Tea Party? Sounds like he went to a Republican Jesus Camp for reprogramming.

In a word "NO"

NEED? - no. 

Do children need a mom and a dad? I don't believe so. But I think it's important that they have role models of both genders in their lives - these rolls can be filled by teachers, Guide/Scout/ youth group leaders, friends, other family members, etc.

At least one female and male role model?  Absolutely.  Those role models do not need to be parents.

lol I was posting at the same time as you somegal!

Some of the people I see really pushing for girls-only schools are single moms.  I'm not sure why that's the case, but it always makes me wonder if those girls have male role models in their lives.  The same goes for women's shelters.  I know some take male volunteers, I don't know if that's true about all of them.

Do children NEED one female and one male parent?  No.  They need adults who care about them, nurture them, help them navigate towards maturity.  They need relationships with adults and children. Millions of kids grow up with only one parent and remain sane.  My maternal grandfather died in WW1 and his children all grew up, found work, married and raised families. 

What do you think Jae? What are your thoughts on this?

LMFAO!

This has been studied. Kids with same sex parents are no worse off. Anyone still running out this stupid line doesn't care about kids - they only care about their politics and their religion. And, they've already lost.

Besides, who the hell cares what the Tea Party thinks? They're idiots.

http://cjournal.concordia.ca/journalarchives/2006-07/may_24/011142.shtml

The Religious Right like to dress their prejudices up in concern troll clothing.

They couldn't care less about the kids. All they want is the control.

So a widowed parent is also sub-standard?  As are households where one parent has to work away for long periods (a big reality in mining and oilfield industries)? 

Or is it only divorced and same gendered faminlies that are detrimental?

While I have a lot of respect for single parents paradox3, my personal belief is that children are best off being raised in a loving home by a mother and father. I think that mothers and fathers each have unique roles to play in the parenting of their children, so that it is best for children to have one of each who love and support each other.

I do recognize that in some sad situations it is best if parents separate for a time. There are even two events given in the New Testament that allow for divorce.

Rich blessings.

The religious right couldn't care less about their kids?

What a horrible thing to suggest Witch.

I'm sure that they care about their kids just as you and I care about ours.

Rich blessings. 

How about one of each who do not love and support each other ... still a good idea for the benefit of the kids jae??

That's a redundant question carolla.

Rich blessings.

Nice try.

I'm sure they care about their own kids, probably as much as they care about their money, and just slightly less than they care about being in control of society. They certainly care more about their kids than they do about the teachings of Jesus, which is about zero.

I'm just as sure they don't care much about anyone else's kids, unless, of course, they can use them to further their political ends and push their prejudices.

Only if you're trying to evade the answer...

Huh? How exactly is that a redundant question???

I consider someone else's marriage is not my marriage at all; what two consenting adults want to do is none of my business.
 

if that person quoted feels that way then that is their responsibility and he should mind his own business when it comes to others' and their marriage/living arrangements in regards to trying to make laws; however, i will defend his right to free speech

Hi MC jae,

No.  They don't.

What children need are parents who love them and love each other.  Children need love modelled for them, that love needs to be just and merciful if we want them to be merciful and just.  It also helps if that love is humble.

Two parents (provided they are both good parents) are better than one (even when that one is good or even great).  Gender and parenting skills are not automatic fits.  Men are not naturally excellent fathers and women are not naturally excellent mothers.  Those who had excellent mothers and fathers stand a decent chance at being excellent and well-adjusted individuals.

Two loving male parents would be better than an unloving male and female combination.  Of course I think one loving parent of either gender is better than any unloving couple no matter how it is configured.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Since I already stated my belief as to what's best somegal, it just logically follows that I believe that anything other than that is less than what's best.

Rich blessings.

Gender of parents is completely unimportant. Number of parents is vital. One is a lonely, tired, overworked number.

I'm trying to think of an ideal situation in which to raise a child.

Two loving parents - who love each other, and love their child(ren), and who have the financial means to support the family

Grandparents - who don't interfer but who love and support the parents, and who give unconditional love to the children - who offer wisdom and stability, and who occasionally need help from the children

Siblings, cousins, close friends - some near their own age, some older as role models, some younger that they can help

Aunts, uncles, god-parents, or other special adults

Caring teachers, coaches, leaders of both sexes (maybe some male teachers in kindergarden and primary grades

Other adults (friend's parents - I know my granddaughter talks to her friend's mother about some of her concerns)

Spiritual guides  

A community that values its young people - and values everyone

Thanks to Seeler and others for their wonderful responses to this post.

You answered the initial question, but I think Carolla's one was quite different. She is asking about the situation in which parents have stayed together, perhaps because of the child, who do not love each other. I'd also be interested in hearing your take on same-sex parents - are they as good for the child as co-ed parents?

Seeler's post reminded me of this song:

Yes somegal, thank you, I understood Carolla's question.

I believe the best possible parenting can be done by a mother and a father who love and support one another.

Therefore, I logically believe...

...It's less than the best possible situation  for children to be raised by a mother and a father who do not love and support one another.

...It's less than the best possible situation for children to be raised by two mothers or two fathers.

'Nuff said?

Rich blessings.

Sadly, Jae, I figured that is what you would say.

Just stumbled on this thread. This is such a typical right wing troll.  You go out and find a gay sexist (there are 400 million people on the continent , you're gonna find at least one and if you don't you can invent him and give him a name like "Doug Manwaring") ... then you print his uninformed, unsubstantiated, unresearched, anecdote based opinion and call it an "insight" and peddle it all over the internet as if were real proof of the existence of an actual point of view and not just an isolated situation where a confused individual cannot differentiate popular fears and prejudices from his own personal rights and interests.

For example last week, a bunch of holy rollers managed, at an event called the National Prayer Breakfast, to find someone who would at one time have been referred to as an "uncle Tom" ... a rich black surgeon who has been making a million dollars a year for so long he has forgotten where he came from (although he says he remembers) ...  to come and deliver a bunch of right wing Tea Party impudence in the presence of of the President in a speech in which he basically spoke against "political correctness", against Obama care, argued for austerity and cuts to "entitlements" (and I guess you all know when you use that word in the U.S. it is code for "payments to black people").  This spread through the internet like wildfire (mainly via 45 year old white men) because it is deemed by Republicans to prove that there a lots of black reactionaries who will vote for their racist policies.  Of course, it proves no such thing and Dr. Carson or no Dr. Carson the Republicans have no chance of prevailing with their Reagan-era strategy of winning elections by criticizing blacks and Hispanics because those two groups now constitute the majority of Americans especially in the key states with a lot of Electoral College votes.

Jae I don't know where you keep finding this kind of crap.  Well actually I do ... you're dredging it out of right wing blogs.  Please just leave it there.

Jae, your side has lost in Canada, is losing in the US, and most people realize by now that you have no bloody clue what you're talking about on this subject. I'm going to embed a video below because it is relevant and impressive, not because I think you would be willing to listen to the child of a same-sex couple over the ruinous ramblings of your old book.

Like it or not, communities raise kids irrespective of the parental situation unless that child is never let out of the house to experience the world.

Mentors and good examples abound outside of the myopic lense "parenthood".

MC jae,

You are familiar with politicians trying to get ahead in a party and saying what they think will garner votes, eh?

Are you familiar with Doug Mainwaring?

I think "cofounder of National Capital Tea Party Patriots" says a bunch.

From their website- "The mission of the National Capital Tea Party Patriots is to inform, educate, organize, and mobilize our fellow citizens in order to secure public policy consistent with our three core values: Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets."

He thinks gays and lesbians are not behind the push for equal marriage. He thinks that they are not in any hurry to get married. He does not think it is about civil rights or even gay marriage. He blames a government who wants to weaken "the institution of marriage" and get bigger and bigger. "The chipping away of the bedrock of American values....", he says. Not so much because gay is wrong, remember he says he is gay... but because he says the chaos that ensues from government messing with us means the government can get more and more authoritarian as the society swirls down the drain.

He does not support gay marriage. So, what?

Not all gays and lesbians do. Just like their heterosexual counterparts, some gays and lesbians think it is just a piece of paper, some do not want to get married, some are afraid to commit, some saw a bad marriage or a divorce in thier home as children, some think sleeping around is great...

So, since you are coming at this from a conservative Christian place, MC jae, why don't you ask Mr. Mainwaring if he supports sex outside marriage? You might want to ask how that is good for kids...?

You see, I think some hop in his camp without thinking much.

They will equate him with traditional or Christian family values when he is "Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets." and gay.  Bonus.

They will hear, "gay is wrong" that can lure the Republicans and the Christians who would shit bricks he is gay, period--- when he is gay. Bonus.

They will hear, "I am gay" and think the party is diverse.... and guess what? Gays and lesbians can also hate the government, be stockpiling food and weapons....Bonus.

He is a joke unless you love the Tea Party.

What do I think?

Children need to grow up with people around them that care for them.

They need many things to be loved by the adults around them and none of them require genitals.

We do not stir pots with our genitals to feed them. We do not tuck them in with them. We do not hold them with them or read stories with them. We do not help them with homework with them. We do not show them we love them with them.

We like to look at others and say they "need" a male and a female parent because we are messed up and we dont want to look at ourselves.

Most will agree, that society should quit thinking "male genitalia plays baseball with the kids and female genitalia tucks them in".

Children need raised where they play football, are told a story, go fishing, are held, learn to throw a ball, bake cookies .... and it can be done by an adult with the various ways genitals can be because none of it requires genitalia.

MC Jae ........ as part of your research ... and I do hope this is research on your part rather than just a "done deal" on what you believe on this issue.....   

How about you get to know a few same sex parents and their children?

Shouldn't be too hard to find......    Then see what kind of family they are.....

If you need help locating such a family to get to know ..... perhaps we can help...

Are you open to that?    Otherwise this just seems like some sort of "loving" put down of same sex families.   That is the sort of conservative christian loving same sex families are used to and for some curious reason .... don't seem to respond well to...

Sincerely

Rita

Having been raised by a single, widowed mother (my father died before I was born) I find the premise of Mr. Mainwaring's position to be offensive in the extreme. (Therefore I also disagree on personal grounds with revjohn's contention that two loving parents are better than one, since I saw nothing in my childhood suggesting that my friends with two parents were in any noticeable way better off than I was but I'm open to empirical evidence to demonstrate that position.)

Setting aside my personal offence at Mainwaring's position, there is no empirical evidence to support his contention (and plenty that disagrees with it.) 

Personally, I believe children are best off if raised by those who give them love and who encourage them to live in love.

well said

SG, way to confront the most basic of fears! Kudos! (still laughing)

What I'm hearing, is that it takes a village to raise a child.

Hey, that sounds catchy. I wonder if I can copyright it?

Did I say I was doing research RitaTG? I don't recall saying I was doing research. I believe what I said was that I was remaining open-minded. Said mind is rapidly drawing to a close. (If I mentioned doing research, please point to me where and I will acknowledge that.)

I have nothing against knowing them. Then I can lead them to Jesus.

Hummm... as I recall Rita, you were one of the regs here who were discouraging me from attending any rainbow luncheons. At any rate, meeting any new people on a social level outside my church and school is reasonably impossible for me right now as I am far to busy with homework and family responsibilities.

Rich blessings.

Single parents can do a good job raising children. My own two stepsons were raised by their divorced mother (my older son being around 12 when the divorce occured, my younger son being around 6).

Rich blessings.

I have been a social worker for a long time now. I have never done child protection for the record. One thing I have learned over the years, is that good families come in all shapes and sizes. Being heterosexual, mom and dad parents, does not make parents any better or worse than other forms of parenting. Some of the most messed up families I have met have been headed by a mother and a father. It is archaic and discriminatory to suggest this is the best form of parenting.

Jae, I echo those who suggest you meet and get to know some same sex parents. Do not spend your time trying to convert them. Just get to know them. If there is any chance they will be attracted to your form of faith, your actions will go a lot further than your trying to convert.

I went to Jamaica to celebrate my step-daughter's wedding six years ago. She had her father and me there. She had her mother and her half-sister. She had her step-father who was now her mother's ex, and his parents. She would have had her mother's current partner if he had been able to attend. It was really neat to see how everyone was able to get along. The bride had all those people who love her. She had two dads walk her down the "aisle". It was wonderful. It also confirmed for me that families can be in all forms, and often these unusual forms are much healthier than "traditional" families can be.

Ok ... my apologies MC Jae ..... I had assumed ... and it would seem wrongly .... that as part of your studies that you would be doing research on issues like this one.   That arises out of the discussion about the rainbow luncheon.

Now ... as for your "open mindeness" drawing to a close .... well .... that's up to you.   So far ... and this is just me .... I have not seen much openess.   This thread is in a way an example.   Rather than asking what the experience was of same sex couples or single please take a look at how you presented this thread.

As for me discouraging you from attending any rainbow luncheons ..... that was within the context of you studying us like "bugs in a bottle"..... That I would still not be comfortable with.

I find your comment about "leading them to Jesus" rather troubling....

You may find this rather difficult to believe ... but there are many same sex couples that one or both spouses are already Christians and have no need of you leading them to Jesus and indeed just may have a far deeper theological background than you.    I really feel that you would learn a lot about faith from persons such as that.

You said you are too busy with homework and family to meet any new people socially outside of your church....     Such a pity...... a rather confined life....

Sincerely

Rita

MC jae,

If your mind was open, what is "rapidly closing" it?

I have seen pacing back and forth on Wondercafe whether being gay is a sin or folks being born that way.

You come back to what Baptists believe or what your minister told you or something.

That, to me, is more partial than impartial. It is more dogmatic minded than undogmatic.

Maybe you mean open-minded as in swayable.

I do not recall on Wondercafe any openness on your part to either gay marriage or gay couples raising children. If you have, I don;t know about them. I know I can cite many threads where you opposed both as more than one poster even.

Have you ever, as any of your monikers, supported either or seriously entertained supporting it?

I didn't think so.

Perhaps it is the inner voice of the Holy Spirit, calling me to be firm in agreement with the way that God thinks about such things. After all, the Scriptures are clear enough.

Please note that I have avoided using sock puppets. I have identified who I was when my username was changed.

Please define "support" in this context.

Rich blessings.

Apology accepted RitaTG.

"Bugs in a bottle" -- that may be your term. I prefer to think of them as consultants or teachers.

Can one be both a spouse in a same sex relationship and also a follower of Jesus Christ?

Can one be in a marriage that runs counter to God's design as given in the Bible and yet still claim to living their life for God?

Thank you for your pity Rita, however I certainly don't feel confined. My life is full. I'm a full-time worker, full-time student, husband and father. There are many people for me to interact with on a social level in school, at church, and through family connections.

Rich blessings.

Jae, the well-known pattern with you is that you start talking sense and really impressing us with your ability to accept people....and then someone else gets your ear and you start talking like a Baptist again. In the end, you gravitate towards dogma and away from evidence and experience. You can't answer a simple question when the answer we are pretty sure you'll come up with will make you look bad. You harbour hateful, intolerant beliefs, but you don't actually take ownership of them - you just float them and watch people's reactions. When pressed on a topic, you obfuscate or run away. It's all getting very old.

What did you expect when you created this thread at WC? I mean, you're quoting Tea Party propaganda to a bunch of progressive Christians, who have been quite adept at picking apart all of your arguments against same sex marriage to date. A large segment of the Christian population doesn't buy these arguments, and the vast majority of the non-Christian population thinks your views are bigotry wrapped in a blanket of fiction. Further, psychologists can't find the the problems with same sex parents that your heros are claiming.

You and your Holy Spirit lost this one years ago. Time to go argue against eating shellfish or something.

Actually, MC jae, the scriptures are not as clear as one would want them to be, now are they?

Would you like to go through them one by one once again? I am certainly game.

I simply said you argued against same-sex marriage with various usernames.

You say you did not use sockpuppets. Since you stated it, I will say I disagree.

One can look at
http://www.wondercafe.ca/discussion/social/how-has-wondercafe-helped-you
or a thread titled "Euthanasia" and see --- quoted as posts that belong to Jae.

If one looks at page one of http://www.wondercafe.ca/discussion/religion-and-faith/conservative-vs-liberal-churches-growth
One can plainly see that ----- is quoted as posts that belong to jubilee. 
In that same thread, Jae also posts, as though Jae is not jubilee or ----.
 

That IMO is a sockpuppet.

Support means support, uphold, back, favour..... Have you ever supported same-sex marriage or same-sex couples parenting or seriously entertained supporting either?