Connect with us

NOM Suggests Kids Raised By Gay Parents Don’t Get Food Or Health Care

Published

on

In yet another example of anti-gay tunnel vision, NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, displaying a complete lack of understanding of the nature of same-sex headed households, links to and quotes a fatally-flawed op-ed that suggests children parented by gay couples will not get “child care, groceries, health care, home maintenance, household products, insurance and juvenile products,” nor will these children of gay or lesbian couples be “acquiring the skills and social capital they need to become well-adjusted, productive workers.”

NOM posted an excerpt — four short paragraphs — of a ludicrous anti-gay op-ed penned by a Republican Minnesota state legislator, Steve Drazkowski. (Let’s pause of a moment and think of all the anti-gay news that’s come out of Minnesota, starting with Michele Bachmann and her husband, Marcus, and the high student suicide contagion rate in the schools in her district, the recent “license to bully” legislation in their not anti-bullying but pro-bullying bill, and take it from there.)

Representative Steve Drazkowski’s supercilious analogy says that “eight of the top 10 ‘best states for business.’ according to a survey of 556 CEO’s by Chief Executive Magazine. have a state marriage amendment in their constitution. [sic]” Well, since only six states/jurisdictions support same-sex marriage, and 31 states have some form of legal ban on marriage equality, saying eight of the top ten states ban marriage equality is like shooting fish in a barrel; you’re bound to hit a good number, and 80% is about right. Heck, you could also argue that eight of the top ten best states for business also have an average temperature of at least 70 degrees.

Here’s the money quote of the ludicrous insinuation:

“Children, raised in married, mother-father families play a huge factor in the health of the economy because they consume many services and goods, especially in child care, groceries, health care, home maintenance, household products, insurance and juvenile products.”

So, children raised by gays don’t get those vital necessities, apparently.

Never mind that gay parents generally adopt, and so are scrutinized and monitored far more than their heterosexual counterparts.

Of course gay couples provide for their children, at least as well as straight couples do, and, again, if they’ve adopted, probably better. Anyone who has been through the adoption process knows there are standards that have to be met, and rightly so, as long as those standards aren’t one man-one woman marriage.

Drazkowski, by the way, is quoting from a May, 2011 article in Chief Executive magazine that has absolutely nothing to do with same-sex marriage or same-sex parenting.

Drazkowski also writes of a report that “emphasized that children, raised in married, mother-father families, have an advantage when it comes to acquiring the skills and social capital they need to become well-adjusted, productive workers.”

Seriously, what are NOM and Rep. Drazkowski thinking? Oh, right, they’re not.

Well, folks, here’s a lesson for you. When NOM’s Maggie, John, Bryan, and their anti-gay ilk, like Rep. Drazkowski, say things like, “studies show that kids need a mom and a dad to be happy/successful/healthy, etc.,” what they’re not telling you is that the studies don’t offer the option of same-sex parents in their analysis, nor do these studies, like the one Rep. Drazkowski, which you can access here, even mention the word “gay” or “homosexual.”

But what is also troubling is that Rep. Drazkowski ignores study after study that proves that marriage equality brings millions of dollars into a state, and states that do not offer same-sex marriage but are near states that do lose millions of dollars a year. It’s very simple. Offer more people the opportunity to maker their relationships legal and they will have weddings. Weddings bring the state and businesses millions of dollars. Seriously, anyone who has ever paid for a wedding will agree with this simple yet expensive economic reality.

Drazkowski also writes, “According to a new study by the Social Trends Institute, marriage and family have a tremendous effect on the economy – and government and corporations should take bold steps to encourage each if they want to remain economically fit.” In this we agree, and believe that extending marriage to same-sex couples will only serve to strengthen the economy, and, more importantly — though Rep. Drazkowski doesn’t seem to care about this — the lives of millions of children already being raised by gay and lesbian couples.

Let’s be very clear here: Same-sex couples, gay and lesbian couples who parent children are at least as good as — and some studies show, better than — their heterosexual counterparts. There is not a single valid study that proves that gays make bad parents. Period.

But perhaps NOM would like to try this statistic on for size: states that offer marriage equality have the lowest rate of child homelessness.

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation

Published

on

Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.

Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”

“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”

In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”

He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”

“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”

“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”

“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”

The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.

“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”

Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”

Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.

Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.

Continue Reading

News

Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs

Published

on

President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.

“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”

The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”

Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”

TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”

Critics blasted Trump.

“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.

One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”

Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”

The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.

According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.

Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”

“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”

Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”

Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.

Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.

The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.

“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.

The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.

“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.