Bitcoin Forum

6-year-old Utah boy chained to bed daily. http://news.yahoo.com/police-6-old-utah-boy-chained-bed-daily-191510221.html

plenty of kids to adopt who need homes, same with pets.

i wonder what the statistics on heterosexual couples that adopt kids vs. gay.. i'm willing to bet that there are more gay couples willing to adopt. it's one of the reasons why i support gays and gay marriage.

Ditto. There have been times when I wondered what the big deal was with gay marriage anyhow. Let them get married, let them adopt kids if they want kids, problem solved. As long as you're not flinging your private life into my face, I'm happy...

Oh don't worry, you'll soon find out what the big deal with gay couples is once the religious maniacs come along that slink around this board, as usual, it's not the stories themselves that bother me anymore as much, it's the comments from other people.

That's probably true. I figure in any large community, you're going to get the crazies that make everybody else look bad. That's one reason I think the Westboro Baptist Church's non-profit status should be yanked. They aren't even a church really. They're just a bunch of inbred whackos.

The church's tax benefits should be yanked as well, these fuckers are loaded. Why should we give them billions of dollars?




I know I shouldn't have children because I'm bipolar making it likely they'll be bipolar. We really don't need any more maniacs and depressed people around.

And gay couples are 20 times likely to abuse their foster children, compared to the straight parents. More than one-third of all the child abuse is homosexual in nature, despite gays constituting to no more than 1-2% of the total population.

Citations, citations, citations.

They are the lowest of the low. If you look at their history there was a time when the Phelps family was a lot more enlightened.

I am sorry to hear that you have to deal with being bipolar. My cousin is the same way. We live in different states now but he still calls me when he gets "that way." That is a really tough hand to be dealt.

Woop! There we go! That's the kind of brainwashed bullshit I was waiting for! Now note everybody how people like Bryant Coleman never provide convincing research and evidence to back up their claims but insist they're completely correct, in fact, I can guarantee that just because people will question him on it he's going to get into a several page long argument about it without citing any kind of historical data or the ones that he does will be heavily skewed or suffer from lack of even the most basic bits of mathematics like most politically biased polls do.

I had earlier posted the research journal papers on the subject here. Right now I can't find them, so I'll post a few others.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS02E3

1. Almost all sex crimes against children are committed by men.
2. Up to one-third of all sex crimes against children are committed against boys (as opposed to girls).
3. Studies indicate that, contrary to the inaccurate but widely accepted claims of sex researcher Alfred Kinsey, homosexuals comprise between 1 to 3 percent of the population.
4. Individuals from the 1 to 3 percent of the population that is sexually attracted to the same sex are committing up to one-third of the sex crimes against children.
5. Some homosexual activists defend the historic connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. Such activists consider the defense of "boy-lovers" to be a legitimate gay rights issue.
6. Pedophile themes abound in homosexual literary culture. Gay fiction as well as serious academic treatises promote "intergenerational intimacy."

What you cite doesn't back up what you are saying. It's a pretty poor understanding of statistics.

(1) is correct.

(2) may be correct.

(3) may be correct.

Here's where it gets fuzzy.

(4) Yes, but this doesn't indicate causality, nor does it give any reliable indicator of how likely an adult is to abuse a child.

(5) No content

(6) No content.

You then go on to say:

"And gay couples are 20 times likely to abuse their foster children, compared to the straight parents."

This is simply a poor understanding of statistics.

And furthermore, you cite the FRC. The FRC!! It is the FRC's position that, and I quote, "homosexual conduct is harmful to the persons who engage in it and to society at large, and can never be affirmed", the FRC that spent money trying to block congressional condemnation of the Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Bill, the FRC that has been listed as a homophobic hate group!

Now, there is a valid discussion to be had on same sex foster parenting, but citing the FRC isn't the way to do it. It's like citing Stormfront to illustrate what is wrong with Jews.

Stop this hypocrisy.

You have already agreed to these facts:

2. Up to one-third of all sex crimes against children are committed against boys (as opposed to girls).
3. Studies indicate that, contrary to the inaccurate but widely accepted claims of sex researcher Alfred Kinsey, homosexuals comprise between 1 to 3 percent of the population.

If a group which comprises 1% of the total population is committing 33% of a particular crime, what does that mean? FRC may not be a reliable source. But it doesn't matter anyway, as you have already agreed with points #2 and #3.

broken condom child

The fact that the child was restrained is what makes it more sensational news. The most important issue is that he left the 6 year old home alone. I guess he felt that, given the two options, restraining the child was safer than not restraining him. However, it's hard to believe that someone who lives in a middle class neighborhood couldn't think of a better option

Are you seriously trying to suggest that the most important issue is a child being left alone at home when he was fucking chained up? How the fuck can you just brush that off?

What im triying to say is that in first place he shouldnt have left the boy alone, chained or without chains.

That's just stupid.

No I didn't. I said they may be correct. They may have been correct since I was about to leave the office and didn't have time to check them. But since they weren't entirely central to my point, it didn't matter too much.


This is where you are wrong. But to be fair, it's a fairly common error. If you're not trained in statistics and probability, you're always going to make these kinds of mistakes. If you wanted to demonstrate that same-sex foster parents were 20 times more likely to sexually abuse children in their care than male-female couples, there is only 1 way to do it: sample a large number of same-sex foster families and a large number of male-female foster families, and compare abuse rates.

The route you're taking is a mixture of inductive error and baseless assumption.

Let me give you an example:


It's actually around a fifth. 1 in 5 girls are the victim of abuse, compared to 1 in 20 boys. But that's irrelevant. What's the assumption/error that you're making here? Anyone spot it?

You're assuming that you are homosexual if you commit a sex crime against a boy. That is simply not the case. But you wouldn't know that because you are cherry picking statistics you like from a homophobic hate site. The simple fact is that most adult men who molest boys do not show any sexual interest in adult men.

I'm not even touching on how you have fallen into the sampling bias heffalump trap.

there are more gay couples willing to adopt because they can't have their own children
what's questionable about that?


it's not about the religious maniacs, it's about making gay mainstream
number of homosexuals has probably grew at least 2000% in the last 200 years since it became globaly accepted
therefore decreasing reproduction of humans and making less and less people in every country
there's an increased chance their children will be gay too since they see it as a normal thing and again they will not have new children decreasing birth rate even more
less people --> weaker country

you see, when wife and i decided to have another baby (hopefully a girl) , i proposed that we adopt a baby girl, but when we faced all the paper work and procedure, in the end, we had to drop the whole idea.
im not saying im glad we canceled adoption, but that resulted in us having a butifull baby girl of our own :) she is 7 now.

it scares me to see what i see almost daily on the street, and worst thing now curently is leaving kids in the car on the sun.
insane, but ppl still do it

I liked the title and you are 101% right, as I always said, being a good father or mother is not easy, it's a very difficult issue specially when the age gap is large and still you need to hear from you son or daughter and to accept their point of view depending on their age.

What about the woman in California that was arrested for leaving her child in a car save so she could go to an interview she used all resources and still no one would help watch her child. Some people have no other resources. but at the sametime were in the hell was the live n girlfriend and she did know how could she not. Chaining a child is abuse, were is the mother or grandparents. Not the whole story.

Thanks, I was just gonna question the statistical errors, especially the point in bold, but you explained it better than I ever could.

There's a great book - Bad Science by Ben Goldacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Science_%28book%29) - which talks about the problems with health/science reporting in the media, and how statistics are misrepresented by people wanting to push a certain story/agenda. Highly recommended.

The author did a TED talk as well - http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_battling_bad_science (http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_battling_bad_science)
It's slightly off topic, but I think it's important that people see through these misleading statistics.

How awful, I would never do that to one of my pet cats or dogs, much less to a child, I mean what if there was a fire and the poor little boy was trapped in it. Awful, just awful.

This is what \happens when people make babies with different women, men, etc, move on with their lives when the last relationship doesn't work out and make new kids with the new boyfriend/girlfriend. There are consequences to being selfish and putting your kids way behind the next phase of your "love life." So a child of 6 gets chained to a bed with new girlfriend and more kids living there. Who knows who mom is or if she is fit to care for the kid..... you right ,just because you CAN have children doesn't mean you SHOULD.

You need a license to drive a car, but not to have a child. There is so much of this disgusting abuse I am so sickened by it. Chain this man up and let the other prisoners know he is in for child abuse.

People (not all, but a lot) do not make enough money to survive let alone pay for child care. But.....you DO NOT chain your child up!!! This child is no an animal. I don't really care what this man's excuses will be, because it's not about him, it's about the child and there is not one single reason why anyone would chain this little guy up!! Not being able to afford child care is no excuse (if that is even his excuse) period!

The parents should plan before deciding to have a child. And use preventive method if necessary.

No kidding. Even if you think you can't afford preventive methods, just remember that they're less expensive than raising a child. And if you don't want to pay for condoms or a sterilization procedure, just don't have sex.

Well, how else is a gay couple supposed to get a kid?

I personally think that all people should be forced to take a test before being legally able to have children, if they have children without the test they would be put in care.
It would stop alot of child abuse and mistreatment by only allowing people who are willing to learn how to become a good guardian.

well, you know they do have biological children right? i mean, a gay dude still has a penis and creates sperm.

he can place his sperm in his husband in any manner he sees fit, but the two of them are not going to conceive a child.

Natural selection.

Nature get rid of those who are deem "inflexible" and "unfit".

It seems the worst parents are the most fertile.

i'm sure there are couples who artificially impregnate other women and raise their kids as a couple.

True it is, that some people shouldn't have kids. I don't have them since i can't afford to have them , but i'd be really happy to have 2 atm.

True dat, there's already too many of us.

In a few years me and the mrs plan on looking into adopting/helping out teens.  I dont know about the level of paper work yet, kinda sucks though.  Almost feels like the system wants a tons of people being produced who are exploitable vs the paperwork being entirely to protect the kids.  Just a guess, tin foil hat off.