Tuesday, August 19, 2008

More good news from California

It's slowly shaping up to be a very good week thanks to the lovely folks in California:

Court decisions forcing same-sex "marriage" on California and Massachusetts have had a predictable side effect -- an increase in adoption by homosexual couples.

The Associated Press recently produced a feature article titled, "More gay men embrace marriage, fatherhood." The report was all but an endorsement of homosexual adoption, according to Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality. - Homosexual adoption increases in California, One News Now

Naturally the One News Now article only features the comments of our dear pet homophobe Peter LaBarbera. But his comments are hilarious:

"What is incorrigible about this coverage from Associated Press is that it is totally absent of any critical coverage; I mean serious coverage examining the effects of homosexual 'parenting,' bringing in public policy data, even bringing in pro-family critics," argues LaBarbera.

By critical coverage from "pro-family" critics, Peter means that the Associated Press should ask the opinion of so-called experts that the anti-gay industry prop up. You know who I am talking about - folks with absolutely no experience in the field they claim to be experts in but who can be counted on to give a good soundbite.

And by all means, let them be the head of a phony group with a credible sounding name, like the Center for Parental Readiness or the American Christian Adoption Association, or The Center Dedicated to Keep Children Away from Those Nasty Homosexuals.

And I love this part of the article:

LaBarbera says that, as with any media discussion of homosexual involvement with children, there was no mention in the AP story of the harm to the children.

I know why there was no mention of it. Because there is NONE. There has never been a legitimate study that has said that children in same-sex homes are harmed because of the orientation of their parents. Of course there are some studies, like those by Paul Cameron. And other claims, like those of Linda Harvey.

But they are as credible as a Klansman advocating racial harmony.

And then there is the piece de resistance:

" . . . you have this ridiculous situation in which these professional adoption organizations are talking about crossing the t's and dotting the i's. Meanwhile, they're intentionally placing children in homes that are motherless or fatherless by design," LaBarbera points out.

I don't care what anyone says, I am convinced that these anti-gay groups have weekly meetings where they bounce phraseologies off of each other. These phraseologies cover up the fact that their positions have nothing behind them that resemble facts.

" . . . Intentionally placing children in homes that motherless and fatherless by design?"

What the hell does that mean anyway? Is there some conspiracy between professional adoption organizations and the lgbt community? Peter seems to be inferring to the old Anita Bryant nonsense of "gay recruitment."

For the last time, let me say something about that. If lgbts were recruiting, we wouldn't be going after children. We would be going after celebrities.

I personally would chair the committees to turn the following celebrities gay:

Philip Seymour Hoffman,
Patton Oswald,
Jonah Hill,
Jon Heder
David Spade (sue me, I'm kinky),
and that Cute Bald Wrestler with the Hairy Back Gay.

But in Peter's defense, he does bring up a good idea. I am all for giving one of those phony "pro-family" studies or spokespeople room to hang themselves with their distorted positions.

After all, giving Elaine Donnelly a forum did wonders for gays in the military.