Babies born out of wed-lock

I second wrote:

Because they statistically don't do as well. I don't care about the guy you know who's a doctor and didn't have a dad. I know a 96 yr old that's smoked since he was 13, doesn't make it a good idea. Overwhelmingly kids without a father are more prone to becoming a burden on society.

A positive male role model is important for both boys and girls. It's sets the bar high for a young lady learning how she should be treated by her spouse. It teaches the young man to become a man.

Don't take offense to statistics. Be proud that you turned out fine despite having a single parent, or that you have great kids that you're raising.

I will happily concede if you can provide reasonable proof of that claim. Please point me to any studies you know of that show that families with one male and one female adult raising kids do better than families with two female adults raising kids controlling for income levels and educational levels of adults.

If you can then I will happily learn something new.

If you cannot then I will conclude that you really have no idea what you are talking about but like to hide behind vacuous claims of "statistically...".

In a historic study of children raised by homosexual parents, sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin has overturned the conventional academic wisdom that such children suffer no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father. Just published in the journal Social Science Research,[1] the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted on this issue found numerous and significant differences between these groups--with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated "suboptimal" (Regnerus' word) in almost every category.

I second wrote:

http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/new-study-on-homosexual-parents-tops-all-previous-research

In a historic study of children raised by homosexual parents, sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin has overturned the conventional academic wisdom that such children suffer no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father. Just published in the journal Social Science Research,[1] the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted on this issue found numerous and significant differences between these groups--with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated "suboptimal" (Regnerus' word) in almost every category.

Well, nice try. But:

"The Family Research Council (FRC) is an American conservative Christian group and lobbying organization formed in the United States in 1981 by James Dobson." - Wikipedia

and

"American Sociological Association takes the position that the conclusions he draws from his study of gay parenting are fundamentally flawed on conceptual and methodological grounds and that findings from Dr. Regnerus’ work have been cited inappropriately in efforts to diminish the civil rights and legitimacy of LBGTQ partners and their families. Two hundred social scientists, led by Gary Gates, signed the 'Letter to the editors and advisory editors of Social Science Research', in which they express their concern 'about the academic integrity of the peer review process for this paper as well as its intellectual merit.'" - Wikipedia

Honestly, I am interested in real research by someone who isn't a lobbying hack.

Anyone?

The statistics on births 'out of wedlock' can be flawed and inconsistent. Sometimes births where the mother and father have separate last names are categorized as 'out of wedlock'. That probably means that 75% of the children of academics are categorized that way in the places that make that stupid assumption. In addition, when one parent takes a combined last name (Sue Jones marries Bob Smith and becomes sue Jones-Smith) also will typically trip this incorrect accounting.

So, be careful of the statistics that get thrown around. Note that for the initial posting, that would likely up the proportions of bad things happening.

Also, note that the crime rate fell for teenagers and then young adults 15-20 years after abortion became legal in the US. See, for instance, Freakonomics.

The statistics on LGBT couples raising families are too new and small scale, to have any validation for either side. Same sex marriage has only been legal (on a very limited basis) for around 30 years. Every study done is discredited by the other side. But both sides agree that having two parents is better than one.

Equally interesting, to me: in the cited study, "Regnerus...surveyed young adults, ages 18 to 39, and asked them about their experiences growing up (and their life circumstances in the present)."

As nearly as I know, "18 to 39" years ago homosexual couples were allowed to marry nowhere (or virtually nowhere). Yet their children were compared to those of intact married couples.

As it happens, I find it entirely plausible that, *on average*, children fare best when raised to adulthood by their two (married) biological parents: there's a high level of parental commitment/investment in that married/biological combo. As someone mentioned, it will be interesting--some decades down the road--to compare such kids to the children of *married* homosexual couples who raise them to adulthood.

I would still think the children of heteros would do better, *on average*, in that situation because the kids of homosexual marriages are still not being raised by two biological forebears. So perhaps the more apt comparison would be looking at children of (married) gay couples--wherein typically only one parent is a biological forebear--vis-à-vis children of (married) hetero couples in which there's one bio parent and one step-parent.

Honestly I stopped reading after just a few of the inane and non relevant posts in this thread. So many complete d!psh!ts on this board, it boggles the mind.

However...its clear to anyone with a brain that kids are better off with a father then without.

Yes, there are exceptions, outliers, bad fathers, gay families, etc, etc but FOR THE POPULATION IN GENERAL, you're better off with a father.

Men who shirk their duties are just horrid people and should be ashamed, and in jail.

next thread.

Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation Correlation does not imply causation

Put a ring on it. wrote:

Research by the National Father Initiative;

60% of America's rapists

72% of adolescent murderers

70% of long term prison inmates

Come from fatherless homes.

Children without a father are 50% more likely to join a gang, drop out of school and use drugs.

3-times more likely to have emotional and behavioral issues, and 5 times more likely to have out of wed-lock children. So the problem just repeats.

________________ _______________

Actually these same stats are used in a commercial trying to get black men to be male role models. Because the large majority of the men that these stats are revealing are black and from fatherless homes.

It even went one step further, at a college I attended in CT. There was a program set up for young black males from local high schools. The program offered a free ride to any black high school male that would agree to get a degree for teaching, and teach in the inner city schools for a minimum of five years. This program's goal was to provide black male role models for high school and middle school age young black males without a father. The program is now being consider for removal for one simple reason. Many of these same young men that accept this agreement do their five years and leave for a higher paying job in a suburban school of mostly white students and less violence. Perhaps some do stay in the schools in the inner city and make a long term difference over some other young men, and who knows? Could they have changed a young man who was destined to be on this batch of pre-mentioned statistics? Maybe. Hopefully it made a difference. the irony of this program is that many of these students that received a free ride were not fans of the mostly white suburban schools. Now, they choose these same schools and towns for their career

Real-er answer wrote:

Honestly I stopped reading after just a few of the inane and non relevant posts in this thread. So many complete d!psh!ts on this board, it boggles the mind.

However...its clear to anyone with a brain that kids are better off with a father then without.

Yes, there are exceptions, outliers, bad fathers, gay families, etc, etc but FOR THE POPULATION IN GENERAL, you're better off with a father.

Men who shirk their duties are just horrid people and should be ashamed, and in jail.

next thread.

You stopped reading then? Now if only you knew when to stop writing.

Here is a hint for you: Throwing your BS opinion around as if it is fact is not very convincing to anyone with a brain.

Bad Wigins wrote:

It is true that children do better raised by a mother and father.

DING DING DING! Hell has now officially frozen over.

What about that was inaccurate?

Do you believe it's a good thing for males to produce children that they either abandon or have no initial intention to raise or support?

web idiot wrote:

What about that was inaccurate?

Do you believe it's a good thing for males to produce children that they either abandon or have no initial intention to raise or support?

Happy to engage in conversation.

But first tell me what you are talking about. What about what was inaccurate? What post are you referring to?

Thx