"It is a fallacy to argue that because a child in one household has abusive parents, we are therefore justified in placing another child in another household where there are two “married” men and no mother."

@ David van Gend, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 9:23:34 AM

Yes, it is fallacy. It is a false dichotomy.

David, yet your example is also 'a non-sequitur' and 'Non causa pro causa'.

Nobody is saying abusive parents are a reason to *then* place a child in a same-sex couple household.

The reality is that many gay and lesbian couples have previously been in heterosexual relationships that bore children. Often to try to confirm to past societal norms.

By the logic of "the children must have a father argument", then one might ask are two fathers better than one?

Well Ammonite, this is the thing......When a teenager becomes an adult...young adult I should say, there minds are focused on their own vision of awaking, and as long as the right amount of caring/love/and devotion is present, in my view.....the hormonal changes will kick in, and presto, mum/dad or mum/mum or dad/dad....goes out the window when the world around them is changing faster than the human biological clock ticks.

I don't think it matter at all who or what raises you. As long as the support is there when needed, it makes no difference.

Knowing what a child needs and knowing what teenager needs and knowing what turns us into as grownups, I think the same sex couples or other wise.....it makes no diff.

Life all comes in three stages.....Need...Want and fly.

Does it matter who gives you the attention at stage one?......of course it doesn't......Does it matter who's gives the attention at stage two, again, of course it doesn't.....and by the time stage three come into action....... 1 and 2 are just loving memories.

Cactus

The idea that there were often societies that raised children differently to the nuclear family is bunk. Every ancient history story I have ever read refers to the nuclear family, and someone knew who their mother was, knew who their father was, knew who their brothers and sisters were, knew who their uncle and aunts were etc.

This is everything from ancient Greeks to Eskimo, from Romans to Egyptians, and from tribes in Africa to the Incas.

There was a prolonged attempt to denigrate marriage by the feminist movement, and this has culminated in society no longer referring to “husband and wife”, but referring to “partners”. Further there was a prolonged attempt to denigrate fathers and to say that the father was not necessary, and a child could be raised by the mother and the state.

Now there is an attempt to say that a father or a mother is not necessary, but the child can be raised by a couple of homosexuals.

I have never known a feminist to get anything right, and I don’t believe homosexuals will get it right also.

The author wrote : (making) "children subservient to adult emotional needs".

The fact is that ALL parents do this to their children, in all kinds of ways. Most of which have negative effects on the psychological health of children.

Which is to say that ALL parents project their "sins" on to their children, and thus cripple them.

I would argue that is especially true of ALL right-wing Christians. Because they all essentially subscribe to the "spirit" vs "flesh" ideology which is at the root of the Christian "world"-view. Put in another right-wing Christian pedagogy is deeply and intrinsically TOXIC to any and every one that believes it, and to all children who are forced to suffer it.

This entire social and cultural game of antisexual, "spirit against flesh" education is so monstrous, so opposed to incarnate happiness and True human responsibility, that it must be considered THE primary social and philosophical issue of our time. Indeed it is the primary cause of all of our seemingly intractable cultural problems, including world-wide terrorism and ecological destruction.

Meanwhile some references which describe the cultural consequences of this monstrous TOXIC PEDAGOGY.

The work of Alice Miller via For Your Own Good : The Roots of Violence in Child-rearing, and her work altogether.

Spare the Child: The Religious Roots of Punishment and the Psychological Impact of Physical Abuse, by Philip Greven.

Sex, Mom & God by Frank Schaeffer. And his writings altogether -writings critical of the toxicity of USA right-wing religiosity. The leading edge of which is now being dramatized by Michelle Bachmann and guv-nor Perry. And promoted by James Dobson via the entirely toxic Focus on the Family.

A History of Childhood by Lloyd deMause - the history of child-hood abuse and its cultural consequences.

And of course this image re applied toxic pedagogy from an unspeakably vile film. Remembering that right-wing Christians uniformly thought this vile film was more than wonderful

http://www.allmoviephoto.com/photo/2003_the_passion_006.html

Will the intergenerational TOXIC CIRCLE ever be broken?

Attacking Christianity is a cheap and bigoted trick, often used by the homosexual and feminist movement.

Even Plato knew who his relatives were (father was Ariston, mother was Perictione, aunt was Solon etc), and Christianity wasn’t even around at that time.

There is no evidence of homosexuals raising children in any society throughout history, and I think there were good reasons for that.

Should we learn from the past?

Of course not says the feminist and homosexual.

The author is being disingenuous when he attempts to argue that only in same sex relationships are children victims of adult's emotional needs.

Practically every child born is at some point subject to adult emotional needs being considered before their own. This can result in serious long term damage when it's the norm rather than the exception. This type of damage to children overwhelmingly occurs in heterosexual relationships, and in heterosexual relationship breakdown and subsequent single parenthood.

If the primary concern is protecting children from emotionally inappropriate adult demands, start with where the problem is most urgent and widespread: in the heterosexual community.

Otherwise this piece is just another homophobic rant under the guise of "What about the children?"