You Mightn't Be Able To Help Here
ChatterBank0 min ago
Misleading Headline?
Is the Mail on Sunday trying to stir up hatred against gay people (again)?
http://
http://
Answers
Yes it is misleading but what else do you expect from the Daily Wail ? The Wail always has to slip in an anti Gay, anti immigrant, anti benefit claimant or what ever is on their current 'hate list' slant to every story. With this one they have managed to get an anti gay and anti benefit claim slant by mentioning 'tax payer funded' and ' gay' in one sentence.
13:11 Sun 03rd Aug 2014
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
sp, I typed “children of same sex parents” into google, and like you, found numerous reports that say they’re healthier. However, all the reports appear to emanate from one study conducted at an Australian university – not as you would have it “a load of studies”. That said, I’ve just read one report that concludes that since gay marriage is relatively new to our society, it’s too early to form judgement about the eventual effect that being raised by single-sex parents might have on a child.
divebuddy
No - not offended, but I think it's dangerous when a news story is twisted so that the facts are presented incorrectly.
And I would suggest that simply ignoring news outlets with a huge readership perhaps isn't the point. I mentioned earlier in the thread that I found this story through a Twitter feed that I subscribe to, rather than directly in the paper itself. I thought that it warranted discussion.
No - not offended, but I think it's dangerous when a news story is twisted so that the facts are presented incorrectly.
And I would suggest that simply ignoring news outlets with a huge readership perhaps isn't the point. I mentioned earlier in the thread that I found this story through a Twitter feed that I subscribe to, rather than directly in the paper itself. I thought that it warranted discussion.
This is probably controversial, but it's just an observation. I know a very wealthy gay couple (male) who have adopted two little children. The children have everything they could possibly need or want, including lots of love from their doting adoptive parents, but it’s interesting to note how they cling to the lady who comes in almost daily to help out. I think there’s something in the ‘maternal’ thing. However hard they try, dads can never be mums.
I just wanted to add that even people who merely walk past or browse over the news stand and see the headline but not actually buy the DM. Nevertheless the headline creeps into their subconscious and they may end up filling in the blanks from their own imaginations and then spouting the lot as fact whenever homosexuality and child-rearing comes up for debate in public.
As far as I'm concerned it was a misleading headline. But, as pointed out, previously, all headlines are "teasers", intended to draw you in, anyway. It's the DM so the outrage button is the one which must be pushed. (Trying to avoid saying "self-righteous outrage" but that's the stereotype some of us go by).
As far as I'm concerned it was a misleading headline. But, as pointed out, previously, all headlines are "teasers", intended to draw you in, anyway. It's the DM so the outrage button is the one which must be pushed. (Trying to avoid saying "self-righteous outrage" but that's the stereotype some of us go by).
It's isn't that misleading. It is being paid for by the taxpayer. It is going to be available for those who are not in a normal relationship and can give a child it's due of a father and mother, but also to those who are/can not and are merely interested in their own wants. For sure it is emphasising the immoral use of the bank, but that is the point is it trying to make. This activity is being made available using money taken from you, even if you know it isn't right, whether you like it or not.
naomi24
There's the report from Australia, which has garnered a lot of recent press. But there's also this one:
http://
And this from Benjamin Siegel (a School of Medicine professor of pediatrics, who coauthored a report, published by the American Academy of Pediatrics):
http://
And this report, which has been running since 1978, checking back on participants as the kids have been growing up:
http://
Yrs, there are caveats that sample sizes are small, but then I've yet to see any evidence which refutes these positive conclusions.
There's the report from Australia, which has garnered a lot of recent press. But there's also this one:
http://
And this from Benjamin Siegel (a School of Medicine professor of pediatrics, who coauthored a report, published by the American Academy of Pediatrics):
http://
And this report, which has been running since 1978, checking back on participants as the kids have been growing up:
http://
Yrs, there are caveats that sample sizes are small, but then I've yet to see any evidence which refutes these positive conclusions.
/// All I get is a load of studies which claim that children of same sex parents are healthier than those of mixed sex parents. ///
That is a disgusting thing to say, that is saying that same sex parents look after their children's health better than mixed couples do.
What would you say if I were to put, "I can get loads of studies that say that Black children are more disruptive than White children."
That is a disgusting thing to say, that is saying that same sex parents look after their children's health better than mixed couples do.
What would you say if I were to put, "I can get loads of studies that say that Black children are more disruptive than White children."
