What People Are Commenting

donate Books CDs HOME updates search contact

Study on Children Adopted by Homo Couples

Children Adopted by Homosexuals


In this link there is another recent study (January 2012) that shows children in homosexual “marriages” suffer more than those in natural marriages. You might want to add it to your statics since you get so much hate mail from homos saying your statistics are outdated.

This study by University of Texas professor Mark Regnerus’ study highlights the deficiencies of previous studies that homosexual advocates have relied on to grant same-sex couples a right to marry and adopt children.

"The empirical claim that no notable differences exist must go," said Regnerus in his study published in Social Science Research.

Regnerus’ comprehensive study examines nearly 3,000 adult children from eight different family structures and evaluates them within 40 social and emotional categories. The results reveal that children who remain with intact biological families were better educated, experienced greater mental and physical health, less drug experimentation, less criminal activity and reported overall higher levels of happiness.

The greatest negative outcomes were found among children of lesbian mothers. This contradicts defective studies popularized by the media claiming children fare as well, or better, with lesbian mothers. Regnerus’ study showed negative outcomes for these adult children in 25 of 40 categories including far higher rates of sexual assault (23% of children with lesbian mothers were touched sexually by a parent or adult, in contrast to 2% raised by married parents), poorer physical health, increased depression, increased marijuana use and higher unemployment (69% of children from lesbian households were on welfare, compared to 17% of those with married parents).

Regnerus’ study debunks an often-cited 2005 American Psychological Association (APA) brief that concluded, “Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents."

In contrast to Regnerus, previous studies compared children of homosexual parents to children of stepfamilies and single parents. Regnerus also relies solely on information directly from adult children rather than opinions from their parents.

A second new study confirms the studies touted by the APA are unreliable. Loren Marks, an associate professor at Louisiana State University, found the APA’s studies had limited data and focused on gender roles and sexual identities. They neglected to examine the children’s education outcomes, employment, risks of substance abuse, criminal behavior or suicide.

The discredited APA-endorsed studies have been used in attempts to impact international legal decisions.

Amicus briefs submitted in E.B. v. France in the European Court of Human Rights defended adoption rights for same sex couples citing APA studies with claims that no objective scientific evidence exists to justify “different treatment of same sex couples who wish to adopt because (to the knowledge of FIDH, ILGA-Europe, BAAF and APGL) all reputable scientific studies have shown that the children of lesbian and gay parents are no more likely to suffer from emotional or other problems than the children of heterosexual parents.”


Newman & Evolution

Dr. Amelunxen,

Here is another prominent churchman – recently raised to the altars – who seemed to accept evolution.

In 1868, John Henry Newman, later to be made Cardinal, corresponded with a fellow priest regarding Darwin's theory. He clearly was ahead of his times, favoring the theories of Darwin and modern science. He made the following comments:

“As to the Divine Design, is it not an instance of incomprehensibly and infinitely marvelous Wisdom and Design to have given certain laws to matter millions of ages ago, which have surely and precisely worked out, in the long course of those ages, those effects which He from the first proposed. Mr. Darwin's theory need not then be atheistical, be it true or not; it may simply be suggesting a larger idea of Divine Prescience and Skill. Perhaps your friend has got a surer clue to guide him than I have, who have never studied the question, and I do not [see] that 'the accidental evolution of organic beings' is inconsistent with divine design – It is accidental to us, not to God. (John Henry Newman, Letter to J. Walker of Scarborough, May 22, 1868, The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973)

Newman’s openness to evolution – and therefore the denial of Adam and Eve and original sin – explains why he is a favorite of the present Pope, Benedict XVI. This position also speaks in favor of a liberal Newman, and one cannot help but wonder again how he could have been canonized…

Thanks for your well-documented and enlightening article. I look forward to the next edition of it.

     Viva Cristo Rey!


Creation, but Not Creationism…

Dear TIA,

Dr. Remi Amelunxen in Original Sin, Evolution & Church Teaching, claims the magisterium teaches creationism. It does not. It teaches creation. We need not accept the derogatory or incorrect characterization of an element of our faith as another ism.

In general, TIA is negligent in combating the ongoing terminology battle. Once you accept their terms you have all but lost the battle.


‘Jesus’ Nervous Breakdown’


Here is a scholar with a bold view of what happened in the Garden of Gethsemane…

Jesus had a brief nervous breakdown in the Garden of Gethsemane,” said Fr Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, the 77-year-old renowned expert on the New Testament. In a recent interview with the Catholic Herald (UK), “Fr Jerry,” as he likes to be called, affirms that Jesus was “out of control” in Chapter Five of his new book The Keys of Jerusalem. The title of the Chapter is “What really happened at Gethsemane?”

He asserts that this always-in-control Christ was invented by the Apostles. The distortion of facts developed, Fr Murphy-O’Connor believes, because “it is clear in the story that the early Church did not want a Jesus that was really human”.

Fr Murphy-O’Connor even goes so far as to ask the question: “How do we know the words of Jesus’ prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane? If the disciples were asleep and they had no time with Jesus after he was arrested and before he was put to death, how does anyone know what Jesus prayed? Where is the source for the content?” His answer: “They made it up!”

This sort of remark one might have expected once from an atheist or a non-believer. But from a renowned Catholic biblical scholar in good standing with the Church?

When will Rome 'correct' this 'living legend's' depiction of Our Lord's 'Nervous Breakdown' in the Garden of Gethsemane? But, of course, this 'New Testament Jesuit Scholar,' Fr Jerome Murphy-O’Connor is 'first cousin' to 'Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor' - 'friend' to both Benedict XVI and to Conciliar Rome. So it's best we not hold our breath waiting for such a correction to be forthcoming anytime soon.

     Viva Cristo Rey!

     Mark Stabinski


Blason de Charlemagne
Follow us

Posted July 3, 2012

The opinions expressed in this section - What People Are Commenting - do not necessarily express those of TIA