http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216750

Philo, correct again, there is much moral & ethical DE generation to be undone.

A good start would be to UNdo everything done by every government federal, state & local since about 1963.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216751

Actually Philo the evidence is already in on GLBT relationships.

feMANazis in Families, DOCS & Community services departments have been hiding DV, mental illness rates, dysfunctionality rates, drug & alcohol abuse, neglect & abuse of children in NON traditional families which is much higher, infinately worse.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216754

Mollydukes, so on the basis of 1 single dysfunctional family you wish to justify the deliberate, premeditated neglect & abuse of even more children.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24sjYlydAuw&feature=watch_response_rev 2 wrongs don't make a right, mentally ill parents go on to abuse their children, the destructive cycle must be stopped, not promoted or speeded up, like you want to achieve.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216755

McReal, augh didams, did the nasty man tell you an "inconvenient truth".

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216757

David van Gend, sanity & logic at last, perfect posting.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216758

Sparkyq, you are comparing apples & oranges again.

The dysfunctional, post apocalyptic families of today do not compere to the healthier, happier, more functional families before the moral & ethical DE generation of the mid 1960's began.

Many baby boomers are looking back on the sexual revolution with regret, moving back into the church.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216759

Ammonite, nobody is in fear of homosexuals, we just want them back in the closet where they belong.

There is a big difference between bashing perverted minorities, or "tolerating" them without bashing them &/or hero worshipping them, encouraging mental illness.

Social liberals have always coddled a sweet nostalgia for the USSR circa 1917 which spauned an entire generation of disabled children to single mothers on welfare because the commissars told them all the family & church was rubbish, they were toasting the glorious revolution with "Sex, Vodka, Jazz & Charleston".

Stalin's purges were primarily to restore law, order, family values, patriarchy & the church. Trotsky, Bakunin & PC nearly destroyed the USSR before it started.

Flo,
"It is the quality that matters."

True, but what happens if the quality is not there?

Will this be hidden?

If homosexuals have lobbied so much for homosexual marriage, they will more than likely try to hide any poor quality marriages, and try to hide away children in homosexual marriages that are not happy.

The precedent has already been set with de facto relationships.

Feminists control most of social science research, and almost no research has been conducted into de fact relationships.

But data occasionally spills out regarding these relationships, and it appears that these relationships are generally far worse for children than marriage.

Homosexuals could also try and hide data concerning homosexual marriage.

Because there is such a close alliance between various feminists and homosexuals, no trust can be placed on homosexual lobby groups.

If you can ignore the occasional lapses into jingoism, this article is actually reasonably well thought-out and raises a few challenges that advocates of same-sex marriage need to consider carefully.

And I'm usually not a fan of citing evidence, but one conspicuous absence in this whole debate is any evidence that children growing up in same-sex marriage turn out to be well-balanced individuals. Intuitively I can't see any reason why this shouldn't be the case but, given for example the "initial indications" that a lot of juvenile offenders come from fatherless families it does give pause for thought.

I suppose I would say that I don't believe any legitimate connection can be drawn between the mental health of a child and the biological sex of their parents. The situation is far more complex, and needs to take into account the way the child is treated, whether they feel loved, and to what extent the parents project their own emotional needs onto the child (which as we have seen happens in pretty much all families). In any case, in most of the lesbian and gay couples I've known, one of the partners tends to take on a more "masculine" role and one a more "feminine". So in some sense I think there's evidence to suggest that same-sex couples do provide an effective male-female balance, or a mum and a dad experience - and this ties into debates on gender being distinct from biological sex, or of gender existing through performance, which are quite mainstream these days.

[cont]

And then there's the notion that the children born into same sex relationships probably wouldn't have been born at all were it not for the relationship and the opportunity it presents to give birth to and raise a child. Could it ever be fair to say that we should deny these as-yet unborn children the chance at life, the chance to be born into a family that wants and is ready to accept them, just because we're worried that they might grow up unhappy? If life is sacred, then shouldn't it be given every chance to flourish? Is an ok life, in a developed society, where the vast majority of us live in luxury unimaginable 200 years ago, better than no life at all? And what of the kids who can't live with their parents and instead get bounced from short-term foster carer to short-term foster carer due to lack of availability of foster carers. Wouldn't it be better to let them live in a stable, loving, same-sex family?

I think the disquiet surrounding this issue indicates that advocates of same-sex marriage do have a little more work to do to convince the people that matter that it should go ahead, because I for one don't yet know how to frame an argument that would convince someone like David van Gend to come onboard. All I know is that I'm glad that movements are being made in the direction that will eventually allow us to make those arguments.

And I also know that I think it's wonderful that Penny Wong and her partner are having a child, and I think they'll make great parents.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216759

Ammonite, again, "repeat the lie until it becomes the truth" Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.

Soviet era proverb, "the present we know, we are doing it now, the future we know, we are building it now, only the past keeps changing"

Your "conversation" is one of the worst i have ever encountered, more Loony Left Alleged academics droning on with their closet communist re-named rhetoric.

Left wing politics never changes, in principle, only the labels are updated with the latest Spinganda, Weasel words.

Reds in "BEDS".

Bovine
Excrement
Distribution
Services

So a couple of communists find a couple of tiny examples of something other than monogamy, in a couple of far flung corners of the world out of the rest of humanity & its multi millenia history of heterosexual, monogamous, marriage for life & this somehow justifies further experimentation with childrens lives, when we already have well documented, scientifically proven evidence to the contrary.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216760

McReal, many of those middle aged homosexuals of yours who experiment with GLBT lifestyle after an unhappy marriage breaks up, often find abnormal behaviour also unsatisfying & end up even more mentally ill as a result.

i have personally seen men commit suicide after such mistakes, caused by people like you.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216764

Cactus, could not possibly be more wrong, it does matter. One minute the communists use the human rights of the child to justify breaking up heterosexual families, next they are denying the human rights of the child to justify throwing them into homosexual marriages without access to both biological parents.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216769

vanna, correct, but even more so, several generations ago our nuclear families existed inside extended families http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Waltons this was also destroyed by closet communist social engineers, earlier in history than the mid 1960's.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12541#216774

Ho Hum, perhaps you prefer "polymorphous perversity" which is the cause of all child abuse & neglect today.

The toxic circle will be broken when every member/supporter of the RED/green, getup, GAYLP/alp, Socialist Alliance is in a labour camp for life.

"True, but what happens if the quality is not there?

Will this be hidden?"

The same that happens now in many families whether conventional, single parent or any other combination you can think of.

Why would it be any different in a single gender family. I suggest, having some knowledge of our society, those in single gender families will be under greater scrutiny and judged by higher standards than the norm.

If you are worried about child abuse being hidden, look to the wealthier families for this.

It is happening here in many comments.