Judge Walker’s Prop 8 Opinion Lifted from APA Brochure


American Psychological Association
Image via Wikipedia

Same-Sex Marriage Judge Finds That a Child Has Neither a Need Nor a Right to a Mother

Astonishingly, the media doesn’t see this angle to the story, nor does it see it as a problem and, again, fails to report it as fact.

Yet, it’s a fact.

Despite Walker’s claim that this “fact” is “beyond serious debate,” one of the sources he cited for it was a brochure published by the American Psychological Association (APA) that was entered into evidence in the case, which specifically stated twice: “Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.” Walker did not quote this part of the brochure in his opinion.

However, Walker did quote this same brochure as saying: “[S]ocial science has shown that the concerns often raised about children of lesbian and gay parents–concerns that are generally grounded in prejudice against and stereotypes about gay people–are unfounded.”

This quote comes from a side-bar box on page five of the six-page APA brochure. The box purports to answer the “most common questions” about homosexual parents, posing four such questions and giving the APA’s answer to them.

Furthermore:

To support this finding, Walker notes that California’s attorney general, who is Jerry Brown, “admits that the laws of California recognize no relationship between a person’s sexual orientation and his or her ability to raise children.”

“Attorney General admits,” writes Walker, “that California law protects the right of gay men and lesbians in same-sex relationships to be foster parents and to adopt children by forbidding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”

Ergo,

A child put out for adoption or foster parenting by the state, or a child conceived through technological means and gestated in a hired womb, would have no right not to be assigned to a homosexual couple who would act as his or her father and father or mother and mother.

Congratulations, California. One judge has just made it so that the state gets to determine whether a child is adopted to a home where there is no mother or no father. But it must be a good thing because it says so right in the brochure!

Many a vacation and fortune has come to ruin because of buying what was being sold in a brochure. One California judge, through the misapplication of the 14th Amendment in this ruling, is about to force the rest of America to embark on a dangerous social experiment, the likes of which has never been seen on earth in its entire existence.

Here are some other sources that Judge Walker seems to have disregarded in his “research”.

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Judge Walker’s Prop 8 Opinion Lifted from APA Brochure

  1. I would rather this country be swarming with children of a solid gay union than children spawn of dead beats, drug dealers, domestic abusers and so on. It’s so easy to say “two boys can’t make a baby, and two girls can’t make a baby” which is therefore not natural which will therefore screw up the child. Where do you people live? In Pleasantville in the 1950s? I’m a child of divorce, my father was never around, I grew up with only a mother – and both of my parents were STRAIGHT. I have a friend who was born out of a STRAIGHT marriage and was left to be adopted by strangers – a loving couple who happened to be GAY and have raised her to be a mature and loving member of society. There are people who a mom and dad and mom’s a drug addict and dad sexually abuses them. Just because you can close your eyes to it, or just because you don’t know anyone in that situation personally doesn’t mean that the typical family of mom and dad is what’s in everyone’s best interest. The children of gay families that I know are the most loving and open-minded people I know, which is what we need in this world. And thank you for putting the word “research” in quotes – it just proves how asinine the whole thing is.

    • It never ceases to amaze me the assumptions people make. The single, stereotypical picture they must have in their heads of people like me who support the traditional definition of marriage. Pleasantville, huh? How long have you been waiting to use that? (Or, alternately, how long have you been using it?)

      I’m actually a child of divorce myself. That’s why I’m a Proposition 8 supporter. I’m actually an adoptive parent as well, though the process is in indefinite limbo due to fraudulent paperwork from a 3rd world country where there are more orphans due to HIV AIDS, drug abuse, cheating, divorce and other social ills than you can shake a stick at. That, again, is why I’m a Prop 8 supporter AND a supporter of returning sanity to divorce laws in this country.

      Both of my parents were straight. I have family members who are loving, straight parents and I have family members who are, unfortunately, abusive, straight parents. I have gay family members and gay friends. Some are “married” and some are not. None of them have kids, so I can’t say much about their relationships with them. I don’t hate gays but I do hate abusiveness towards any of God’s children. And to imply, as you do, that ALL gays are loving parents whereas most straight couples are not is a complete fallacy.

      Having a mother and a father is no magic bullet, but it is an overwhelming indicator of successful outcomes for children. There are many reasons for it, but one main reason is that children learn different things from each gender in ways that they can’t get when only one gender is present. I personally know this because of the limited access I had to father figures growing up. Yes, I am more able to access empathy, sympathy, and other feminine qualities, but there are parts of me that cannot manage well when faced with the need to work well with other men in things that pertain to the world of men and the way that men interact with each other (engaging in male-oriented small talk, male-oriented joking, pranking, sports, hanging out, reading male signals for when to talk and when to not, even resisting peer pressure in a way that garners respect–not derision, etc.). I had no consistent model for any of this in growing up. You, as a woman who apparently believes in a gender-neutral ideal for a society full of emasculated men and super-powerful wymyn, may think this no big thing, and even an asset not a liability, but from my perspective in providing for my family and trying to hold down a job which sometimes requires optimal male-to-male business interactions, it truly is a liability whether you and your political persuasions like it or not.

      There’s this partial list of credible family structure research that overwhelmingly contradicts one propaganda brochure upon which the Judge based his ruling. There is much evidence to show, over long periods of time, even, that children raised without both a mother and a father are not as able to cope with the issues of peer pressure, drug abuse, and other societal ills as those who ARE raised with a mother and a father. Until you can contradict, study for study, in a preponderance of evidence to the contrary, your emotionally-based, hearsay, non-scientific rhetoric about openminded “family” structure rings hollow and baseless.

      I am a white male, though. So pat yourself on the back…you got that part right. Whee.

  2. I wonder if it ceases to amaze you when you make your own assumptions. “You, as a woman who apparently believes in a gender-neutral ideal for a society full of emasculated men and super-powerful wymyn…”

    And “…but from my perspective in providing for my family and trying to hold down a job” is all fine and well. We’re not talking about your family here, we’re talking about that of those that you do not know whom you are basing judgment on and using said judgment as a means to protect something that should be more personal to you than universal and political.

    And there was no implication that ALL gays are fabulous and ALL straight people suck, but when you throw around statistics that say children with both a mom and a dad excel more than the rest, you are implying that all opposite-sex couples which is something same-sex couples cannot provide and that is simply fallible.

    • My use of the word “apparently” as a modifying adverb was meant to give you room to prove otherwise, and trumps your direct implication that I am a bigot, which I categorically reject.

      Of course we’re not talking about my family here. I’m merely giving you an example of how being from a fatherless home affected me and pointing to the research that validates what I’m talking about. There are many people on my side of the argument that, likewise, YOU don’t know about whom YOU are making baseless assumptions and projecting your personal opinions about them into the political sphere. Can you not see this? No, your sense of “social justice” has clouded your ability to look beyond your agenda. I’ve already stated the ways in which my sense of social stability has not.

      I’ve not thrown around a single statistic. I merely pointed you to the bona fide research that, if you actually bother to look up the individual studies, clearly shows that there is an overwhelming body of straight-forward fact that children without both a mother and a father INDEPENDENT OF THE CURRENT DEBATE ON HOMOSEXUALITY, do far worse than children who have been raised in a father/mother family structure.

  3. I find that response laughable. Thank you.

  4. No I just find it useless arguing with you when you’re so accusatory yet everything you say I am, you are yourself.

  5. “Where do you people live? In Pleasantville in the 1950s?”, accusing me of closing my eyes when you don’t even know me, and saying Prop 8 support is “asinine” was meant to be a conciliatory statement? You’re holding out an olive branch of peace?

    Please. I have little patience and time for people who come onto my blog to front me and then turn around and accuse me of being accusatory. If you’ve got a point to make, make it respectfully and I’ll respond in kind. If you come in here saying I’m a bigot, well, no guarantees. I’ve sincerely argued peacefully with your type many, many, many times before in my own effort to hold out an olive branch of peace and all it does is prolong the inevitable. Just trying to save us both some time.

    You reap what you sow. Enjoy the harvest.

  6. Well you see, but that’s just it. I never denied being accusatory. Does that make it okay? No. Would I reword my previous statements? Perhaps. But instead you call me accusatory but then say things like “your type” and “you, as a woman who apparently believes in a gender-neutral ideal for a society full of emasculated men and super-powerful wymyn…” of course with your modifying verb “apparently,” which only gives you the freedom to say what you will and hide behind a technicality. If it’s that easy then “APPARENTLY you live in Pleasantville in the 1950s.” There, I’m absolved of all sins. What I was pointing out was you say I’m too hung up on my agenda to see what’s in front of me, but you can’t even acknowledge that perhaps the same could be said for yourself all the while you’re pointing your finger at me. THAT is why I’m removing myself from the debate, as you say, trying to save us both time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s