The Instigator
Danielle
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points
The Contender
Pirates
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points

Gay Parenting

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Danielle
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/8/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,227 times Debate No: 68004
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

Danielle

Pro

My last attempt to debate this was taken on by a non-serious debater, so I'd like to try this again.

Many arguments against the legality of gay marriage include the sanctity of the family. According to social conservatives, gay people are deranged, perverted or otherwise unfit to provide a safe, functional and/or loving family environment in which kids can be raised successfully. At the very least, they argue that a proper home is strictly defined by having both a mother and a father. As such, despite the fact that lesbians can still get pregnant and gay couples can adopt, many people are opposed to same-sex headed families and think they should be discouraged if not outright illegal.


In this debate, I will be arguing that gay and lesbian couples can on balance raise children just as well as straight couples. For all intents and purposes, just as well will essentially be defined as according to the same standards of wellness and success under similar circumstances. For example, if Con argues that kids with straight parents are likely to attend college, Pro will have the burden of proving kids with gay parents are also likely to attend college (or provide an otherwise equal measure of success). This is not meant to turn into a debate about semantics or trivialities, but discuss legitimate concerns regarding same-sex parenting.

My opponent is free to make opening notes in R1, as I intend to start the debate and make my affirmative case in R2. However if he or she would like to post first, they may do so.

Thanks and good luck.
Pirates

Con

sry for asking what should i debate here ?
Debate Round No. 1
Danielle

Pro

My debate has been noob sniped. Please forfeit the debate, Con, if you don't know how to debate. I'm not sure how to proceed.
Pirates

Con

Pirates forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Danielle

Pro

Although this debate has been noob sniped, I don't want to forfeit and lose on that basis alone. I'm going to post an argument and my opponent can feel free to rebut if he or she so chooses.

According to the 2000 U. S. Census, 1/3 of lesbian couples and 1/5 of gay male couples have at least one child under the age of 18 living in the home [1]. Many children are being raised by single parents or non-biological parents, including gay couples. Con will have the burden of proving that this is significantly detrimental to these children. We cannot rely on the fallacy of appeal to tradition, considering sociological trends are shifting what that tradition will become. I also think it's significant to note that these figures are 12 years old. We have good reason to believe that the numbers are even higher today.

Some points to start...

1. Being gay is not a mental disorder [2]. Like most heterosexuals, most gay people are fully functioning members of society. A good parent is responsible, competent, loving, trustworthy, etc. None of these qualities are exclusive to heterosexuals. There seem to be no qualifications of a good parent that a gay person can not possess.

2. It seems to be that a parent's sexual endeavors have little to no impact on their ability to raise a child; instead what's important is the attention and care that child receives. Most children do not know details about their parents sex lives. It is irrelevant to their relationship. If Molly's parents practice S&M, and Jim's parents haven't had sex for 15 years, those factors in themselves are probably not going to affect how well each child turns out.

3. There have been numerous studies indicating that children raised by 2 parents have more success and less emotional or behavioral problems than their single-parent counterparts. We can think of several reasons for why this is probably the case: shared division of responsibility, more resources, more emotional support, etc. Of course these same benefits can be provided by 2 parents of the same sex. A UC Berkeley study finds that data indicates there is a visible benefit to having a two-parent family, regardless of whether the couple is married, heterosexual, or same-sex [3].

4. On that note, much like adopted parents, gay parents typically have to go out of their way to have kids (i.e. in vitro fertilization). Meanwhile 50% of heterosexual babies are unplanned. Psychologist Abbie Clark explains, "That translates to greater commitment on average and more involvement" [4].

4. Jessey Levey, a Republican activist, has two gay moms and says "I am a well-adjusted heterosexual whose upbringing proves that love, not gender, makes a family... My family had strong family values. I was raised in a loving, caring household that let me be a free thinker... I'm tired of hearing that my family isn't legitimate." And while I don't want this debate to turn into a he said/ she said quote war of personal testimonials, Jeff DeGroot, a man with two lesbian moms, notes "My parents can throw a baseball and take me hiking just as well as any man could. I've always had a plethora of male role models. I never felt that I was missing anything by not having that dad for me" [5]. Kids with gay parents aren't missing out on these things.

There are plenty of people raised by gay parents who have had great experiences and turned out very well adjusted. Zach Wahl's speech about family (he also has two lesbian moms) went viral on YouTube, and I encourage my opponent to look it up. He is a very successful and admirable young man. However, I mentioned that I don't want this to turn into a debate over anecdotal evidence. We need to consider not individual cases, but how much sexuality in general influences parenthood.

5. As I've said, kids with gay parents can turn out perfectly fine, just as kids with heterosexual parents can turn out perfectly fine... or not. It could go either way. A parent only has so much influence in their child's life. "Evidence indicates that parents have little or no long term effect on their children's personality, intelligence, or mental health. The environment definitely has an effect on how children turn out, but it's not the home environment. It's not the nurture they do or don't get from their parents" [6]. Now, while no one can deny the impact parenting has on a child's emotional and behavioral development, the amount of attention and care a child receives is most important. Con must explain how a parent's sexuality, either homo or hetero, has a specific impact on a child's behavior.

6. I expect my opponent to make the argument that kids with gay parents might get teased more. There are two fundamental arguments against this premise. First, kids get teased for a plethora of reasons. Kids with parents who are fat, ugly, dumb or heck even "normal" for all intents and purposes get teased just because that's what kids do. However fat people or people with red hair (Gingers) aren't considered inherently inferior parents just because their kids might get made fun of due to qualities their parents have. Second, the reason that kids might get teased is because gay parents are still the minority. However, history shows us that through exposure, cultural norms and expectations shift. After awhile what is once obscure becomes familiar. That is why in bigger cities like New York and L.A., kids with gay parents are barely given a second thought, whereas that might not be the case in culturally stunted places like Arkansas. Exposure and acceptance is the only way to change attitudes so that this no longer becomes taboo.

7. Rather than rely on anecdotal testimonials, let's explore what science and psychology say. Ellen C. Perrin, MD, professor of pediatrics at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston reveals "The vast consensus of all the studies shows that children of same-sex parents do as well as children whose parents are heterosexual in every way. In some ways children of same-sex parents actually may have advantages over other family structures." Researchers looked at information gleaned from 15 different studies on more than 500 children, evaluating possible stigma, teasing and social isolation, adjustment and self-esteem, opposite gender role models, sexual orientation, and strengths.

Studies from 1981 to 1994, including 260 children reared by either heterosexual mothers or same-sex mothers after divorce, found no differences in intelligence, type or prevalence of psychiatric disorders, self-esteem, well-being, peer relationships, couple relationships, or parental stress. Two other large studies involving more than 100 couples found that same-sex parents also had contact with extended family, had social support, and had a more equitable division of labor in the home [1].

In a 2010 review of virtually EVERY study on gay parenting, New York University sociologist Judith Stacey and University of Southern California sociologist Tim Biblarz found no differences between children raised in homes with two heterosexual parents and children raised with lesbian parents. While research indicates that kids of gay parents show few differences in achievement, mental health, social functioning and other measures, research shows these kids may have the advantage of open-mindedness, tolerance and role models for equitable relationships [4].

I'll leave it at that for now.

Sources:

[1] http://www.webmd.com...
[2] http://psychology.ucdavis.edu...
[3] http://turnstylenews.com...
[4] http://www.livescience.com...
[5] http://www.cnn.com...
[6] Wierson, M., & R. Forehand. (1994). Parent behavioral training for child noncompliance: Rationale, concepts, and effectiveness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5, pp 146-150. -- Referenced in "You Are Being Lied To" interview with Judith Rich
Debate Round No. 3
Danielle

Pro

Please extend my arguments. Thanks.
Pirates

Con

Pirates forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Danielle 2 years ago
Danielle
...Wtf are you talking about?
Posted by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
You'll pay for bullying people like this, Danielle. People will see what a nasty person you are and there will be consequences for this. This is just not acceptable.
Posted by TUF 2 years ago
TUF
I remember when I used to argue against gay parenting with you. *shudders at the memory of how bad you destroyed me in those arguments*
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
DaniellePiratesTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:51 
Reasons for voting decision: Disgusting conduct by Pro. How dare you tell your opponent to forfeit, and then insult him/her by saying that your debate was "noobsniped". Absolutely revolting, sub-human conduct. Anyway, Pro's arguments and sources went unrefuted, so arguments and sources to Pro. Con, next time a bully tells you to do something that is unfair, don't roll over on command. Tell him/her to develop some manners or smash him/her in the face. Don't be so disrespectful to yourself by allowing this.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
DaniellePiratesTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: I want to give more than conduct, but with so little offered by con's act of piracy against your debate, I shall hold off reading your case until you reopen it with a new challenger.
Vote Placed by warren42 2 years ago
warren42
DaniellePiratesTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:51 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct Con. Forfeiture alone would have given this debate to Pro, but instead they instructed their opponent to forfeit, then took advantage of it. Pro could have easily said "Please extend my arguments from Round 2." and she still would have won. Which brings me to argumentation which Pro obviously dominated. Sources also go Pro as she utilized them, while Con did not.