How does having a married mother and father work for the benefit of children?

Question

Sexual liberals tell us that a mother and her girlfriend or a father and his boyfriend are just as good for parenting children as a married mother and father, but sociological data seem to suggest otherwise. Why are married biological parents so helpful for children?

Answer 1

Family is important and children need the nurturing and guidance from two parents. To each their own, but I think having parents of the same gender puts kids under alot of undue stress because they probably get the heck teased out of them. Childhood can be so stressful as it is! God did intend us to marry not have multiple children with a slew of men. I know it happens and I am not trying to judge anyone, I am just saying.

Answer 2

You're taking a simplistic view of the studies. Sociological studies (and every other kind of study) merely give direction for further studies. They don't give reliable definitive answers. What does come through from the studies that do more than just count beans is that it's not the genders of the parents but the attitudes they convey to the kids that has more effect. And same-s*x parents often are vocal activists and comment regularly on one or another "establishment." You can never say one or the other sort of marriage is better for kids, because the range of quality in parent pairs is far greater than an averages you can come up with for the two types. By shear numbers, maybe we should outlaw man-woman parents. After all, nearly all the messed up kids came from them.  

Answer 3

Maybe so that it gives more of a firm foundation of masculine and feminine attributes? That is, if you're coming from the nuclear family portrait. I was mainly raised by my mom (she got divorced when I was really young). But she was a hard worker and not affraid to get her hands dirty, but she also behaved like a lady and would be polite and kind so I picked up on both masculine and feminine traits from her. Also I would always watch how my grandparents interacted and picked up traits from them, my uncles, heck even some from my own dad.

Answer 4

cause who could love them the most and have their best welfare in mind than the biological parents

Answer 5

to the individuall child, it does not make a difference. So long as the household is stable and supportive and loving, it should not matter whether the parents are biological, adopted, or same-gendered. Teasing at school is something every child goes through to a degree, and honestly that is the only problem I see that arises from same-gendered couples raising a child. The rest of society is the problem, not the loving family  

Answer 6

i don't know, i think it's just the way it's supposed to be. not that i'm against g**s or anything. it's their choice and i respect that. i just think it's easier for children growing up with a mother and a father.

Answer 7

Only HAPPILY married parents are helpful. A child is much better off in a stable, loving g*y family than a dysfunctional straight one.

Answer 8

its more of having both gender rolle models in your life to learn to interact with both

unhappy parents is never better for a child

also spicies tends to change over time as their enviroment change

humans today is not the same as humans say 500 years ago

Answer 9

they are not if there drama all the time

Answer 10

Children raised by both biological parents are significantly healthier, happier and better adjusted emotionally than kids raised by single parents of either s*x. They are less likely to live in poverty or engage in violent crime or sexual promiscuity and more likely to be successful in school, career, and marriage.

Same-s*x couples, by definition, would have at best have only one biological parent.

Children need both biological parents. The sexes are different. Because s*x differences are real, men and women parent differently. Men and women bring different, complementary skills to childrearing. Men are more likely to play expansively with their children than to do mundane care taking; women tend to be more practical. Mothers tend to be more responsive to their child's immediate needs, while fathers tend to be more firm, more oriented to abstract standards of justice (right and wrong). Kids need both.

Mothers tend to emphasize the emotional security of their children, while fathers tend to stress competition and risk taking. Mothers tend to seek the immediate well-being of the child, while fathers tend to foster long-term autonomy and independence. Children of both sexes appear to learn self-control and responsibility primarily from their fathers. They fail to learn them when he's not involved in their lives. Our national epidemic of fatherlessness has spawned an epidemic of antisocial children.

Children need both parents, because they learn different lessons from each. Neither fathers nor mothers are expendable. The presence of a father is critical to a male child's learning self-control and appropriate male behavior, especially learning to respect women. Similarly, the presence of a father is vital for a female child's self-respect and eventual development of a healthy adult sexuality. Children need mothers just as much. The presence of both parents seems to be necessary for ideally balanced emotional and mental development.

The social science evidence suggests that women teach children communion (the drive toward inclusion, connectedness, and relationship) and that men teach children agency (the drive toward independence, individuality, and self-fulfillment).

Because of the need for a stable, nurturing, educating home with two biological parents, marriage is a major public health issue and not just a private affair. Marriages that are exclusive, permanent, unconditional, and life-giving contribute to public health and longevity; marriages that fail any of these criteria and end in divorce create an enormous social, emotional, and health care burden for the couple, their children, and society.

Cheers,

Bruce

Answer 11

What sociological data are you referring to?

Most studies show that children who grow up in same-s*x households tend to be as well adjusted if not more so than children brought up in traditional households. The reason being that most same-s*x families have waited longer to have children, are more financially secure, and tend not to take for granted the fact that they WILL have children. These people tend to have children on-purpose, as opposed to traditional families who are much more likely to have children "by accident" before they are ready.

Anyway, I have never understood why it was anyone's business other than that of the parent's themselves. No one bats an eye when a heterosexual couple has children who turn out poorly, have low self-esteem, kill their classmates. In fact, I have never hear anyone ever say that kids who turn out poorly who have two married hetero parents turned out that way because of THEIR families. Seems ridiculous to impose a standard on same-s*x relationships that we don't on traditional ones... after all haven't traditional parents had more practice?  

Answer 12

It's the way God intended if you believe in God. It goes back to Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.....