Refuting study which claims same-sex parents offer equal outcomes

  • Thread starter Thread starter dominikus28
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is what he claims were the reasons for conducting the research (paid for by The Witherspooon Institiute and the Bradley Foundation. Because of::

A persistent claim by those supporting same-sex marriage is that there is “no difference” in the outcomes of children raised by a biological mother and father and those who have been raised by two women or two men. scribd.com/doc/207414874/Michigan-Regnerus-Expert-Report

So presumably he compared children raised in the two types of households. Otherwise…it didn’t fulfil the stated reason for the research. But:

‘I didn’t compare respondents to an overall category of average young adults’. dallasnews.com/opinion/sunday-commentary/20130614-mark-regnerus-defending-my-research-on-same-sex-parenting.ece

So, bit of a waste of time, really. And in any case, how did those three samples turn out (noted as 2 in the following quote):

‘The two respondents who lived with their mother and her partner for all 18 years of their childhood did indeed appear comparatively well-adjusted on most developmental and contemporary outcomes’.

In any case, what does he think his research indicates:

‘…it remains prudent for government to continue to recognize marriage as a union of a man and a woman’.

Wow. Chutzpah of the highest order. By the way, didn’t you read either of the reports to which you linked…?
 
Bradski said:
So you think that three was large enough?
Click to expand...
If the study shows that only 3 children of lesbian parents grew up full time with that parent, that in itself is a revealing statistic in how said parents are “raising” said children, don’t you think? So I think the shock value at the number 3 is kind of irrelevant if the stats are the stats.
 
Originally Posted by johnnypdx View Post
The Church I attend would disagree with a lot of you view. During a mass the Father said the Church accepts all people…
Click to expand...
Originally Posted by johnnypdx View Post
We can agree to disagree. As I stated not the message coming from my Catholic Church or Father.
Click to expand...
johnnypdx said:
I agree. I am on my way to mass. I plan on talking with my Father there about your post and views.
Click to expand...
Johnny, I am a little confused. I don’t want to get off topic, but I need some clarification to understand where you are coming from.

When you say: “the Church I attend”…do you mean a Roman Catholic parish church?

When you say: “the Father said the Church accepts all people…” Do you mean “God said…”?

When you say: “I plan on talking with my Father…” Do you mean God, or your Dad?

Help me out here…:confused::confused:
 
I just want to bump this thread because I was reading an article about how the social sciences have been slowly losing their “sociological eye” and have delved into PC ideological spewing. The article named four incidents were books and studies that have gone against the grain in academia that have met harsh backlash and absolute vitriol due the content not toeing the “enlightened” and “non-bigot” line. Mark Regnerus’ study was one of the four.

In the combox, do you know what incident was talked the most? In fact, it was the only one talked about. Mark Regnerus’ study. No mention of the other three incidents. The comments singled out the study saying it was bunk and was thoroughly discredited. The three incidents concentrated on Thomas Sowell and how women weren’t actually victims of the patriarchy.

Something’s up. I recall two posters who have posted on articles that objected to same-sex “marriage”. In fact, I held a conversation with one the other day and to my surprise he showed up on this obscure site. Now, the article didn’t have a headline that would lead the horse to the water - you’d have to read the article (or in this case someone scouting the site it was on to give a heads up to the poster and his ilk) to know that Mark Regnerus’ study was even mentioned (about half way with no more than three paragraphs dedicated to him alongside a handful of other issues). The fervor to denounce this study is proof that anything but “equality” (of outcomes) cannot be tolerated and promoted.

The ever vigilante eye of the mention of this infamous study is alive and well. It is the same fervor that tracked down the address and real name of a blogger who was raised by two lesbians that denounced same-sex “marriage” and adoption. This blogger’s husband named was revealed with his work info. The person who did this? A homosexual (“PinkPower” I believe) from Spain. Or what is Portugal? The desperation is on display and the pathological -four letter word- wants its due. It’s hungry.

As an ex-supporter of same-sex “marriage” I was fully behind the LGBT and the activists. I was one of them. Now I’ve seen that such a demographic is not sound. Their supporters act in ways that can only be described as zealotry.

I’ll say this: I’ll give the benefit of the doubt to the Regnerus’ studies of the world. Why? Because they have everything to lose and nothing to gain. Given the political climate and the mission to normalize the deviant in academia, I refuse to play nice and stupid. As Ryan Anderson said, “We can play the whole ‘study’ game all day.” Common sense and honesty will separate those who are willing to fight this insidious PC garbage and those who wait on the sidelines, and when the poop hits the fan they aren’t to be found. If you do find them they’ll say “Oh well. At least we didn’t judge people!”

To play nice is to lose. You hit back twice as hard and don’t say sorry. You save their posts as proof of their asinine behavior. You say that Michael & Todd aren’t like Jim & Pam. Over and over. And over. Forget about their “dignity.” Forget about their feelings. All that is a waste and distraction as their camp and supporters set up their lies while you stand their and apologizing. It’s smoke & mirrors people.
 
Midwest88 said:
I’ll say this: I’ll give the benefit of the doubt to the Regnerus’ studies of the world. Why? Because they have everything to lose and nothing to gain.
Click to expand...
Maybe it would be better to actually look at the study by Regnerus and what his peers in sociology have said about it. Here’s something interesting from the Washington Post:
Three years ago, against the strong consensus of social scientists and professional child-welfare groups, University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus concluded that children of gay parents fare worse than children raised by married opposite-sex parents. In the face of intense criticism and a scorching assessment from a federal judge (“not worthy of serious consideration”), Regnerus doubled down on his conclusions and filed an amicus brief against gay marriage in federal court.
Click to expand...
But a new critique of Regnerus’ work by Professors Simon Cheng (University of Connecticut) and Brian Powell (Indiana University), published in the same journal as his original study,* Social Science Research* (available free to most academics and for a $35.95 fee to the general public), suggests that Regnerus misclassified a significant number of children as being raised in same-sex households. Based on a re-evaluation of the data, it concludes there are minimal differences in outcome for children raised by same-sex parents and married opposite-sex parents…
Click to expand...
Fundamental to the critique is the basic idea that Regnerus misclassified children as having been raised in same-sex households when, in fact, under a fairer assessment they had not been.
Click to expand...
Regnerus does not check for, or apparently even consider the possibility of, inconsistent, uncertain, and unreliable cases in his data—even though some other items in the NFSS offer some limited means to assess this possibility. For example, Regnerus (2012c) acknowledges that, according to the aforementioned calendar data, over half of the respondents never lived with a parent’s same-sex partner, but fails to mention that many respondents—approximately one-third—also never lived with their same-sex parents or lived with them very briefly. [emphasis original]
Click to expand...
This likely means that a sizable number of the 236 respondents counted as “raised by” lesbian mothers and gay fathers had not, in fact, been raised by same-sex parents. For example, nine of the responses likely came from jokesters:
Click to expand...
The most blatant example of highly suspicious responses is the case of a 25 year-old man who reports that his father had a romantic relationship with another man, but also reports that he (the respondent) was 7-feet 8-inches tall, weighed 88 pounds, was married 8 times and had 8 children. Other examples include a respondent who claims to have been arrested at age 1 and another who spent an implausibly short amount of time (less than 10 minutes) to complete the survey.
Click to expand...
washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/10/new-criticism-of-regnerus-study-on-parenting-study/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top