The on-line rape of his 5-year-old adopted son by Duke University’s openly-gay, Frank Lombard, is no anomaly. Instead, Lombard’s molestation fits the pattern that emerged in the latest review of the scientific literature about gay fathers.
Lombard lives with his gay partner, another Duke University employee. The Arrest Warrant documents that Lombard sodomized one of his two adopted African-American sons and made the boy give him oral sex on-line. He offered other gays the same opportunity. Although the boy was drugged, “it is likely he developed interest in gay sex through these activities,” said Dr. Paul Cameron, an expert in gay fostering/gay adoption and author of the latest review.
Published in the peer-reviewed Psychological Reports, the review (1) noted that gays’ children were more frequently exposed to parental molestation and more apt to adopt homosexual interests and activities. “The Lombard case fits the pattern,” said Dr. Cameron. “While every gay parent does not molest his child, the scientific literature records a much higher incidence of molestation by gay parents or foster parents.”
Dr. Cameron, Chairman of the Family Research Institute, a Colorado Springs think-tank, noted that the review documented that gays’ children were also:
1) more apt to report sexual confusion;
2) more apt to be socially disturbed;
3) more apt to abuse substances;
4) less apt to get married;
5) more apt to have difficulty in attachment and loving relationships; and
6) more apt to have emotional difficulties.
“The cant that ‘gay parents are no more likely to molest’ is not based on evidence but liberal ideology,” said Cameron. “By endorsing gay adoption, President Obama, the state of North Carolina, and Duke University share blame for this tragedy. These policy makers let dogma blind them to evidence that has been in the literature for years. Why would anyone who cared about children endorse adoption by members of a group which had 23% of its members admit to sex with boys(2) or had 19% say they felt ‘positive’ about sex with them?(3)”
George A. Rekers, professor of neuropsychiatry and behavioral science at the University of South Carolina School of Medicine explains that the inherent nature of a household formed by homosexually behaving adults “uniquely endangers foster children by exposing them to a substantial level of harmful stresses that are over and above usual stress levels in heterosexual foster homes.”
The professor observes that adopted children are “among the most vulnerable of all citizens,” as by the time they arrive at their new home they have already gone through a series of difficulties, often involving separations, neglect, and traumas such as the death of parents. Added to this is the stress of adjusting to a new home and neighborhood.
He then goes on to cite a number of studies that detail how, even when adopted children are placed in favorable family circumstances, they already suffer from substantially higher rates of psychological disorders.
Citing a wide variety of academic studies from countries around the world, Rekers explains that homosexual adults suffer from significantly higher rates of psychological disorders such as suicide, conduct disorder and substance abuse. Living with a parent who suffers from a mental disorder or has problems with drug or alcohol abuse will only trigger further stresses and problems for adopted children, he contends.
“The logical conclusion from these findings would be that heterosexual adults generally have significantly and substantially better health, more energy, and better emotional stamina to devote to foster children,” argues Rekers.
Another factor that militates against homosexuals being given the possibility to adopt children is the well-demonstrated fact that same-sex partner relationships are significantly less stable and more short-lived on the average compared to a marriage of a man and a woman.
For adopted children this will lead to a substantially higher rate of household transitions in foster homes for youngsters placed with a homosexually behaving adult. Foster children have already suffered one or more traumatic transitions, notes Rekers, and more-frequent transitions result in greater psychological harm and psychosocial maladjustment.
Rekers observes that a longitudinal study based on population registers in Norway and Sweden, which included legally registered same-sex partnerships in the latter nation, reported that homosexual male couples were 1.5 times as likely to break up as married heterosexual couples.
Breakup rates were even higher for homosexual female couples, who were found to be 2.67 times as likely to split as heterosexual married couples. Rekers goes on to explain that according to this study, when controls for demographic characteristics associated with increased risk of divorce were added to the analysis, male homosexual couples were 1.35 times as likely to divorce, and lesbian couples were three times as likely to divorce as heterosexual married couples.
Gays claim they were “born that way”. Lets indulge this lie for a moment. OK so lets say all the gays were “born that way”. By their own measure, they have shown themselves to be a very small minority and statistical anomaly. Given this line of “born that way” logic, it’s safe to assume that the overwhelming majority of babies are “born straight”.
Looking at things this why, why would we allow the statistical anomaly to raise the statistical norm? It’s usually near impossible for a statistical anomaly to be able to raise a statistical norm. Usually parents that shun education raise children that shun education and so on. So a gay person would never be able to properly raise a child, assuming that by their own analysis the child was very more than likely “born straight”.
This means gays should not be raising children and to even consider it would be foolish not by religious or moral standards, but by gays’ own supposed proof that they are not born into the statistical norm.
1. Cameron P. Gay Fathers’ Effects On Children: A Review Psychological Reports, 2009:104;649-639
2. Bell AP, Weinberg MS Homosexualities: a study of diversity among men and women. NY: Simon & Schuster, 1978.
3. Jay K & Young A. The Gay report. NY: Summit, 1979