From: ralph@eddlewood.demon.co.uk   
      
   In message <45688e00$1_4@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, John Brockbank   
    writes   
   >   
   >"i"  wrote in message   
   >news:u00x4SCgB1ZFFwRy@eddlewood.demon.co.uk...   
   >> In message , Evelyn Ruut   
   >>  writes   
   >>   
   >> ralph writes   
   >>   
   >>>> There are doubrless examples of same-sex couples doing a magnificent job   
   >>>> of rearing children, but they will only illustrate the richness of human   
   >>>> kind: they will not change the odds materially.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Anyone out there agree, or even disagree?   
   >>>   
   >>>I don't think there is enough evidence in the way of real studies about   
   >>>how children of same sex relationships fare in the world.   When there is,   
   >>>there may be something more to discuss.   Personally I think it is as   
   >>>individual as the people themselves may be.   
   >>   
   >> Firstly, the information about these influences comes from the British   
   >> cohort studies.   
   >>   
   >> These started in 1946 to coincide with the start of the National Health   
   >> Service. A sample of all the children born on one day was chosen (about   
   >> 8,000) and they have been followed through their lives, and then the lives   
   >> of their children, and now grandchildren. The original sample has been   
   >> supplemented from time to time.   
   >>   
   >> It is these studies which show the advantage obtained from two-parent,   
   >> two-sex families over all others.   
   >>   
   >> Now, in most cases the others will not include two males or two females;   
   >> such families were rare, certainly at the beginning.   
   >>   
   >> Some such groups may do a great job (as I originally acknowledged), but to   
   >> risk the others strikes me as playing with vulnerable lives in a way which   
   >> is not for their benefit.   
   >>   
   >> --   
   >> ralph   
   >   
   >So you think that orphans and other children without parents to look after   
   >them should be put in care homes?   That will guarantee them misery and   
   >prison.   
   >   
   >   
   That's a different issue. Children in care homes have mostly been   
   rescued from abusive or incompetent parents - often single parents.   
   There is a shortage of children for adoption, at least in the UK, so   
   there is no need to involve unconventional adoptive parents.   
      
   --   
   ralph   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)