For years, studies have looked at the impact on children of having homes broken by divorce and by single parenting. The conclusions are universal that it is generally healthiest for children to be reared in a family with a married mother and a father. This is not to call families in which one parent has died or in which the parents are divorced “non-families,” but it is a matter of recognizing that children in such families are in a position that is not as healthy for them as it would be otherwise. One can’t help make up for a deficit without at least recognizing that a deficit exists.
Eyes now turn to the children of homosexual and transgender parents, but to listen to the most readily available reports they don’t seem to include a critical eye among them. Rather, they seem to be eyes already set, a priori, to be approving and accepting of whatever they see. But there are important voices we should hear when it comes to those circumstances.
Massive, undisciplined, parenthetical aside: Some might assume I am speaking of the Regnerus study concerning the impact of having same-sex parents. I am not. That said, though, I am not ignoring it because there is anything wrong with the Regnerus study, even if that is the message the media and homosexual activists would want you to think, as typified by the (so-called) Human Rights Campaign’s mostly defunct “Regnerus Fallout” website. In all the many ways in which the study, its results, and the scientist behind it were attacked, the study was vindicated as solid science–a fact which its attackers seem to ignore or remain unwilling to report with quite the same passion they possessed in their unfounded attacks. In fact, to date it is one of the most (if not the most) solid scientific examinations and explorations of the potential impact of having a homosexual parent. For instance, unlike many “studies” that preceded it, the Regnerus study began with a large sample base that used random subjects as opposed to “convenience samples” of smaller size. Some critique the study for its very few “stable” homosexual families instead of recognizing the important point that such stable families were frankly hard to find in the original sample of 15,000 people.
Ask the frankly honest homosexual authors of After the Ball why that might be. As Marshall Kirk and Hunter Masden admit in their own work about how to sell homosexuality to America (a work that has clearly been influential and followed to a “T”), comparing faulty heterosexual marriage fidelity to that of “committed” homosexuals: “[S]urely the cheating ratio of ‘married’ gay males, given enough time, approaches 100%.”
Sorry–that was a too tempting distraction from what I want to say. Put all of that aside. The voices of scientists like Mark Regnerus aren’t the voices I’m talking about in the title.
I’m talking about the voices of children, themselves, who have grown up in households with homosexual–and transexual–parents and who explain that, based on their own experience, that it is not a healthy place to be. And there are the voices of homosexuals, themselves, who recognize that there is nothing “equivalent” about their relationships and their capacity to be “married parents” for a child–voices which the influential in their own community don’t seem to welcome.
Aside from God’s own voice (which increasingly fewer people are interested in listening to), these may be the most relevant voices in the discussion, but they are the voices I don’t hear from news programs or in mainstream publications. If you’ve seen or heard an interview with such a person, let me know.
I’d like this post to be a place where I can curate such voices. If you come across more, feel free to let me know.
- Heather Barwick’s story–a tale of “Heather Has Two Mommies” in real life–was the first I encountered here, and is very accessible and well written: “Dear Gay Community: Your Kids Are Hurting”
- Robert Oscar Lopez, reared by two homosexual women, has written in multiple places, such as here and here, but I first came across him here in First Things.
- Testimony of Katy Faust, Dawn Stefanowicz, B. N. Klein, and, again, Robert Oscar Lopez in the Washington Times.
- Dolce & Gabbana’s comments are covered here. Google for more; it was quite a splash when it took place.
- “We Are ‘Synthetic Children’ And We Agree With Dolce & Gabbana” — article by Hattie Hart and Alana Newman. Focuses on the effects of being conceived through artificial means and not living with both biological parents, not necessarily having homosexual parents, though, clearly, the latter requires the former. Even from the most dismissive point of view, one must agree that their comments concern growing up in a “family” situation other than being reared by one’s biological mother and father.
- “I’m Gay, and I Oppose Same-Sex Marriage” — an article in The Federalist written by a homosexual man under a pseudonym, Paul Rosnick, presumably because he knows what his opinion would do to his standing with those in his community. Not a child of homosexual parents, but a voice in that community who recognizes the truth of the matter and is honest enough to admit it.
- Great article by Denise Shick, “Children of Transgender Parents Deserve a Voice.” Her comment there is, essentially, the point of this particular post: “It should not only be only the adults whose voices are heard. The children who come from untraditional homes should be equally important.” More: “Children like me who grew up in painfully untraditional homes are not allowed the freedom to voice their true feelings in a society ruled by political correctness and the LGBT agenda. Most of us don’t even recognize what our circumstances cost us until we are adults, and in some situations not until one or both living parents are no longer with us. At that point we might comprehend it all and finally be able to express what our lost childhoods have done to the remainder of our lives.”
I will add more articles as I come across them here and there (and as I remember to do so). It seems to me that these are voices that should be heard in all of this discussion, and they are the very voices that no one is looking for — even worse, voices that many assume do not exist. They are certainly voices many do not want to exist. Yet, there they are.
I don’t want to pretend that there aren’t many voices out there of now-adult children of same-sex couples who claim to have had a pretty normal life. (As best I can tell, there isn’t much solid, legitimate science backing up the generalizations of such claims, but put that aside.) Their voices are encouraged, even celebrated today. I’m not interested in the voices that find their way to the front of the crowd–if anything, are thrust to the front of the crowd and given an agenda-driven priority over others in the noise. It’s the voices like these–voices shushed or intimidated into silence due to their agenda-evaluated inconvenience–that have my attention. How many more would there be if the culture were more welcoming? If they weren’t in the process of being publicly shamed for what they have to say?
One of the important facts about marriage that many miss, including most of those in evangelical or mainstream Christianity, is that, as an institution, it is about much, much more than the happiness and satisfaction of two people who want to be together. Among the many things one learns from the way of life God has designed is that, among many other things, the institution of marriage must include considerations of family and childrearing. Concern for the children created and reared by a marriage is something one must consider. Maybe more people will begin to listen to the voices of children who have actually been reared in families that functionally ignored that consideration before they begin endorsing a redefinition of “family” that will, by design, deprive future children of one of their greatest needs: a mother and a father.
Thoughts En Route 
If some people – increasingly, much of the human race on so many subjects – applied an “intelligent design” philosophy to the questions they address, they wouldn’t have to find out by hard experience what the “intelligent design” premise would’ve led them to see beforehand. Our minds, mortal souls, and bodies are designed to work within the framework of the so-called “traditional” (read: equally designed) human familiy.
But then, why am I telling you this? You know it already, better than most people I know.
Keep up the good Work, sir. 🙂
Thanks much, Mr. Wheeler. Even when you consider the evolutionary-materialist worldview, false as it is, it supports the same thesis. From that vantage point, the idea that human children can thrive without those elements present — father and mother — for which we have become biologically adapted is nonsensical. Whether you come from the perspective of divine design or materialistically selective evolutionary adaption, the conclusion is the same: we should generally expect human children to thrive best when reared by both father and mother (the biological parents, themselves, in particular).
That’s the weird thing, isn’t it? Even evolutionary thinking should tell people something. But then, there are some weird things in nature which people have used to justify homosexuality. An “intelligent design” perspective might remind such people of the effects of the Law of Decay – and that not everything that “survives” is truly “fittest”.
An excellent blog in content and layout, Mr. Smith. Well done! On your point that news programmes, etc., don’t cover stories of people raised in same-sex ” families “, this is certainly true. But it appears that the apparent majority of people who have swallowed hook, line and sinker the LGBT propaganda on the same-sex marriage and its consequences, will not listen to or read evidence from children trapped and raised in such a framework if what they say is negative. I have shared posts from men and women who have stated clearly how badly affected they were as a result of their experiences – and people I know personally, or whose people I know who are from the area in which I live in Ireland, appear not to have read or listen to the victims of this anti-God and anti-family social construct of atheistic, agnostic, secularist liberals and left-wingers. As you know, the majority of the Irish elctorate in the Republic of Ireland voted in favour of the change in the Irish constitution to permit persons of the same sex to ” marry “. It is obvious that those who voted in support of this evil made no effort to find out the potential consequences of the rejection of God-ordained traditional marriage. Their personal opinions, based on nothing more than their opinions – opinions not grounded in facts – compelled them to vote as they did. How sad!
I have two mothers. One of them is transgender. I am not hurting, and actually find it easier to express myself in this family than I did before my trans mother came out, and I had a married mother and father.
Both of my mothers are Christian, and married, Sure, we face problems, but every family does – ours are just slightly different. I don’t miss how my mother was when she was my father – she was angry and depressed then, and now she’s a happier person.
Saying you’re not interested in the positive answers people give to the question “How did you feel being raised by same-gender parents?” is just as bad as the thing you say you dislike – the pushing away of the negative answers. And trust me, people may have problems with their parents no matter the relationship (just as I felt unsafe in a house with a straight couple) and this is no reason to deny all of them.
Thank you, Anonymous, for your comment. There is much to say about your response, but let me focus on the most relevant things.
First, you seem to miss my point (possibly my fault due to poor writing). Here’s the passage I wrote to which you seem refer in your “not interested in positive answers” comment: “I’m not interested in the voices that find their way to the front of the crowd–if anything, are thrust to the front of the crowd and given an agenda-driven priority over others in the noise. It’s the voices like these–voices shushed or intimidated into silence due to their agenda-evaluated inconvenience–that have my attention.”
My point was that viewpoints like yours already get loads of attention and tend to be “thrust to the front of the crowd” as opposed to those I am highlighting, which are those “shushed or intimidated into silence” because they are inconvenient to the dominant social agenda.
I do believe that all voices should be heard. But, as I mentioned, voices like yours “are encouraged, even celebrated today.” Voices like yours have no problem finding a broad audience. It’s the other voices, those who aren’t like yours, that are being ignored. And my interest in this post was to ensure that voices like yours don’t stand alone as if they are all that are out there. My interest was in making those voices heard, as well. If you, too, are interested in all voices being heard, then you must agree with my intent.
More importantly, let me comment on the other matters you discussed. Purely for the sake of commenting, let me grant all you have said: that your parents believe they are Christians, that your father was angry and depressed before he began pretending to be a woman and now he is happier, that you are in a state you consider to be “not hurting,” and that you now feel safer.
None of that would diminish the force of those referenced in the article, nor would it present a challenge to anyone who argues for the unhealthy and irrational state of transgenderism and its impact on families. I have heard children who talk about their alcoholic parents and who say that life was always better when mom was drinking because she was so angry and unsettled when she tried to stay away from the bottle. Similar examples are legion. The new state doesn’t reflect life at its best or as it should be; it reflects movement within a dysfunctional state from one lacking stability to one more stable, yet one still harmful. Many people are more stable, “happier,” when they give in to their vices and sin. It doesn’t justify doing so and doesn’t mean that another course would have been better. In your father’s case, for instance, the better course might be to seek counseling and therapy to help him with his body dysmorphism, just like an anorexic, bulimic, or “transabled” person needs counseling and therapy. This article by Dr. Paul McHugh might help begin to educate you about your father’s condition.
One of the strengths of the articles to which I link in this post is that some of the writers, when they were still within the confines of their family, felt exactly the same as you do. It was only later, when they had the benefit of time, experience, and increased wisdom, that they realized the harm their circumstance caused them. That’s why they deserve to be heard more loudly—including by folks like you.
Thanks for commenting, and I pray that you, your father, and your mother find a healthier place to be.
Well all I can say is thank [EXPLETIVE DELETED] this blog is dead, because the attitude and morality its author displays would have us back in the stone age if he ever got any tractcion outside of the fundagelical finge.
Well, your logic is unassailable, Brian. Brilliant! What an impressive case for your position. Impressive vocabulary, as well! I’m not sure what you have against ensuring the voices of those reared by homosexuals or transsexuals are heard and not silenced or ignored, but surely your fears would be validated by powerfully logical argumentation such as you have posted above. Thank you for sharing a mote of your enlightened thinking with all of us, not to mention your personal example of class, grace, and civil communication. Truly, a blog comment for the ages.