Gay British Actor: ‘There’s Nothing Worse Than Gay Parents’

So the saying goes: one step forward, two steps back. Or so it seems with LGBT people in the media:

Rupert Everett

Rupert Everett, the 53-year-old British actor who starred in the 1998 film “Shakespeare in Love,” took a few giant steps backward for the gay rights movement this week when he told the UK’s Sunday Times Magazine that there’s apparently nothing worse than having gay parents.

Everett came out as gay 20 years ago and says his mother still wishes he had a wife and kids. Though he has a boyfriend, he seems to agree with her.

The Sunday Times‘ article is behind a paywall, but the Telegraph (and tons of U.S. media) also covered the story, including the full version of Everett’s ignorant statement:

“She [my mother] thinks children need a father and a mother and I agree with her. I can’t think of anything worse than being brought up by two gay dads. Some people might not agree with that. Fine! That’s just my opinion. I’m not speaking on behalf of the gay community. In fact, I don’t feel like I’m part of any ‘community’. The only community I belong to is humanity and we’ve got too many children on the planet, so it’s good not to have more.”

GLAAD president Herndon Graddick responded with the following statement:

“Since Everett shared his outdated opinion, gay parents, as well as their friends and families, have voiced overwhelming disappointment. Children aren’t hurt when raised by caring gay parents, but they are when uniformed people in the public eye insult their families.”

According to the Telegraph, Everett has said his coming-out damaged his career and urges actors not to come out for fear of losing work. Sure, he’s entitled to his own opinion, but publicly bashing gay parents is just uncalled for.

About Camille Beredjick

Camille is a twentysomething working in the LGBT nonprofit industry. She runs an LGBT news blog at

  • Paddy Reddin

    Isn’t it a shame when someone you want to hold up as an icon for a cause has a different opinion,

    Plus, I think you emphasized the wrong part of Everett’s quote, the important part was 

    Fine! That’s just my opinion. I’m not speaking on behalf of the gay community

  • TrinainUS

    I think most actors who’ve come out in more recent years probably wouldn’t agree about damage to their careers – look at Neil Patrick Harris.  Twenty years was a long time ago.   As far as gay parents are concerned, children of gay parents have spoken for themselves.   Yes, Everett is entitled to his opinion, but he’s probably done some damage here that he didn’t intend.   

  • Mike

     Of course it’s just his opinion, and of course he’s allowed to hold it, but it doesn’t make it any less ignorant and it doesn’t mean no one is allowed to call him out on it.  There are plenty of people raised by 2 gay men that have terrific childhoods and grow into healthy, productive adults. 

    Aside from being potentially harmful to gay couples and their kids, Everett is just flat-out wrong.  We call out people for their incorrect thinking all the time (bigfoot, UFOs, homeopathy, catholic priests), why should this be treated any differently?

  • smrnda

    He sounds like a typical whiner, and with the comments about his Mom being disappointed that she won’t be getting grandchildren and he won’t be getting married makes it seem like he  comes from a family of whiners.

    When people say things like “that’s just my opinion” it’s asking to express a point of view but to take no responsibility for backing it up with facts. My take on opinions is that everybody has them, but that the only time a person is really entitled to an opinion is when it’s informed.

  • Cincinatheist

    “Everett has said his coming-out damaged his career and urges actors not to come out for fear of losing work. ”
    So to sum up: People hate us for who we are. Therefore, keep hiding in shame so that our lifestyles stay in the shadows and can continue to look “not normal” when those of us who do choose to live openly do so. And the cycle of abuse, derision, and hate can continue.


  • jose

    He needs to add he would never! vote for a gay president. Then he can have a job on TV with Cupps.

  • David Benjamin Patton

    Someone explain to me again why anyone should bother to give weight to a celebrities opinions? They’re paid to be actors, musicians and performers we’re not paying them for their opinion or sage ‘advice.’ 

  • Patrick

    He is the S.E. Cupp of Gay, it sounds like.  Gay and ashamed and wishes he wasn’t.

  • Grizzz

    wait, what?

    Here is a gay man who is giving his experience and testimony and you claim he is full of shit?

    If he had said “gay parents are hunky dory” you would be drooling all over him with sycophantic love.

    Hypocrisy once again.

  • Grizzz

    so people who work entertainment jobs are not allowed to have political or social opinions, even in a public realm? Why not?

    Okay, I’ll play along…..I don’t know why anyone gives plumbers, lawyers, doctors, Indian chiefs, chefs, pilots, accountants, professors, ditch diggers, truck drivers, bee keepers, farmers, computer programmers…..a right to speak…..

    Jesus fucking christ.

  • Grizzz

    Right. He says something that you disagree with even though it is his experience and you call him a whiner. If he had said “gay parents rock the world” you would be knee high to him in a flash.


  • Grizzz

    You are just pissed because he does not fit your ideal of a gay man.


  • Sindigo

    Opinions are only worthy of respect in and of themselves when they are on entirely subjective matters. When someone holds an opinion which is objectively wrong, the only response they should expect is derision. Such is the case here as children of gay couples have been shown to perform just fine on a range of metrics. Here’s one study for starters:

    My uncle had a very similar reaction to his son-in-law’s brother, a gay man who, with his partner had a child with a surrogate mother. We had a long debate about it but, after meeting the people in question (and a few drinks, the debate took place in a pub, natch) he conceded that he may have been prejudiced in his original assessment.

    For the record, I don’t credit the force of my argument for his change of heart. Just that when presented with the facts he was able to admit he had been wrong. Something I hope I can do when I’m his age. ;)

  • Sindigo

    Wow. Way to miss the point.

    As long as you’re playing along though; I think OP meant: “Why should we give any more weight to a celebrity’s opinion, rather than anyone else’s.” He in no way implied that they shouldn’t be allowed to have one, nor that they shouldn’t be allowed to voice it.

  • gingerjet

    Everett has always been a rather bitter queen.  We’ve stopped paying attention to him and his career long ago.

  • gingerjet

    What experience or testimony has he been giving?  None.

  • smrnda

    What personal experience? He mentions his Mom but he wasn’t raised by 2 gay dads, so on what experience is he basing the assumption that it sucks? Did he raise children with another man and did they tell him that it sucked? It doesn’t look like he actually has any personal experience in this area at all.

    On being a whiner, he came out a long time ago, if his Mom is still lamenting not having a future daughter-in-law or grandchildren, this is something people should come to term with. If he thinks she’s got some right to lingering feelings of disappointment, he’s a bit off his rocker. Plus, he’s a whiner if he’s getting so upset over something that he really has no information about.

    And on gay parents, there are actual studies done on same-sex parents. If I want to see whether it’s a good or a bad thing, I go with those, not anecdotal reports from people who don’t even have personal experience in the area.

  • rhodent

    David didn’t say we shouldn’t let celebrities speak; he asked why we should give weight to their opinions.  Indeed, your overwrought comparison to plumbers, lawyers, pilots, bee keepers, etc. illustrates David’s point quite nicely.  If there was an article saying that the pilot who flies Oprah’s private jet thinks there’s nothing worse than gay parents, most people’s reaction would be “Why should we give a shit what this guy thinks about gay parenting?”  But let a celebrity say it, and suddenly it’s a big deal to a lot of people.  We shouldn’t take the celebrity’s opinion any more seriously than we take the pilot’s (or the plumber’s, or the accountant’s, et cetera).

  • amycas

     The only part of this that was from his own experience was the when he said his career was damaged by coming out. He didn’t have gay parents, and he’s not a gay parent, so saying that gay parents are the worst thing that could happen is not from his experience at all–it’s just his ill-informed opinion. An opinion that can go a long way in actually causing harm to families with same-sex parents.

  • Octoberfurst

      You know that the Right is going to have a field day with this. They will be shouting from the house tops: ‘SEE! We told you gay parenting was bad and now we have a gay man saying that gays shouldn’t be parents! Ha ha!”  >sigh<
       Granted he is expressing his own opinion but why make such a stupid blanket statement?  He could have just said that HIS gay parents were horrible and leave it at that.  Why say that ALL gay parents are bad? People really need to think before they speak.  On the bright side he could get a job at Fox News being the gay version of S.E. Cupp.

  • Levon Mkrtchyan

    I really don’t like the tone of Grizzz’s comments.  I think that while he has some valid points, this kind of tone in the comment threads really hurts our community and prevents good discussions.

  • Patrick

    I’m just not big on people who are ashamed of who they are.  The gayness doesn’t really matter to that sentiment.

  • LesterBallard

    The bad parents I know are straight. And they are quite bad; and very straight.

  • jdm8

    I wonder how he knows it would be so bad to be raised by two dads or two moms for that matter? That seems to imply that genitals equate to qualifications.

  • SwedishLore15

    How did Mr. Everett come to the conclusion that there is “nothing worse than gay parents”?  Which studies has be looked at?  Was he raised by gay parents?  Is he a gay parent?  Even then, I don’t think he would be qualified to make so sweeping a statement as “there’s nothing worse than gay parents”.  

  • Aguz

    we’ve got too many children on the planet, so it’s good not to have more”
    Is he referring to overpopulation? Well, if a gay couple is adopting then how is that a problem? Does he only have problem with in-vitro fertilization? 

  • Coyotenose

     This word, “hypocrite”, I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • Coyotenose

      This word, “hypocrite”, I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • Hello, my name is…

      This word, “hypocrite”, I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • Matthew Baker

    I think he might be trying to squeeze the last few drops out of his 15 minutes. He seems very bitter about getting type cast. Mind you I think its more from his limited range than him being gay. There are many gay actors who are out and proud and have no trouble getting work.  My fear is that his comments will get shanghaied by people who oppose gay parenting rights. They will say something to the effect –”See even they gays say they will be bad parents.”

  • SJH

     I do not know if he can cite anything to back up his opinion. Surely he is speaking in hyperbole at least a little, after all he is an actor, but there is evidence out there that would suggest that it is healthy for children to have heterosexual parents.

    Obviously we have a ways to go before we can make any decisive conclusions on the subject but the studies do raise a concern.

  • SJH

     Looking at the livescience article, I did not see any citations for the studies. I would like to find more information on them considering that I have seen studies that show that the opposite is true.

    As I posted in another response, check these out and let me know what you think:

  • Mark O’Leary

    My first reaction: what an odious opinion. Dismiss him as a nitwit.
    My second reaction: imagine the pain Everett suffered to lead him to this view. he is a victim of narrow-minded ignorance and cruelty. The straight world has a lot to answer for. Some people better HOPE there’s no payback in a future life.

  • Mark O’Leary

    My first reaction: what an odious opinion. Dismiss him as a nitwit.My second reaction: imagine the pain Everett suffered to lead him to this view. he is a victim of narrow-minded ignorance and cruelty. The straight world has a lot to answer for. Some people better HOPE there’s no payback in a future life.

  • newavocation

    Funny, I wonder why he didn’t include show biz parents.

  • Madge

    Studies actually have raised some questions about same-sex parents, with one point being that divorce-risk levels are “considerably higher in same-sex marriages”; for female partners, the risk is nearly doubled. 

  • Paddy Reddin

    Why?  Easy.  Because he’s not pushing this on anyone.  He’s not trying to say he saw bigfoot, or that homeopathy works, or he was abducted by a UFO.  He’s not even saying gays shouldn’t have kids or be allowed to adopt.  He’s simply saying he’s not into the idea. 

  • Simon Cooper

    Statistics are all well and good but all they are is numbers. The same studies in the UK and Denmark show the opposite and there’s considerably different circumstances and social pressures involved when comparing straight and same-sex partnerships.

    For example, and to bring the comparison between the two closer, childless married couples are something like twice as likely to divorce than couples with children.

    Pressure to stay married if you’re raising children, different exposure to or views on the normative values that “marriage is for life” as well as pressure from elements of a society that is still far from universally approving of same-sex marriage; basically there’s a whole bunch of other factors in play. You can’t just plonk the two statistics next to each other and reason that being a gay/lesbian couple causes divorce. That’s just stupid.

  • Bball246165

    The study from your first link has been discredited and condemned by the medical community already. The second link just talks about divorce rates and nothing about child rearing. Divorce is at 50% already, so obviously marriage is not a sacred institution. Kids do well with parents that care about them, gender doesn’t matter.

  • Bball246165
  • Bball246165

    Hetero marriage is at 50%. What’s your point?

  • Michael S

    He must have some weird bias against having any number of gay dads. Too bad he didn’t explain that at all.
    In his defense, the actual quote is “I can’t think of anything worse than being brought up by two gay dads.” not “There’s nothing worse than…” And he then follows it up by literally disqualifying himself from speaking on the subject. I don’t see how it was even irresponsible of him to say this. The harm is done in shortening that paragraph-long quote down to the headline that is used everywhere else now.

  • Michael S

    My theory is that because so many people watch celebrities that they start to consider them as personal acquantances instead of random strangers who are payed to act different ways. So when a celebrity says something dumb, millions of people suddenly feel like their friend made a mistake. It is difficult not to take attacks against a friend personally, even when your friend is at fault.

  • the bullet

    I’m pretty sure nobody cared that he was gay as much as they cared about his shitty movies and pop albums. And he seems to have bounced back ok.

  • SJH

    Regarding the first link, who discredited it? It seems that the article you linked does not cite anything. I think the study points out that even if one of the parents is homosexual/bisexual then the child is at a greater risk. I would say that given that Regnerus’ limited sample, which he admits to, he has valid data. As I said in my earlier post, we can’t make any decisive conclusions but it does raise questions. I understand that there are studies that conclude that homosexual parenting is healthy but obviously, due to the conflicting information, this should be considered an open issue which needs more study.
    Regarding the second link, did I miss something about the study on divorce? The study showed that homosexual couples are more likely to get divorced. To me, this means that they have a divorce rate greater than 50% thus less healthy for children.

  • Bball246165

    The study was hugely flawed. I believe there’s an article on here showing what was wrong with it. They consider anyone ever having any same sex relations gay. You can’t call someone that had sex once with someone of the same sex as gay. Also some of the children were not raised at the the same time the gay parent had a same sex relationship. It’s a horrible study that no major medical association will endorse it. Divorce is not necessarily bad for children. Some couples are better parents when they are not married.

  • Anna

    Anecdotal, but I grew up with lesbian parents and knew several other children with lesbian mothers, and all of those couples are still together 25-30 years later.

    Incidentally, second and third marriages break up at enormously high rates. 67% for second marriages, and 73% for third marriages. If we want to protect children from divorce, perhaps we should pass laws against remarriage?

  • wmdkitty

    No worries, he throws that word around at EVERYONE.

    I’d recommend ignoring his pathetic male-supremacist, ableist jackassery.

  • wmdkitty


  • Anna

    Not to mention, there has been over 40 years on research on children of lesbian and gay parents, and none of the evidence suggests that we are even remotely harmed by our upbringings, so for people to pretend that this is still an open question annoys me.

  • Anna

    Oh, not this again. I really wish the right-wing would stop lying. They go on screaming about the “social experiment” of same-sex families, when an entire generation has already been born and raised to adulthood. There is absolutely no evidence that children are harmed by having two moms or two dads. None whatsoever. Anyone saying otherwise is a liar with a religious agenda to promote.

    Here are links to 40 years of actual research:

    I have so little patience for this. I find it wearying when people act like it’s still 1989. Newsflash: Little Heather of Two Mommies fame is all grown up now.

  • Anna

    The Regnerus study has absolutely nothing to do with children who have two moms or two dads.

    Only two of the 1.7 percent of respondents who reported a parental same-sex relationship reported living with that couple as parents for their entire childhood, meaning that the study has little to say about gay couples who deliberately chose to parent children through donor insemination, surrogacy or other means.

    That’s two people. Two people out of 3000. Again, there’s nothing in the Regnerus study about those of us who were born or adopted into planned same-sex families.

  • Anna

    Kind of ironic that Rupert Everett actually played a gay dad in the movie The Next Best Thing.

  • AxeGrrl

    Yes, Everett is entitled to his opinion, but he’s probably done some damage here that he didn’t intend.

    This sums it all up, right here.

  • yohocoma

    Many gay couples worsen the planet’s human overpopulation through the phenomenon of *surrogacy*.  Almost every commenter, and the original article author, overlook this part of Everett’s comments, which I consider to be just as important as his criticism of gay parents.

    He’s saying to quit lumping him in with other gay people, and to quit the presumption that new human life is precious and to be cooed over.  Both of these impulses stem from tribalism.

  • Georgina

    There are many, many young girls in the world willing to swear that having one dad is bad enough. Without a mother on her side (and not all mothers are), they would not have been able to cope. Do we condemn them too?

    Some men are just not cut out to be fathers, some are.
    Plus, he is right about “too many already”. What will the world do in 30 years – with 16 Billion humans?

    I hate this idea that if someone disagrees with the ‘public opinion’ they should shut up,
    and no this is not the expression of a phobia; just righteous anger.  

  • Georgina

    Nope, but hormones affect behaviour and social conditioning affects reactions.
    No parents really raise a child – this is done by their social circles, schools, peers, TV and the usual rota of religious idiots.

    When all these ‘outside influences’ are against same gender parenting, this will cause the children to feel segregated.  Whether s.g.parents have a ‘right’ to adopt or not is not the issue.
    The issue is:  is the world ready to treat these children fairly? 

    p.s.  I think marriage, per ce, is outdated.

  • Sindigo

    You’re right, that Live Science article isn’t good. I shan’t reference it again. 

    I don’t have time to go through the articles you referenced in their totality but I’m not sure that it is fair to characterise them as demonstrating the opposite conclusion. I think that the takeaway is that children of GLB couples have some unique challenges to face but I’m not sure that isn’t true for all kids. The factors that are causing those challenges seem to be unclear. Some of those factors may well be solved by wider acceptance of marriage equality.

    Certainly, more research involving larger sample sets needs to be done on the issue.

  • Aguz

    Yes, I understand that, but that still doesn’t cover adoption as an alternative. 

  • Norman Dostal

    pretty gross-his numerous fact lifts are affecting his brain! Rupert is a washed up bitter old queen who was mad because he couldnt play straight-so he disparages gays any chance he gets. self hating-pretty vile

  • Norman Dostal

    thankfully no damage-everyone knows he hates teh fact that he isnt talented enough to get “straight” roles so hes bitter-and teh face lifts? he looks vile!

  • Norman Dostal

    Grizz-but all studies show gay parents are just as good if not BETTER than straight parents so to congratulate gay parents would be dwelling in reality…dumdum

  • SJH

     Very interesting. I don’t have time right now to look into all of the info you provided but I will look at more as time is available. One thing I noticed in the APA link was that they discount the Sarantakos study. One of the reasons that they give for this is that the study had a high number of divorced gay and lesbian parents. Shouldn’t the divorced status be relevant? If gay and lesbian couples are more likely to get divorced then doesn’t that also mean that they are potentially less healthy for the children. This is consistent with the other link I provided.

  • Anna

    I have no idea what you’re trying to say here. Are you talking about men who sexually abuse their daughters? What do abusive straight fathers have to do with anything? I’m not seeing how having two gay dads is going to make young girls more at risk for abuse. Most men who molest children are heterosexual. If anything, girls with two gay dads are much safer than girls in heterosexual homes. Most girls are abused by straight fathers, stepfathers, or their mothers’ boyfriends.

    And who’s “condemning” women who say that their fathers were bad parents? Of course some women have terrible fathers. So if a girl has one horrible father, she needs a mother to help her cope with it? Why? For the sake of argument, let’s say that one half of a gay couple is doing an awful job. Why isn’t the other father capable of being on her side and helping her cope?

    Sure, some men aren’t cut out to be fathers, but what does that have to do with attacking an entire category of people? There’s no evidence to suggest that gay men are less capable of parenting than straight men, or that gay male couples are less equipped than heterosexual or lesbian couples to take good care of their children.

    No one’s saying that Rupert Everett should shut up, but he’s not immune from criticism. He put that opinion out there in the media. He has the right to express his thoughts, and other people have the right to say that his thoughts are ill-informed, hurtful, and unfounded.

  • Anna

    Actually, the vast majority of gay male couples adopt. Surrogacy is far too expensive for most to afford. That said, I see no reason to condemn men who choose to have biological children. No one bothers straight couples who do the exact same thing.

  • Anna

    No, it isn’t. You clearly didn’t read the entire section:

    1 A study from Australia (Sarantakos, 1996) has been cited as demonstrating deficits among children raised by gay and lesbian parents in Australia compared to children raised by heterosexual couples. The anomalous results reported by this study–which contradict the accumulated body of research findings in this field–are attributable to idiosyncrasies in its sample and methodologies and are therefore not reliable. An expert reading of the Sarantakos article reveals that certain characteristics of its methodology and sample are highly likely to have skewed the results and rendered them an invalid indicator of the well-being of children raised by gay and lesbian parents in at least three respects:

    The children raised by gay and lesbian parents experienced unusually high levels of extreme social ostracism and overt hostility from other children and parents, which probably accounted for the former’s lower levels of interaction and social integration with peers (see pp. 25-26);

    Nearly all indicators of the children’s functioning were based on subjective reports by teachers, who, as noted repeatedly by the author, may have been biased (see pp. 24, 26, & 30); and

    Most or all of the children being raised by gay and lesbian parents, but not the children being raised by heterosexual married parents, had experienced parental divorce, which is known to correlate with poor adjustment and academic performance.

    Indeed, although the differences Sarantakos observed among the children are anomalous in the context of research on parents’ sexual orientation, they are highly consistent with findings from studies of the effects of parental divorce on children (see, e.g., Amato, 2001, and Amato & Keith, 1991). Children Australia is a regional journal that is not widely known outside Australia. As such, it cannot be considered a source upon which one should rely for understanding the state of scientific knowledge in this field, particularly when the results contradict those that have been repeatedly replicated in studies published in better known scientific journals. In summary, the Sarantakos study does not undermine the consistent pattern of results reported in other empirical studies addressing this topic.

    Some nonscientific organizations have attempted to convince courts that there is an actual scientific dispute in this area by citing research performed by Paul Cameron as supporting the existence of deficits in gay and lesbian parents or their children compared to heterosexual parents or their children. In fact, there is no scientific evidence of such deficits. Cameron’s research is methodologically suspect. His key findings in this area have not been replicated and are contradicted by the reputable published research. Unlike research that makes a contribution to science, his key findings and conclusions have rarely been cited by subsequent scientific studies published in peer-reviewed journals as informing their scientific inquiry. For a detailed critique of the research project on which Cameron has based many of his published papers, see Herek (1998).

    It’s honestly sad to see people scramble to defend bad research because it promotes their agenda.

  • yohocoma

    You see no reason?  The reason is gross human overpopulation which is, very quickly now, destroying the balance of life.  They all ought to be bothered, gay and straight, a lot more.  Kudos to Everett for attacking it from the gay side.

  • Anna

    So you’re against all straight couples having biological kids, too? Fine, at least that’s consistent. However,
    gay male couples are much less likely to have biological children than straight couples. If anything, people who are against more children being born ought to be in favor of gay men parenting because more often than not, they choose to adopt their children.

  • Anna

    The same argument could be made against any minority group. There’s still a lot of racism in the world. Does that mean that African Americans shouldn’t have children? After all, it’s harder to be a black child than a white child, particularly if one is raised in a less diverse community.

    People argued vociferously against interracial marriage because they thought children would be harmed by it. Now society has come to accept that biracial and multiracial people are perfectly normal, and while there may be some challenges, there is no reason for them not to exist. The solution to bigotry and intolerance isn’t to get rid of the people who are being discriminated against. The answer is combatting ignorance, prejudice and stereotypes.  

    I grew up with two lesbian moms. I have a good life, and it’s not anyone’s place to tell me that I shouldn’t have been born, or that my parents shouldn’t have raised me. My parents had just as much right to raise me as straight couples have to raise their children. Thank goodness we don’t like in a world that passes laws against people having children based on their sexual orientation!

  • yohocoma

    That’s a valid point.  I have the feeling, though, that if adopted children weren’t available, surrogacy would see a sharp increase.  And the pool of ready adopters indirectly facilitates a ready pool of adoptees.  The end result is the same – people procreating and human population increasing.  The basic impulses of both procreation and parenthood have to be fought.

  • SJH

    I am not scrambling, I am trying to have a discussion. If you prove me wrong, I am fine with that. I did read what you pasted regarding the Sarantakos study. They gave three reasons, one of which was that the homosexual parents had been divorced which seems to be consistent with the other study that homosexual couples are more likely to get divorced.
    Are you suggesting that it does not say that? Are they suggesting that the sample used was biased because fewer of the heterosexual parents were divorced? Shouldn’t that be part of the reasoning?

    Also, regarding that APA link you posted, it was authored by Charlotte Patterson who is herself a lesbian who performed a study which is shown to be extremely flawed. She cites her own study to shown that the Regnerus study is inconsistent with past research.

    I would like your opinion on the this link.

    NARTH obviously has a bias but they seem to back up their accusations and I have not seen a rebuttal by Dr. Patterson.

  • Anna

    You’re linking to NARTH? Are you serious? There is no debate about this issue. Absolutely none. Stop trying to pretend like there is some controversy, or some question about how children of same-sex parents fare. There is none. The study you mentioned has been discounted for scientific reasons. I know right-wingers often think the entire medical establishment is in collusion, but there is absolutely no secular, professional organization that believes there is something wrong with children who have gay parents. These organizations are not biased. They are concerned with the welfare of children and with legitimate research. You are the one who is biased, grasping at straws to try to justify your religious bigotry. The fact that you are still mentioning the Regnerus study even thought it’s been thoroughly discredited just shows how desperate anti-gay people are to try to further their agenda. And, no, I’m not going to get drawn into any kind of debate about what the link at NARTH says. Going down that rabbit hole does not interest me because your mind is not open, and you are not actually interested in what the research has to say. You will only believe what your church tells you to believe.

  • SJH

     You should read it. I mentioned that it might be biased but you will find that they back up their accusations rather well. As far as me being closed minded, I have taken the time to read up on the links that you have provided even though I think they are biased (I do not think that the APA is as scientific as you might think. You should look into them a little more) Regardless, I have put that aside in an effort to better understand all sides. If you do not want to follow up then I think it may be you that is being closed minded. By the way, NARTH is not the only one that discredited Dr. Patterson’s study.

  • Anna

    I did read it, but I’m not going to discuss it with you. If I can make a comparison, it is like arguing with a creationist. I don’t argue with creationists because creationism is a ludicrous proposition, and there is no controversy surrounding evolution. People who have been presented with the evidence and still insist that there is some controversy are not worth my time. That’s not being closed minded; that’s not wanting to lend legitimacy to their views.

    Now, if you were actually interested in evidence, that would be one thing. But since you linked to such an utterly vile organization as NARTH and keep bringing up the Regnerus study, that tells me all I need to know about your belief system. Why should I wander down the rabbit hole with you when it’s clear that you don’t accept actual evidence? When your mind is closed, when you will only ever believe what your church tells you to believe about gay people?

    Believe me, I’ve been arguing this issue online for about 20 years now. In the beginning, I fought hard to try to convince religious people by showing them evidence, but eventually I came to understand that they weren’t interested in evidence, that no secular studies would ever satisfy them, and that they’ll simply keep moving the goalposts.

    Frankly, there comes a point where it’s just not worth the effort. I’ll have discussions with people who are genuinely ignorant, who are honestly on the fence, but not those with entrenched religious beliefs. They are incapable of changing their minds.