Friday, December 13, 2013

You're trusting these folks to say whether kids should have moms and dads?

I've been getting some of the updates from New Mexico about the SOC (same-old-crap) peddled by purveyors of same-sex parenting. It goes like this: A big, powerful, well-funded association with a fancy, imposing name issues a declaration on their "endorsement of same-sex parenting."

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-mexico-groups-promote-same-sex-marriage-as-a-benefit-to-kids-ignoring-t?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=6269d2388a-LifeSiteNews_com_US_Headlines_06_19_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0caba610ac-6269d2388a-397522465

Remember that the gay marriage cases before the Supreme Court last March saw amicus briefs submitted by athletes, corporations, and random Republicans who endorsed this as if they had any relevance in deciding something so heavy:

Do children have a right to a mom and dad? Can we just take away their mom or dad because adults want it?

And what do you tell the kid as he/she grows up? Do you forever say, "Nike and Starbucks signed an amicus brief saying it was okay to do this?"


Okay, it's late and I have a stack of student papers to grade, so I can't go putting up all the necessary hyperlinks for this quick blog post, but I'll just give you the thumbnail profiles of all these SOC statements we hear again and again.


The American Psychiatric Association



This particular association had a consensus for 100 years that homosexuality was a mental disorder. Members of this association endorsed eugenics, forced sterilization of people, and electroshock therapy. These are the people who tell soldiers who are shell-shocked and in tears that there's nothing wrong with them, so they have to go back to combat even though they're screaming that they want to kill themselves.

I'm constantly amazed that gay activists bank on the APA to make smart decisions regarding gay people.


They constitute a profession that deals with human beings who  have mental illnesses. In order to establish whether someone has a mental illness, they use this enormous thing called a DSM, which defines what a disorder is and how to read its symptoms.

Recently, the APA tried to classify pedophilia as a sexual orientation, as if it's en par with heterosexuality and homosexuality. The move to reclassify pedophilia went down in flames, because the online firestorm was the equivalent of six counties afire in SoCal. This was done, I will betchya, under secret duress from LGBT advocates who are dying to say that all the predatory gay men who sleep with teenagers one half or one third their age aren't really gay, but something else; that way they don't have to deal with the rampant abuse of teenagers that's happening right under their noses.

But let me not belabor the point. I wouldn't trust the APA to advise me about how I should arrange the furniture in my house, because all they can do is tell me whether I am crazy. Far less would I trust them with the sensitive issue of whether to deprive a child of a mom or dad. If they could be wrong about homosexuality for 100 years, of course they can be wrong about same-sex parenting for 20 years.

The Adoption and Foster Care Professionals

I'm sure you've heard lots of the horror stories about adoption and foster care disasters in the US: kids being sent to live with molesters, folks ignoring plentiful warning signs, and state authorities taking away kids from good families based on vindictive tips from nasty neighbors, then placed with wicked stepmothers to make Cinderella shudder. 

Yes, there are great adoption agencies and tons of honest foster care professionals. But let's face it, a lot of them are lousy. If you go to Facebook and join the group "Adoption News" you get an endless daily torrent of these horror stories.

Let me say again: There are wonderful adoption stories and great adoptions that have happened. There were also countless adoption tragedies, such as the depopulation of Native American reservations, which led to a 1978 law banning such schemes. That law got overturned in June 2013 by the same Supreme Court that handed down a decision on gay marriage, endorsing the consensus on same-sex parenting hook, line, and sinker.

Don't get me started on Lebensborn.

Let me say again: There are wonderful adoption stories and great adoptions that have happened. There have also been rampant human trafficking and black markets for babies in Guatemala, South Korea, Vietnam, multiple countries in West Africa, and many parts of the United States. Much of this racketeering was carried out under the banner of adoption and overseen by adoption professionals.

So these are the folks we should trust, when they say they support same-sex parenting because they think it's a good idea? I don't think so.

The Academic Research Industrial Complex

I'm sure by now you've seen one of those policy findings by an academic association representing a gold-banner field like Sociology, Anthropology, Political Science, Law, History, or Economics.

They typically point to a bunch of studies that their members were paid to undertake, which their members peer-reviewed, and which their members published. They say there's a "consensus" because anyone who is labeled as anti-gay by GLAAD or HRC has been blocked from receiving funding or banished from the association in the first place.

Newsflash to the lay people out there: People with PhDs lie! They lie all the time. They lie in large numbers, repeatedly, consciously, especially when they are worried about getting grants, don't want to be turned down for tenure, fear being sued, and don't have the guts to buck peer pressure (okay, I've just described 99.95% of the academy.) The propensity for dishonest groupthink is heightened if the critical mass of the faculty in this area are liberal and dependent for funding on universities, foundations, or donors who are registered Democrats (okay, I've just described 98.5% of the academy.)

Let me write it again: People with PhDs lie!

People with PhDs lie! They lie!

When it comes to same-sex parenting, the cute little consensus about kids of same-sex couples enjoying a perfect life is ... well, too on the money. A few things to note, or perhaps I should say, questions to pose:

  • Most researchers in this field work at a university that has a speech code classifying homosexuals as a protected class. Literally, if you publish any research finding that offends homosexuals, you may be brought under investigation, even if it was just honest data you found in a study. This happened with Texas professor Mark Regnerus. He conducted a study that found serious disadvantages for kids raised by same-sex couples. He was actually placed under investigation by a New York City blogger. The latter individual also sent various complaints to my university accusing me of hate speech and calling for an investigation, because I was raised by a lesbian couple and honestly described my own life! So what do you call a "consensus" that has been reached by a profession that defines dissent from the consensus as a punishable crime? I have a word for what I'd call it, but I want to keep this classy.
  • Notice something about research done on parenting. If it doesn't deal with the specific issue of same-sex parenting, scholars find adverse effects tied to divorce, adoption, artificial reproductive technology, blended families, and other parenting arrangements that involve a lost connection to a mother or father. That is to say, divorces are hard on kids, as the research shows. Even if the adoption was in the end right for them, adoptees struggle with their identity and often experience certain existential crises, especially as they grow into adulthood. Sperm-donor-conceived children, in a 2010 study, reported significant uneasiness and stress as adults regarding their parents' decision to use a third party's genetic material to conceive them. And surrogacy arrangements, we have found in recent research, cause greater levels of depression in children, which makes sense given what we know about the mother-child bonding in gestation and breastfeeding. In fact a recent study found that surrogate-conceived children have a 95% higher risk of certain kinds of cancer, something that scientists have not been able to explain. Have you noticed something odd? The only way for a same-sex parenting household to exist, is by one of these methods. And whenever researchers study these family arrangements, without the study being about "same-sex parenting," they find, consistently, difficulties placed on the children. But then when they do studies on same-sex parenting, these difficult arrangements magically become no longer difficult!
  • All you have to do is look at kooky resolutions passed on other topics by "respected" and time-honored academic associations to see how meaningless these policy statements are. The American Studies Association recently passed a diktat calling for the boycott of an entire nation, Israel. In 2012, the Modern Language Association came close to passing a resolution endorsing Occupy Wall Street. What does Occupy Wall Street have to do with literature classes and learning French? Nothing! What do sociologists and lawyers know about the value of having a mom and a dad? Nothing!
The Lawyers

This is my favorite. Whenever the topic of same-sex parenting comes up, people call in lawyers. We hear from legal eagles working in places like the Williams Institute to tell us whether it's a good idea to set up same-sex parenting households.


Have you ever gone through a divorce? Ever been sued? Ever had to deal with an estate in probate court?

Have you ever hung around a lot of lawyers? Do you live in Washington DC?

If you answer yes to any of the questions above, you know one thing: A lot of lawyers are lacking in human understanding. When you sit down and contemplate the value to you, of your mom and dad, is your first instinct to call a lawyer for a shoulder to cry on? I rest my case.

Testimonials from Kids Who Can't Eat Unless They Love Their Gay Parents

I would like to believe that the kids who come forward and say they love their gay parents are telling the truth. Before I get into a bad head space where I am second-guessing them, let me say, I believe them. They do love their parents, and their parents love them.

The problem is that they can't eat unless they love their gay parents, and their gay parents are listening to everything they say.

Just like people with PhDs can lie, let me tell you a little secret: Gay parents brainwash their kids!

Have you noticed how parents in general enjoy imposing their own agendas and insecurities on their kids, especially if they are wounded by years of social alienation and bitter about what other people have? Straight parents do this, yes. Now, when you are dealing with gay parents, you must crank up the dial. Multiply that by about 10.


No child who is dependent on a same-sex couple for a place to live, food, emotional support, clothing, shelter, and college tuition is going to say anything but the following in public: "I love my gay parents." No way. No how.

Jean-Dominique Bunel was in his sixties when he revealed in the Figaro earlier this year that he was scarred by being raised by lesbians.

My mother died in 1990 and I never spoke up until 2012.

Dawn Stefanowicz wrote her memoir Out from Under when she was already in her forties and her gay father had passed away.

 Rivka Edelman, another woman I've been in contact with, who was raised by lesbians, still will not use her real name for fear of shaming her mother's memory and bringing down the wrath of the gay community.

The woman who runs Askthebigot.com has not, as far as I can tell, revealed her real name as she blogs about her Christian opposition to same-sex marriage, having admitted that she was raised by a lesbian couple herself.

A woman in France to whom I was supposed to be introduced, was scarred by the gay male couple that raised her, but backed out of meeting me at the last minute, for fear that she could not open this Pandora's box for her own family.

What about the kids raised by gays, who have living gay parents and have negative things to say? Where are they? Glad you asked. Since I came forward in Public Discourse in August 2012, if you account for all the emails I got from kids raised by gay parents, ex-wives of gay men who took their kids away, ex-husbands of lesbians who took their kids away, extended family, neighbors, and friends, I have gotten hundreds, I mean hundreds, of negative narratives about how terrible it is to do this to children and their extended families. None of these people is ready to come forward yet, and won't, not for a very long time. They love the people who raised them. But the fact is, sometimes people we love do things that hurt us. They understand that, but can't say it publicly yet. Not in this toxic climate.

To get a human sense of how bad this can be, it's good to look at the cases that ended up in the news because they crossed the threshold into criminal activity and therefore authorities had to intervene. In these cases, the ugly secrets of same-sex parenting have been laid bare: the Cannon case in England, the Wirth case in Connecticut, the Newton case in Australia and the US (they were an international couple), the Lombard case in North Carolina (and now, the Herold case in Alabama). Then there's the lesbian couple in California who gave their toddler boy the idea to get a sex change operation, and the South African lesbian couple who strangled the child who refused to call one of the women daddy. You have the host of horrendous custody cases between sperm donors and lesbian couples, between surrogate mothers and gay men, that have gone up to state courts in Florida, Kansas, Maine, California, and other jurisdictions as well.

The Common Thread: Fear, Money, Peer Pressure

All these clusters of people who issue glowing endorsements of same-sex marriage:


-have reasonable fear of reprisal from the gay lobby if they resist
-stand to gain financially from endorsing this
-are being actively cowed and pressured by the gay lobby through social channels

Do you trust socially terrorized, fearful people with glaring conflicts of interest to provide you with sound information about whether to shatter the bond between children and their mothers and fathers?

If you do, you're a fool.