If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   The American Academy of Pediatrics says gay couples should be allowed to marry to help ensure the health and well-being of their children, citing research confirming that such kids tend to turn out FABULOUS   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 168
    More: Cool, American Academy of Pediatrics, gay parents, couples  
•       •       •

2440 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Mar 2013 at 2:35 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



168 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-21 04:12:02 PM

MilesTeg: So being married should be mandatory in order to have kids, for health reasons. Seeing as health costs are shared by all of us, this should be federal law.


Mandatory?  No.  But in a country with condoms, birth control pills, spermicide, IUDs, abortion, and readily available adoption, it's a really stupid decision to have kids before marriage (regardless of who you marry).
 
2013-03-21 04:15:50 PM

hardinparamedic: scottydoesntknow: This is bad news...for every hate-filled bigot who screams "We're doing it for the children!"

/Nice job AAP

I think the APA and the social worker equivalent of them have been saying this for quite a few years now. But it's awesome that the AAP, the definitive source on pediatrics, is now saying it.

Of course, to theocratic conservative hardliners like the religious right, this doesn't mean much, since their 2000 year old book clearly had everything figured out before the advent of modern medicine.


I also like the fact that they wanted the information released so the Supreme court would have to review.

"The academy announced its position Thursday. Officials with the group said they wanted to make the academy's views known before two gay marriage cases are considered by the U.S. Supreme Court next week."

"We wanted that policy statement available for the justices to review," said Dr. Thomas McInerney, the academy's president and a pediatrician in Rochester, N.Y."


/This makes me smile
 
2013-03-21 04:16:29 PM
I believe Law and Order already covered this.
 
2013-03-21 04:18:05 PM

Dr Dreidel: ParagonComplex: I've been tempted to find a list of all the silly shiat it says is wrong to show to him to shut him up. If any of you Farkers have one handy, do share.

Deuteronomy says it's OK to kill a "rebellious" child. Leviticus forbids re-marrying a woman you divorced if she "knew" another man in the interim (as well as forbidding some US-legal but weird relationships like screwing your stepmom). Exodus makes it legal to kill an intruder in your home, but only if "the sun does not shine upon him" (i.e. you don't know who he is).

Off the top of my head. There are some things that happens that aren't punished, suggesting tacit approval - like the judge (in Judges) who promises god an offering of "the first thing I see in my return home" (he'd just won a major battle). Guy's daughter came out to meet him, so he had her sacrificed (he was sad about it, though).

// though in that last story, there is a very clear lesson: watch your damned mouth and don't let your mouth write checks your family can't cash


Obligatory

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
 
2013-03-21 04:22:34 PM
Bible pounders will refute reality to hold on to their pre-determined hatred.
 
2013-03-21 04:25:28 PM
Hey if two are better than one... how about 10 or 15. Heck 100 is a nice round number.
 
2013-03-21 04:28:19 PM
The best environment for raising a child is in a stable household with the biological parents in every science except one, POLITICAL! Can we have some more tax money, Obama? Screw the fact that we are cementing a permanent cycle of screwed up generations of dependency. We need funding for our worthless jobs, trying to create a new science to discredit the nuclear family as a foundation for every healthy society in the history of mankind. But really, it is more important to teach our children to define themselves by how they F***
 
2013-03-21 04:33:28 PM

George Walker Bush: The best environment for raising a child is in a stable household with the biological parents in every science except one, POLITICAL! Can we have some more tax money, Obama? Screw the fact that we are cementing a permanent cycle of screwed up generations of dependency. We need funding for our worthless jobs, trying to create a new science to discredit the nuclear family as a foundation for every healthy society in the history of mankind. But really, it is more important to teach our children to define themselves by how they F***


Is this a new troll account?
 
2013-03-21 04:34:09 PM

Wade_Wilson: Wade_Wilson: I have a horrible confession; I actually prefer turkey bacon to pork bacon.
I'm so sorry, internet. Will you forgive my sins if I dip it in Nutella?
Wrong thread. I suck.


It doesn't matter what kind of bacon you eat, I support your right to marry the partner of your choice.
 
2013-03-21 04:34:20 PM

StreetlightInTheGhetto: I know you have studied these things extensively,


That letter has some problems. The intention is good and it makes a great point, but the specifics are...under-researched.

For example, "pigskin" is a colloquial term for a football, even though they haven't ever used porcine organs for American footballs (and certainly not anymore). Also, Exodus lays out the procedure for meting out capital punishment (2 witnesses, a trial, and it's the court that carries out the actual sentence, not a witness at the time of witnessing the crime) - in roughly the same section he cites.

Anyway, even the few things I cited are incompletely referenced - for example, the Talmud sets the bar for "rebellious kid" pretty damn high.

// anyway, the Bible uses the verb "to lie with" (mishkav) and not the usual sexual euphemism "to know" (lada'at), so the prohibition could easily refer to sleeping in the same bed, not sex
 
2013-03-21 04:35:14 PM

FLMountainMan: George Walker Bush: The best environment for raising a child is in a stable household with the biological parents in every science except one, POLITICAL! Can we have some more tax money, Obama? Screw the fact that we are cementing a permanent cycle of screwed up generations of dependency. We need funding for our worthless jobs, trying to create a new science to discredit the nuclear family as a foundation for every healthy society in the history of mankind. But really, it is more important to teach our children to define themselves by how they F***

Is this a new troll account?


Mods gotta eat.
 
2013-03-21 04:35:49 PM

meat0918: So, two caregivers are better than one.

Call Captain Obvious...


You can't be a caregiver within a civil union?
 
2013-03-21 04:36:07 PM

FLMountainMan: Is this a new troll account?



No, it's somebody that doesn't parrot your stupid farking agenda. Weird, huh?
 
2013-03-21 04:41:42 PM

George Walker Bush: FLMountainMan: Is this a new troll account?


No, it's somebody that doesn't parrot your stupid farking agenda. Weird, huh?


Instead, he just parrots every other moan teabagger's list of imbecilic talking points
 
2013-03-21 04:44:23 PM

DrewCurtisJr: meat0918: So, two caregivers are better than one.

Call Captain Obvious...

You can't be a caregiver within a civil union?


We've tried "separate but equal".  Doesn't work.
 
2013-03-21 04:46:36 PM

gunga galunga: George Walker Bush: FLMountainMan: Is this a new troll account?


No, it's somebody that doesn't parrot your stupid farking agenda. Weird, huh?

Instead, he just parrots every other moan teabagger's list of imbecilic talking points


It certainly does tie into taxing and spending. That and pretty much all problems in our society, but I do  stand with the Tea Party.
 
2013-03-21 04:46:44 PM

gunga galunga: George Walker Bush: FLMountainMan: Is this a new troll account?


No, it's somebody that doesn't parrot your stupid farking agenda. Weird, huh?

Instead, he just parrots every other moan teabagger's list of imbecilic talking points


I did not know defending gay marriage is a teabagger's imbecilic talking point.
 
2013-03-21 04:48:29 PM

George Walker Bush: The best environment for raising a child is in a stable household with the biological parents in every science except one, POLITICAL! Can we have some more tax money, Obama? Screw the fact that we are cementing a permanent cycle of screwed up generations of dependency. We need funding for our worthless jobs, trying to create a new science to discredit the nuclear family as a foundation for every healthy society in the history of mankind. But really, it is more important to teach our children to define themselves by how they F***


The nuclear family has only existed since the 1950's, and even then there were still farked-up kids, farked-up parents, divorces, and everything else coming from nuclear families. Also, the name itself has negative connotations: "nuclear". Nuclear things are unstable and radioactive and very dangerous. Why did they want families to be unstable and radioactive and dangerous?

And if straight parents are unable or refuse to raise their own children, why is it so horrible to allow gay couples to raise them?
 
2013-03-21 04:53:12 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: The nuclear family has only existed since the 1950's, and even then there were still farked-up kids, farked-up parents, divorces, and everything else coming from nuclear families. Also, the name itself has negative connotations: "nuclear". Nuclear things are unstable and radioactive and very dangerous. Why did they want families to be unstable and radioactive and dangerous?

And if straight parents are unable or refuse to raise their own children, why is it so horrible to allow gay couples to raise them?


Defined in the 50's

Inability and refusal are the problems to tackle, not cover for.
 
2013-03-21 04:53:48 PM

George Walker Bush: FLMountainMan: Is this a new troll account?


No, it's somebody that doesn't parrot your stupid farking agenda. Weird, huh?



media.comicvine.com
 
2013-03-21 04:55:23 PM

StreetlightInTheGhetto: A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?


That part gets me every time.
 
2013-03-21 04:58:44 PM

George Walker Bush: Keizer_Ghidorah: The nuclear family has only existed since the 1950's, and even then there were still farked-up kids, farked-up parents, divorces, and everything else coming from nuclear families. Also, the name itself has negative connotations: "nuclear". Nuclear things are unstable and radioactive and very dangerous. Why did they want families to be unstable and radioactive and dangerous?

And if straight parents are unable or refuse to raise their own children, why is it so horrible to allow gay couples to raise them?

Defined in the 50's

Inability and refusal are the problems to tackle, not cover for.


There's no doubt that people should be encouraged to raise their own children.  However, many people can't, and no amount of counseling, money, or time is going to change that.

If two people want to take a stab at raising that child instead, where is the harm to society?  It's hard to believe an apparent conservative is objecting to something that would reduce the amount of public assistance doled out.
 
2013-03-21 04:59:52 PM

FLMountainMan: gunga galunga: George Walker Bush: FLMountainMan: Is this a new troll account?


No, it's somebody that doesn't parrot your stupid farking agenda. Weird, huh?

Instead, he just parrots every other moan teabagger's list of imbecilic talking points

I did not know defending gay marriage is a teabagger's imbecilic talking point.


I was responding to his post. Not yours.
 
2013-03-21 05:02:48 PM

gunga galunga: FLMountainMan: gunga galunga: George Walker Bush: FLMountainMan: Is this a new troll account?


No, it's somebody that doesn't parrot your stupid farking agenda. Weird, huh?

Instead, he just parrots every other moan teabagger's list of imbecilic talking points

I did not know defending gay marriage is a teabagger's imbecilic talking point.

I was responding to his post. Not yours.


Gotcha, makes a lot more sense.  You and Big Jerk's post had me thinking I was in some bizarro world.
 
2013-03-21 05:03:41 PM

meatsack_01: Well at least they can't procreate.


No doubt.  They're too spent from procreating with the kid all day.
 
2013-03-21 05:06:52 PM

meat0918: We've tried "separate but equal".  Doesn't work.


Seem'd to be working pretty well, unless you think most of the gay parents raising kids in the "research" were legally married.
 
2013-03-21 05:08:48 PM

DrewCurtisJr: meat0918: We've tried "separate but equal".  Doesn't work.

Seem'd to be working pretty well, unless you think most of the gay parents raising kids in the "research" were legally married.


That's not what I meant, and you know it.
 
2013-03-21 05:09:06 PM

FLMountainMan: There's no doubt that people should be encouraged to raise their own children. However, many people can't, and no amount of counseling, money, or time is going to change that.

If two people want to take a stab at raising that child instead, where is the harm to society? It's hard to believe an apparent conservative is objecting to something that would reduce the amount of public assistance doled out.


No amount? WRONG! And it's volunteer counseling, no money. But give up and there will be even more kids to go around! I see the reasoning for the intrinsic defeatism. And it increases cycles of dependency, increasing public assistance which should not exist in federal form.
 
2013-03-21 05:15:27 PM

meat0918: That's not what I meant, and you know it.


Just trying to bring you back on topic.
 
2013-03-21 05:29:18 PM

George Walker Bush: FLMountainMan: There's no doubt that people should be encouraged to raise their own children. However, many people can't, and no amount of counseling, money, or time is going to change that.

If two people want to take a stab at raising that child instead, where is the harm to society? It's hard to believe an apparent conservative is objecting to something that would reduce the amount of public assistance doled out.

No amount? WRONG! And it's volunteer counseling, no money. But give up and there will be even more kids to go around! I see the reasoning for the intrinsic defeatism. And it increases cycles of dependency, increasing public assistance which should not exist in federal form.


How does letting gays adopt unwanted children out of the foster and/or welfare, system at their own expense, add to the cycles of dependency?
 
2013-03-21 05:29:40 PM

Flash_NYC: cyberspacedout: It's really about the couple's commitment to each other and the family. Whether or not the parents are legally married wouldn't necessarily affect the child's health, unless the marriage somehow did affect the couple's sense of commitment.

Since there's no such thing as a gay shotgun wedding, any same-sex couple who has kids does so voluntarily, and has already put a lot more planning into it than, say, a heterosexual couple that forgot to use a condom. Married or not, the family should be pretty stable.

If you've ever seen the hoops that couples, both gay and straight, need to jump through to adopt, it wouldn't ever surprise me that most adopted kids do better than their peers.


Good point, but that's more of an argument in favor of changing adoption laws. Not all gay couples with kids adopt, though; it's quite possible with a lesbian couple for one or both to have a child of her own.
 
2013-03-21 05:34:30 PM

rkiller1: Wait a minute.  So married couples raise better kids?  That not what I heard from Women's Libbers at NOW.



That's odd.  I figured they most likely told you, "Get away from me, you creep, before I call the police."
 
2013-03-21 05:35:24 PM
Who the fark cares? Gay people are no more special or unspecial than hetero people, so why does this report need to even be published? Also, just because you're gay doesn't automatically qualify you as being father of the year. It just means you're raising a kid, and that you likely enjoy having a wang in your mouth.
 
2013-03-21 05:35:39 PM

BarkingUnicorn: KrustyKitten: I'm ok with this.

What child wouldn't benefit from being raised in a loving stable home?

One who's allergic to horses?



Hay, that was pretty funny.
 
2013-03-21 05:37:19 PM

Soymilk: How does letting gays adopt unwanted children out of the foster and/or welfare, system at their own expense, add to the cycles of dependency?


It is not holding the bio-parents responsible, increasing the chance of more irresponsible pregnancies. Which is fine for you (more babies to pass around), but robbing them of...

George Walker Bush: The best environment for raising a child is in a stable household with the biological parents in every science except one, POLITICAL! Can we have some more tax money, Obama? Screw the fact that we are cementing a permanent cycle of screwed up generations of dependency. We need funding for our worthless jobs, trying to create a new science to discredit the nuclear family as a foundation for every healthy society in the history of mankind. But really, it is more important to teach our children to define themselves by how they F***


Anyone want to go for another trip around?
 
2013-03-21 05:41:50 PM

Lumpmoose: hardinparamedic: scottydoesntknow: This is bad news...for every hate-filled bigot who screams "We're doing it for the children!"

/Nice job AAP

I think the APA and the social worker equivalent of them have been saying this for quite a few years now. But it's awesome that the AAP, the definitive source on pediatrics, is now saying it.

Of course, to theocratic conservative hardliners like the religious right, this doesn't mean much, since their 2000 year old book clearly had everything figured out before the advent of modern medicine.

No, they have more than a book.  They invented the American College of Pediatricians to oppose and confuse the AAP's gay family stance (and whatever other "liberal" positions they object to) by peddling junk science.



So basically, when science and medicine didn't go his way, Joseph Zanga told the AAP, "Yeah, well... I'm gonna go build  my own association of pediatricians, with blackjack and hookers!  In fact, forget the blackjack and hookers!"
 
2013-03-21 05:42:14 PM

George Walker Bush: Anyone want to go for another trip around?


I'm good. I can usually only handle one trip on the Derp train before I start to get motion sickness
 
2013-03-21 05:43:02 PM

Wade_Wilson: I have a horrible confession; I actually prefer turkey bacon to pork bacon.

I'm so sorry, internet. Will you forgive my sins if I dip it in Nutella?


Just don't dip any homophobic pediatricians in Nutella and we're golden.
 
2013-03-21 05:43:06 PM
Two primary ingredients in rendering this opinion -

1. You think the Bible is a rubbish can of nonsense
2. That Almighty God is a poppy head

Good Luck
 
2013-03-21 05:45:03 PM

xaldin: Hey if two are better than one... how about 10 or 15. Heck 100 is a nice round number.


So you're saying it takes a village to raise a child?
 
2013-03-21 05:45:04 PM

scottydoesntknow: George Walker Bush: Anyone want to go for another trip around?

I'm good. I can usually only handle one trip on the Derp train before I start to get motion sickness


Trolls sit in back
 
2013-03-21 05:45:43 PM

FLMountainMan: George Walker Bush: The best environment for raising a child is in a stable household with the biological parents in every science except one, POLITICAL! Can we have some more tax money, Obama? Screw the fact that we are cementing a permanent cycle of screwed up generations of dependency. We need funding for our worthless jobs, trying to create a new science to discredit the nuclear family as a foundation for every healthy society in the history of mankind. But really, it is more important to teach our children to define themselves by how they F***

Is this a new troll account?


No, he's been doing that schtick for months.
 
2013-03-21 05:48:29 PM

ciberido: xaldin: Hey if two are better than one... how about 10 or 15. Heck 100 is a nice round number.

So you're saying it takes a village to raise a child?


It take an economy capable of a one income household norm and an involved parent with internet. (2)
 
2013-03-21 05:53:01 PM

ciberido: FLMountainMan: George Walker Bush: The best environment for raising a child is in a stable household with the biological parents in every science except one, POLITICAL! Can we have some more tax money, Obama? Screw the fact that we are cementing a permanent cycle of screwed up generations of dependency. We need funding for our worthless jobs, trying to create a new science to discredit the nuclear family as a foundation for every healthy society in the history of mankind. But really, it is more important to teach our children to define themselves by how they F***

Is this a new troll account?

No, he's been doing that schtick for months.


Yup. Sound, irrefutable schtick...
 
2013-03-21 05:53:24 PM

Lumpmoose: No, they have more than a book.  They invented the American College of Pediatricians to oppose and confuse the AAP's gay family stance (and whatever other "liberal" positions they object to) by peddling junk science.


Really? I thought American Association of Physicians and Surgeons existed to fill the junk science catagory, since the AMA is too librul.
 
2013-03-21 06:01:29 PM
I bet I wouldn't have gotten my ass kicked in school so much due to my horrible fashion choices if I had gay parents. Also, better window treatments.
 
2013-03-21 06:35:03 PM
I'm a Christian, and I'd prefer orphans go to nice two parent Christian homes, but until there are enough of those to get all the orphans, I don't see how anybody who's not dangerous should be denied. Fat, lazy, gay... I think I know a better way, but they're better than nobody.
 
2013-03-21 06:36:08 PM

andyfromfl: I'm a Christian, and I'd prefer orphans go to nice two parent Christian homes, but until there are enough of those to get all the orphans, I don't see how anybody who's not dangerous should be denied. Fat, lazy, gay... I think I know a better way, but they're better than nobody.


Translation: Only Christian homes can raise the best children. But the non-believers and sinners are better than letting them starve.
 
2013-03-21 06:37:01 PM

Publikwerks: So..

[s21.postimg.org image 850x531]

Is better than

[images.fineartamerica.com image 850x566]


Oh my god. What does it mean?
 
2013-03-21 06:49:17 PM
As an AAP member, I have to say this is not too much of a change as the Academy already endorsed same sex parents adopting. But last time this happened we had a bunch of fellows cancel their membership in a snit. The AAP chat board was full of conservatives railing away at the Academy for taking such a lefty stance. I'm sure we will have more members tearing up their memberships or not renewing. The AAP has been pretty good about backing up policy changes like this with a good study or two. Once again, science trumps religion.
 
Displayed 50 of 168 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report