, identified only 39 young adults who had lived with a same-sex couple for more than three years out of 2,988 cases.
For researchers, it’s a conundrum. The number of children being raised by same-sex couples is so small – 0.005 percent of American households with children — that capturing them in a random sample is like finding a needle in a haystack. So the figure of 512 children, while still relatively small, makes Sullins’s study a major contribution.
Sullins examines whether other factors could explain the difference in emotional welfare. According to his analysis, none of them does.
One factor could be instability. Children do not flourish in unstable environments. Gay and lesbian parents tend to rent rather than to own their own houses, which involves the trauma of pulling up stakes and resettling. This may also indicate parents are less settled in their relationship. Parental psychological distress is also associated with children’s increased risk of emotional problems. Neither of these explained the differences.
The most widely-accepted explanation of poor emotional and behavioural results amongst children in same-sex households is homophobia. Supporters of same-sex parenting attribute poor emotional well-being to stigmatization. These kids are damaged, it is said, because they have been singled out, teased and bullied. If their peers were less homophobic, things would be different.
But Sullins dismisses this. “Contrary to the assumption underlying this hypothesis, children with opposite-sex parents are picked on and bullied more than those with same-sex parents.”
This sounds surprising, but in another paper, published last year in the British Journal of Medicine and Medical Research and based on the same data, Sullins found that children of same-sex parents are more at risk of ADHD. And if they had ADHD, they were over seven times more likely to suffer stigmatization because of their impaired interpersonal coping skills. In other words, if kids from homes with same-sex parents are bullied more, it’s because they lack interpersonal skills, not because their parents are gay or lesbian.
Bullying is toxic, but it’s important to find out whether kids are being bullied because they’re different or because their parents are different.
What is the implication of Sullin’s study?
It is not that all children in same-sex homes will be emotionally damaged. Sullins is quite emphatic about this. “Most children in most families achieve a level of psychosocial function that is not characterized by serious emotional problems.” However, even if most kids are all right, more of them are all right in intact marriages with their biological parents.
Sullins’s concluding suggestions for further research are eye-openers. In the media and in the courts, fine-grained studies have been few and far between. What about studies of girls who have no fathers and boys who have no mothers? Does same-sex parenting affect younger children differently than teenagers? Do adopted children fare are well as children from IVF or surrogate mothers?
These are obvious questions; who will be brave enough to ask them?
Paul Sullins must be a gutsy guy. When Mark Regnerus attacked the “no difference” hypothesis, his career was almost destroyed by trolls who trashed his data, his competence and his integrity. As a professor at Catholic University of America, and a married Catholic priest with three children (he used to be an Episcopalian), Sullins has to be ready to go all 15 rounds.
The following comes from a Feb. 9 posting by Michael Cook, editor of MercatorNet.
Fr. Sullins is brave and accurate.
The HomoFascists, which, unfortunately included many in the Church of today, simply will attack this guy, but with what? Their “studies” are nothing much more than “because I said so” type of work. (Very much like the APA reversing decades of professional judgment that homosexuality was a form of mental illness; curiously, even liberal ex-APA Chair believes that homosexuals can change, as well.)
Notwithstanding Pope Francis, Cardinal Baldisseri, Cardinal Dolan and many others, homosexual sexualists can never bring gifts to the Catholic Church; and deserve no welcome (except to the confessional). The notion that homosexual relationships are normal or that homosexual “couples” should have rights, even to the point of adopting innocent children, is perverse. Of course, the cowardly US Supreme Court is sure to add enormous pressure on the Church soon, Satan is simply running the table. But, we read the Book, and he loses in the End.
That’s right St. Christopher “and he loses in the end.”
Taken from : ‘ A moment with Mary ‘
February 15 – Apparition of the Child Jesus to Lucia of Fatima (Pontevedra, Spain, 1926)
‘‘Strive to console me’’
“During her apparition in Fatima, Portugal, on July 13, 1917, Our Lady announced, “To prevent the war, I will come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays.
On December 10, 1925, Mary appeared with the Child Jesus to Sister Lucia in the Convent of Pontevedra, Spain, and said, “See, my daughter, my Heart encircled by thorns with which ungrateful men pierce it at every moment by their blasphemies and ingratitude. Do you, at least, strive to console me. Tell them that I promise to assist at the hour of death with all the graces necessary for salvation, those who, on the first Saturday of the month for five consecutive months, will go to confession, receive Holy Communion, recite the Rosary and keep me company for fifteen minutes while meditating on the fifteen mysteries of the Rosary with the intention of making reparation to me.”
On February 15, 1926, the Child Jesus appeared to Sister Lucia. She told him that it was difficult for many people to go to confession on Saturdays, and asked if confession within eight days could be valid. Jesus answered, “Yes, they have several days to do it, provided that in receiving Me they should be in a state of grace and have the intention of making reparation for the offenses against the Immaculate Heart of Mary.”
Thank you for posting this, Catherine.
We are Not Alone – and should indeed Stand Together as Americans on the 1st Amendment Rights Not to Pander:
“How believing in the Bible can get you canned in today’s America
Benham brothers pen new book ‘Whatever the Cost’ https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/02/10/how-believing-in-bible-can-get-canned-in-today-america/?intcmp=ob_article_footer_text&intcmp=obnetwork
If you want to get fired, sued or lose your business in today’s America, stand with Biblical convictions…
First of all, we must draw a distinction between those that identify as LGBTQ and militant gay activists. When we were fired by HGTV for standing by our Biblical beliefs about marriage and life…
– militant activists refuses to tolerate dissenters to their lifestyle choices. And unfortunately, they have the United States Government in their back pockets (not to mention the media and Hollywood)…
– We’ve shifted from religious freedom to forced acceptance in America.
The idea of forced acceptance infringes on our constitutional rights as Americans. As Alliance Defending Freedom succinctly states, the First Amendment guarantees that the government cannot tell its citizens what they can and can’t say or force them to express a positive message about something they believe is morally wrong.
– The question is not should we as Americans be involved in the battle for freedom, the question is: are you willing to stand with courage at any cost if and when the battle comes knocking on your door?
Agreed. Some (most?) researchers who find for the pro-queer-families, are, by their own public profiles, living in homosexual relationships and hoping to adopt children. Their biased results justify their normalcy needs.
Both researchers who claim to find against pro-queer families are by their own public profiles, living opponents to gay people. They have their own bias. Professional therapists know that children raised by same sex couples fair as well as those by similarly situated straight couples, and protecting those children with the marriage of their parents will only improve that situation.
Lauretta Brown had this piece in CNS news this January. Gat coupes are not such attractive parents:
B.N. Klein, Robert Oscar Lopez, Dawn Stefanowicz, and Katy Faust all grew up with homosexual parents. All four argued that redefining marriage to include same-sex couples would harm children by depriving them of a mother or father.
In her brief, Dawn Stefanowicz described her experience living in a same-sex household.
“I wasn’t surrounded by average heterosexual couples,” she says in her court brief. “Dad’s partners slept and ate in our home, and they took me along to meeting places in the LGBT communities. I was exposed to overt sexual activities like sodomy, nudity, pornography, group sex, sadomasochism and the ilk.”
“There was no guarantee that any of my Dad’s partners would be around for long, and yet I often had to obey them,” she said. “My rights and innocence were violated.”
“As children, we are not allowed to express our disagreement, pain and confusion,” Stefanowicz explained. “Most adult children from gay households do not feel safe or free to publicly express their stories and life-long challenges; they fear losing professional licenses, not obtaining employment in their chosen field, being cut off from some family members or losing whatever relationship they have with their gay parent(s). Some gay parents have threatened to leave no inheritance, if the children don’t accept their parent’s partner du jour.”
This is the affidavit to the Fifth Court of appeals of another victim of gay couple upbringing:
Robert Oscar Lopez who was also raised by a lesbian mother and her partner, had a different experience which he described as the “best possible conditions for a child raised by a same-sex couple.”
“Had I been formally studied by same-sex parenting ‘experts’ in 1985, I would have confirmed their rosiest estimations of LGBT family life,” Lopez wrote, but then went on to argue against same-sex marriage saying that, “behind these facades of a happy ‘outcome’ lay many problems.”
He describes experiencing a great deal of sexual confusion due to the lack of a father figure in his life. He turned to a life of prostitution with older men as a teenager.
“I had an inexplicable compulsion to have sex with older males,” he recounted, saying he “wanted to have sex with older men who were my father’s age, though at the time I could scarcely understand what I was doing.”
“The money I received for sex certainly helped me financially because it allowed me certain spending money beyond what I earned with my teenage jobs at a pizzeria and in my mother’s [psychiatric] clinic,” he states in the brief. “But the money was not as impactful as the fact that I needed to feel loved and wanted by an older male figure, even if for only as short as a half hour.”
Too bad that no one considers the child; only political correctness.
Perversion of sexual appetites rules logic and faithfulness in America now, in large part. Courts and our legislatures are corrupt, with few brave enough to stand up against the brute force of political will.
Children are defenseless: in the womb they are slaughtered, in life they are handed around to perverted homosexuals who play act at being parents. These human beings need nurturing and protection, just as Christ was protected and taught by Joseph and Mary.
If you do not believe this, then you are certainly not Catholic, and likely not Christian, however it is defined. As pagans, then, at least you can understand that same sex sexual activities are not the place for a child. If you are homosexual, you know, innately, that children need to be sheltered from what you do.
What is wrong with our society is that Satan is in charge, and politicians fail to believe it. Instead, they relegate religion to the dog heap of poor fantasy, and understand raising children as introducing them, vampire-like, into the world order of their new tribe. Interesting how much like the TV series “The Strain” these Zombie-Liberals are. Just think about what they believe is good for children (that is, those that they deem OK to survive).
Time to shut down the Democratic Party, and all those that follow “The Master” (only in real life “The Master” is Lucifer, not some blood sucker). Stand up, at least, for what is best for children, not what is best for lesbians and sodomites.
We must never trade TRUTH for POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.
“Emotional problems [are] over twice as prevalent for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents.”
” Sullins found that children of same-sex parents are more at risk of ADHD.
And if they had ADHD, they were over seven times more likely to suffer stigmatization because of their impaired interpersonal coping skills. ”
God knew what he was doing when he made marriage between one man and one woman. And when he required both a man and a woman to biologically reproduce, and raise their children.
Men and women are different and each brings needed traits/gifts to the family.
From the actions of the SC not taking the Alabama case it appears they have played their hand on same sex marriage. Also, Justice Ginsburg has said that Americans are ready for same sex marriage. It doesn’t matter what is best for children. This one study is not going to stop the movement. If justices were concerned about children they would have never allowed legal abortion.
Considering some of the other ongoing Gaystapo Purges – helps estimate the size of the tidal wave of dirty water headed ‘Our’ way:
“Blacklisting the Boy Scouts
California judges can belong to the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Organization for Women, Veterans of Foreign Wars, the NAACP, La Raza, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Alcoholics Anonymous, the Sierra Club, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the NRA, and even the North American Man/Boy Love Association.
But thanks to the state’s radical Supreme Court, judges will soon be barred from participation in the venerable Boy Scouts of America.
Why? Because the Boy Scouts promote, among other things, heterosexuality as a norm—a view shared by a majority of Americans.
Effective next January, California state judges can no longer serve as scoutmasters, assistant scoutmasters, committee chairs, or in any other volunteer positions with the BSA that requires “membership” in the organization.
Judges wishing to serve as adult leaders in the BSA will soon have to abandon their First Amendment rights as a condition of employment. Legal challenges are certain.
The committee contends that its blacklisting of the BSA will “promote the integrity of the judiciary” and “enhance public confidence” in the impartiality of the judiciary. Not likely.
This decision illustrates how out of touch (and intolerant) the legal establishment’s ruling elite has become. That the Boy Scouts—chartered by Congress in 1916—could be formally shunned in this manner should disturb all Americans who cherish freedom of association and a pluralistic society.
There is nothing in this article about the Boy Scouts or California judges.
“There is nothing in this article about the Boy Scouts or California judges”
Gosh – What an astute observation; although lacking any analysis of the future – say when the Church appears Before CA Judges whose ranks have been Purged of the Politically Ungood – meaning those who might take an even hand with Catholic Bishops as with the Boy Scouts.
Remember – in the land of the Alinskyite Gaystapo – The Friend of ‘The Enemy’ (the hated heater-patriarchy) is Also ‘The Enemy’ – and must be destroyed BAMN By Any Means Necessary.
Hence, any Judge who thought the Boy Scout Position (guaranteed by USSC Decision in Boy Scouts v. Dale) is the proper one or otherwise helped out in virtually any capacity, would not be permitted to sit on the Bench – and thus the pool of Judges for Catholics to appeal their First Amendment Rights would be Heavily Prejudiced…
With even those Potentially sympathetic to Catholic Rights – Purged in advance as too Un-Good to Judge the Right of Others.
No. It’s just off-topic. Distracting.
Abraham Lincoln said, “You can fool some of the people all the time, and you can fool all of the people some of the time– but you cannot fool all of the people all the time!” Hippie radicals, dope advocates, “free sex” believers, abortion advocates, women’s libbers, gay activists, and many other “misfits,” are not clear in their thinking, have immense emotional problems, fail to face their lives honestly, and rely on plenty of “teen-age-style” “emotional drama,” and lots of “hype,” rather than reason and responsibility, to defend and advance their causes. They are all extremely immature and selfish! It is such a shame, that so many Americans who are supposedly well-educated, and leaders of our Nation in many fields— have such little moral and religious background, as well as emotional and intellectual maturity, to see through a crazy, emotional, hype-filled radical— and call a spade a spade, on-the-double!! Many of our forefathers, some with little formal education (like Lincoln!) — were far better educated about life and people, grew up with good religious and moral training— had more maturity overall, and ran this country much better!
I will add one thing to my post, above. It is very true, that many groups of people– such as gays– do have a right to complain, that they have often been mistreated, and abused. Women, too, have suffered mistreatment and abuse, down through the centuries, as well as many other groups, especially people of various races and religions. Abuse and mistreatment are unChristian, shameful, and totally sinful! However– the cure for this sin, is to educate people to follow Christ’s example, of love and charity! True charity also means to extend Christian love to others– but never to support any sinful behaviors or beliefs! Big difference! And the protection of little children, is a very important responsibility, in which selfish emotions, politics, drama, and “hype,” should all be excluded! The well-being of an innocent child is so important! When one reaches adulthood– one must be ready, to set emotions and whims aside– for very important adult responsibilities, and decisions affecting the innocent lives of others! Aren’t American leaders intelligent enough, and MATURE enough— to understand this??
PRAY UP! SPEAK OUT, CHURCH! OUR VOICES RAISED TO PRAISE THE ALMIGHTY GOD, AND HAD TO PEN TO VOTE FOR PRO-LIFE GOD FEARING GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS. OUR VOTES MATTER!
Children are not stupid. Sooner or later they figure out that they do not have two mothers or two fathers but one of each. It is child abuse to force them to say otherwise.
I am not saying that children should not call their adoptive heterosexual parents mom or dad, but every child knows that they are entitled by God, or Nature if you will have it, to a mother AND a father. None of got here without two opposites no matter the lies told..
Correction to last sentence: “None of us got here…..”
Sorry (not sorry) to burst your bubble while you clench onto a study which appears to support your biases, but you can throw this study right down the toilet. Like Regnerus, it has been debunked!
Dr. Philip Cohen has written many times for the New York Times, he is both a Sociologist and a Demographer.
Please let Dr. Cohen explain these studies to you.
Straight Grandmother, why in the world, do you need politically corrupt “scientific” studies, to “prove” anything?? Just look at Mother Nature— and admit the truth!! Don’t you CARE about RESPONSIBLY seeking the HIGHEST GOOD and WELL-BEING—for poor, helpless, innocent little children? Do you not want what is truly right and best for them? Have you NO MORAL CONSCIENCE— “Grandmother???” p.s. Don’t you think it is a BIG RESPONSIBILITY, for a priest, minister, rabbi (etc.) to STAND UP for the highest welfare, for INNOCENT, HELPLESS CHILDREN?? If we cannot depend on the clergy, and if they are all SELFISH, CORRUPT— AND WORTHLESS, like wolves in sheep’s clothing— then, WHAT GOOD IS THAT, for the world, “Grandmother??”
At the very least, it has major credibility issues.
Sciencedomain International (the publisher) is not a peer reviewed journal. It’s on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers: Essentially it’s a vanity publishing outfit made to sound official; with little or no peer review. This is the domain of pseudoscience and polemics. Given the most generous benefit of the doubt here, at best, the choice of this publisher could have been due to wanting this out in the public sphere in time to influence the SC decision on marriage this summer.
Obviously, there’s the concern of bias on the part of the researcher as well. He’s a fellow at the Marriage and Religion Research Institute, a Family Research Council funded outfit. FRC has a long history of meta-studies (data analysis, not research) where the objective is to manipulate data in a superficially plausible way to advance a political agenda.
There will undoubtedly be scrutiny, but there should be.
Fr. Sullins needn’t worry about any of this harming his career. It’s not like Catholic University or the FRC will care, even if his work is ultimately discredited. It’s fodder for the culture war.
Hugh, it is well-known, that a great deal of scientific research, of all types— (deemed “credible” or not, in “Academia”) is biased, an!d financed also, by biased organizations, seeking to support their causes, by use of science! Why place your trust in scientific researchers?? It is not necessary, especially with basic things, in life! All you need, is common sense, and a basic, truthful look at Mother Nature! She always tells the truth, for all to see! In regards to the welfare of little children— what good is “Academia,” if the so-called “scientists” have NO INTEGRITY– and only seek to use a little child, for their own selfish, immoral needs, and cruel political agendas??? What good is this?? Many in “Academia” are immature and irresponsible, “anti-society” liberals, sadly “educated beyond their intelligence!” Also, all priests, ministers, rabbis, (etc,) have a BIG RESPONSIBILITY— to PROTECT THE WELFARE OF INNOCENT, HELPLESS CHILDREN!! BIG RESPONSIBILITY, Hugh!
There are always issues with validity in research, especially in sociology. The goal, however, is to have the most valid, unbiased presentation of data.
If you want to dismiss scientific research in favor of faith, that’s fine, but they’re separate things. This is being presented as scientific research, and should be gauged accordingly.
There is no need for a “Culture War”. Consenting adults are free to commit Mortal Sins in the privacy of their own homes.
Just do not involve the rest of society in any manner.
And certainly do not expect heterosexuals to give up their children as sacrifices to the god of sexual immorality.
Good work Father. Will the truth prevent the queering of parenthood? Is it too late? Pray to Our Blesses Mother for her loving intervention.
Look, if this is about religion and faith, maybe you don’t need studies at all. But if you’re going to rely on studies, you should know that these Sullins papers are not in legitimate scientific journals. They just aren’t. They’re bogus journals. I explain here:
Philip Cohen– just what do you hope to contribute to society, for the ultimate welfare, of innocent, helpless children? What is your daily work for? Is it for the best and highest interest, for little children? Or is it for CORRUPT POLITICAL AGENDAS, as well as MONEY, EGO, and a secure job?? DO YOU NOT HAVE A NORMAL, DECENT MORAL CONSCIENCE?? p.s. When are people going to understand, that TO UNSELFISHLY GIVE (even if it HURTS YOU!) for the highest welfare of society— is far more important, than to constantly GRAB WHAT YOU WANT FOR YOURSELF, EVEN IF IT IS IMMORAL, AND DESTRUCTIVE TO OTHERS— all for “SELFISH ME??” At the expense of poor little children, that’s pretty ROTTEN!!!
Get off you high horse, honey. You’re gonna get a nose bleed. No children are being harmed.
Thank you for your article, Philip. Not only are the journals bogus but the papers themselves are seriously flawed. This article here is excellent eye opener… https://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/02/10/3621375/regnerus-sullins-same-sex-parenting/
By choosing to not publish his work in a reputable journal, Fr. Sullins has really done more harm than good. Doing so makes this work (and future work for that matter) easy for naysayers to dismiss without even having to look at the data.
It would have been better for them to self publish. Then the data would stand or fall on its own merit. But in attempting to (falsely) pretend that their work is peer reviewed, they are essentially lying about the validity of their work, or at the least, covering up the objections that would have come from a genuine peer review process.
They know that they cannot get their work peer reviewed because it compares apples and oranges. Unmarried same sex couples who raised their children from an indeterminate age and for an indeterminate length of time together, compared to straight couples married from the time of birth. Every honest peer reviewer, or even casual reader, knows that you can’t compare the two.
Anytime a child becomes aware of his/her surroundings – the example of MORTAL SIN by parents (or teachers, or Clergy) is devastating.
Especially when parents pretend that Mortal Sin is good and appropriate.
Mortal Sin is never good. Confusing a child of any age is never good.
Homosexual Acts are an abomination.
CCC: ” 2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized.
It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others.
Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing. “
“Same sex couples who raised their children from an indeterminate age and for an indeterminate length of time together” – will have to answer to God for the damage that they have done through their example of Mortal Sin.
Homosexuals also want the children of Heterosexuals.
You really have a limited vocabulary, “peter”. what is your point for breathing our air, “peter”? You and “Your Fellow Catholic” are nothing more than storm troopers for homosexual sexualists that want acceptance; something that can never be given.
You are not fit to be parents. You cannot marry licitly in a Catholic Church. You should have limited access to positions of authority around children. You can never be priests, at least not where your sexual practices are made public.
Either accept Catholic teachings, repent, and use your life to help others avoid homosexual sexual contact, or find somewhere else to be. Otherwise, you are nothing more that mercenaries, seeking to disrupt dialog among Catholics trying to better their Church.
What a sweet ‘job’ for those who Hate The Church – ‘teaching the Young’ of the Church to Hate With Them – pretending it’s a ‘human right’, like Terry Bean, and others Censored by the Gaystapo:
**HOMOSEXUAL HRC FOUNDER ARRESTED FOR RAPING 15-YEAR-OLD BOY
Yet another high profile “gay” activist has been arrested for homosexual assault on a child.
Terrance Patrick Bean founded the “Human Rights Campaign” (HRC), which is one of the world’s largest, wealthiest and most powerful anti-Christian organizations. To this day he remains on the board of directors.
HRC was developed for the sole purpose of pushing the extremist homosexual political agenda.
Bean is also a major player for the DNC and a big Obama supporter…
Terry Bean’s ride on Air Force One with Obama…
– Larry Brinkin, another high profile… homosexual activist, was arrested in San Francisco for possessing and distributing reams of child pornography.
CNS News Reported – Brinkin, a former city employee, apparently had photos of children, as young as 1- or 2-years-old, performing sexual acts and being sodomized by adult …
Theresa Sparks, director of the Human Rights Commission, told the Huffington Post:
“He’s always been one of my heroes, and he’s the epitome of human rights activist,”
“This is [the] man who coined phrases we use in our daily language.
I support Larry 100 percent…”
Brinkin later plead guilty to the charges.
SEE San Francisco’s Gay Icon Larry Brinkin Guilty of Felony Child Porn Possession:
These monsters are “heroes” to the HRC
Clarification is desperately needed, for readers to know the VAST differences between so-called “soft” sciences, the social sciences (sociology, psychology, etc.) — and “REAL” science, the “hard” and factual sciences— physics, chemistry, etc. “Hard” sciences are quite factual, and much more “provable,” whereas, the “soft” social “sciences,” are not at all reliable, or as “provable,” due to the focus on human beings!
I will add something, to my above post. Professionals in all fields, must abide by solid morals, in their work— and have a Code of Ethics, in their professional field. They have a big responsibility to society! The priest in this article, is well-aware of this, and is very responsible and mature! However– others in scientific fields, do NOT abide, in their work– by a good moral conscience, and a sense of responsibility! Many are IMMATURE, IMMORAL, UNRELIABLE– and UNTRUSTWORTHY!! BEWARE!!
Linda Maria, they all have ethical standards by which they adhere. Disagreement with your point of view is not an ethical standard that they are required to uphold.
Exactly. Regnerus, Sullins, Allen, et. al. are frauds and no amount of special pleading can excuse that.
What is a “reputable” journal? Is it one that ignores simple biology and says that two men can misuse their body parts and be safe when anyone who knows the truth knows that is not correct. Such behavior can even contribute to anal and other cancers, condoms or no condoms, besides a multitude of other diseases that are rare among heterosexuals.
Some so-called educated people should not be making decisions on these issues at all. I remember when a Dr. Gupta and Bill Clinton were discussing embryonic stem cell treatment on national television, and Bill Clinton repeatedly said that embryos should not be used IF they were fertilized. Well anyone who knows anything about embryos know they are fertilized, yet Dr. Gupta never corrected Ex President Clinton during the whole interview (which I am sure can still be found on line.) Either the two were trying to deliberately deceived the public or they were not qualified to make such decisions. I believe that is what is going on here. Since some people in high places engage in this kind of behavior or have relatives who do, we are all expected to just follow into line. Well some of us refuse to do so. We are not lemmings. If you want to go over the edge to your death, well do it, but leave the rest of us the heck alone.
Anne T. the answer is that individuals need to make the best moral decisions possible, regardless of what aid is available to them. The Church ought to focus on individual choice, rather than groupthink.
NO, YFC!! Stop calling yourself a false name, of “fellow Catholic!” You are NOT a follower of Christ, are you, and NOT educated in Catholic teaching, nor obedient to Our Lord! The Gospel says, “If you love Me, keep My commandments!” Christian Morality is a VERY SERIOUS RESPONSIBILITY, not a babyish, irresponsible, SELFISH “free individual choice,” for the FALSE “CHRISTIAN,” the “JUDAS” character— who DENIES the teachings as well as the Divine Authority, of Christ!
Oh, I get it. You think that we should all decide for ourselves what is good and what is evil kind of like what Adam and Eve did in the Garden. Very original thinking, you who call yourself YFC. (Said tongue in cheek, of course, as that kind of thinking is what has gotten us into trouble since humanity began.)
YFC, you are definitely not a Catholic, or even a Christian.
In Sacred Scripture – God did not say, do whatever your conscience thinks best, in either the Old or New Testaments.
God gave us rules to live by, and Jesus passed these down through His Apostles.
CCC: ” 1801 Conscience can remain in ignorance or make erroneous judgments.
Such ignorance and errors are not always free of guilt. ”
CCC: ” 1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal
This is the case when a man takes little trouble to find out what is true and good,
or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.
In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits. ”
There is very little legitimate excuse for the Literate to remain in ignorance.
The Magisterium has given us Sacred Scripture and the CCC.
At our own personal/particular judgment at death Jesus will not allow ignorance as an excuse for not reading/ laziness – “personal responsibility”.
When I said, “well do it” in my last post, I meant that there is nothing we can do to stop you from hurting yourselves if you will not listen, but innocent children should not be told this is okay.