Homosexuals make great parents

Introduction I would like to note that at this point, my opponent officially dropped all arguments attacking my study. Since my opponent has done this, my study has gone successfully defended and must be taken as scientific evidence for this debate. Instead of attacking my studies my opponent drops the arguments then continues to persist it’s about love, care, commitment, ect. ect. Although these are indeed important, I have still successfully shown that there is a negative biological factor in homosexual couples raising children. Rebuttals “Every study has its flaws. Whether it be a very large flaw or a very small flaw.” This does not justify using your study has scientific evidence. I have shown that this flaw is far too big to give your source any credibility whatsoever. All families have a disadvantage in one way or another. The sexual orientation or gender of the parents do not determine if the child will have disadvantages or not. In my opening arguments I already that there is a biological factor in this. You cannot simply dismiss this by arguing the opposite of the study’s results without any scientific back-up. “My studies do not contradict at all. No were in my first post does it say children of homosexual parents are more likely to be gay because we all know most gay children come from heterosexuals. My first post stated that children of homosexuals take on both gender rolls but they also still embrace there own gender roll. The study never said they act completely like the other gender and have trouble identifying themselves.” This is taken from your study conducted by the AAP: “Children of same sex parents are not more likely to be gay than children with heterosexual parents. Children of same sex parents are not more likely to be sexually abused. Children of same sex parents do not show differences in whether they think of themselves as male or female (gender identity). Children of same sex parents do not show differences in their male and female behaviors (gender role behavior).” This is taken from your Narth Study: “1. Compared to the daughters of heterosexual mothers, the daughters of lesbians more frequently dress, play and behave in ways that do not conform to sex-typed cultural norms. They show greater interest in activities with both masculine and feminine qualities. They have higher aspirations to occupations that are not traditionally female. 2. In terms of aggression and play, sons of lesbians behave in less traditionally masculine ways. They are likely to be more nurturing and affectionate than their counterparts in heterosexual families. 3. One study examined by the researchers indicated that a significantly greater proportion of young adult children raised by lesbians had engaged in a same-sex relationship (six of 25 interviewed) than those raised by a heterosexual mother (none of 20 interviewed). 4. Those raised by lesbian mothers were also more likely to consider a homosexual relationship. 5. Teen-age and young adult girls raised by lesbian mothers appear to be more sexually adventurous and less chaste than girls raised by heterosexual mothers. Sons, on the other hand, were somewhat less sexually adventurous and more chaste than boys raised by heterosexuals. 6. The studies indicate that sexual orientation has no measurable effect on the quality of parent-child relationships or on the mental health of children.” I have bolded the conclusions that contradict each other. Not only have I shown that both of these studies are unreliable due to improper conduction of each study, but I have also shown that these studies contradict each other on gender roll behavior and on homosexual behavior. On kids turning out well: “That was from a general standpoint. They was proof that these kids turned out fine.” Not according to my uncontested studies. You can’t just say things without backing them up. I have been successfully attacking your studies; in fact, you haven’t even attempted to defend the studies I have showed are unreliable. In addition, you stopped attacking my studies, therefore going uncontested, and therefore can be properly used as scientific evidence for this debate. “It may not be inherent but they will always be there.” – Talking about prejudice against homosexuals in society. This isn’t about what is “right now”. This is about what is inherent and biological no matter what circumstance you are put in. You’re statement that there will always be a handful of people who hate homosexuals is unsupported, and flawed, especially seeing that they have been getting more and more support recently. Conclusion My opponent persists in arguing that sexual orientation and gender has nothing to do with it, but fails in arguing this seeing that not only did I successfully show that every study my opponent presented was unreliable, but that my opponent also stopped trying to attack my source showing that gender and sexual orientation does have an impact, and an inherently negative one at that. I dropped a couple things like the argument gender roles and their relevancy to society (was getting off-topic from the debate), and domestic violence among couples because I realized that these were unsupported by the study I presented. I am only defending my study because it successfully showed that gender and sexual orientation does make a difference. I felt no need to expand off that so I dropped arguments that were not relevant to it. Leave All Biasness At The Door When You Are Voting On This Debate. Vote On What Was Presented, Not On What You Personally Believe.