A Kansas State University researcher is publishing a study that shows that gay parents are more likely to raise gay children.
Duh, right? I know, but the last researcher to state this in a study was promptly called a “Nazi” and got booted from the American Psychological Association.
So Walter Schumm knows he’s about to become the next punching bag for the left. But this is where the study led him and he’s sticking to the facts, and not heeding the politicized thuggery of the left.
After the last researcher to say such things was drummed out of polite society, Schumm began investigating the effect of parents on sexual orientation (among other things.)
“I just want to know the truth about something,” he tells AOL News. And he found it strange that parents can influence so many facets of their children’s lives — but not in any way their sexual orientation.
Schumm’s study to be released next month says that gay and lesbian parents are far more likely to have children who become gay.
AOL News reports:
Schumm concluded that children of lesbian parents identified themselves as gay 31 percent of the time; children of gay men had gay children 19 percent of the time, and children of a lesbian mother and gay father had at least one gay child 25 percent of the time.
Furthermore, when the study restricted the results so that they included only children in their 20s — presumably after they’d been able to work out any adolescent confusion or experimentation — 58 percent of the children of lesbians called themselves gay, and 33 percent of the children of gay men called themselves gay. (About 5 to 10 percent of the children of straight parents call themselves gay, Schumm says.)
Schumm next went macro, poring over an anthropological study of various cultures’ acceptance of homosexuality. He found that when communities welcome gays and lesbians, “89 percent feature higher rates of homosexual behavior.”
Studies like this will not go unpunished I assure you.
Abbie Goldberg, a psychology professor at Clark University and the author of “Lesbian and Gay Parents and Their Children: Research on the Family Life Cycle,” admits she hasn’t read Schumm’s study but is still willing to say, “The fundamental problem with this [type of meta-analysis] is such samples tend to be biased.”
She hasn’t seen the study but already she’s talking about bias? That’s science?
Schumm though takes it a step further and scolds the scientific establishment for not having done this study earlier. Clearly, he’s expecting to be attacked. He concluded his study with a quote from philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer. “All truth passes through three stages: First it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
For many of us this was already self evident but Schumm should get ready for the ridicule part with a little violent opposition thrown in for good measure. It’s coming.
October 18, 2010 at 2:57 pm
I would have thought that Konrad Lorenz's study of imprinting in geese, over 50 years ago, supports Schumm's study.
October 18, 2010 at 3:04 pm
Why should anyone be opposed to such findings? Is there something wrong with being gay? He should simply accuse those attacking the study as homophobic!!
October 18, 2010 at 3:35 pm
Wait a minute? Isn't that the whole idea of gay marriage and gay adoption: To make society more gay? Shouldn't the left and the GLBT community be celebrating the study? And if they wont: Doesn't that just show what kind of bigots they are?
October 18, 2010 at 5:38 pm
I wonder if you're a homosexual bishop or homosexual in charge of vocations for the arch/diocese or a homosexual director of a seminary if that might mean you were more inclined to recruit, ordain and promote homosexuals? Isn't it nice to think about the future of the church when Cardinal McCarrick (ordained by Cardinal Spellman) brags about how many priests he has ordained…
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:w6Lt6_ObFHwJ:whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2008/05/golden-ted.html+mccarrick+ordinations&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
I wonder if there's a study on how these same bishops, vocation and seminary directors would be inclined to discrimate agains heterosexuals?
http://whereisfrhaley.blogspot.com/
October 18, 2010 at 5:48 pm
How many of the children in this study were adopted versus how many of them were conceived from at least one of the gay parents' sperm or egg? Someone may argue that this study supports the genetic-based sexual orientation argument if a large percentage of these children carry at least one of the gay parents' genes.
October 18, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Studies on the effects of gay parenting are BS. The majority of gays and lesbians are not out and willing to participate in these studies, therefore, how in the hell can these scientist "conclude" anything. IMO, there is sampling bias in EVERY study.
October 18, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Wait a minute? Isn't that the whole idea of gay marriage and gay adoption: To make society more gay?
As anonymous 2 pointed out, defenders of homosexuality have hitched their wagon to the "I was born gay" dogma and brook no dissent. Of course even if it were true that people are born gay, it's an invalid argument and a dehumanizing one at that, but that hasn't stopped anyone before.
October 18, 2010 at 8:56 pm
Anyone who has ever spent a significant amount of time in the company of homosexuals (especially gay men), as I have, knows without a doubt that this study is likely to be 100% true. Unless you have homosexual parents who are set on acting militantly straight, the child grows up seeing any, some, or all aspects of gay culture. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that what you're exposed to you end up being OK with, if not embracing outright.
But again – what's wrong with being gay? That's their battlecry.
October 18, 2010 at 11:29 pm
As a lesbian parent, this study makes no sense to me whatsoever. I have spent my whole life dealing with ignorant attempts to malign my sexuality. Why would I do that to my children? I have taught my children to be safe, to be kind, to be responsible citizens, and to contribute to society, and to have fun doing those things. Hopefully they will love and be loved, as I have been blessed to be. So far they all seem so straight it makes my teeth hurt! As long as they are functional productive citizens, why would I care?
October 19, 2010 at 12:51 am
I mean does anyone care about a study from Kansas State University? It's probably closer to a high school term paper on either coast. Kansas is not know for its intellectuals.
October 19, 2010 at 1:02 am
I think that is some bias showing about fly-over country!
Susan Peterson
October 19, 2010 at 1:17 am
The coasties can keep on flying over the heartland! Nothing down here (but beautiful mid-westerners) but the world's grain. Adios!
October 19, 2010 at 1:51 am
I get a sense that the point that homosexual "marriage" activists are trying to create the impression that they're absolutely not different. The whole reason that they should be "allowed to marry" is because there is no difference between their "marriage" and one between a man and a woman. To say that they have a proclivity to raise homosexuals in turn is telling. Maybe there are differences indeed? Or much more importantly, maybe the "nature vs. nurture" philosophy that the homosexual activists are trying to debunk when saying they are homosexual not because of the way they were raised is not concretely true? This is like a skeleton in the closet for the gay community, and one they'd rather lash out at then deal with, imo.
October 19, 2010 at 3:18 am
I don't see the problem with the conclusion of this study. It suggests to me that homosexuality may be genetically determined.
October 19, 2010 at 5:55 am
@Anonymous Lesbian Parent,
As Christians, we do not believe that the point of our existence is to be "functional productive citizens" who "have fun doing those things" (as you put it). So right off the bat we disagree about what the human good is. Our goal is to surrender the self into the love and mystery of Christ. We must decrease so Christ can increase. Christ cannot continue to increase in persons who set an aspect of their life (such as their sexuality) as off-limits to Christ–as something they won't surrender or allow Him to transform. After all, separation is the essence of sin vis-a-vis God–it is a break in the relationship. As Christians, we don't want those who have same-sex attraction to prefer this attraction to Christ, so we speak up. The same goes with the millions of heterosexuals in the U.S. who have sex outside of marriage, or the married couples who have sex that is not marked by trust, Christian love, genuine respect and recognition, etc. Christ's peace. Scott W
October 19, 2010 at 7:27 am
Academically, the study is kind of weird.
It says he took data from 10 books for a total of over 250 children, so about 25 kids per book. The problem here isn't just the small sample size, which is small, but the lack of random sampling. The fact that he took the data from 10 books instead of a survey should also make anyone skeptical.
October 19, 2010 at 9:20 am
I'm not a scientist, but hasn't the project to map the entire human DNA (or genome?) been completed and found there is no homosexual gene? If so, the only logical conclusion to draw is that homosexuality is chosen, learned or some combination of the two. My only bug now is that I can't recall the source. Can someone please provide the source so we won't have to wonder if it's one camps wishful thinking or some internet myth? If science supports the non-gene statement the foundation is laid for building proper and balanced morally and scientifically based laws.
October 19, 2010 at 1:42 pm
If homosexuality were genetically determined, then the law of diminishing returns would lead to a DECREASE over time in gay offspring (because two gay 'parents' cannot have a biological child), thus the species would die out completely over time. It can continue only by conditioning. This study seems to indicate that gays are recruiting. The Natural Law is not repeal-able.
October 19, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Last anon, I couldn't say, but I would highly doubt that DNA scientists would claim they've got it all pegged. Rather there are two things I would bring up.
First, the good news is that we are starting to see challanges to what I've heard called "DNA Reductionism" See Steve Talbot's article here: http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/getting-over-the-code-delusion
Secondly, as the Church says and many have repeated, the origin of the desire for homosexual sex is entirely irrelevant to the question of its moral licitness as an act in and of itself. A "gay gene" may have helpful explanatory power; it doesn't have a whit of justifying power. I'm genetically wired to have sex with every beautiful woman I see–that doesn't make it right to do so. The call always goes up, "I didn't choose to be this way!" Maybe, maybe not; but dropping trou is always a chosen act for all of us.
The good news I think is that people are starting to wake up to these facts. The bad news is that defenders of perverse sexual acts are more and more resorting to argumentum ad baculum, and if Catholics and people of good faith don't start growing spines, we are going to get rolled over.
October 19, 2010 at 1:43 pm
I see another anon commented before I submitted. So instead of "last anon", my comments are directed to penultimate anon. 🙂