1 - 6
I will ask again, what are the implications, if the assertions of this article are really true? Do we call on the federal government to step in, in order to protect society from homosexuals?
We would see the issue in better light if people could set aside their emotional bias, and look onward with a sense of open objectivity. You imply that dysfunction is causation for variation in sexual preference? An objective mind wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the notion that society's negative connotations towards homosexuals is causation for dysfunction.
I would assume, from your first sentence, that you wouldn't entrust your children's care to someone who defines themselves as straight either? For that would qualify as defining oneself by their sexuality.'
I will temporarily entertain the notion that the opinions of this article are factually grounded. What are the implications? Is it being stated that homosexuality alone implies some sort of negative connotation? Should we promote government intervention to protect society from gays? Surely the federal government understands the issue better than someone who is actually gay. It seems humorous to me, that a conservative website would harbor so many left-wing views.
The argument that same-sex parents create more homosexual children than normal parents relies on a few pieces of information that remain completely unknown. To make that determination, you must first determine the actual percentage of the population that is gay or bisexual. Without that knowledge, the data itself is inconclusive and irrelevant. All we are left with are assertions based upon assumptions. Honestly, the article itself, and the cited studies offer no concrete conclusions. Instead we have incomplete data that is being manipulated into politically biased implications. The opinions derived from these studies are not scientifically based. They are based on emotions dealing with a subject very few people really understand.
This article makes the entire case for the reasons politics should not mix with personal, and private issues. It's a shame to see the scientific method so haphazardly used, and then to be called hard science. If the narrative fits, it is fact, If not then deny it. The article offers very little to prove the accuracy of the mentioned studies. There is even less substance explaining how the studies are at all relevant to the expressed opinions. The first point made, about the increased number of homosexual children with same-sex parents, is without any factual basis. The honest implications are that a much larger of the population is actually homosexual than most people want to believe.
1 - 6