The Student Room Group

POLL : Gay rights : what if you had two dads?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by tieyourmotherdown
Couldn't agree more :wink:. Pretty much sums up everything that would just make the world an easier place, and can apply to any personal views people may have: "What makes it OK to hate on people who are?".


let's start a revolution
Reply 221
I'd get on with my life.
Original post by Planto
Stigma to fuel stigma; the genius of the modern troglodyte.


off topic interjection: nice use of the word troglodyte
Reply 223
Original post by imperial maniac
1. 38 pairs is a far too small sample size to make any conclusion whatsoever.


No. I did predict and pre-empt this stupid statement before you said it in the hope that you would be deterred but it seems that you have steamrolled ahead anyway. You need to learn statistics, my friend. You cannot look at a number and say outright that it is "too small"; you must examine it in terms of statistical significance.

Let's consider the case that the results are purely coincidental (i.e. the correlation is not indicative of a causal relationship between genetics and sexuality).

We have that 26 out of the 38 pairs of twins showed homosexuality concordance. If it's coincidence, we have that the chance of the twin of a homosexual ALSO being a homosexual is about 1/10. Since I can't be bothered with the combinatorics, I'm running a little script to simulate the trials. Each trial, 38 numbers between 1 and 10 are generated. If 26 or more of them are equal to 1, the trial passes and the script ends.

The chance of my script ending on any given trial is the same as 26 out of 38 pairs of identical twins showing concordant homosexuality by chance, i.e. what you are suggesting by criticizing the sample size.

So far I am up to around 6,000,000 trials with no result. I'll keep you posted, but it seems like "no conclusion whatsoever" is looking a little unlikely.

Edit: got to 15 million trials and gave up. I'm sure you have the sense to see how unlikely it is that the 38-twin study produced those results by chance, now. Contrary to what you seemed to think, 26 out of 38 sets of separately-reared twins showing concordant homosexuality is actually a pretty ****ing conclusive result.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by Planto
No. I did predict and pre-empt this stupid statement before you said it in the hope that you would be deterred but it seems that you have steamrolled ahead anyway. You need to learn statistics, my friend. You cannot look at a number and say outright that it is "too small"; you must examine it in terms of statistical significance.

Let's consider the case that the results are purely coincidental (i.e. the correlation is not indicative of a causal relationship between genetics and sexuality).

We have that 26 out of the 38 pairs of twins showed homosexuality concordance. If it's coincidence, we have that the chance of the twin of a homosexual ALSO being a homosexual is about 1/10. Since I can't be bothered with the combinatorics, I'm running a little script to simulate the trials. Each trial, 38 numbers between 1 and 10 are generated. If 26 or more of them are equal to 1, the trial passes and the script ends.

The chance of my script ending on any given trial is the same as 26 out of 38 pairs of identical twins showing concordant homosexuality.

So far I am up to around 6,000,000 trials with no result. I'll keep you posted, but it seems like "no conclusion whatsoever" is looking a little unlikely.

Edit: got to 15 million trials and gave up. I'm sure you have the sense to see how unlikely it is that the 38-twin study produced those results by chance, now.


Okay let's assume that it is genetic.

My view is unchanged, they CHOOSE to adopt a child, which I think is immoral.
Reply 225
Original post by imperial maniac
Okay let's assume that it is genetic.

My view is unchanged, they CHOOSE to adopt a child, which I think is immoral.


Ah yes. At the failure of one's attempt to reason, we descend into arbitrary, unreasoned statements such as "x is right" and "y is wrong".

I think that's the end of this discussion.
Original post by Planto
Ah yes. At the failure of one's attempt to reason, we descend into arbitrary, unreasoned statements such as "x is right" and "y is wrong".

I think that's the end of this discussion.


Agreed. I don't like the idea of gays adopting because I find it fundamentally wrong, in the same way that I find the thought of someone hitting a child fundamentally wrong, you can bring up whatever factoids you like saying that the child gets on better in life as it is more disciplined, but that's kinda irrelevant to me.

Maybe my views will change over time, maybe they won't.
Reply 227
Original post by imperial maniac
Agreed. I don't like the idea of gays adopting because I find it fundamentally wrong, in the same way that I find the thought of someone hitting a child fundamentally wrong, you can bring up whatever factoids you like saying that the child gets on better in life as it is more disciplined, but that's kinda irrelevant to me.

Maybe my views will change over time, maybe they won't.


Ok, let's leave it at that, but please do more research into homosexuality and gay adoption before making a final decision
Imagine a world full of gay people :bl:
Reply 229
Surely if we're saying a child needs a male and a female role model, we're saying children shouldn't be brought up with only one parent?
My friend has been brought up by her dad, so she doesn't really have a female role model. The only difference with gay dads is that there are two of them.
Original post by Panda Vinnie
Bully at school: "my dad will batter your dad..."

Me: "LISTEN! MY DAD WILL SHAG YOUR DAD!!!!!! and your dad will enjoy it :sexface:"

So I have the upper hand there!

No prizes for guessing who that came from.


****ing Frankie Boyle whore. Give him credit atleast you assinine. It really pisses me off when people like you completely rip off the geniuses of this world.
It's horrific and totally disgusting and shouldn't be allowed. His development as a child will be severely hindered, you need a mother, and you need a father !...
Reply 232
Original post by TheCurlyHairedDude
It's horrific and totally disgusting and shouldn't be allowed. His development as a child will be severely hindered, you need a mother, and you need a father !...


Just like if you're brought up in a single parents family, or one of your parents has died. Families are evolving.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/67463-effects-gay-adoption/
Original post by Lewis :D
Just like if you're brought up in a single parents family, or one of your parents has died. Families are evolving.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/67463-effects-gay-adoption/


Being brought up by anyone is ok..

Just a mum
Just a dad
An aunt
uncle

Just not TWO guys, it's wrong.
Original post by sugarmice
Surely if we're saying a child needs a male and a female role model, we're saying children shouldn't be brought up with only one parent?
My friend has been brought up by her dad, so she doesn't really have a female role model. The only difference with gay dads is that there are two of them.


Being brought up by two guys is bad, but then the two guys being gay that's horrendous.
Reply 235
Original post by TheCurlyHairedDude
Being brought up by anyone is ok..

Just a mum
Just a dad
An aunt
uncle

Just not TWO guys, it's wrong.


I don't see how being brought up by two men would be difficult to being brought up by one?
Original post by zazamak
I have nothing against being gay.
I just think you need Both a Mother and Father in a child's life (or at least some sort of equivalent figures).

I think that they both play important roles in upbringing of a child and I don't think it's fair to dismiss the father or mother. And if two guys have a kid, atleast have some sort of female support as well.

I don't think it's realistic to say "it's all about the personality of the parent regardless of their gender" because a child will need the perspective of both.

But then again I don't think a child will have a "hindered upbringing" if they had gay guardians, I just think they should have two influences which carry out the role of a mother and father .

Ultimately I believe a child needs a variety of role models, both masculine and feminine


What makes you think that though? My father was pretty much absent throughout most of my life (and my brother and sister's) yet I'm pretty sure we all turned out normally with just a mother.
Original post by Lewis :D
I don't see how being brought up by two men would be difficult to being brought up by one?


You're not going to develop into a adult properly, it will heavily influence the kids childhood. They may even get bullied.
Reply 238
Original post by TheCurlyHairedDude
You're not going to develop into a adult properly, it will heavily influence the kids childhood. They may even get bullied.


How will it not develop into a proper adult? Just because it has single sex parents doesn't mean it won't have contact with any of the opposite sex. It's sad, Children will get bullied for anything, it's not exactly anything new.
Original post by TheCurlyHairedDude
They may even get bullied.

Oh noes :frown: being bullied for having gay parents... not like they could be bullied for anything else :rolleyes:

It seems we are going into repeat mode :frown:

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending